Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28638610›Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2017

Looking for the needle in the kidney transplantation haystack.

Josep M Cruzado, Edoardo Melilli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Josep M CruzadoNephrology Department, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, IDIBELL, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
Edoardo MelilliNephrology Department, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, University of Barcelona, IDIBELL, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
Bellvitge University Hospital · ESInstitut d'Investigació Biomédica de Bellvitge · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of acute rejection still relies on renal allograft biopsy. In fact, histological features including C4d staining can be useful to differentiate cellular and antibody-mediated acute rejection. However, the pathogenic mechanism to define the type of rejection is usually assessed by anti-HLA donor specific antibodies (DSA) monitoring. Suspicion of acute rejection is usually based on renal function deterioration. This method has low sensitivity. Moreover, creatinine increase follows graft injury and therefore the diagnosis is performed when there is an ongoing acute rejection. One strategy to overcome the limitation of serum creatinine as predictor of acute rejection is to perform surveillance protocol biopsies. However, the low incidence of subclinical acute rejection among patients treated with tacrolimus-based immunosuppression makes this procedure questionable in terms of cost-effectiveness. In this scenario new biomarkers predicting acute rejection are urgently needed. Ideally, such biomarkers should anticipate acute rejection, thus allowing preventive actions such as maintenance immunosupression intensification and/or modification. Alternatively, these new biomarkers should at least improve the predictive value of serum creatinine monitoring. Although many of the new biomarkers are promising, none have been translated to the clinic to date because of a lack of validation studies and the existence of major methodological concerns.

Identifiers

PMID28638610
PMCPMC5469560
OpenAlexW2571445602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.