ArticleTransplantation direct2019
The Measurement of Donor-Specific Cell-Free DNA Identifies Recipients With Biopsy-Proven Acute Rejection Requiring Treatment After Liver Transplantation.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterizing Early Donor-Derived cfDNA Kinetics in Stable Pediatric Living-Donor Liver Transplant Recipients.Pediatric transplantation · 2026Article
- Advances and challenges in the application of donor-derived cell-free DNA for diagnosis and treatment in liver transplantation: a narrative review.BMC surgery · 2025Review
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA and miRNA monitoring for the early prediction and diagnosis of liver allograft rejection and patient outcomes.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Observational
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Pancreas-Kidney, Heart-Kidney, and Liver-Kidney Multiorgan Transplant Recipients (MOTR).Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025Article
- Application of graft-derived cell-free DNA for solid organ transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Donor Fractions of Cell-Free DNA Are Elevated During CLAD But Not During Infectious Complications After Lung Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024Article
- Article
- Detecting Liver Cancer Using Cell-Free DNA Fragmentomes.Cancer discovery · 2023Article
- Clinical and financial impacts of abnormal liver biochemistry after liver transplantation.BMC research notes · 2023Article
- European Society for Organ Transplantation Consensus Statement on Biomarkers in Liver Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Evaluation of circulating cell-free DNA in cholestatic liver disease using liver-specific methylation markers.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Donor-specific cell-free DNA as a biomarker in liver transplantation: A review.World journal of transplantation · 2020Review
- Current Trends in Applications of Circulatory Microchimerism Detection in Transplantation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- Role of Donor-derived Cell-free DNA In Predicting Short-term Allograft Health In Liver Transplant Recipients.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyArticle
- Current Status of Biomarkers and Molecular Diagnostic Tools for Rejection in Liver Transplantation: Light at the End of the Tunnel?Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessment of donor-specific cell-free DNA (dscfDNA) in the recipient is emerging as a noninvasive biomarker of organ rejection after transplantation. We previously developed a digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based approach that readily measures dscfDNA within clinically relevant turnaround times. Using this approach, we characterized the dynamics and evaluated the clinical utility of dscfDNA after liver transplantation (LT).
methodsDeletion/insertion polymorphisms were used to distinguish donor-specific DNA from recipient-specific DNA. Posttransplant dscfDNA was measured in the plasma of the recipients. In the longitudinal cohort, dscfDNA was serially measured at days 3, 7, 14, 28, and 42 in 20 recipients. In the cross-sectional cohort, dscfDNA was measured in 4 clinically stable recipients (>1-y posttransplant) and 16 recipients (>1-mo posttransplant) who were undergoing liver biopsies.
resultsRecipients who underwent LT without complications demonstrated an exponential decline in dscfDNA. Median levels at days 3, 7, 14, 28, and 42 were 1936, 1015, 247, 90, and 66 copies/mL, respectively. dscfDNA was higher in recipients with treated biopsy-proven acute rejection (tBPAR) when compared to those without. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of dscfDNA was higher than that of routine liver function tests for tBPAR (dscfDNA: 98.8% with 95% confidence interval, 95.8%-100%; alanine aminotransferase: 85.7%; alkaline phosphatase: 66.4%; gamma-glutamyl transferase: 80.1%; and bilirubin: 35.4%).
conclusionsdscfDNA as measured by probe-free droplet digital PCR methodology was reflective of organ health after LT. Our findings demonstrate the potential utility of dscfDNA as a diagnostic tool of tBPAR.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.