Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33134500›Full record

ArticleTransplantation direct2020

DNA Methylation Age Is More Closely Associated With Infection Risk Than Chronological Age in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Joanna Schaenman, Xinkai Zhou, Rong Guo, Maura Rossetti, Emily C Liang, Erik Lum, Basmah Abdalla, Suphamai Bunnapradist, Phuong-Thu T Pham, Gabriel Danovitch and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation direct, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joanna SchaenmanDepartment of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Xinkai ZhouDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Rong GuoDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Maura RossettiDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, UCLA Immunogenetics Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Emily C LiangDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, UCLA Immunogenetics Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Erik LumDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Basmah AbdallaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Suphamai BunnapradistDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Phuong-Thu T PhamDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Gabriel DanovitchDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Arun KarlamanglaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Elaine ReedDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, UCLA Immunogenetics Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Steve HorvathDepartment of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
David ElashoffDivision of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

UCLA Clinical Translational Science InstituteUL1TR001881 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ARLEEN F. BROWN, ARASH NAEIM · 2016 to 2026
$118.1M
Project 3: Mapping the Evolution of Chronic Transplant Injury in the Context of CMV InfectionU19AI128913 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LANIER, LEWIS LEE · 2017 to 2021
$11.2M
The role of HLA and its coreceptors in endothelial cell activation and leukocyte recruitment in antibody-mediated transplant rejectionR01AI135201 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Robert L Fairchild, ELAINE F REED · 2018 to 2026
$5.3M
Evaluation of Epigenetic Markers of Biologic Age to Predict Adverse Outcomes after TransplantationR21AG055879 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI SCHAENMAN, JOANNA M · 2018 to 2019
$429k
Evaluation of T Cell Immune Function Impairment in Elderly Solid Organ Transplant RecipientsR03AG050946 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI SCHAENMAN, JOANNA M · 2015 to 2016
$231k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001881NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI135201NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI128913NIA NIH HHS R03 AG050946NIA NIH HHS R21 AG055879
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Older kidney transplant recipients demonstrate increased rates of infection but decreased rates of rejection compared with younger recipients, suggesting that older transplant patients are functionally overimmunosuppressed. We hypothesized that this is a consequence of reduction in immunological activity due to biological aging and that an immune biological age, as determined by DNA methylation (DNAm), would be associated more strongly with incidence of infection than chronological age.

methodsDNAm analysis was performed on peripheral blood mononuclear cell collected from 60 kidney transplant recipients representing older (≥age 60 y) and younger (aged 30-59 y) patients 3 months after transplantation. DNAm age was calculated based on methylation status of a panel of CpG sites, which have been previously identified as indicative of biological age.

resultsCorrelation was seen between chronological and DNAm age; however, there were many patients with significant differences (either acceleration or slowing) between DNAm age and chronological age. A statistically significant association was seen between increased DNAm age and incidence of infection in the first year after kidney transplantation, whereas no significant association was seen between chronological age and infection.

conclusionsAssessment of DNAm age holds promise as an approach for patient evaluation and individualization of immune suppression regimens. This analysis may provide insights into the immunological mechanism behind increased incidence of infection observed in older transplant patients. The ability to measure biological age would allow for patient risk stratification and individualization of immunosuppression, improving outcomes for the growing numbers of older patients undergoing kidney transplantation.

Identifiers

PMID33134500
PMCPMC7581059
OpenAlexW3096695522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.