ArticleTransplantation direct2021
Absolute or Relative Quantification of Donor-derived Cell-free DNA in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Case Series.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA monitoring for early diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation: a randomized trial.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2025Trial
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA associated with increased risk of chronic lung allograft dysfunction and mortality: Are absolute levels better than percentage?The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2026Observational
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA as a Non-Invasive Readout of Activity Across the Rejection Continuum.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026Article
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA and its utility in kidney transplantation: A myth or a reality.World journal of nephrology · 2025Review
- Utility and limitations of the use of donor-derived cell-free DNA in kidney transplantation.World journal of transplantation · 2025Review
- A two-threshold algorithm using donor-derived cell-free DNA fraction and quantity to detect acute rejection after heart transplantation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2025Article
- Biomarkers of Rejection in Kidney Transplantation.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2025Review
- Integrating Donor Derived Cell-Free DNA Fraction and Absolute Quantification for Enhanced Rejection Diagnosis in Kidney Transplant Recipients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- 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
- Using a combination of biomarkers to monitor allograft dysfunction in lung transplant recipients.Frontiers in transplantation · 2025Review
- Perspective for Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Antibody-Mediated Rejection After Kidney Transplantation: Defining Context of Use and Clinical Implications.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024Review
- Detection of donor-derived cell-free DNA in the setting of multiple kidney transplantations.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA at 1 Month after Kidney Transplantation Relates to HLA Class II Eplet Mismatch Load.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- An Initial Analysis of the Baseline Levels of Dd-cfDNA After Pancreas Transplantation: A Prospective Study From High-volume Centers in the United States.Transplantation direct · 2023Article
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA for Kidney Allograft Surveillance after Conversion to Belatacept: Prospective Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Single center study investigating the clinical association of donor-derived cell-free DNA with acute outcomes in lung transplantation.Frontiers in transplantation · 2023Article
- Anti-interleukin-6 Antibody Clazakizumab in Antibody-mediated Kidney Transplant Rejection: Effect on Donor-derived Cell-free DNA and C-X-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 10.Transplantation direct · 2022Article
- Temporary antimetabolite treatment hold boosts SARS-CoV-2 vaccination-specific humoral and cellular immunity in kidney transplant recipients.JCI insight · 2022Article
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA as a diagnostic tool in transplantation.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Review
- Why Cell-Free DNA Can Be a "Game Changer" for Lung Allograft Monitoring for Rejection and Infection.Current pulmonology reports · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDonor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is increasingly recognized as a valuable biomarker for acute transplant injury, with possible indications in the detection of cellular or humoral rejection and the guidance of immunosuppressive therapy. There is an ongoing debate on whether relative or absolute quantification of dd-cfDNA is more reliable for the detection of acute transplant injury.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all 22 kidney transplant recipients who underwent dd-cfDNA measurements (percentage and absolute) between April 2020 and April 2021 at our institution. Of these, 9 (41%) showed discrepancies between absolute (cutoff: 50 copies/mL) and relative (cutoff: 0.5%) quantification in at least 1 dd-cfDNA measurement.
resultsWe report on 9 of 22 cases with discrepancies in relative and absolute quantification of dd-cfDNA, which were predominantly late posttransplant patients. We found bacterial and viral infections, as well as low leukocyte count from chronic myeloid leukaemia treatment, to be reasons for variability in total cell-free DNA (cfDNA), leading to inter- and intraindividual variability in relative dd-cfDNA quantification. When correlating dd-cfDNA quantification and biopsy results, as well as clinical course, our data indicate that relying solely on relative dd-cfDNA can lead to false-negative and false-positive results.
conclusionsIn summary, these cases argue that absolute quantification of dd-cfDNA is better suited in patients with underlying conditions affecting total cfDNA levels and suggest using both absolute and relative dd-cfDNA together for higher reliability and interindividual comparability in the clinical setting. Especially for patients with chronic active antibody-mediated rejection, further studies on the use of dd-cfDNA are desirable.
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.