ArticleTransplantation direct2022
Noninvasive Diagnosis of Acute Rejection in Renal Transplant Patients Using Mass Spectrometric Analysis of Urine Samples: A Multicenter Diagnostic Phase III Trial.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noninvasive Diagnosis of Kidney Allograft Rejection.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025Review
- Biopsy proteome-based classification of T cell-mediated kidney allograft rejection.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Predicting Cellular Rejection of Renal Allograft Based on the Serum Proteomic Fingerprint.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Biomarker-Development Proteomics in Kidney Transplantation: An Updated Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Proteomics for Biomarker Discovery for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Kidney Transplantation Rejection.Proteomes · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Timely recognition and treatment of acute kidney graft rejection is important to prevent premature graft failure. A predefined urinary marker set for acute T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) containing 14 peptides was tested for this purpose in a multicenter in-place validation study. Methods: Three hundred twenty-nine prospectively collected and 306 archived urine samples from 11 transplant centers in Germany, France, and Belgium were examined. Samples were taken immediately before a biopsy, performed for graft dysfunction within the first transplant year. Primary outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of the marker set for the diagnosis of biopsy-proven acute TCMR, with prespecified thresholds of 83% for sensitivity and 70% for specificity. Results: Eighty-two patients (13%) had acute TCMR grade I-III. In relation to the biopsy diagnosis of TCMR, the sensitivity of the urine test was 0.66 (95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.76) and the specificity 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.51), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.60. The different TCMR grades I-III were not reflected by the marker set, and borderline TCMR was not specifically detected. Secondary independent masked assessment of biopsies consented by 2 pathologists revealed an interobserver kappa value of 0.49 for diagnosing TCMR, compared with the local center's diagnosis. Using this consensus diagnosis, the AUC of the urine test was 0.63 (sensitivity 0.73, specificity 0.45). Post hoc optimization of the marker set improved the diagnostic performance in the study cohort (AUC 0.67) and in an independent patient cohort (AUC 0.69). Conclusions: This study illustrates the difficulty of proteomics-based diagnosis of TCMR and highlights the need for rigorous independent in-place validation and optimization of diagnostic biomarkers.
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.