ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
All That Glitters in cfDNA Analysis Is Not Gold or Its Utility Is Completely Established Due to Graft Damage: A Critical Review in the Field of Transplantation.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Detecting Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Renal Transplant Rejection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of transplantation · 2026Review
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA as a noninvasive biomarker for diagnosis and monitoring of acute rejection after liver transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Acute and Chronic Rejection of Solid Allograft Transplantation.Results and problems in cell differentiation · 2026Review
- Donor-derived cell-free DNA in solid organ transplantation: analytical considerations, diagnostic performance, and clinical interpretation.Clinical transplantation and research · 2025Review
- Epigenetic signatures on plasma cell-free DNA to detect kidney allograft rejection in a non-invasive way: development of a 10-plex digital PCR assay.Biomarker research · 2025Article
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Allograft Transplantation: Exaggerated Hope or Cautious Reality?Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Diagnostic Utility of dd-cfDNA in Renal Allograft Surveillance: A Single-Center Perspective.Genes · 2025Article
- Integrating Donor Derived Cell-Free DNA Fraction and Absolute Quantification for Enhanced Rejection Diagnosis in Kidney Transplant Recipients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- %dd-cfDNA: The New Frontier for Heart/Lung Transplant Surveillance?Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025Review
- Early Monitoring of Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Kidney Allograft Recipients Followed-Up for Two Years: Experience of One Center.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- MicroRNAs as Potential Graft Rejection or Tolerance Biomarkers and Their Dilemma in Clinical Routines Behaving like Devilish, Angelic, or Frightening Elements.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Application of graft-derived cell-free DNA for solid organ transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In kidney transplantation, a biopsy is currently the gold standard for monitoring the transplanted organ. However, this is far from an ideal screening method given its invasive nature and the discomfort it can cause the patient. Large-scale studies in renal transplantation show that approximately 1% of biopsies generate major complications, with a risk of macroscopic hematuria greater than 3.5%. It would not be until 2011 that a method to detect donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) employing digital PCR was devised based on analyzing the differences in SNPs between the donor and recipient. In addition, since the initial validation studies were carried out at the specific moments in which rejection was suspected, there is still not a good understanding of how dd-cfDNA levels naturally evolve post-transplant. In addition, various factors, both in the recipient and the donor, can influence dd-cfDNA levels and cause increases in the levels of dd-cfDNA themselves without suspicion of rejection. All that glitters in this technology is not gold; therefore, in this article, we discuss the current state of clinical studies, the benefits, and disadvantages.
Indexed as
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.