ArticleLife science alliance2023
Cell-free chromatin immunoprecipitation to detect molecular pathways in heart transplantation.
Article in Life science alliance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using Disease-Agnostic Genomic Liquid Biopsy in Complex Diagnoses: Real-Life Example of cfChIP-Seq in a Fever of Unknown Origin.JCO precision oncology · 2026Article
- SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination elicit distinct pharyngeal mucosal B cell responses in children.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- Histone Modifications in Cardiovascular Disease: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Opportunities.MedComm · 2026Review
- Liquid biopsy epigenetics: establishing a molecular profile based on cell-free DNA.Molecular oncology · 2026Review
- SNAP: Streamlined Nextflow Analysis Pipeline for Immunoprecipitation-Based Epigenomic Profiling of Circulating Chromatin.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination elicit distinct pharyngeal mucosal B cell responses in children.Research square · 2025Article
- Circulating cell-free DNA methylation patterns indicate cellular sources of allograft injury after liver transplant.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Utility of Plasma Cell-free Chromatin Immunoprecipitation to Detect Cardiac Allograft Rejection.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Circulating, cell-free methylated DNA indicates cellular sources of allograft injury after liver transplant.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Existing monitoring approaches in heart transplantation lack the sensitivity to provide deep molecular assessments to guide management, or require endomyocardial biopsy, an invasive and blind procedure that lacks the precision to reliably obtain biopsy samples from diseased sites. This study examined plasma cell-free DNA chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (cfChIP-seq) as a noninvasive proxy to define molecular gene sets and sources of tissue injury in heart transplant patients. In healthy controls and in heart transplant patients, cfChIP-seq reliably detected housekeeping genes. cfChIP-seq identified differential gene signals of relevant immune and nonimmune molecular pathways that were predominantly down-regulated in immunosuppressed heart transplant patients compared with healthy controls. cfChIP-seq also identified cell-free DNA tissue sources. Compared with healthy controls, heart transplant patients demonstrated greater cell-free DNA from tissue types associated with heart transplant complications, including the heart, hematopoietic cells, lungs, liver, and vascular endothelium. cfChIP-seq may therefore be a reliable approach to profile dynamic assessments of molecular pathways and sources of tissue injury in heart transplant patients.
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.