Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38962472›Full record

ReviewTransplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation2024

European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) Consensus Statement on the Use of Non-invasive Biomarkers for Cardiothoracic Transplant Rejection Surveillance.

Andriana Nikolova, Sean Agbor-Enoh, Saskia Bos, Marisa Crespo-Leiro, Stephan Ensminger, Marta Jimenez-Blanco, Annamaria Minervini, Michael Perch, Javier Segovia, Robin Vos and 2 more

Abstract readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Exploring acute cellular rejection in lung transplantation: insights from donor-derived cell-free DNA analysis.Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Post-lung transplant surveillance in 2026: current practice, variability, and the need for standardization.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. %dd-cfDNA: The New Frontier for Heart/Lung Transplant Surveillance?Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025
    Review
  18. Review
  19. 2024: A Year in Review.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Andriana NikolovaSmidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Sean Agbor-EnohGenomic Research Alliance for Transplantation (GRAfT) and Laboratory of Applied Precision Omics, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Saskia BosNewcastle University Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle uponTyne, United Kingdom.
Marisa Crespo-LeiroCardiology Department, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruna (CHUAC), Instituto de Investigación Biomédica A Coruña (INIBIC), Universitade de Coruna (UDC), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/Network Biomedical Research Center-Cardiovascular Diseases (CIBERCV), La Coruna, Spain.
Stephan EnsmingerKlinik für Herz- und Thorakale Gefäßchirurgie, Universitäres Herzzentrum Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Marta Jimenez-BlancoCardiology Department, University Hospital Ramón y Cajal (Madrid), Centro de Investigación Biomedica en Red-Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain.
Annamaria MinerviniHeart Failure and Transplant Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Michael PerchDepartment of Cardiology, Section for Lung Transplantation, Righospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Javier SegoviaCardiology Department, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda University Hospital, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Puerta de Hierro-Segovia de Arana/Puerta de Hierro Health Research Institute-Segovia de Arana (IDIPHISA), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/Network Biomedical Research Center-Cardiovascular Diseases (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain.
Robin VosDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, UZ Leuven, and Lung Transplant Unit, Department of Chronic Diseases and Metabolism, Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases and Thoracic Surgery (BREATHE), KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Kiran KhushDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, United States.
Luciano PotenaHeart Failure and Transplant Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While allograft rejection (AR) continues to threaten the success of cardiothoracic transplantation, lack of accurate and repeatable surveillance tools to diagnose AR is a major unmet need in the clinical management of cardiothoracic transplant recipients. Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) and transbronchial biopsy (TBBx) have been the cornerstone of rejection monitoring since the field's incipience, but both suffer from significant limitations, including poor concordance of biopsy interpretation among pathologists. In recent years, novel molecular tools for AR monitoring have emerged and their performance characteristics have been evaluated in multiple studies. An international working group convened by ESOT has reviewed the existing literature and provides a series of recommendations to guide the use of these biomarkers in clinical practice. While acknowledging some caveats, the group recognized that Gene-expression profiling and donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) may be used to rule out rejection in heart transplant recipients, but they are not recommended for cardiac allograft vasculopathy screening. Other traditional biomarkers (NT-proBNP, BNP or troponin) do not have sufficient evidence to support their use to diagnose AR. Regarding lung transplant, dd-cfDNA could be used to rule out clinical rejection and infection, but its use to monitor treatment response is not recommended.

Indexed as

BiomarkersGraft RejectionHeart TransplantationLung TransplantationBiopsyCell-Free Nucleic AcidsEuropeGene Expression ProfilingHumansSocieties, MedicalBiomarkersCell-Free Nucleic Acidsbiomarkerguidelinesheart transplantationlung transplantrejection

Identifiers

PMID38962472
PMCPMC11221358

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.