Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39402819›Full record

ArticleAnnals of transplantation2024

Urinary Chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10 Are Non-Invasive Biomarkers of Kidney Transplant Rejection.

Ernesta Mačionienė, Martynas Simanavičius, Monika Vitkauskaitė, Alvita Vickienė, Roberta Staučė, Artūras Vinikovas, Marius Miglinas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. T-Cell Remodeling in Renal Fibrosis: From Acute Injury to Chronic Kidney Disease.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Diagnostic Potential of Urine CXCL10 and Donor-Derived cfDNA in Kidney Transplant Rejection.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026
    Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Ernesta MačionienėInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Gastroenterology, Nephro-Urology and Surgery Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.ORCID 0000-0001-6554-5552
Martynas SimanavičiusInstitute of Biotechnology, Life Sciences Center, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Monika VitkauskaitėInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Gastroenterology, Nephro-Urology and Surgery Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Alvita VickienėInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Gastroenterology, Nephro-Urology and Surgery Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Roberta StaučėNephrology Center, Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Clinics, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Artūras VinikovasNephrology Center, Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Clinics, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Marius MiglinasInstitute of Clinical Medicine, Gastroenterology, Nephro-Urology and Surgery Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Rejection is the main cause of kidney allograft failure, and kidney biopsy is the criterion standard method to diagnose it. However, non-invasive techniques to detect kidney transplant rejection are necessary. This study aimed to evaluate urinary chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10 as potential biomarkers of kidney transplant rejection and to analyze chemokine association with allograft prognosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS We collected 117 urine samples from kidney transplant recipients undergoing allograft biopsy. CXCL9 and CXCL10 levels were measured by ELISA and the ratio to urine creatinine was calculated. Histology and other clinical data were collected from medical records. RESULTS The diagnostic performance of urinary CXCL9/cre in discriminating rejection from all other histological groups showed an ROC AUC value of 0.728 (95% CI 0.632-0.824, p<0.001), and a cut-off value 0.11 ng/mmol had the best sensitivity (76.9%) and specificity (73.1%). The ability of CXCL10/cre to discriminate transplant rejection from all other histological groups had ROC AUC value 0.73 (95% CI 0.63-0.84, P<0.001), the cut-off value 0.42 ng/mmol with best sensitivity (71.4%) and specificity (84.6%). CXCL9 and CXCL10 levels were also increased in patients with polyoma BK virus, recurrent AA amyloidosis, and thrombotic microangiopathy. Patients with higher CXCL9/cre (≥0.11 ng/mmol) and CXCL10/cre (≥0.42 ng/mmol) levels were at increased risk of transplant progression to ESRD (HR 3.25, 95% CI=1.27-8.36, P=0.01), irrespective of serum creatinine at the time of biopsy. CONCLUSIONS Urinary CXCL9/cre and CXCL10/cre were able to distinguished between patients with transplant rejection and those without rejection. High levels of urinary CXCL9/cre and CXCL10/cre were associated with worse allograft survival.

Indexed as

BiomarkersChemokine CXCL10Chemokine CXCL9Graft RejectionKidney TransplantationAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedBiomarkersChemokine CXCL10Chemokine CXCL9CXCL10 protein, humanCXCL9 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID39402819
PMCPMC11490196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.