ArticleClinical transplantation and research2025
The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for acute allograft rejection and delayed graft function prediction in kidney transplant recipients: a meta-analysis.
Article in Clinical transplantation and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association Between Perioperative Daprodustat Use and Early Posttransplant Graft Function in Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Study.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2026Article
- Postoperative Day-28 Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Predictor of Early Mortality After Lung Transplantation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) have been the focus of several observational studies investigating their roles in acute allograft rejection (AR) and delayed graft function (DGF) among kidney transplant (KT) recipients. This meta-analysis evaluated the impact of the NLR and PLR on the incidence of AR and DGF in KT recipients. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE and Science Direct from their inception through October 2023. Random effects models were used. To investigate potential sources of heterogeneity, we performed subgroup and meta-regression analyses. The Comprehensive Meta-Analysis ver. 3 software package was used. Results: Seven studies (247 KT recipients with AR or DGF and 475 controls) were analyzed. Our pooled analysis showed a significantly higher NLR in KT recipients with AR (weighted mean difference [WMD], 2.292; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.449-3.135; P<0.001) than in controls. The preoperative NLR was insignificantly higher in patients with DGF (WMD, 0.871; 95% CI, -0.103 to 1.846; P=0.08). The PLR was insignificantly higher in KT recipients with AR than in controls (WMD, 32.125; 95% CI, -19.978 to 84.228; P=0.227). The PLR was not significantly different between KT recipients with DGF and controls. Region, publication year, sample size, donor type, biopsy type, AR type and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score did not affect the outcomes of the meta-analysis. Meta-regression showed that publication year and donor type might be sources of heterogeneity. Conclusions: This study revealed a significantly higher NLR in patients with AR. This suggests that NLR may be utilized as a noninvasive marker for AR in KT recipients.
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.