ReviewFrontiers in transplantation2025
Using a combination of biomarkers to monitor allograft dysfunction in lung transplant recipients.
Review in Frontiers in transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Liquid biopsy: current applications and future directions.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Review
- Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Allograft Transplantation: Exaggerated Hope or Cautious Reality?Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Diagnostic approach to elevated dd-cfDNA with reassuring EMB in heart transplantation.Frontiers in transplantation · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Allograft dysfunction is a major limitation of survival in organ transplant recipients including those who have received lung transplantation. Early detection of allograft dysfunction is thus crucial to improve outcomes in these patients. However, there are several causes of allograft dysfunction with allograft infection and rejection being the two important causes. It is often difficult to distinguish between those causes as the presentation can be similar. Allograft rejection, especially antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) are often identified too late where progression has already occurred. Biomarkers like anti-HLA antibodies including donor-specific antibodies (DSA), donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), immune cell function (ICF) assays and next-generation sequencing for microorganisms allow for early identification of allograft dysfunction as well as differentiate rejection from other processes such as infection. This in turn allows for early intervention and, ideally, improved long-term allograft outcomes. Greater evidence exists for these biomarkers in other solid organ transplantations including kidney and heart transplantation, but application to lung transplant recipients is increasing and seems equally promising. In this review, we evaluate existing evidence for using these biomarkers and share our center practice in utilizing a combination of these biomarkers post-transplantation to assess for allograft dysfunction.
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.