ArticleKidney international reports2025
Validation of 2 Prognostic Models to Predict Renal Allograft Outcome After IgA Nephropathy Recurrence.
Article in Kidney international reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: IgA nephropathy (IgAN) recurrence (IgANr) after kidney transplantation (KTx) is common and contributes to reducing graft survival. Some tools have been developed to predict the patients who are at a higher risk of poor outcomes among the native (international IgAN prediction tool [IIgAN-PT]) and graft (Bednarova's prediction tool [Bednarova-PT]) kidney. We aimed to analyze their performance in a KTx population other than the originally reported. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study including KTx with biopsy-proven IgANr. IIgAN-PT and Bednarova-PT were used to calculate the risk of death-censored graft loss (DCGL). We assessed the performance of both prediction models using discrimination and calibration metrics and Kaplan-Meier plots. Results: One hundred twenty KTx with IgANr were included. The time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) of Bednarova-PT for predicting DCGL was 83.5 (95% CI: 72.3-94.7) and the calibration slope was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.37-1.49). The time-dependent ROC AUC of IIgAN-PT for predicting DCGL was 87.3 (95% CI: 77.58-97.02) and the calibration slope was 2.49 (95% CI: 0.19-4.13). IIgAN-PT tended to underestimate the graft-loss risk in high-risk individuals. The Kaplan-Meier curve of the highest risk group, defined by using both prediction tools, was clearly separated from the other curves. Conclusion: Both IIgAN-PT and Bednarova-PT performed well in predicting DCGL after IgANr and should be used to identify those KTx at the highest risk. Both models had good discriminatory ability and were well-calibrated, although the calibration slope was higher for IIgAN-PT, tending to underestimate the risk in high-risk individuals.
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.