ReviewScandinavian journal of immunology2025
Redefining the Immunobiology of Organ Transplantation for New Clinical Horizons.
Review in Scandinavian journal of immunology, 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.
- Integrating 3D bioprinting and neural stem cell therapy for central nervous system repair: implications for regenerative neurosurgery.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- The Invisible Lens: Why Theoretical Models Are Essential for Interpreting Immune Phenomena.Scandinavian journal of immunology · 2025Review
- Redefining the Immunobiology of Organ Transplantation for New Clinical Horizons.Scandinavian journal of immunology · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Traditional organ transplantation relies on the Self-Non-self (SNS) model of immunity, focusing on donor-recipient compatibility and aggressive immunosuppression to prevent acute rejection. Although effective early, this strategy does not prevent chronic rejection and cannot account for operational tolerance, failure of perfectly HLA-matched grafts, or the occasional spontaneous acceptance of a fully mismatched organ. The adaptation model of immunity offers a different lens. In the thymus, "central adaptation" programs T cells to recognise self-peptide-MHC (pMHC) so they can later recognise different tissues to facilitate tissue repair and homeostasis. Whether a graft thrives or fails depends on how quickly this self-oriented circuitry can operate. Autografts and isografts arrive with their own extracellular-matrix (ECM) "memory", and recipient T cells immediately recognise their pMHC, triggering tissue-remodelling responses. Allografts must adapt to new ECM-a transition that is associated higher levels of graft injury allowing indirect antigen presentation. Until adaptation is complete, recipient T cells mount cytotoxic rather than reparative responses because of antigen cross-presentation, during which the graft relies on donor-derived tissue-resident memory T cells (T
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.