ArticleiScience2025
Urinary metabolite signatures to detect and differentiate graft injury in kidney transplant patients.
Article in iScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Benchmarking the urinary transplant metabolome of kidney transplant recipients using healthy organ donors.Frontiers in transplantation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current biomarkers are either lagging indicators of injury or have been developed to maximize negative predictive value only for active rejection. In this study, we aimed to demonstrate the utility of urinary metabolites to detect and differentiate types of graft injury. Retrospective urine samples from a training cohort of 102 patients were used to develop a metabolite signature to detect and differentiate a stable graft from graft injury including borderline rejection, active rejection due to under-immunosuppression, and polyomavirus-associated nephropathy (PVAN) due to over-immunosuppression (0.867 area under the curve (AUC), 0.843 accuracy, 0.843 sensitivity, and 0.843 specificity). The signature was validated in an independent retrospective validation cohort of 43 patients (0.878 AUC, 0.864 accuracy, 0.957 sensitivity, and 0.762 specificity). All training and validation samples had matched surveillance and/or indication biopsies. Further, we were also able to nearly perfectly differentiate borderline or active rejection from PVAN. These results could be used to reduce the need for surveillance biopsies and to personalize immunosuppressive therapy to prevent graft injury.
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.