ReviewCureus2025
Renal Allograft Pathology Classifications: Contemporary Updates and Diagnostic Utility.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Clinicopathological Correlation of Kidney Allograft Biopsies According to the Banff 2022 Classification.Cureus · 2026Article
- Rejection-Focused Precision Medicine in Kidney Transplantation: Biology, Biomarkers, and Artificial Intelligence.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for end-stage renal disease; however, long-term graft survival continues to be jeopardized by rejection, chronic allograft injury, and infection. Histopathological assessment of renal allograft biopsies remains the diagnostic gold standard, yet interpretation variability has historically hindered consistency across institutions and clinical trials. To address this, international consensus efforts established the Banff Classification, with biennial updates refining and expanding its scope. This review outlines the evolution of renal allograft pathology classification systems, emphasizing key Banff revisions that introduced diagnostic criteria for T cell-mediated and antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR), borderline changes, chronic active rejection, and polyomavirus nephropathy. Modern frameworks increasingly incorporate morphology, immunohistochemistry, and emerging molecular diagnostics to improve accuracy and reproducibility. In clinical practice, the Banff system informs immunosuppressive strategies, guides treatment response monitoring, supports prognostication, and standardizes endpoints in clinical trials. Ongoing challenges include interobserver variability, sampling limitations, and restricted access to advanced molecular and digital technologies in resource-limited settings. Future directions point toward integrating multi-omics, digital pathology, and artificial intelligence to create a unified, patient-centered diagnostic platform that extends Banff's legacy of consensus and adaptability.
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.