ArticleTransplantation direct2026
The Evolution of Molecular Phenotypes Through Time in Kidney Transplant Recipients.
Article in Transplantation direct, 2026. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The correlation between histologic lesions and allograft gene expression data is a subject of significant interest. Most analyses include a single for-cause biopsy from each recipient, precluding serial assessment of gene scores. Methods: Using the nCounter system, we evaluated the Banff Human Organ Transplant gene panel in a unique cohort of 8 renal transplant recipients, each with 3 distinct histologic phenotypes (no rejection, T cell-mediated rejection [TCMR], and antibody-mediated rejection [AMR]), to explore the serial evolution of molecular phenotypes. Results: No rejection biopsies showed large interindividual differences in TCMR and AMR gene scores. Compared with biopsies with No Rejection, TCMR gene scores were greater in those with TCMR (mean fold change 1.95 ± 0.87, Conclusions: In most cases, deviations in gene scores occurred in the expected direction as recipients transitioned through histologic phenotypes. The unexpected deviations in gene scores and the significant variability among individuals within histologic phenotypes warrant further investigation.
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.