ArticleHLA2026
The Phenotype List String Grammar for Enhanced Protein and Antigen Reporting in the Immunogenetic Context.
Article in HLA, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Standardised data representation is fundamental to the integrity, interoperability and reproducibility of immunogenetics and histocompatibility testing. While well-established standards such as the genotype list (GL) String, histoimmunogenetics markup language (HML) and minimum information for reporting next-generation sequence genotyping exist for encoding HLA genotyping results, no equivalent syntax currently exists for describing phenotype- or antigen-level information that underlies antibody testing and immunological risk assessment. We introduce the phenotype list (PL) String grammar and the phenotype list string code (PLSC) syntax, structured, machine-readable grammars designed to represent antigen- and protein-level data across three contexts: (1) the HLA phenotype composition of assay reagents, (2) test results derived from those reagents and (3) clinical interpretations of HLA antibody specificities. PL String extends the hierarchical logic of the GL String grammar, while adapting a subset of GL String delimiters and rules to describe ambiguity, heterodimeric relationships and phenotypic composition. PL String incorporates explicit namespace definitions (e.g., World Health Organization HLA Nomenclature Committee for Factors of the HLA System, Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, Eurotransplant and NMDP) to ensure traceability and compatibility with existing regulatory and operational frameworks. By harmonising how HLA phenotypic and antibody data are encoded, PL Strings enable automated data exchange between laboratories, registries and information systems, reducing transcription errors and improving computational interpretation. This new grammar establishes a foundation for interoperable representation of serologic and functional HLA data, facilitating reproducible research and enhancing clinical decision support in transplantation and immunogenetics. Technical specifications for PL Strings and PLSCs are available at plstring.org.
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.