ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation with high isoagglutinin titres: practice pattern and problem solving: a German multi-centre survey.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation (ABOi-KT) expands the donor pool, yet baseline anti-ABO isoagglutinin titres ≥ 1:512 remain challenging and practice is highly variable. We surveyed the German transplant centres to capture current management of very high-titre ABOi candidates and centre responses to insufficient titre decline. Methods: Thirty-six centres were invited to complete an anonymised 19-item web-based questionnaire (January-March 2025) on (i) centre activity, (ii) isoagglutinin testing and isoagglutinin titre limits (iii) desensitisation protocol, (iv) ABO abort criteria and (v) escalation & re-attempt strategies. Data are reported descriptively. Results: Of 36 eligible programmes, 27 (75%) responded. Thirteen (48%) accept any isoagglutinin titre; the rest cap at 1:512 (15%), 1:1024 (26%) or 1:2048 (11%). Centres without a cap reported greater 5-year ABOi experience (median 20 vs 9 cases). IgG isoagglutinin titres are monitored in 26/27 centres, IgM in 18/27. All centres use rituximab, usually 4 weeks pre-transplant. Antigen-specific immunoadsorption (IA) is the principal antibody-removal method in 88%, while 54% also employ plasma exchange (PLEX). In cases of insufficient titre decline, different strategies are employed. Desensitisation is halted mainly for refractory isoagglutinin titres or serious complications; 67% of programmes would re-attempt after 3-6 months, typically with intensified apheresis and/or additional B-cell depletion. Discussion: German centres display marked protocol heterogeneity, but all accept very high titres, relying on rituximab plus IA. Greater experience correlates with abandonment of fixed cut-offs. Harmonised isoagglutinin titre assays, evidence-based futility criteria and multicentre registries are needed to optimise high-titre ABOi-KT.
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.