ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Clinical application of PIRCHE scores: reclassifying immunologic risk in patients with medium eplet mismatch.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Molecular histocompatibility assessment using eplet mismatch and Predicted Indirectly ReCognizable HLA Epitopes (PIRCHE) scores has improved immunologic risk stratification in kidney transplantation, but its clinical implementation remains limited, particularly for donor-recipient pairs with medium eplet mismatch. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 493 adult kidney transplant recipients (2021-2024). Eplet mismatch was categorized based on Wiebe/Nickerson criteria, and medium mismatch pairs were further stratified using PIRCHE-T2 and PIRCHE-B scores. The primary outcome was early allograft injury within one year, defined as a composite of donor-specific antibody (DSA) development, histologic or molecular rejection, or elevation of donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA). Associations were assessed using Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: Zero and low eplet mismatch groups had similar outcomes and were combined as the low-risk reference group. Compared with this group, medium eplet mismatch was associated with increased risk of early allograft injury (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41-4.23), biopsy-conditioned rejection (aHR 7.47, 95% CI 2.07-26.91), and elevated dd-cfDNA (aHR 4.83, 95% CI 1.70-13.75), while high mismatch conferred greater risk (aHR 5.17, 95% CI 2.86-9.33). Among medium mismatch recipients, ~20% were reclassified as medium-low risk based on PIRCHE scores; this subgroup showed no statistically significant increase in risk relative to the low-risk group for early allograft injury (aHR 1.87, 95% CI 0.92-3.81), DSA, rejection, or dd-cfDNA, although confidence intervals were wide and a clinically meaningful increase in risk cannot be excluded. Conclusions: Medium eplet mismatch recipients with low PIRCHE scores had no statistically significant increase in risk compared with the zero/low mismatch group, although confidence intervals were wide. Molecular matching may help refine risk stratification and expand donor options, but the PIRCHE-T2/-B thresholds-derived from an overlapping cohort-require external validation before clinical use.
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.