ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
The Biomarker Revolution in Kidney Transplantation.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the first successful kidney transplant in 1954, transplant medicine has advanced significantly, achieving favorable one-year outcomes. However, despite excellent short-term outcomes, long-term renal allograft survival remains sub-optimal, with acute rejection continuing to be a major contributor to death-censored allograft loss. Current approaches for post-transplant surveillance and rejection monitoring rely on either nonspecific markers that often detect injury late in their course or invasive procedures associated with procedural risks and complications. To address these limitations, numerous non-invasive biomarkers have been introduced into solid organ transplantation research with the goal of improving allograft surveillance, facilitating earlier detection of rejection and complementing existing diagnostic approaches. Although several biomarkers have demonstrated clinical promise, none currently possess sufficient accuracy to replace kidney allograft biopsy. Biomarkers under investigation include blood-, tissue- and urine-based specimens. Their development and validation as independent markers have been limited by smaller sample size, heterogenous targets, variable performance characteristics and suboptimal sensitivity and specificity. In response, the field has increasingly shifted toward multimodal approaches that combine biomarkers and incorporate artificial intelligence to improve diagnostic accuracy and outcomes prediction. This review summarizes current biomarkers, discusses their limitations and explores future directions for biomarker development and clinical implementation.
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.