A selective Pd probe is described, which shows fluorometric and colorimetric responses towards both Pd(2+) ions and Pd(0)-complexes with excellent sensitivity and potential application. The fluorescence quenching effect of Pd(2+) is inhibited by filling up d-orbitals after the reduction from Pd(2+) (open-shell) to Pd(0) (closed-shell).

Donor‐derived cell‐free DNA (dd‐cfDNA) has been evaluated as a rejection marker in organ transplantation. This study sought to assess the utility of dd‐cfDNA to diagnose graft injury in liver transplant recipients (LTR) and as a predictive biomarker prior to different causes of graft dysfunction. Plasma from single and multicenter LTR cohorts was analyzed for dd‐cfDNA. Phenotypes of treated biopsy‐proven acute rejection (AR, N = 57), normal function (TX, N = 94), and acute dysfunction no rejection (ADNR; N = 68) were divided into training and test sets. In the training set, dd‐cfDNA was significantly different between AR versus TX (AUC 0.95, 5.3% cutoff) and AR versus ADNR (AUC 0.71, 20.4% cutoff). Using these cutoffs in the test set, the accuracy and NPV were 87% and 100% (AR vs. TX) and 66.7% and 87.8% (AR vs. ADNR). Blood samples collected serially from LTR demonstrated incremental elevations in dd‐cfDNA prior to the onset of graft dysfunction (AR > ADNR), but not in TX. Dd‐cfDNA also decreased following treatment of rejection. In conclusion, the serial elevation of dd‐cfDNA identifies pre‐clinical graft injury in the context of normal liver function tests and is greatest in rejection. This biomarker may help detect early signs of graft injury and rejection to inform LTR management strategies.

Background and objectivesSubclinical acute rejection is associated with poor outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. As an alternative to surveillance biopsies, noninvasive screening has been established with a blood gene expression profile. Donor-derived cellfree DNA (cfDNA) has been used to detect rejection in patients with allograft dysfunction but not tested extensively in stable patients. We hypothesized that we could complement noninvasive diagnostic performance for subclinical rejection by combining a donor-derived cfDNA and a gene expression profile assay.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe performed a post hoc analysis of simultaneous blood gene expression profile and donor-derived cfDNA assays in 428 samples paired with surveillance biopsies from 208 subjects enrolled in an observational clinical trial (Clinical Trials in Organ Transplantation-08). Assay results were analyzed as binary variables, and then, their continuous scores were combined using logistic regression. The performance of each assay alone and in combination was compared.ResultsFor diagnosing subclinical rejection, the gene expression profile demonstrated a negative predictive value of 82%, a positive predictive value of 47%, a balanced accuracy of 64%, and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.75. The donor-derived cfDNA assay showed similar negative predictive value (84%), positive predictive value (56%), balanced accuracy (68%), and area under the receiver operating curve (0.72). When both assays were negative, negative predictive value increased to 88%. When both assays were positive, positive predictive value increased to 81%. Combining assays using multivariable logistic regression, area under the receiver operating curve was 0.81, significantly higher than the gene expression profile (P<0.001) or donor-derived cfDNA alone (P=0.006). Notably, when cases were separated on the basis of rejection type, the gene expression profile was significantly better at detecting cellular rejection (area under the receiver operating curve, 0.80 versus 0.62; P=0.001), whereas the donor-derived cfDNA was significantly better at detecting antibody-mediated rejection (area under the receiver operating curve, 0.84 versus 0.71; P=0.003).ConclusionsA combination of blood-based biomarkers can improve detection and provide less invasive monitoring for subclinical rejection. In this study, the gene expression profile detected more cellular rejection, whereas donor-derived cfDNA detected more antibody-mediated rejection.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

No abstract

No abstract

Background. Noninvasive biomarkers distinguishing early immune activation before acute rejection (AR) could more objectively inform immunosuppression management in liver transplant recipients (LTRs). We previously reported a genomic profile distinguishing LTR with AR versus stable graft function. This current study includes key phenotypes with other causes of graft dysfunction and uses a novel random forest approach to augment the specificity of predicting and diagnosing AR. Methods. Gene expression results in LTRs with AR versus non-AR (combination of other causes of graft dysfunction and normal function) were analyzed from single and multicenter cohorts. A 70:30 approach (61 ARs; 162 non-ARs) was used for training and testing sets. Microarray data were normalized using a LT-specific vector. Results. Random forest modeling on the training set generated a 59-probe classifier distinguishing AR versus non-AR (area under the curve 0.83; accuracy 0.78, sensitivity 0.70, specificity 0.81, positive predictive value 0.54, negative predictive value [NPV] 0.89; F-score 0.61). Using a locked threshold, the classifier performed well on the testing set (accuracy 0.72, sensitivity 0.67, specificity 0.73, positive predictive value 0.48, NPV 0.86; F-score 0.56). Probability scores increased in samples preceding AR versus non-AR, when liver function tests were normal, and decreased following AR treatment (P < 0.001). Ingenuity pathway analysis of the genes revealed a high percentage related to immune responses and liver injury. Conclusions. We have developed a blood-based biologically relevant biomarker that can be detected before AR-associated graft injury distinct from LTR never developing AR. Given its high NPV (“rule out AR”), the biomarker has the potential to inform precision-guided immunosuppression minimization in LTRs.

BaCKgRoUND aND aIMS:A high proportion of patients develop chronic kidney disease (CKD) after liver transplantation (LT). We aimed to develop clinical/protein models to predict future glomerular filtration rate (GFR) deterioration in this population. appRoaCH aND ReSUltS: In independent multicenter discovery (CTOT14) and single-center validation (BUMC) cohorts, we analyzed kidney injury proteins in serum/plasma samples at month 3 after LT in recipients with preserved GFR who demonstrated subsequent GFR deterioration versus preservation by year 1 and year 5 in the BUMC cohort. In CTOT14, we also examined correlations between serial protein levels and GFR over the first year. A month 3 predictive model was constructed from clinical and protein level variables using the CTOT14 cohort (n = 60). Levels of β-2 microglobulin and CD40 antigen and presence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection predicted early (year 1) GFR deterioration (area under the curve [AUC], 0.814). We observed excellent validation of this model (AUC, 0.801) in the BUMC cohort (n = 50) who had both early and late (year 5) GFR deterioration. At an optimal threshold, the model had the following performance characteristics in CTOT14 and BUMC, respectively: accuracy (0.75, 0.8), sensitivity (0.71, 0.67), specificity (0.78, 0.88), positive predictive value (0.74, 0.75), and negative predictive value (0.76, 0.82). In the serial CTOT14 analysis, several proteins, including β-2 microglobulin and CD40, correlated with GFR changes over the first year. CoNClUSIoNS:We have validated a clinical/protein model (PRESERVE) that early after LT can predict future renal deterioration versus preservation with high accuracy. This model may help select recipients at higher risk for subsequent CKD for early, proactive renal sparing strategies. (Hepatology