ライフサイエンスコーパス: posttransplant

1 nal function deterioration 7.7 +/- 5.6 years posttransplant .

2 posttransplant graft outcomes (at median 4 y posttransplant).

3 mized patients were followed up at 5-7 years posttransplant.

4 transplant recipients during the first-year posttransplant.

5 a graft-versus-host-disease episode 5 months posttransplant.

6 ildren, 25% developed obesity within 5-years posttransplant.

7 tic accuracy across tertiles of age and time posttransplant.

8 r reduced by >= 1 percentage point at 1 year posttransplant.

9 s receiving usual care during the first year posttransplant.

10 EVL was added after 3 months posttransplant.

11 s the incidence of IPA beyond the first-year posttransplant.

12 atopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) posttransplant.

13 to 30-40% of patients within the first-year posttransplant.

14 ins a major cause of morbidity and mortality posttransplant.

15 inase-associated lipocalin in the first week posttransplant.

16 of the increased likelihood of complications posttransplant.

17 measure of medication adherence in children posttransplant.

18 ltration rate between CS and MP at 12 months posttransplant.

19 t recruitment was deferred until 6-12 months posttransplant.

20 onverted to belatacept within the first-year posttransplant.

21 r and pibrentasvir, targeted to start 3 days posttransplant.

22 ents and when to optimally immunize patients posttransplant.

23 io, 2.58; CI, 1.56-4.27; I = 0%) up to 12 mo posttransplant.

24 t was histologically more profound by day 10 posttransplant.

25 espectively (ml/min/1.73 m(2) ), at 2 months posttransplant.

26 xis/preemptive therapy within the first-year posttransplant.

27 nous regimen was maintained until 2.97 years posttransplant.

28 graft function but did not require dialysis posttransplant.

29 umab as primary therapy for active AMR early posttransplant.

30 viremia late, that is, after the second year posttransplant.

31 measured pretransplant and daily for 4 days posttransplant.

32 (DSA) and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) posttransplant.

33 ent and de novo FSGS was 3 (0.75-7.5) months posttransplant.

34 be significantly associated with tobacco use posttransplant.

35 (82%) of PAK recipients as early as 14 days posttransplant.

36 ho remained DSA-negative over the first-year posttransplant.

37 plant (n = 598); mean (SD) 1.7 +/- 1.4 years posttransplant.

38 ent antibiotic use was examined for 100 days posttransplant.

39 somewhat associated with primary nonfunction posttransplant.

40 beta cell containing aggregates, 3-76 months posttransplant.

41 death or retransplant during the first year posttransplant.

42 pared to control mice especially at 6 months posttransplant.

43 nt surgery, 1 of whom had further procedures posttransplant.

44 (24.2%) developed de novo DSA within 1-year posttransplant.

45 asp-deficient HSPCs, boosting their function posttransplant.

46 e-preventable infection in the first 5 years posttransplant.

47 waiting liver transplantation or 6-12 months posttransplant.

48 rate, eGFR) and overall survival at 2 years posttransplant.

49 depending on the type of transplant and time posttransplant.

50 lopment (range) was 1.5 months (0.5-17.3 mo) posttransplant.

51 ntly different over time (pre-Tx: 59%; 1-6 m posttransplant: 38%; 7-12 m: 44%; 13-24 m: 47%; and >24

52 148 COVID-19 recipients from <1 to >10 years posttransplant: 69.6% were kidney recipients, and 25.0%

53 ounger age and factors during the first year posttransplant (acute graft rejection, chronically eleva

54 operative risk period within the first month posttransplant (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.493.494.8

55 ammaCD8 T-cell subset significantly inhibits posttransplant alloantibody production in a murine trans

56 vity of alloprimed CD8 T cells that suppress posttransplant alloantibody production.

57 ecific graft loss during the first 60 months posttransplant among 445 consecutive intestinal transpla

58 iopsy-proven GVHD during the first 60 months posttransplant among 445 consecutive intestinal transpla

59 In 17 patients (28 DSA) with posttransplant analyses, persisting DSA posttransplant h

60 Each patient's posttransplant anatomy may be slightly different, making

61 antation, and graft losses in the first-year posttransplant and assessed potential risk factors.

62 oderm cells (PECs) to maintain normoglycemia posttransplant and characterize the phenotype of the PEC

63 (TSA) to blood donors of transfusions given posttransplant and examine the impact on clinical outcom

64 an T cell population during the first 1-3 wk posttransplant and had elevated human IFN-gamma in plasm

65 alence of TCMR is higher in the early months posttransplant and has decreased with the increased pote

66 ms include (1) ischemic preconditioning; (2) posttransplant and host factors playing a greater role i

67 , 2018, and had AMR within the first 30 days posttransplant and treated with eculizumab +/- plasmaphe

68 ally on alternate days for the first 2-weeks posttransplant, and then twice a week till day +50, whil

69 biopsy (KTxBx) 1.7+/-1.4 (mean +/-SD) years posttransplant; and the Cross sectional Cohort (CSC, n=4

70 h cohort windows are better than the current posttransplant assessment with 1-year follow-up, particu

71 The posttransplant assessments were from period prevalent, r

72 Posttransplant assessments with 5-year follow-up and 18-

73 Posttransplant autoreactive T cell phenotype may be a pr

74 Consequently, additional posttransplant B cell depletion effectively prevents lat

75 6), estimated glomerular filtration rate 1-y posttransplant (B, 0.58; 95% CI, -2.07 to 3.22; P = 0.67

76 positive link was identified between IA and posttransplant bacterial infection (OR = 7.51; 95% CI =

77 nflammation in areas of fibrosis (i-IFTA) in posttransplant biopsy specimens has been associated with

78 th histological ATN, milder i-INT, and early posttransplant biopsy times.

79 nted between 2008 and 2018, 36 children with posttransplant BKPyV-DNAemia were identified.

80 PLA3 c.444G allele in the donor (P < 0.001), posttransplant body mass index (P < 0.001), and serum tr

81 owing injury is a proposed mechanism driving posttransplant bronchiolitis obliterans (BO), and its cl

82 In human OLT, posttransplant but not pretransplant HO-1 expression cor

83 atients and guide LRT strategies to optimize posttransplant cancer outcomes.

84 nsplant success was mixed, and assessment of posttransplant cardiac function was limited to an invasi

85 vant to pretransplant risk assessment, early posttransplant care, and assessment of immune response,

86 ust prioritize immunizations in both pre and posttransplant care.

87 surgical considerations as well as pre- and posttransplant care.

88 Posttransplant CDOA was also associated with cardiovascu

89 ted, and none developed clinical evidence of posttransplant cholangiopathy.

90 recipients will successfully complete their posttransplant clinical course, which is crucial for liv

91 the cellular characteristics of islet grafts posttransplant closely mirror the original donor islets.

92 Also, 15-day posttransplant CMI risk stratification and CMI specific

93 S recipients converted within the first-year posttransplant compared to non-HS recipients (log-rank P

94 y apply to immune-mediated allograft injury, posttransplant complications, and disease recurrence, wh

95 chemia-reperfusion injury, which can lead to posttransplant complications.

96 spitalization length of stay (LOS) and early posttransplant complications.

97 with the host immune system in allo-SCT and posttransplant complications.

98 ectomy is a safe and effective treatment for posttransplant constrictive pericarditis.

99 However, the posttransplant course has some distinct features when co

100 To date, no recipients have developed posttransplant COVID-19.

101 ominal tumors with reasonable expectation of posttransplant cure, extensive mesenteric vein thrombosi

102 etic stem cell transplantation (h-HSCT) with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCY) using peripheral

103 ematopoietic stem cell transplantation using posttransplant cyclophosphamide is associated with low r

104 afts and syngeneic MSCs given on day 0 or on posttransplant day 2.

105 -CCM was present in all 4 waitlist deaths, 7 posttransplant deaths, and 20 patients with a CSAE (P <

106 malignancy, de novo donor specific antibody, posttransplant diabetes (PTD), cardiac complications, es

107 Posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) affects up to 50

108 The optimal therapeutic management of posttransplant diabetes mellitus needs to be further inv

109 basis for diarrhea, we investigated whether posttransplant diarrhea is associated with gut dysbiosis

110 Posttransplant diarrhea is associated with kidney allogr

111 heal fecal specimens from 25 recipients with posttransplant diarrhea than in 112 fecal specimens from

112 2 fecal specimens from 46 recipients without posttransplant diarrhea.

113 transplant survivors (n = 14) compared with posttransplant disease controls (P = .01).

114 cal (estimated GFR [eGFR], proteinuria, time posttransplant, donor-specific antibody [DSA]) and molec

115 ics, from both the donor and recipient, with posttransplant eGFR at different time-points, out to 5 y

116 rt transplant is an independent predictor of posttransplant end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and mortal

117 everity of CKD at the time of waitlisting on posttransplant ESRD and mortality.

118 r measured recipient and donor risk factors, posttransplant evaluations at listing predicted differen

119 g and prospectively followed them for 1 year posttransplant for development of cGVHD.

120 lemtuzumab existed during the first 6 months posttransplant for the hazard rate of graft loss-due-to-

121 and alemtuzumab existed during the first 6mo posttransplant for the hazard rate of graft loss-due-to-

122 continued need for hemodialysis within 3 mo posttransplant) for dCLKT (6.3%) compared with eCLKT (19

123 Groups differed in median time posttransplant, for example, R3(injury) 99 days vs R4(la

124 the relationship between ESHP parameters and posttransplant function.

125 elate with the degree of ischemic injury and posttransplant function.

126 comes rank was significantly associated with posttransplant graft and patient survival, with worst te

127 ed >360 miles had a slightly higher risk for posttransplant graft failure than patients traveling <=6

128 ng injury biomarkers was not associated with posttransplant graft outcomes (at median 4 y posttranspl

129 However, the currently reported 1-year posttransplant graft survival assessments are commonly c

130 HR, (0.94) 0.96(0.99) ) transplantation, and posttransplant graft survival evaluations with one addit

131 these assessments at listing with subsequent posttransplant graft survival included candidates listed

132 ients at the time of listing with subsequent posttransplant graft survival.

133 When assessing posttransplant graft viability, clinicians can prioritiz

134 ced by IL-10-dominated response in the 1-6 m posttransplant group, reverting to predominantly IFN-gam

135 with posttransplant analyses, persisting DSA posttransplant had more often DSA-M (6/12; 50%) than non

136 Examining executive functioning (EF) posttransplant has become increasingly prevalent, as EF

137 s to selection of patients at higher risk of posttransplant HCC recurrence.

138 Requiring posttransplant hemodialysis (OR = 3.69; 95% CI = 2.13-6.

139 of 22 organ recipients (64%) had evidence of posttransplant HHV-8 infection.

140 on ACR/severe ACR disappeared beyond 24 days posttransplant (ie, nonproportional hazards).

141 globulin) before HSCT and a short course of posttransplant immunosuppression.

142 o evaluate whether a delayed (ie, 28 +/- 4 d posttransplant) immunosuppression regimen based on evero

143 ng the peritransplant period and 6-16 months posttransplant in 13 donor-recipient pairs using shotgun

144 ween A1AT level and liver volume at 3 months posttransplant in donors or recipients.

145 eillance should be considered beyond 2 years posttransplant in pediatric patients at higher risk.

146 pients were studied: 23 pretransplant and 40 posttransplant (including 5 with pretransplant phenotypi

147 The burden and timeline of posttransplant infections are not comprehensively docume

148 SOT recipients included in the Management of Posttransplant Infections in Collaborating Hospitals (MA

149 possible AMR, 31 controls (negative for any posttransplant injury) and 10 patients with nonimmune-re

150 efore transplantation associate with risk of posttransplant injury.

151 the amnestic response within the first month posttransplant is a rare but devastating cause of early

152 sive features and was treated with the usual posttransplant Kaposi sarcoma management protocol.

153 Better awareness of the risk of posttransplant KS for recipients of organs from donors w

154 SA elimination was associated with increased posttransplant LOS but no significant differences in pre

155 Optimal upfront therapy for posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) arisin

156 EBV type II and III latency tumors, such as posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD), on EB

157 cidence of reoperation, vascular thrombosis, posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease, and estimate

158 Higher incidence of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is re

159 n of other complications post-ITx, including posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder, graft-versu

160 ugh plasma cell neoplasms are a rare form of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder, which could

161 rus (EBV) DNAemia is a major risk factor for posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder; however, im

162 prior solid organ transplantation (SOT) and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD).

163 Early posttransplant M-MDSCs were lower in patients with enhan

164 es, immunosuppression-linked infections, and posttransplant malignancies have precluded widespread IT

165 HCC in the LT population, guidance regarding posttransplant management is lacking.

166 Endoscopy plays a critical role in the posttransplant management of these patients, most common

167 lity criteria, as well as peritransplant and posttransplant management, requires a multidisciplinary

168 ting donor selection, immunosuppression, and posttransplant management.

169 ations about administration of live vaccines posttransplant may need to be reevaluated in the setting

170 ipients had excellent graft function 3 years posttransplant (median serum creatinine 1.5 mg/dL).

171 es 2 and 3 was diagnosed earlier (16.9 weeks posttransplant [median], P = .004), and showed significa

172 Posttransplant metabolic syndrome (PTMS) was most freque

173 Criteria for posttransplant metabolic syndrome was met in 34.6% of EW

174 h there was a trend toward a greater risk of posttransplant metabolic syndrome.

175 synthesize and update the pathophysiology of posttransplant MN, as well as to address unsolved issues

176 nt therapeutic strategies so far deployed in posttransplant MN.

177 Early posttransplant mobilization of M-MDSCs predicts cancer a

178 might provide prognostic information during posttransplant monitoring.

179 was associated with a > 2-fold reduction in posttransplant mortality (P = 0.01) and a nearly 3-fold

180 g any heart remained cost effective provided posttransplant mortality and costs among those receiving

181 igh-BMI remained an independent predictor of posttransplant mortality at 30 days (P < 0.0001) and per

182 65-69 had an increased risk of waitlist and posttransplant mortality compared to younger groups, whe

183 >=65) have an increased risk of waitlist and posttransplant mortality compared to younger individuals

184 ional status and dialysis were predictors of posttransplant mortality in individuals >=65 with NASH,

185 age was associated with an increased risk of posttransplant mortality in the fully adjusted model (ha

186 nder KAS, although longer-term monitoring of posttransplant mortality is warranted.

187 No effect was observed on posttransplant mortality or percent of patients within M

188 patients are at increased risk for pre- and posttransplant mortality, but this risk is not explained

189 efore transplant, and may be associated with posttransplant mortality.

190 When given posttransplant, MSCs home to the graft where they promot

191 in the first biopsy for cause after 90 days posttransplant (n = 598); mean (SD) 1.7 +/- 1.4 years po

192 as the most significant predictor of time to posttransplant NMSC (adjusted P = 9.39 x 10(-7) ; HR = 1

193 negative bronchoscopy during the first year posttransplant, only 6 (3%) developed IPA during the fol

194 ine) followed by CNI withdrawal at week 7-11 posttransplant or (2) standard-exposure cyclosporine, bo

195 2) with corticosteroid withdrawal at 6-month posttransplant or continue mycophenolate mofetil + stand

196 d for ADV in the plasma through Day (D) +100 posttransplant or for 16 weeks after the onset of ADV vi

197 R/rTAC) and steroid elimination from month 5 posttransplant or to continue standard tacrolimus with m

198 Costs were categorized as 1-year posttransplant or transplant episode and standardized us

199 ant predictor of case:control status of NMSC posttransplant (OR = 1.61; adjusted P = .0022; AUC [full

200 EC injury, which translated into an improved posttransplant organ function.

201 Posttransplant outcome assessments are publicly reported

202 We investigated the association of different posttransplant outcome assessments available to patients

203 ) flow beads assay is critical in monitoring posttransplant outcome.

204 nsplant rate over the hospital with the best posttransplant outcomes (marginal relative risk and 95%

205 nary resuscitation (CACPR) leads to inferior posttransplant outcomes due to organ hypoperfusion durin

206 mine the incidence, unique risk factors, and posttransplant outcomes for simultaneous liver kidney (S

207 2005, to March 31, 2014, to evaluate several posttransplant outcomes in individuals who received a ki

208 t function (DGF) is associated with inferior posttransplant outcomes in kidney transplantation.

209 at listing was associated with better 1-year posttransplant outcomes in liver (hazard ratio [HR], 0.9

210 This study aims to evaluate waitlist and posttransplant outcomes in patients with HCC, before and

211 The association of BMI with posttransplant outcomes is highly variable among kidney

212 r cohorts A and B, and further monitoring of posttransplant outcomes is required.

213 opioid use in lung transplant candidates on posttransplant outcomes is unknown.

214 ansplant (DDKT) recipients to study post-KAS posttransplant outcomes not readily available in nationa

215 To study this, we compared posttransplant outcomes of 525 pre-KAS (12/4/2009-12/3/2

216 To study this, we compared posttransplant outcomes of 525 pre-KAS (December 4, 2009

217 Our aim was to compare posttransplant outcomes of patients supported or not by

218 Patient characteristics and posttransplant outcomes were compared.

219 models to estimate associations of incident posttransplant outcomes with serious fall injury in the

220 There was no difference in posttransplant outcomes, including prolonged ventilation

221 HCV status, DGF is associated with inferior posttransplant outcomes.

222 and may represent an opportunity to improve posttransplant outcomes.

223 impact on overall waiting list mortality and posttransplant outcomes.

224 not providing information about longer-term posttransplant outcomes.

225 ht be an effective intervention in improving posttransplant outcomes.

226 fts after transplantation, leading to better posttransplant outcomes.

227 mor recurrence also has a negative effect on posttransplant outcomes.

228 in the United States is commonly measured by posttransplant outcomes.

229 transplant opportunity without an effect on posttransplant outcomes.

230 ss likely to be transplanted due to inferior posttransplant outcomes.

231 t differences in pretransplant ECMO or other posttransplant outcomes.

232 Posttransplant, overall, and intensive care unit LOS inc

233 Posttransplant patient survival was not different, 93.6%

234 The median posttransplant peak in alanine transaminase was 1136 U/L

235 on average lower in the early stages of the posttransplant period (<postoperative mo 12, time of mot

236 ost uniformly describe patients in the early posttransplant period (days to months) with the typical

237 g of ACR risk, particularly during the early posttransplant period.

238 safety, efficacy, and timing in the pre- and posttransplant periods; making a complete immunization r

239 While posttransplant PGNMID can change its apparent clonality

240 e training should be offered in the pre- and posttransplant phase for both adults and children.

241 Transplant providers' attitudes regarding posttransplant pregnancy vary widely.

242 not associated with recommendations to avoid posttransplant pregnancy.

243 ased a 5-tier system for categorizing 1-year posttransplant program evaluations.

244 ability to monitor patients less invasively posttransplant, promises to usher in the era of precisio

245 nsplant desensitization therapies, we used a posttransplant prophylactic strategy.

246 A posttransplant protocol was applied to patients transpla

247 transfusions are allogeneic, and when given posttransplant (PTBT) they may independently increase th

248 eas recipients given the potential impact on posttransplant quality of life.

249 , all six patients who consented 6-12 months posttransplant received the cell infusion.

250 By demonstrating the importance of posttransplant recipient HO-1 phenotype in hepatic macro

251 , achieving cPR portends significantly lower posttransplant recurrence and superior survival.

252 ammatory response after brain death (BD) and posttransplant reperfusion injury play significant roles

253 , ACTH gel might be an effective therapy for posttransplant resistant FSGS cases that fail to respond

254 IL-10-oriented posttransplant response was associated with relatively l

255 Clustering analysis of posttransplant responses revealed two main agglomeration

256 ptive therapy strategy within the first-year posttransplant resulted in 4% incidence of IPA at 4-year

257 % of survivors) were assessed (M = 3.9 years posttransplant, SD = 0.8).

258 Posttransplant serum creatinine) was compared among thes

259 Renal transplant recipients beyond 1 month posttransplant should not undergo screening and treatmen

260 tively collecting data from OTRs attending 2 posttransplant skin surveillance clinics: 1 in London, U

261 Posttransplant stroke and need for dialysis were the str

262 nscriptomes are comparable pretransplant and posttransplant, suggesting that the cellular characteris

263 The TAM score can help stratify posttransplant survival and identify an optimal transpla

264 with MD undergoing HTx had similar long-term posttransplant survival compared with matched cardiomyop

265 Posttransplant survival did not differ significantly bet

266 o produce a prognostic model to help predict posttransplant survival in patients transplanted with gr

267 Significant predictive factors of posttransplant survival included alpha-fetoprotein, size

268 D, no statistical difference was observed in posttransplant survival of Becker MD versus non-Becker M

269 Posttransplant survival of MD cohort was not statistical

270 ay provide insights on candidate listing and posttransplant survival outcomes for deceased-donor kidn

271 Five-year posttransplant survival was 74.5% (95% confidence interv

272 changes in pretransplant patient complexity, posttransplant survival, and cause-specific hospitalizat

273 Wait time did not predict posttransplant survival.

274 n who are listed for SLK but may not improve posttransplant survival.

275 t risk factors on short-term and longer-term posttransplant survival.

276 he first year after bilateral LT with 3-year posttransplant survival.

277 Posttransplant, sustained suppression of 3 of 3, 4 of 6,

278 At both 1 month and 6 months posttransplant, the urine voiding behavior of recipient

279 We focused on the posttransplant time period, when the majority of patient

280 y of HCC and non-HCC recipients in different posttransplant time periods (epochs) to separate the imp

281 splant recipients randomized at 4 to 6 weeks posttransplant to receive everolimus + reduced-exposure

282 Anakinra treatment administered at 1-hour posttransplant to recipients of cardiac allografts from

283 e, and the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of posttransplant tobacco cessation interventions.

284 The posttransplant tumor incidence in these patients was com

285 Significant increases in posttransplant tumor incidence with hazard ratio ranging

286 isease, type 2 diabetes, and graft function, posttransplant urinary tract infection and rejection tre

287 Using all pre- and posttransplant variables until 3 and 12 months (n = 65),

288 ent weight gain for all recipients at 1 year posttransplant was 10% (interquartile range, 2.7%-19.3%)

289 Cumulative incidence of obesity 5-years posttransplant was 24.1%.

290 imated glomerular filtration rate at 2 years posttransplant was 61.3 (24.0-90.0) mL/min/1.73 m when X

291 Furthermore, CDOA in the first year posttransplant was associated with an approximately 2-fo

292 Continued opioid use at 1-year posttransplant was common (27/56, 48%).

293 percent of the variability in eGFR at 1-year posttransplant was explained by our model containing cli

294 recipients with functional grafts at 90 days posttransplant were followed prospectively for a median

295 Higher M-MDSC counts at day 14 posttransplant were observed in patients who subsequentl

296 evere ACR) but only during the first 24 days posttransplant (when the ACR hazard rate was at its peak

297 4.807.8812.93, P < 0.001) in the first month posttransplant, whereas MELD 35-40 candidates had a 68%

298 neic cardiac transplant recipients at 1-hour posttransplant with Anakinra, a US Food and Drug Adminis

299 orrected TAC CV and TAC TTR during the first posttransplant year in a cohort of 538 patients with a m

300 orrected TAC CV and TAC TTR during the first posttransplant year in a cohort of 538 patients with a m