ライフサイエンスコーパス: donor-specific antibody

1 ated rejection on the basis of histology and donor-specific antibody.

2 the presence of microcirculation lesions and donor-specific antibody.

3 , and occur more frequently in patients with donor-specific antibody.

4 mechanisms underlying the downregulation of donor-specific antibodies.

5 e 1-year eGFR only in kidney recipients with donor-specific antibodies.

6 zation and the development of posttransplant donor-specific antibodies.

7 or suboptimal immunosuppression and de novo donor-specific antibodies.

8 ntation in infants, who cease producing only donor-specific antibodies.

9 ates, C4d positivity and high serum anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies.

10 osition and significant decline in their HLA donor-specific antibodies.

11 ated rejection confirmed by demonstration of donor-specific antibodies.

12 nondonor-specific antibodies in addition to donor-specific antibodies.

13 None of the DST-treated animals developed donor-specific antibodies.

14 rejection or, at least, for the presence of donor-specific antibodies.

15 s, peritubular capillary C4d deposition, and donor-specific antibodies.

16 rejection, viral infections, and class 1 HLA donor-specific antibodies.

17 mediated rejection (ABMR) in the presence of donor-specific antibodies.

18 ble, and 22 recipients had unacceptably high donor-specific antibodies.

19 and allograft dysfunction in recipients with donor-specific antibodies.

20 %) and their recipient had unacceptably high donor-specific antibodies (28%).

21 ury, (2) may occur before the development of donor-specific antibodies, (3) predict the development o

22 s; P<0.001), increased occurrence of de novo donor-specific antibodies (52% vs. 13%; P=0.001), and no

23 significant at 8 years across all levels of donor-specific antibody: 89.2% for recipients of kidney

24 and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) remove donor-specific antibodies, a cause of acute humoral reje

25 Presence of donor-specific antibodies (Abs) is detrimental to posttr

26 ivariate survival predictors were absence of donor-specific antibody, absence of recipient splenectom

27 toring revealed transient moderate levels of donor-specific antibodies, adequate immunocompetence, an

28 er pretransplant panel reactive antibody and donor-specific antibody affected KTx outcome in SLK.

29 y predict patients at risk for production of donor-specific antibody after transplantation.

30 Although a link between donor-specific antibodies against human leukocyte antige

31 Preexisting donor-specific antibodies against human leukocyte antige

32 survival but did suppress the development of donor-specific antibodies, an effect not achieved with C

33 d by simultaneous occurrence of pAMR on EMB, donor specific antibodies and allograft dysfunction.

34 Eleven percent of patients developed donor-specific antibodies and 7% of patients experienced

35 ansplant biopsies from patients with de novo donor-specific antibodies and eighteen 1-year surveillan

36 IdeS reduced or eliminated donor-specific antibodies and permitted HLA-incompatible

37 ts augment early inflammation in response to donor-specific antibodies and that platelet-derived medi

38 cases because of the presence of high titer donor-specific antibodies and the potential of the liver

39 ar, only those who further developed de novo donor-specific antibodies and transplant glomerulopathy

40 Eighty-six of these recipients had donor-specific antibodies and underwent protocol biopsy,

41 ) after adjustment for pretransplant/de novo donor-specific antibody and delayed graft function.

42 in a donor-specific manner, but still formed donor-specific antibody and generated T cells that infil

43 m anti-HLA antibodies to donor HLA antigens (donor-specific antibodies) and serum MHC class 1-related

44 eloped anti-HLA antibodies, of which 6% were donor-specific antibodies, and 6% developed anti-MICA an

45 ent monitoring for adverse events, outcomes, donor-specific antibodies, and renal function was perfor

46 ironment insults (i.e. abnormal physiology), donor-specific antibodies, and T cell-mediated immunity.

47 sing serum creatinine with marked rebound of donor-specific antibody, and a biopsy that showed featur

48 sensitized recipients (positive cross-match, donor-specific antibody, and elevated panel reactive ant

49 persistently chimeric subject has developed donor-specific antibody, and renal function has remained

50 converse occurs, and whether changes on non-donor specific antibodies are associated with any outcom

51 Donor-specific antibodies are also formed de novo, and t

52 Current therapies to modify donor-specific antibodies are limited and ineffective in

53 C4d deposits in the skin and circulating donor-specific antibodies are rarely detected, suggestin

54 wed decreased mean fluorescence intensity of donor-specific antibodies as soon as day 12, with no sig

55 s), immunostaining, and circulating anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies at the time of biopsy, togethe

56 with bolus steroid treatment, and four were donor-specific antibody+ at T=0 or T=6.

57 Donor-specific antibody avoidance and reduction strategi

58 ugh none of the nine subjects had detectable donor-specific antibodies before or after transplantatio

59 al transplant patients who had no detectable donor-specific antibody before transplantation.

60 MR score was associated with the presence of donor-specific antibodies, biopsy indication, Banff ct,

61 humoral rejection (AHR) has been removal of donor-specific antibodies by plasmapheresis (PPH) in con

62 Three patients had donor-specific antibody by flow PRA (two anti-DR4 and on

63 fined as 3 of 4 criteria: renal dysfunction, donor specific antibody, C4d positivity on biopsy, and h

64 The four diagnostic tenets of donor-specific antibodies, C4d staining, histopathologic

65 De novo alloantibodies (donor-specific antibody) contribute to antibody-mediated

66 With Luminex single antigen bead technology, donor-specific antibodies could be identified before ris

67 Donor-specific antibodies create an immunologic barrier

68 ious transplants, panel reactive antibodies, donor specific antibody, crossmatches (CMXs), patient an

69 The use of donor-specific antibodies demonstrated that this was due

70 Donor-specific antibodies detected by solid-phase assays

71 Donor-specific antibodies detected by solid-phase assays

72 ches serve as potential epitopes for de novo donor specific antibody development and correlate with l

73 is a risk factor for development of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) and can contribute to

74 Recent evidence suggests that de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) are associated with an

75 be used in a cohort of patients with de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) as an early marker to

76 role of protocol kidney biopsies for de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) in kidney transplant r

77 Production of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) is a major risk factor

78 Development of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) is associated with lat

79 In renal transplant patients with de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) we studied the value o

80 We hypothesized that HLA class II de novo donor-specific antibody (dnDSA) development correlates w

81 De novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSAs) have been associated

82 hronic rejection is associated with anti-HLA donor specific antibodies (DSA) and complement C4d depos

83 The potential role of donor specific antibodies (DSA) was examined in 194 prim

84 irst to determine the epitope specificity of donor specific antibody (DSA) in the serum of alloimmuni

85 of chronic rejection (CR) is multifactorial, donor specific antibody (DSA) is considered to have a ca

86 afts can be elicited by adoptive transfer of donor specific antibody (DSA) to class I MHC antigens an

87 Development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) after lung transplantati

88 itive cytomegalovirus serostatus (P = 0.02), donor-specific antibodies (DSA) against HLA class II (P

89 g Banff 2007 criteria along with presence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and acute rise in serum

90 We determined the role of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and antibodies (Abs) to

91 ibody-mediated rejection (CAABMR), with C4d, donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and other lesions of chr

92 High titer donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and positive crossmatch

93 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are associated with acut

94 It is widely accepted that HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are associated with anti

95 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are considered as reliab

96 ected at donor human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies (DSA) associated with adverse

97 Circulating donor-specific antibodies (DSA) cause profound changes i

98 e role of anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies (DSA) detected by Luminex in t

99 Circulating donor-specific antibodies (DSA) detected on bead arrays

100 Postkidney transplant donor-specific antibodies (DSA) have been identified as

101 and 24 months protocol biopsies and anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) in 140 low immunological

102 n (AR) associated with de novo production of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) is a clinicopathological

103 on into sensitized patients with preexisting donor-specific antibodies (DSA) is very challenging.

104 Presence of circulating donor-specific antibodies (DSA) may be associated with w

105 occur in patients with preexisting anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) or in patients who devel

106 Anti-HLA antibodies and especially donor-specific antibodies (DSA) play a significant role

107 er C1q-fixing antibodies distinguish de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA) that are clinically rele

108 AND Of 37 AMR+ patients, 22 (60%) developed donor-specific antibodies (DSA) to HLA compared with 6 o

109 or every 2 months, a test was performed for donor-specific antibodies (DSA) using Luminex mixed and/

110 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) were detected in posttra

111 were: HLA antibodies at transplant, de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA), antibody-mediated rejec

112 verity of each patient and were negative for donor-specific antibodies (DSA), C4d, and microcirculati

113 ermine the association between C4d staining, donor-specific antibodies (DSA), histological features,

114 nd correlated with morphology, ELISA screen, donor-specific antibodies (DSA), response to treatment,

115 study including 85 biopsies of patients with donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

116 radigm with respect to the interpretation of donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

117 f-reactive antibodies that develop alongside donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

118 , such as capillary C4d or complement-fixing donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

119 ive (CM) patients were tested for C1q-fixing donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

120 idney-combined organ recipients with de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA) and histologic evidence of

121 We hypothesized that de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA) causes complement-dependen

122 On average, the level of HLA class I donor-specific antibody (DSA) decreased by 32%, whereas

123 cytometric techniques were used to test for donor-specific antibody (DSA) formation.

124 e importance of C4d staining and circulating donor-specific antibody (DSA) in subsequent LGF.

125 Avoiding donor-specific antibody (DSA) is difficult for sensitize

126 Donor-specific antibody (DSA) is the major barrier to su

127 ceived renal transplants with a pretreatment donor-specific antibody (DSA) level of more than 500 in

128 We have demonstrated that immunodominant donor-specific antibody (DSA) more than 100 mean fluores

129 e the prevalence and investigate the role of donor-specific antibody (DSA) on intestinal graft outcom

130 lants and pregnancies as sensitizing events, donor-specific antibody (DSA) relative intensity scores

131 1 for cause biopsies [FCBx]) with concurrent donor-specific antibody (DSA) studies, C4d staining, and

132 of this study were to determine the level of donor-specific antibody (DSA) that allows for successful

133 Routine monitoring for donor-specific antibody (DSA) was begun in September 200

134 based on the results of a VXM, in which the donor-specific antibody (DSA) was prospectively evaluate

135 glomerulus were strongly associated with TG, donor-specific antibody (DSA), and C4d staining.

136 ly associated with the generation of de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA), antibody-mediated-rejecti

137 R decline by halting the progression of late donor-specific antibody (DSA)-positive ABMR.

138 FLXM of sera with strong (MESF units>18,000) donor-specific antibody (DSA).

139 idual donor-recipient HLA mismatch to induce donor-specific antibody (DSA).

140 part by increasing circulation/production of donor-specific antibody (DSA).

141 odies directed against donor HLA mismatches (donor specific antibody; DSA) is associated with renal a

142 De novo DQ donor-specific antibodies (DSAbs) are the predominant HL

143 human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies and donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) after early graft loss

144 Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) after kidney transplant

145 antibodies are the predominant HLA class II donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) after transplantation.

146 Six of these 10 developed both donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) and non-donor-specific

147 Complement-activating anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are associated with imp

148 Preexisting, donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are culprits of hyperac

149 The effect of low titers of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) detected only by sensit

150 re excluded from matching to recipients with donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) greater than 2000 mean

151 The role of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) in AAD, with the increa

152 but the relationship between BK viremia and donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) is unexplored.

153 y an inhibitory effect on the development of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) make it an interesting

154 phocyte/flow crossmatch was negative; and if donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) were absent in the firs

155 (IgG) subclass and C1q binding activity for donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) were determined.

156 Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) were identified using s

157 st-transplantation, subjects without de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSAs), AR, or inflammation at

158 f therapies targeting removal of circulating donor-specific antibodies (DSAs), blocking their effect

159 enal allograft recipients (67 with preformed donor-specific antibodies [DSAs]) with 281 indication bi

160 with an increased risk of developing de novo donor-specific antibodies during the first year posttran

161 xp3(+) cells within donor grafts, diminished donor-specific antibody formation, and delayed rejection

162 ral clearance while preventing rejection and donor-specific antibody formation.

163 Overall mean donor-specific antibody frequencies were comparable for

164 creatinine, panel reactive antibody levels, donor-specific antibody frequency, or mean fluorescence

165 r-specific HLA antibodies and/or increase in donor-specific antibodies from pretransplant levels are

166 immunosuppression for prevention of de novo donor-specific antibody generation at the individual lev

167 OA also delayed donor-specific antibody generation up to 19 days after t

168 ection of anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies has been associated with a var

169 aft outcomes among patients desensitized for donor-specific antibody (HLA-incompatible) is unknown.

170 Eighteen of 20 patients in group 3 had donor-specific antibody identified by solid phase assay.

171 zed patients with positive FC crossmatch and donor-specific antibody identified by solid phase assays

172 Immunodominant donor-specific antibody (iDSA) was defined as the DSA wi

173 he presence and, importantly, the absence of donor-specific antibodies in an international study of p

174 significantly reduced the production of anti-donor-specific antibodies in Lewis rats transplanted wit

175 itivity for human leukocyte antigen class II donor-specific antibodies in the R group.

176 ond cohort correlated with the appearance of donor-specific antibodies in the serum.

177 totoxicity against stromal cells coated with donor-specific antibodies in vitro.

178 r in combination with (1/2) dose CsA reduced donor-specific antibody, intragraft transcripts for chem

179 Because the development of donor-specific antibody is associated with early graft l

180 nel-reactive antibody was 60+/-33 and median donor-specific antibody level was a mean fluorescence in

181 ere the beta2fHC or pepF-beta2aHC normalized donor-specific antibody level would reveal the true anti

182 Donor-specific antibody levels were measured by single a

183 ntation grade (P<0.001) and association with donor-specific antibody levels.

184 lack of immunological surveillance-including donor-specific antibody monitoring, human leukocyte anti

185 oth donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) and non-donor-specific antibodies (NDSAs), whereas only NDSAs we

186 croarray allows detailed characterization of donor-specific antibodies necessary for effective transp

187 = 55 nondirected donors, performance of only donor specific antibody negative transplants, the requir

188 reactive antibody less than 20%, absence of donor-specific antibody, negative crossmatch, warm ische

189 Neither donor-specific antibodies nor vascular Cd4 deposits were

190 Neither donor-specific antibody nor the third component of compl

191 The negative effect of donor-specific antibodies on the success of solid transp

192 tches, and/or the presence of high levels of donor-specific antibodies, on the outcomes of simultaneo

193 gnosis of isolated G (isG) in the absence of donor-specific antibodies or G in combination with T cel

194 The existing donor-specific antibodies or moderate microvascular infl

195 h the donor as well as the pretransplant HLA-donor specific antibodies (P=0.002) were associated with

196 ith the presence of TRIs (P=0.04) along with donor-specific antibodies (P=0.01).

197 immunological risk and sensitized (including donor-specific antibody) patients, immunosuppressive com

198 living donors/151 deceased donors) patients (donor-specific antibody positive, PRA>80%) were desensit

199 -fixed paraffin-embedded tissues (FFPE) from donor-specific antibody-positive (DSA+) renal allograft

200 For 60% of the donor-specific antibody-positive patients, antibodies we

201 The clinical significance of pretransplant donor-specific antibodies (pre-Tx DSAs) detected by sing

202 Whether the absence of donor-specific antibodies reflects absence of a B cell r

203 Those with donor-specific antibody requiring desensitization and in

204 te was associated with (1) abrogation of the donor-specific antibody response, (2) transient preponde

205 e in 2 days and used for luminex, ELISA, and donor-specific antibody screening.

206 The increase in frequency of donor-specific antibody-secreting cells after renal tran

207 all exhibited increases in the frequency of donor-specific antibody-secreting cells eight weeks afte

208 We enumerated donor-specific antibody-secreting cells in the blood of

209 ts: the ABMR Molecular Score and endothelial donor-specific antibody-selective transcript set.

210 CI], 1.37 to 3.58; P=0.001) and endothelial donor-specific antibody-selective transcripts (HR, 3.02;

211 The strength of a donor-specific antibody should be assessed with a bead-s

212 A high level of donor-specific antibody should not preclude simultaneous

213 The second patient developed donor-specific antibodies; some months after CT were fir

214 es a prognostic value independent of initial donor-specific antibody status, previous immunologic eve

215 Donor-specific antibody strength and number were reduced

216 5% in the diagnosis of AHR compared with the donor-specific antibody test (90%).

217 e Banff Working Groups, the relationships of donor-specific antibody tests (anti-HLA and non-HLA) wit

218 , and significantly higher levels of class I donor-specific antibodies than those in the Swedish stud

219 sociated with the risk of developing de novo donor-specific antibodies, therapeutic immunosuppression

220 participate in allograft lesions mediated by donor-specific antibodies through antibody-dependent cel

221 Donor-specific antibody titers in CCR5(-/-) recipients w

222 en to investigate the direct contribution of donor-specific antibodies to corneal graft rejection.

223 AMR is caused by donor-specific antibodies to HLA, which contribute to TA

224 o the donor or immunity masked by binding of donor-specific antibodies to the graft is not known.

225 ients (negative flow crossmatch and positive donor-specific antibodies) treated with tacrolimus.

226 population was 267 consecutive patients with donor-specific antibody undergoing desensitization.

227 llaritis (g>/=1 and ptc>/=1) with detectable donor-specific antibodies was observed in some recipient

228 llaritis (g>/=1 and ptc>/=1) with detectable donor-specific antibodies was observed in some recipient

229 C1q+ donor specific antibodies were reduced in 2 C1-INH treat

230 Anti-donor-specific antibodies were analyzed by flow cytometr

231 Donor-specific antibodies were elevated in three patient

232 Donor-specific antibodies were evaluated using solid-pha

233 merulitis and detectable posttransplantation donor-specific antibodies were risk factors for TxGN (P<

234 merulitis and detectable posttransplantation donor-specific antibodies were risk factors for TxGN (P<

235 Relatively low initial titers of donor-specific antibody were predictive of successful at

236 dent cytotoxicity assay, of 77+/-19% or with donor-specific antibodies) were enrolled and received tr