ライフサイエンスコーパス: donor-specific

1 Sensitized recipients with pretransplant donor-specific Abs are at higher risk for Ab-mediated re

2 idney transplant recipients without anti-HLA donor-specific Abs who experienced acute graft dysfuncti

3 ath-censored allograft loss in patients with donor-specific alloantibodies (DSA) mean florescence int

4 LT) recipients with preformed or de novo HLA donor-specific alloantibodies (DSA).

5 idates on waiting lists, and the presence of donor-specific alloantibodies (DSAs) at the time of tran

6 extended allograft survival, indicating that donor-specific alloantibodies (not T cells) were the cri

7 lasmablast numbers, as well as production of donor-specific alloantibodies and complement deposition

8 Currently, strategies used to reduce donor-specific alloantibodies are collectively called de

9 As in HLA alloimmunity, donor-specific alloantibodies can be identified against

10 After perioperative inflammation subsided, donor-specific alloantibodies were passively transferred

11 jury to allografts is mediated by pathogenic donor-specific alloantibodies, usually of the IgG isotyp

12 rder to predict the outcome of patients with donor specific alloantibody (DSA) at the time of transpl

13 Adding the presence of donor-specific alloantibody at 1 year did not improve pr

14 s at 1-year surveillance biopsy and/or serum donor-specific alloantibody status could improve predict

15 erum creatinine levels, high serum titers of donor-specific alloantibody, minimal T cell infiltration

16 Enhanced mixed chimerism leads to long-term donor-specific allograft tolerance.

17 Customised peptide arrays verified a donor-specific alloimmune response to genetically predic

18 lopment of interstitial fibrosis and de novo donor specific anti-HLA antibodies (dnDSA) at 1 year.

19 De novo donor specific anti-HLA antibodies (dnDSA) may cause gra

20 until April 2013, patients who showed early donor specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) after lung tran

21 The impact of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) on antibody-med

22 Screening for donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) using bead-base

23 acteristics (allograft biopsy specimen), and donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA).

24 y indicate the clinical relevance of de novo donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA).

25 the biopsy were screened for the presence of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSAs) and their abil

26 islets and determined that the appearance of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSAs) did not accele

27 Circulating donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (HLA-DSAs) are often

28 omes in transplant recipients with preformed donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (pfDSA) managed with

29 and have been postulated to be activated by donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies triggering their CD16

30 Circulating donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies were significantly as

31 Circulating donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies were significantly as

32 t dysfunction and graft loss, development of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies, and antibody-mediate

33 dividual risk stratification on the basis of donor-specific anti-HLA antibody (anti-HLA DSA) characte

34 tenuate the inflammation response induced by donor-specific anti-HLA antibody binding.

35 ons (55% vs 11%, P < 0.01) with detection of donor-specific anti-HLAabs.

36 2008 and 2010, we enrolled 125 patients with donor-specific anti-human HLA antibodies (DSA) detected

37 ponses in renal transplantation, and de novo donor-specific anti-human leucocyte antigen antibodies (

38 in PB and to analyze their relationship with donor specific antibodies and histological phenotype.

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

40 %) and their recipient had unacceptably high donor-specific antibodies (28%).

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

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

43 Development of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) has detrimental effect

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

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

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

47 R) have been associated with risk of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA).

48 R) have been associated with risk of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA).

49 tients (15.9%) developed anti-VA de novo HLA donor-specific antibodies (dnDSAs) at a median time afte

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

51 The importance of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) after liver transplantat

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

53 we analyze the impact of low-level preformed donor-specific antibodies (DSA) against an RMM on transp

54 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) against HLA and non-HLA

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

56 T lymphocytes resulted in the generation of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and AMR, which was assoc

57 ave an increased risk for the development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and antibody-mediated re

58 in PB and to analyze their relationship with donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and histological phenoty

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

60 -activating factor (BAFF) is associated with donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and poorer outcomes afte

61 apy selectively depleted mature PC producing donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and reduced DSA, when ad

62 De novo donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are associated with anti

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

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

65 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are putatively associate

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

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

68 rejection (AMR) driven by the development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) directed against mismatc

69 De novo HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) following transplantatio

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

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

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

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

74 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) play a major role in ant

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

76 is exposed to rapid increases in high-titer donor-specific antibodies (DSA) that are most often gene

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

78 the ability to reduce the incidence of these donor-specific antibodies (DSA), but its mechanism is su

79 ossmatches were achieved against 3, 6, and 8 donor-specific antibodies (DSA), including those that we

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

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

82 ntation and may act synergistically with HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

83 De novo donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are associated with ant

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

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

86 -DR/DQ molecular mismatch to predict de novo donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) during the first year o

87 Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) have a strong negative

88 -reactive memory T and B cells and preformed donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) have all been implicate

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

90 Binding of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) to kidney allograft end

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

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

93 Anti-human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies (DSAs), especially in combinat

94 %), prior rejection (n=76, 62%), presence of donor-specific antibodies (n=69, 57%), and prior peripar

95 .009), class II anti-human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies (P=0.004), and acute cellular

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

97 pt exhibited significantly reduced levels of donor-specific antibodies (P=0.05) and bone marrow plasm

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

99 ansplant inflammation augments generation of donor-specific antibodies against MHC class II antigens.

100 erm graft survival showed gradual rebound of donor-specific antibodies and antibody-mediated rejectio

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

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

103 The groups had similar numbers of donor-specific antibodies and serious adverse events.

104 to 4/18 non-HLA antigens synergize with HLA donor-specific antibodies and significantly increase the

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

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

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

108 azakizumab displayed significantly decreased donor-specific antibodies and, on prolonged treatment, m

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

110 Donor-specific antibodies are associated with increased

111 Resulting MHC class II-reactive donor-specific antibodies are essential mediators of kid

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

113 ased-donor kidney transplants with preformed donor-specific antibodies are reported.

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

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

116 the correlative association between IRI and donor-specific antibodies by using humanized models and

117 Donor-specific antibodies create an immunologic barrier

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

119 pes was associated with early development of donor-specific antibodies in 4 of 5 recipients.

120 tly reduced anti-HLA antibodies and anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies in a nonhuman primate model an

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

122 lation highly expressed IL-18R1 and promoted donor-specific antibodies in response to IL-18 in vivo.

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

124 The presence of preformed donor-specific antibodies in transplant recipients incre

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

126 Neither donor-specific antibodies nor vascular Cd4 deposits were

127 Donor-specific antibodies of the IgG isotype are measure

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

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

130 The existing donor-specific antibodies or moderate microvascular infl

131 Donor-specific antibodies play a major role in antibody-

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

133 rved a significant decrease in class 1 and 2 donor-specific antibodies that led to clinical improveme

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

135 However, the reduction in donor-specific antibodies was not maintained because all

136 ter kidney transplant or abrupt increases in donor-specific antibodies when biopsy cannot be performe

137 tion, de novo anti-HLA antibodies (including donor-specific antibodies), and phenotypic differentiati

138 injury (IRI) predisposes to the formation of donor-specific antibodies, a factor contributing to chro

139 We analyzed the risk of de novo donor-specific antibodies, acute rejection, or death-cen

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

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

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

143 is now clear that VCA recipients can develop donor-specific antibodies, conclusions made in solid org

144 evels of anti-MHC class II (but not class I) donor-specific antibodies, increased donor-reactive T ce

145 macrophage recruitment, suggesting augmented donor-specific antibodies, rather than T cells, increase

146 egies permit transplantation via lowering of donor-specific antibodies, the B cell-response axis from

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

148 nd tubular atrophy), as well as with de novo donor-specific antibodies.

149 levels of anti-class 2 but not anti-class 1 donor-specific antibodies.

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

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

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

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

154 ate into germinal center B cells and secrete donor-specific antibodies.

155 h protocol biopsy and development of de novo donor-specific antibodies.

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

157 in the absence of C4d staining or detectable donor-specific antibodies; the potential value of molecu

158 of alloimmune events (development of de novo donor specific antibody and/or biopsy proven rejection)

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

160 = 55 nondirected donors, performance of only donor specific antibody negative transplants, the requir

161 acute rejection episode, malignancy, de novo donor specific antibody, posttransplant diabetes (PTD),

162 ogical and immunohistochemical analysis, and donor- specific antibody (DSA) characterization with the

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

164 me phenotype with the development of de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA) after kidney transplantati

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

166 Reduction in donor-specific antibody (DSA) has been associated with i

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

168 ted information exists about outcomes of HLA donor-specific antibody (DSA) negative (DSA-) microvascu

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

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

171 sses underlying the induction of deleterious donor-specific antibody (DSA) responses remain poorly un

172 nd treatment of subclinical AMR based on the donor-specific antibody (DSA) testing may result in bett

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

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

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

176 dies have described its use in patients with donor-specific antibody (DSA).

177 tive traditional FXM results are missing HLA donor-specific antibody 36.2% of the time based on the D

178 FR [eGFR], proteinuria, time posttransplant, donor-specific antibody [DSA]) and molecular and histolo

179 n, old age, no BCG vaccination, and positive donor-specific antibody are also positive predictors for

180 Donor-specific antibody avoidance and reduction strategi

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

182 SA-FXM) that distinguishes HLA class I or II donor-specific antibody bound to HLA antigens on the don

183 LISA, anti-HLA-total IgG, IgG3 and IgG4, and donor-specific antibody by Luminex assay.

184 In late allograft failure, donor-specific antibody deposits complement membrane att

185 smatch improved the correlation with de novo donor-specific antibody development (area under the curv

186 mL/min/1.73 m (HR, 2.61; P = 0.011), de novo donor-specific antibody development (HR, 4.09; P < 0.001

187 ted rejection (P = .0006), HLA-DR/DQ de novo donor-specific antibody development (P < .0001), antibod

188 h, variability of tacrolimus trough, de novo donor-specific antibody development, cytochrome P450 3A5

189 These findings plus the lack of donor-specific antibody formation imply that prolonged g

190 in low dd-cfDNA patients (P = .004), de novo donor-specific antibody formation was seen in 40% (17/42

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

192 helper cells in allograft tissues to promote donor-specific antibody formation.

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

194 ween ongoing inflammation and development of donor-specific antibody has renewed our interest in subc

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

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

197 d with daratumumab had significantly reduced donor-specific antibody levels compared with untreated c

198 Donor-specific antibody levels were measured by single a

199 organizes germinal center responses, reduces donor-specific antibody levels, and prolongs allograft s

200 ulate the immune system to prevent or reduce donor-specific antibody levels.

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

202 The negative role of HLA class II donor-specific antibody on graft outcome is well recogni

203 t that C1-INH may decrease sensitization and donor-specific antibody production and might improve out

204 , many patients do not respond or experience donor-specific antibody rebound, highlighting the divers

205 Those with donor-specific antibody requiring desensitization and in

206 ulin (Ig), Qa-1 mutant mice developed robust donor-specific antibody responses and accelerated heart

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

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

209 n, and 2 cases were presumed on the basis of donor-specific antibody trends and allograft function.

210 histologic features of ABMR were present but donor-specific antibody was undetected (49.4% [43/87]).

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

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

213 llus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) scar, presence of donor-specific antibody, and KTR group were independent

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

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

216 development of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibody/antibodies (DSA) is not well des

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

218 ncluded 20 kidney transplant recipients with donor-specific, antibody-positive ABMR >=365 days post-t

219 , clodronate pre-treatment increased durable donor-specific BALB/c skin allograft tolerance.

220 aive (untreated) or made immune or tolerant (donor-specific BALB/c splenocyte transfusion -/+ anti-CD

221 llo-hMSC patient developed an elevated (>80) donor-specific calculated panel reactive antibody level.

222 Endogenous donor-specific CD8 T cells were tracked down using major

223 ion, structure, CCL21 presence, and Treg and donor-specific cell location relative to high endothelia

224 Hence, this method is suitable for the donor specific enrichment and proteomic analysis of neur

225 pothesized that transplanted tissues release donor-specific exosomes into recipient circulation and t

226 tched allogeneic cardiac graft survival in a donor-specific fashion.

227 Herein, we describe a unique donor-specific flow crossmatch (DSA-FXM) that distinguis

228 specific expression show that iPSCs retain a donor-specific gene expression pattern.

229 (1) reporting that de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies (dnDSA) development during

230 The role of donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) after pediatric live

231 enal allograft recipients with pretransplant donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) and its association

232 serum creatinine together with reduction of donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) below 500 mean fluor

233 Defining the clinical relevance of donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) detection by Luminex

234 Complement fixation by donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) is a primary mechani

235 The association of donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSA) with kidney graft fa

236 ches (mismatch load) on de novo formation of donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSAs) and transplant outc

237 Post-transplant, development of de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies and/or increase in donor-s

238 ogical risk assessment is currently based on donor-specific HLA antibodies in serum.

239 nd they were associated with post-transplant donor-specific HLA antibodies, antibody-mediated rejecti

240 bead assays allow for detection of recipient donor-specific HLA antibodies, enabling prediction of co

241 ntibody-mediated rejection in the absence of donor-specific HLA antibodies.

242 Factors contributing to donor-specific HLA antibody (DSA) development after lung

243 The impact of donor-specific HLA antibody (DSA) following liver transp

244 ivity algorithms and the impact of resulting donor-specific HLA antibody (DSA) positivity on long-ter

245 nized that patients may become sensitized to donor-specific HLA antigens as a result of previous anti

246 layed graft function (DGF) and pretransplant donor-specific HLA-antibodies (DSA) are both regarded as

247 Renal function and donor-specific HLA-antibodies remained similar in both g

248 De novo donor-specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies

249 No donor-specific human leukocyte antigen Abs or rejection

250 ird party antigen, with in vitro evidence of donor-specific hyporesponsiveness in the absence of dono

251 sensitized the recipients as confirmed with donor-specific IgG in the serum, which increased 26-fold

252 accommodation with concurrent inhibition of donor-specific immune memory is likely to be involved.

253 Donor-specific induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) can

254 ion primary response gene 88 (MyD88) induced donor-specific kidney allograft tolerance.

255 DSCs prolong cardiac allograft survival in a donor-specific manner via induction of recipient's endog

256 in the presence of CD11b(+)Gr1(+) MDSCs in a donor-specific manner.

257 is led to the generation of a highly anergic donor-specific medicinal product containing an average o

258 as to investigate the presence of concurrent donor-specific memory B cell-derived HLA antibodies (DSA

259 We demonstrate that donor-specific memory T and B cells can be effectively i

260 c allografts were passively transferred with donor-specific MHC I antibodies, mTOR inhibition signifi

261 We report the observation of donor-specific mitochondrial cfDNA in the circulation of

262 tional B cell proportions and either de novo donor-specific or nondonor-specific antibody (dnDSA; dnN

263 further stained to define ILC subsets and a donor-specific or recipient-specific HLA marker to analy

264 Hematopoietic chimerism is known to promote donor-specific organ allograft tolerance; however, clini

265 ositive antibodies, although not necessarily donor-specific (P < 0.001).

266 We also analyzed CD8(+) T cell reactivity to donor-specific PBMCs in 24 patients who had received liv

267 within host retinae that express an array of donor-specific proteins.

268 short-term LFA-1 blockade promoted long-term donor-specific regulation, which resulted in attenuated

269 In vitro assays showed no donor-specific regulatory T cell expansion, which has be

270 Presence/absence of AD-like pathology was donor-specific (reproducible between individual organoid

271 achieve durable hematopoietic chimerism and donor-specific skin allograft tolerance and justify furt

272 Tolerance was not observed because donor-specific skin graft rechallenge in nonrejecting an

273 th anti-CD40L monoclonal antibody (mAb) plus donor-specific splenocyte transfusion (DST) induces allo

274 BALB/c donor-specific splenocyte transfusion and anti-CD40L mon

275 Although donor-specific stimulation induced a similar rapid, earl

276 anisms through which HCV infection modulates donor-specific T cell responses following LT and the inf

277 Donor-specific T-cell migration was visualized by adopti

278 us to achieve mixed allogeneic chimerism and donor-specific tolerance (DST).

279 ccepted a heart allotransplant and displayed donor-specific tolerance also accepted skin grafts from

280 el nonmyeloablative approach that results in donor-specific tolerance and mixed allogeneic chimerism.

281 rt illustrate that established mechanisms of donor-specific tolerance are strained during potent immu

282 ed lymphocyte reaction and ELISPOT) revealed donor-specific tolerance before and after transplantatio

283 Donor-specific tolerance can be achieved in a subset of

284 Durable engraftment and donor-specific tolerance can be achieved with mPBMC in n

285 This local immunotherapy imparted systemic donor-specific tolerance in otherwise immunocompetent ra

286 se model of cardiac transplantation in which donor-specific tolerance is induced with costimulation b

287 ionally transplanted patients, thus, whether donor-specific tolerance results in improved outcomes re

288 Donor-specific tolerance was assessed with mixed lymphoc

289 ression for many years, suggesting permanent donor-specific tolerance.

290 thout immunosuppression to assess for robust donor-specific tolerance.

291 stem cell transplantation (HSCT) can lead to donor-specific tolerance.

292 rom rejection, and subsequently demonstrated donor-specific tolerance.

293 us abrogating transplantation tolerance, the donor-specific tolerant state re-emerges, allowing spont

294 duced with costimulation blockade (CoB) plus donor-specific transfusion (DST), we have previously sho

295 in stringent animal transplant models using donor-specific transfusions (DST) has previously require

296 c effect in promotion of alloengraftment and donor-specific transplant tolerance, significantly decre

297 In addition, donor-specific Tregs significantly increased the express

298 romotes the differentiation and expansion of donor-specific Tregs without secondary reprogramming to

299 Importantly, by combining IL-2 with donor-specific Tregs, but not with polyclonal Tregs, a s

300 The results showed donor-specific variations in dose dependent deformabilit