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

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

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

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

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

9 mechanisms underlying the downregulation of donor-specific antibodies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

21 %) and their recipient had unacceptably high donor-specific antibodies (28%).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

33 Preexisting donor-specific antibodies against human leukocyte antige

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

62 Donor-specific antibodies are associated with increased

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

71 Donor-specific antibody avoidance and reduction strategi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

83 Donor-specific antibodies create an immunologic barrier

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

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

86 Donor-specific antibodies detected by solid-phase assays

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

127 Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are putatively associate

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

170 1 for cause biopsies [FCBx]) with concurrent donor-specific antibody (DSA) studies, C4d staining, and

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

183 Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) after kidney transplant

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

210 Overall mean donor-specific antibody frequencies were comparable for

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

234 Donor-specific antibody levels were measured by single a

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

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

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

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

239 %), prior rejection (n=76, 62%), presence of donor-specific antibodies (n=69, 57%), and prior peripar

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

241 = 55 nondirected donors, performance of only donor specific antibody negative transplants, the requir

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

243 Neither donor-specific antibodies nor vascular Cd4 deposits were

244 Donor-specific antibodies of the IgG isotype are measure

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

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

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

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

249 The existing donor-specific antibodies or moderate microvascular infl

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

265 Those with donor-specific antibody requiring desensitization and in

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

278 Donor-specific antibody strength and number were reduced

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

296 Donor-specific antibodies were elevated in three patient

297 Donor-specific antibodies were evaluated using solid-pha

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

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

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