4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Early prognosis of the development of renal chronic allograft rejection by gene expression profiling of human protocol biopsies

Journal

TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 75, Issue 8, Pages 1323-1330

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000068481.98801.10

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Chronic allograft rejection (CR) is the major cause of failure of long-term graft survival and is so far irreversible. Early prognosis of CR by molecular markers before overt histologic manifestation would be a valuable aid for the optimization of treatment regimens and the design of clinical CR trials. Oligonucleotide microarray-based approaches have proven to be useful for the diagnosis and prognosis of a variety of diseases and were chosen for the unbiased identification of prognostic biomarkers. Methods. Renal allograft biopsies were taken at month 6 posttransplantation (PT) from two groups who were, at that time, healthy recipients: one group developed CR at month-12 PT, the other group remained healthy. Gene expression profiles from the two groups at month-6 PT biopsies were analyzed to identify differentially expressed genes with prognostic value for CR development at month 12. Results. A set of 10 genes was identified that showed differential expression profiles between the two patient groups and had a complete separation of the 15% to 85% quantile range for each individual gene. This set of genes was sufficient to allow the correct prediction of the occurrence or nonoccurrence of CR in 15 of 17 (88%) patients using cross-validation (occurrence for a patient was predicted on the basis of the other patients' data only). In addition, a correct prediction could be made that a recipient with a normal biopsy 12 months PT developed CR within the following 6 months. Conclusions. Identified expression patterns seem to be highly prognostic of the development of renal CR.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available