Identifying biomarkers as diagnostic tools in kidney transplantation

Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 183-196

  Mas, Valeria R ^a   Mueller, Thomas F ^b   Archer, Kellie J ^c   Maluf, Daniel G ^d  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

biomarkers; immune monitoring; kidney function; kidney transplantation; long term outcomes; short term outcomes

Indexed keywords

ANGIOTENSIN; BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CREATININE; CYCLOSPORIN; EDETATE CHROMIUM CR 51; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; FAS LIGAND; GAMMA INTERFERON; GRANZYME B; HLA ANTIGEN CLASS 1; INTERLEUKIN 10; INTERLEUKIN 4; INTERLEUKIN 6; INULIN; IOHEXOL; IOTALAMIC ACID I 125; MESSENGER RNA; MICRORNA; PENTETATE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; PERFORIN; TACROLIMUS; THROMBOSPONDIN 1; TRANSFORMING GROWTH FACTOR BETA;

ACUTE GRAFT REJECTION; ACUTE KIDNEY TUBULE NECROSIS; BIOCHEMISTRY; BIOLOGICAL MONITORING; BLOOD SAMPLING; BODY COMPOSITION; CD3+ T LYMPHOCYTE; CD8+ T LYMPHOCYTE; CHRONIC ALLOGRAFT NEPHROPATHY; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; CYTOMEGALOVIRUS INFECTION; CYTOTOXIC T LYMPHOCYTE; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; FIBROSING ALVEOLITIS; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC LINKAGE; GENOMICS; GENOTYPE; GLOMERULUS FILTRATION RATE; GOLD STANDARD; GRAFT FAILURE; GRAFT RECIPIENT; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGING; IMMUNE RESPONSE; IMMUNOLOGICAL TOLERANCE; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; INNATE IMMUNITY; ISCHEMIA; KIDNEY ALLOGRAFT; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY FUNCTION; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY; LIVING DONOR; MASS SPECTROMETRY; METABOLOMICS; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; MULTIPLE ORGAN FAILURE; MUSCLE ATROPHY; NEPHRON; OBESITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERIPHERAL BLOOD MONONUCLEAR CELL; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PROTEINURIA; PROTEOMICS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPERFUSION INJURY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; TUBULAR ATROPHY; TUBULAR DYSFUNCTION; URINALYSIS; URINARY TRACT INFECTION;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; GRAFT REJECTION; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMANS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; PROGNOSIS; REPERFUSION INJURY; TRANSPLANTATION, HOMOLOGOUS;

EID: 79952919186     PISSN: 14737159     EISSN: 17448352     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/erm.10.119     Document Type: Review

References (114)

1. Hariharan S, Johnson CP, Bresnahan BA, Taranto SE, McIntosh MJ, Stablein D. Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N. Engl. J. Med. 342(9), 605-612 (2000). (Pubitemid 30118412)
2. Meier-Kriesche HU, Schold JD, Srinivas TR, Kaplan B. Lack of improvement in renal allograft survival despite a marked decrease in acute rejection rates over the most recent era. Am. J. Transplant. 4(3), 378-383 (2004). (Pubitemid 38282293)
3. Solez K, Vincenti F, Filo RS. Histopathologic findings from 2-year protocol biopsies from a U.S. multicenter kidney transplant trial comparing tarolimus versus cyclosporine: A report of the FK506 Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplantation 66 (12), 1736-1740 (1998). (Pubitemid 29035001)
4. Cunningham MJ. Genomics and proteomics: The new millennium of drug discovery and development. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 44(1), 291-300 (2000). (Pubitemid 32239481)
5. Ashton-Chess J, Giral M, Soulillou JP, Brouard S. Using biomarkers of tolerance and rejection to identify high- and low-risk patients following kidney transplantation. Transplantation 87(9 Suppl.), S95-S99 (2009).
6. Keown PA, McMaster WR, McManus BM. Tools to identify organ rejection and immune quiescence for biological understanding and personalized medical care. Biomark. Med. 4(1), 115-121 (2010).
7. Sigdel TK, Sarwal MM. The proteogenomic path towards biomarker discovery. Pediatr. Transplant. 12(7), 737-747 (2008).
8. Biomarkers Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate end points: Preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 69, 89-95 (2001).
9. Gillespie A, Lee IJ. Biomarkers in renal transplantation. Biomark. Med. 2(6), 603-612 (2008).
10. Fitzsimmons W, Thompson D, Hariharan S, Van Veldhuisen P. Serum creatinine as a surrogate end point for graft loss in kidney transplantation: Validation efforts from multicentre trials. Am. J. Transplant. 2 (Suppl. 3), 272 (2002).
11. Kaplan B, Schold J, Srinivas T et al. Effect of sirolimus withdrawal in patients with deteriorating renal function. Am. J. Transplant. 4(10), 1709-1712 (2004). (Pubitemid 39312308)
12. Schold JD, Kaplan B. The elephant in the room: Failings of current clinical end points in kidney transplantation. Am. J. Transplant. 10(5), 1163-1166 (2010).
13. Poggio ED, Batty DS, Flechner SM. Evaluation of renal function in transplantation. Transplantation 84(2), 131-136 (2007). (Pubitemid 47205744)
14. Goerdt PJ, Heim-Duthoy KL, Macres M, Swan SK. Predictive performance of renal function estimate equations in renal allografts. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 44, 261-265 (1997). (Pubitemid 27376253)
15. Stoves J, Lindley EJ, Barnfield MC, Burniston MT, Newstead CG. MDRD equation estimates of glomerular filtration rate in potential living kidney donors and renal transplant recipients with impaired graft function. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 17, 2036-2037 (2002). (Pubitemid 35277115)
16. Manotham K, Booranalertpaisarn V, Eiam-Ong S, Chusil S, Praditpornsilpa K, Tungsanga K. Accurately simple estimation of glomerular filtration rate in kidney transplant patients. Transplant. Proc. 34, 1148-1151 (2002). (Pubitemid 34665303)
17. Mariat C, Alamartine E, Barthelemy JC et al. Assessing renal graft function in clinical trials: Can tests predicting glomerular filtration rate substitute for a reference method? Kidney Int. 65(1), 289-297 (2004). (Pubitemid 38037516)
18. Gaspari F, Ferrari S, Stucchi N et al. Performance of different prediction equations for estimating renal function in kidney transplantation. Am. J. Transplant. 4(11), 1826-1835 (2004). (Pubitemid 39434444)
19. Bosma RJ, Doorenbos CR, Stegeman CA, van der Heide JJ, Navis G. Predictive performance of renal function equations in renal transplant recipients: An analysis of patient factors in bias. Am. J. Transplant. 5(9), 2193-2203 (2005). (Pubitemid 41648466)
20. Pascual M, Vallhonrat H, Cosimi AB et al. The clinical usefulness of the renal allograft biopsy in the cyclosporine era: A prospective study. Transplantation 67(5), 737-741 (1999). (Pubitemid 29161716)
21. Furness PN. Predicting allograft survival: Abundant data, but insufficient knowledge? Transplantation 83(6), 681 (2007). (Pubitemid 46569181)
22. Rush D. Can protocol biopsy better inform our choices in renal transplantation? Transplant. Proc. 41(6 Suppl.), S6-S8 (2009).Interesting article about the impact of protocol biopsies in discerning allograft status and its impact on biomarker discovery.
23. Piovesan AC, Lucon AM, David DS, Nahas WC, Antonopoulos IM, Srougi M. Multifocal renal allograft biopsy: Impact on therapeutic decisions. Transplant. Proc. 40(10), 3397-3400 (2008).
24. Strimbu K, Tavel JA. What are biomarkers? Curr. Opin. HIV AIDS 5(6), 463-466 (2010).
25. De Gruttola VG, Clax P, DeMets DL et al. Considerations in the evaluation of surrogate end points in clinical trials. Summary of a National Institutes of Health workshop. Control Clin. Trials 22(5), 485-502 (2001). (Pubitemid 32907433)
26. Daemen A, Gevaert O, Ojeda F et al. A kernel-based integration of genome-wide data for clinical decision support. Genome Med. 1(4), 39 (2009).
27. Losko S, Heumann K. Semantic data integration and knowledge management to represent biological network associations. Methods Mol. Biol. 563, 241-258 (2009).
28. Furness PN. Predicting allograft survival: Abundant data, but insufficient knowledge? Transplantation 83(6), 681 (2007). (Pubitemid 46569181)
29. Kong X, Mas V, Archer KJ. A nonparametric meta-analysis approach for combining independent microarray datasets: Application using two microarray datasets pertaining to chronic allograft nephropathy. BMC Genomics 26(9), 98 (2008).
30. Morgan AA, Khatri P, Jones RH, Sarwal MM, Butte AJ. Comparison of multiplex meta analysis techniques for understanding the acute rejection of solid organ transplants. BMC Bioinformatics 11(Suppl. 9), S6 (2010).
31. Hockley SL, Mathijs K, Staal YC et al. Interlaboratory and interplatform comparison of microarray gene expression analysis of HepG2 cells exposed to benzo(a) pyrene. OMICS 13(2), 115-125 (2009).
32. Pedotti P, 't Hoen PA, Vreugdenhil E et al. Can subtle changes in gene expression be consistently detected with different microarray platforms? BMC Genomics 10(9), 124 (2008).
33. Fan J, Feng Y, Niu YS. Nonparametric estimation of genewise variance for microarray data. Ann. Stat. 2010 38(5), 2723-2750 (2010).
34. Shi L, Campbell G, Jones WD et al. The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study of common practices for the development and validation of microarray-based predictive models. Nat. Biotechnol. 28(8), 827-838 (2010).
35. Sato F, Tsuchiya S, Terasawa K, Tsujimoto G. Intra-platform repeatability and inter-platform comparability of microRNA microarray technology. PLoS One 4(5), e5540 (2009).
36. Mao S, Wang C, Dong G. Evaluation of inter-laboratory and cross-platform concordance of DNA microarrays through discriminating genes and classifier transferability. J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 7(1), 157-173 (2009).
37. Sarwal MM. Deconvoluting the 'omics' for organ transplantation. Curr. Opin. Organ Transplant. 14(5), 544-551 (2009).
38. Irish WD, Ilsley JN, Schnitzler MA, Feng S, Brennan DC. A risk prediction model for delayed graft function in the current era of deceased donor renal transplantation. Am. J. Transplant. 10(10), 2279-2286 (2010).
39. Bartlett ST, Schweitzer EJ, Cooper M. Prediction model for delayed kidney transplant function: No need for new regulation. Am. J. Transplant. 10(10), 2191-2192 (2010).
40. Mühlberger I, Perco P, Fechete R, Mayer B, Oberbauer R. Biomarkers in renal transplantation ischemia reperfusion injury. Transplantation 88(3 Suppl.), S14-S19 (2009).
41. Basile DP. Novel approaches in the investigation of acute kidney injury. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 18(1), 7-9 (2007). (Pubitemid 46053415)
42. Hauser P, Schwarz C, Mitterbauer C et al. Genome-wide gene-expression patterns of donor kidney biopsies distinguish primary allograft function. Lab. Invest. 84(3), 353-361 (2004). (Pubitemid 41656490)
43. Kainz A, Mitterbauer C, Hauser P et al. Alterations in gene expression in cadaveric vs. live donor kidneys suggest impaired tubular counterbalance of oxidative stress at implantation. Am. J. Transplant. 4(10), 1595-1604 (2004). (Pubitemid 39312293)
44. Mueller TF, Reeve J, Jhangri GS et al. The transcriptome of the implant biopsy identifies donor kidneys at increased risk of delayed graft function. Am. J. Transplant. 8(1), 78-85 (2008).
45. Mas VR, Archer KJ, Yanek K et al. Gene expression patterns in deceased donor kidneys developing delayed graft function after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 85(4), 626-635 (2008).
46. Naesens M, Sarwal M. Looking into the crystal chip: Can microarrays predict graft function? Transplantation 85(4), 499-500 (2008).
47. Korbély R, Wilflingseder J, Perco P et al. Molecular biomarker candidates of acute kidney injury in zero-hour renal transplant needle biopsies. Transpl. Int. 24(2), 143-149 (2010).
48. Kainz A, Wilflingseder J, Mitterbauer C et al. Steroid pretreatment of organ donors to prevent postischemic renal allograft failure: A randomized, controlled trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 153(4), 222-230 (2010).
49. Wilflingseder J, Kainz A, Mühlberger I et al. Impaired metabolism in donor kidney grafts after steroid pretreatment. Transpl. Int. 23(8), 796-804 (2010).
50. Hall IE, Yarlagadda SG, Coca SG et al. IL-18 and urinary NGAL predict dialysis and graft recovery after kidney transplantation. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 21(1), 189-197 (2010).
51. Mishra J, Ma Q, Kelly C et al. Kidney NGAL is a novel early marker of acute injury following transplantation. Pediatr. Nephrol. 21(6), 856-863 (2006). (Pubitemid 43740956)
52. Zhang PL, Rothblum LI, Han WK, Blasick TM, Potdar S, Bonventre JV. Kidney injury molecule-1 expression in transplant biopsies is a sensitive measure of cell injury. Kidney Int. 73(5), 608-614 (2008). (Pubitemid 351264105)
53. Nijboer WN, Schuurs TA, Damman J et al. Kidney injury molecule-1 is an early noninvasive indicator for donor brain death-induced injury prior to kidney transplantation. Am. J. Transplant. 9(8), 1752-1759 (2009).
54. Coca SG, Yalavarthy R, Concato J, Parikh CR. Biomarkers for the diagnosis and risk stratification of acute kidney injury: A systematic review. Kidney Int. 73(9), 1008-1016 (2008). (Pubitemid 351543898)
55. Hartono C, Muthukumar T, Suthanthiran M. Noninvasive diagnosis of acute rejection of renal allografts. Curr. Opin. Organ Transplant. 15(1), 35-41 (2010).
56. Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC et al. Banff 07 classification of renal allograft pathology: Updates and future directions. Am. J. Transplant. 8, 753-760 (2008). (Pubitemid 351347767)
57. Sorof JM, Vartanian RK, Olson JL et al. Histopathological concordance of paired renal allograft biopsy cores. Effect on the diagnosis and management of acute rejection. Transplantation 60, 1215-1219 (1995). (Pubitemid 26005274)
58. Furness PN, Taub N. International variation in the interpretation of renal transplant biopsies: Report of the CERTRAP project. Kidney Int. 60, 1998-2012 (2001). (Pubitemid 33000007)
59. Sarwal M, Fernandez-Fresnedo G, Rodrigo E et al. Molecular heterogeneity in acute renal allograft rejection identified by DNA microarray profiling. N. Engl. J. Med. 349(2), 125-138 (2003).Pioneer article on the use of microarrays for detecting gene-expression profiles in allograft biopsies of patients with acute rejection. (Pubitemid 36818782)
60. Reeve J, Einecke G, Mengel M et al. Diagnosing rejection in renal transplants: A comparison of molecular- and histopathology-based approaches. Am. J. Transplant. 9(8), 1802-1810 (2009).
61. Desvaux D, Schwarzinger M, Pastural M et al. Molecular diagnosis of renal-allograft rejection: Correlation with histopathologic evaluation and antirejection-therapy resistance. Transplantation 78(5), 647-653 (2004). (Pubitemid 39244723)
62. Chua MS, Mansfield E, Sarwal M. Applications of microarrays to renal transplantation: Progress and possibilities. Front. Biosci. 8, S913-S923 (2003). (Pubitemid 39140207)
63. Jurcevic S, Sacks S. Gene microarrays in transplantation. Curr. Opin. Nephrol. Hypertens. 12(6), 577-579 (2003). (Pubitemid 38186746)
64. Ying L, Sarwal M. In praise of arrays. Pediatr. Nephrol. 24(9), 1643-1659 (2009).
65. Flechner SM, Kurian SM, Head SR et al. Kidney transplant rejection and tissue injury by gene profiling of biopsies and peripheral blood lymphocytes. Am. J. Transplant. 4(9), 1475-1489 (2004). (Pubitemid 39159062)
66. Li B, Hartono C, Ding R et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of renal-allograft rejection by measurement of messenger RNA for perforin and granzyme B in urine. N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 947-954 (2001). (Pubitemid 32240312)
67. Yannaraki M, Rebibou JM, Ducloux D et al. Urinary cytotoxic molecular markers for a noninvasive diagnosis in acute renal transplant rejection. Transpl. Int. 19(9), 759-768 (2006). (Pubitemid 44196165)
68. Vasconcellos LM, Schachter AD, Zheng XX et al. Cytotoxic lymphocyte gene expression in peripheral blood leukocytes correlates with rejecting renal allografts. Transplantation 66(5), 562-566 (1998). (Pubitemid 28433834)
69. Ting YT, Coates PT, Marti HP et al. Urinary soluble HLA-DR is a potential biomarker for acute renal transplant rejection. Transplantation 89(9), 1071-1078 (2010).
70. Nickerson P. Post-transplant monitoring of renal allografts: Are we there yet? Curr. Opin. Immunol. 21(5), 563-568 (2009).
71. Schaub S, Wilkins JA, Nickerson P. Proteomics and renal transplantation: Searching for novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Contrib. Nephrol. 160, 65-75 (2008).
72. Schaub S, Rush D, Wilkins J et al. Proteomic-based detection of urine proteins associated with acute renal allograft rejection. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 15(1), 219-227 (2004). (Pubitemid 38020714)
73. Sigdel TK, Kaushal A, Gritsenko M et al. Shotgun proteomics identifies proteins specific for acute renal transplant rejection. Proteomics Clin. Appl. 4(1), 32-47 (2010).
74. Tian J, Shi WF, Zhang LW et al. HLA class I (ABC) upregulation on peripheral blood CD3+/CD8+ T lymphocyte surface is a potential predictor of acute rejection in renal transplantation. Transplantation 88(12), 1393-1397 (2009).
75. Hoefig KP, Heissmeyer V. MicroRNAs grow up in the immune system. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 20, 281-287 (2008).
76. Lodish HF, Zhou B, Liu G et al. Micromanagement of the immune system by microRNAs. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 8, 120-130 (2008). (Pubitemid 351161305)
77. Valencia-Sanchez MA, Liu J, Hannon GJ et al. Control of translational and mRNA degradation by miRNAs and siRNAs. Genes Dev. 20, 515-524 (2006). (Pubitemid 43345317)
78. Sui W, Dai Y, Huang Y, Lan H, Yan Q, Huang H. Microarray analysis of MicroRNA expression in acute rejection after renal transplantation. Transpl. Immunol. 19(1), 81-85 (2008).
79. Anglicheau D, Sharma VK, Ding R et al. MicroRNA expression profiles predictive of human renal allograft status. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 5330-5335 (2009).Pioneer article in the elucidation of miRNA profiles associated with acute renal allograft rejection.
80. Anglicheau D, Muthukumar T, Suthanthiran M. MicroRNAs: Small RNAs with big effects. Transplantation 90(2), 105-112 (2010).
81. Serón D, Moreso F, Ramón JM et al. Protocol renal allograft biopsies and the design of clinical trials aimed to prevent or treat chronic allograft nephropathy. Transplantation 69(9), 1849-1855 (2000). (Pubitemid 30340344)
82. de Matos AC, Cǎmara NO, de Oliveira AF et al. Functional and morphologic evaluation of kidney proximal tubuli and correlation with renal allograft prognosis. Transpl. Int. 23(5), 493-499 (2010).
83. Vazquez MA, Jeyarajah DR, Kielar ML, Lu CY. Long-term outcomes of renal transplantation: A result of the original endowment of the donor kidney and the inflammatory response to both alloantigens and injury. Curr. Opin. Nephrol. Hypertens. 9(6), 643-648 (2000).
84. Giral M, Nguyen JM, Karam G et al. Impact of graft mass on the clinical outcome of kidney transplants. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 16(1), 261-268 (2005). (Pubitemid 43073181)
85. Nankivell BJ, Borrows RJ, Fung CL, O'Connell PJ, Allen RD, Chapman JR. The natural history of chronic allograft nephropathy. N. Engl. J. Med. 349(24), 2326-2333 (2003). (Pubitemid 37509740)
86. -2008 Annual Report of the US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant data 1998-2007. US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation, Rockville, MD, USA (2008).
87. Halloran PF, Langone AJ, Helderman JH, Kaplan B. Assessing long-term nephron loss: Is it time to kick the CAN grading system? Am. J. Transplant. 4(11), 1729-1730 (2004). (Pubitemid 39434427)
88. Mengel M. The kidney transplant: New horizons. Curr. Opin. Nephrol. Hypertens.
89. Bestard O, Cruzado JM, la Franquesa M, Grinyó JM. Biomarkers in renal transplantation. Curr. Opin. Organ Transplant. 15(4), 467-473 (2010).Interesting article about biomarkers in transplantation and their associated advantages and limitations.
90. Serón D, Moreso F, Ramón JM et al. Protocol renal allograft biopsies and the design of clinical trials aimed to prevent or treat chronic allograft nephropathy. Transplantation 69(9), 1849-1855 (2000). (Pubitemid 30340344)
91. de Matos AC, Cǎmara NO, de Oliveira AF et al. Functional and morphologic evaluation of kidney proximal tubuli and correlation with renal allograft prognosis. Transpl. Int. 23(5), 493-499 (2010).
92. Rosen S, Stillman IE. Acute tubular necrosis is a syndrome of physiologic and pathologic dissociation. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 19(5), 871-875 (2008).
93. Schlondorff DO. Overview of factors contributing to the pathophysiology of progressive renal disease. Kidney Int. 74(7), 860-866 (2008).
94. Schröppel B, Heeger PS. Gazing into a crystal ball to predict kidney transplant outcome. J. Clin. Invest. 120(6), 1803-1806 (2010).
95. Mas VR, Archer KJ, Scian M, Maluf DG. Molecular pathways involved in loss of graft function in kidney transplant recipients. Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 10(3), 269-284 (2010).
96. Scherer A, Gwinner W, Mengel M et al. Transcriptome changes in renal allograft protocol biopsies at 3 months precede the onset of interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (IF/TA) at 6 months. Nephrol. Dial.Transplant. 24(8), 2567-2575 (2009).
97. Scherer A, Krause A, Walker JR, Korn A, Niese D, Raulf F. Early prognosis of the development of renal chronic allograft rejection by gene expression profiling of human protocol biopsies. Transplantation 75(8), 1323-1330 (2003). (Pubitemid 36513042)
98. Hotchkiss H, Chu TT, Hancock WW et al. Differential expression of profibrotic and growth factors in chronic allograft nephropathy. Transplantation 81(3), 342-349 (2006). (Pubitemid 43255717)
99. Mas V, Maluf D, Archer K et al. Establishing the molecular pathways involved in chronic allograft nephropathy for testing new noninvasive diagnostic markers. Transplantation 83(4), 448-457 (2007). (Pubitemid 46667849)
100. Maluf DG, Mas VR, Archer KJ et al. Molecular pathways involved in loss of kidney graft function with tubular atrophy and interstitial fibrosis. Mol. Med. 14(5-6), 276-285 (2008). (Pubitemid 351785700)
101. Mengel M, Reeve J, Bunnag S, Einecke G et al. Molecular correlates of scarring in kidney transplants: The emergence of mast cell transcripts. Am. J. Transplant. 9(1), 169-178 (2009).
102. Einecke G, Reeve J, Sis B et al. A molecular classifier for predicting future graft loss in late kidney transplant biopsies. J. Clin. Invest. 120(6), 1862-1872 (2010).
103. Park WD, Griffin MD, Cornell LD, Cosio FG, Stegall MD. Fibrosis with inflammation at one year predicts transplant functional decline. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 21(11), 1987-1997 (2010).
104. Kurian SM, Heilman R, Mondala TS et al. Biomarkers for early and late stage chronic allograft nephropathy by proteogenomic profiling of peripheral blood. PLoS One 4(7), e6212 (2009).
105. Mas VR, Mas LA, Archer KJ et al. Evaluation of gene panel mRNAs in urine samples of kidney transplant recipients as a non-invasive tool of graft function. Mol. Med. 13(5-6), 315-324 (2007). (Pubitemid 47175041)
106. Schröppel B, Heeger PS. Gazing into a crystal ball to predict kidney transplant outcome. J. Clin. Invest. 120(6), 1803-1806 (2010).
107. Afzali B, Lombardi G, Lechler RI. Pathways of major histocompatibility complex allorecognition. Curr. Opin. Organ Transplant. 13, 438-444 (2008).
108. Hernandez-Fuentes MP, Lechler RI. A 'biomarker signature' for tolerance in transplantation. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 6(10), 606-613 (2010).
109. Newell KA, Asare A, Kirk AD et al. Immune Tolerance Network ST507 Study Group. Identification of a B cell signature associated with renal transplant tolerance in humans. J. Clin. Invest. 120(6), 1836-1847 (2010).
110. Sagoo P, Perucha E, Sawitzki B. Development of a cross-platform biomarker signature to detect renal transplant tolerance in humans. J. Clin. Invest. 120(6), 1848-1861 (2010).
111. Zaza G, Granata S, Sallustio F, Grandaliano G, Schena FP. Pharmacogenomics: A new paradigm to personalize treatments in nephrology patients. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 159(3), 268-280 (2010).
112. Goldfarb-Rumyantzev AS, Naiman N. Genetic prediction of renal transplant outcome. Curr. Opin. Nephrol. Hypertens. 17(6), 573-579 (2008).
113. McKnight AJ, Currie D, Maxwell AP. Unravelling the genetic basis of renal diseases; from single gene to multifactorial disorders. J. Pathol. 220(2), 198-216 (2010).
114. Little J, Higgins JP, Ioannidis JP et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)-an extension of the STROBE statement. Genet. Epidemiol. 33, 581-598 (2009).