<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <rss version="2.0">
      <channel xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
        <title>Transplant International | New and Recent Articles</title>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/journals/transplant-international</link>
        <description>RSS Feed for Transplant International | New and Recent Articles</description>
        <language>en-us</language>
        <generator>Frontiers Feed Generator,version:1</generator>
        <pubDate>2026-10-01T07:50:00.08+00:00</pubDate>
        <ttl>60</ttl>
        <item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16893</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16893</link>
        <title><![CDATA[The frequency and timing of leukopenia and CMV infections in kidney transplant recipients in Finland – a retrospective observational study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Ilkka Helanterä</author><author>Fernanda Ortiz</author><author>Essi Havula</author><author>Samuli Tuominen</author><author>Markus Hakamäki</author><author>Tapio Hellman</author><author>Satu Mäkelä</author><author>Riku Korhonen</author>
        <description><![CDATA[This retrospective observational study investigated the frequency of post-transplant leukopenia and neutropenia (PTLN) and its association with cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections, clinical outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in Finland. Clinical and HCRU data were collected from electronic medical records and national registries for the years 2013–2022. Clinical outcomes were assessed during the first 18 months, and cost-related outcomes were evaluated up to 4 years post-transplant. The cohort included 966 KTRs, with the following donor/recipient CMV serostatus distribution: R+ 706 (73.1%), D+/R─ 200 (20.7%), and D─/R─ 60 (6.2%). At 12 months, PTLN occurred in 224 (31.7%) R+, 103 (51.5%) D+/R─, and 6 (10.0%) D─/R─ recipients (p < 0.001). Valganciclovir prophylaxis was started in 28.0% of R+ and 95.0% of D+/R─ patients. CMV DNAemia occurred in 357 (50.6%) R+ and 106 (53.0%) D+/R─ recipients, with median time to CMV DNAemia of 66 days (IQI: 48–110) in R+ and 239 days (IQI: 175–323) in D+/R─ recipients (p < 0.001). PTLN and D+/R─ serostatus were associated with higher HCRU and increased healthcare costs. In conclusion, PTLN was more common in CMV D+/R─ KTRs and both D+/R─ serostatus and PTLN were linked to greater healthcare utilization and cost burden.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17165</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17165</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Disparities in outcomes among patients on lung transplantation waitlist in Saudi Arabia]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Letter to the Editor</category>
        <author>Amjad Albatli</author><author>Ruqayyah Fadhel</author><author>Yehia Rabea Yousef</author><author>Rana Ahmed Saleh</author><author>Haifa Aldakhil</author><author>Yasmin Altwaijri</author><author>Faisal Albaiz</author><author>Khaled Alkattan</author><author>Waleed Saleh</author><author>Moheeb Alawwami</author><author>Amer Alzahrani</author><author>Husna Thalib</author><author>Bedour Almudaiheem</author><author>Kris Marquez</author><author>Rayid Abdulqawi</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17855</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17855</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Guiding light: new European guidelines on CLAD prevention and treatment]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-30T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Forum</category>
        <author>Kieran Halloran</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17554</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17554</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Decoding AI for transplantation: many models, one patient: why there is no single “AI for transplantation” – and what to ask instead]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-30T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Special Article</category>
        <author>Olivier Aubert</author><author>Esteban Cortes Garcia</author><author>Silvia Pineda</author><author>Thomas Neyens</author><author>Nina Pilat</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17772</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17772</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Correction: Landscape of current practices and future perspectives in living donor kidney donation in Europe: proceedings of a pan-European symposium by the European kidney transplant association section of the European Society for Organ Transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-28T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Correction</category>
        <author>Transplant International Production Office </author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16322</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16322</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Nutritional strategies in kidney transplantation: optimising outcomes beyond surgery]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-24T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Review</category>
        <author>Lara Caldiroli</author><author>Paolo Molinari</author><author>Simone Vettoretti</author><author>Anna Regalia</author><author>Simona Verdesca</author><author>Giuseppe Castellano</author><author>Maurizio Gallieni</author><author>Carlo Alfieri</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Although kidney transplantation (KTx) remains the optimal therapy for end-stage kidney disease, long-term graft survival and patient outcomes continue to be limited by cardiometabolic complications and chronic allograft dysfunction. Nutritional management has evolved from supportive care to a core component of post-transplant follow-up. The early post-transplant phase is marked by catabolism, high-dose immunosuppression, and metabolic instability, leading to increased protein requirements but also potential susceptibility to hyperfiltration injury. In the stable post-transplant phase, a moderate protein intake similar to that recommended for chronic kidney disease (CKD) may support graft longevity, although evidence in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) remains limited and inconsistent. Plant-forward dietary models, including Mediterranean and DASH patterns, consistently improve cardiometabolic risk, inflammation, oxidative stress, and dietary acid load, with potential benefits for graft outcomes. Predominantly plant-based diets may further reduce uremic toxin generation and improve mineral metabolism, though careful monitoring for micronutrient deficiencies is required. Low-protein approaches, such as PLADO, remain largely theoretical in transplant populations, while ketogenic or very low-carbohydrate diets raise concerns regarding acid–base balance, renal hemodynamics, and long-term tolerability. Overall, personalised nutritional strategies tailored to graft function, immunosuppression, and metabolic profile are essential to optimise long-term transplant health.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16702</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16702</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Bortezomib in combination with standard-of-care for late active antibody-mediated rejection with de novo donor-specific antibodies after kidney transplantation: a multicenter randomized trial]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-23T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Renaud Snanoudj</author><author>Fabienne Marquant</author><author>Karine Renaudin</author><author>Valérie Dubois</author><author>Alice Koenig</author><author>Nadia Arzouk</author><author>Sophie Caillard</author><author>Magali Giral</author><author>Arwa Jalal Eddine</author><author>Hakim Mazouz</author><author>Nassim Kamar</author><author>Vincent Pernin</author><author>Marie Matignon</author><author>Nacera Ouali</author><author>Dany Anglicheau</author><author>Caroline Elie</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Bortezomib has been proposed as a treatment for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) after kidney transplantation; however, its efficacy remains uncertain. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial in France between February 2015 and July 2019 in adult kidney transplant recipients with late active AMR associated with de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA). Sixty of the planned 100 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive standard-of-care consisting of corticosteroids, plasmapheresis, and intravenous immunoglobulin, either alone or with bortezomib administered as two cycles of four infusions. The primary endpoint was a composite of a >50% reduction in immunodominant DSA mean fluorescence intensity and stabilization or improvement of microvascular inflammation and transplant glomerulopathy on graft biopsy at 12 months. This endpoint was achieved in 40.0% of patients receiving bortezomib and 33.3% receiving standard-of-care alone in the intention-to-treat analysis (RR = 1.20, 95% CI 0.61–2.34; p = 0.59), and in 50.0% and 42.1%, respectively, in the per-protocol analysis (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.60–2.36; p = 0.62). Neither component differed between groups. Serious adverse events occurred in 23 patients (76.7%) receiving bortezomib and 14 patients (46.7%) receiving standard-of-care alone (p = 0.017). Adding bortezomib did not demonstrate a significant efficacy benefit and was associated with a higher incidence of serious adverse events (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02201576).]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16175</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16175</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Evolution and interrelation of physical frailty and mild cognitive impairment up to two years after kidney transplantation: a multi-center prospective cohort study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-21T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Nadine Beerli</author><author>Manuel Wehrle</author><author>Isabelle Binet</author><author>Michael Dickenmann</author><author>Déla Golshayan</author><author>Karine Hadaya</author><author>Uyen Huynh-Do</author><author>Reto W. Kressig</author><author>Sabina De Geest</author><author>Oliver Mauthner</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Kidney transplantation (KT) is the preferred treatment for kidney failure, providing superior survival and quality of life compared with haemodialysis. However, the demand for transplantation exceeds organ availability, underscoring the need to optimize pre- and post-transplant care. Physical frailty and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are important predictors of post-transplant outcomes, yet their long-term trajectories remain insufficiently understood. This prospective multicentre longitudinal study, nested within the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study, included 230 adult KT recipients followed for up to 2 years after transplantation. Physical frailty was assessed using the adapted Fried Frailty Phenotype and MCI using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Physical frailty declined from 8.3% before transplantation to below 2% during follow-up, while pre-frailty decreased from 54.3% to 27.6% at 2 years. MCI prevalence declined from 42.6% to 31.3%. Longitudinal analyses demonstrated that physical frailty was more dynamic than cognitive function. Better cognitive function at earlier time points predicted lower subsequent frailty, whereas frailty did not significantly predict later cognitive function. These findings suggest that cognitive assessment may help identify patients at risk of persistent frailty and support the routine assessment of both physical frailty and cognitive function before and after KT to improve risk stratification and guide individualized patient care.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17154</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17154</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Normothermic regional perfusion in controlled donation after circulatory death liver transplantation: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis versus non-NRP and brain-death donors]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-21T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</category>
        <author>José Ramírez‐Esteban</author><author>Ezequiel Sarrió</author><author>Alberto Ruiz‐Pacheco</author><author>Ana Cots</author><author>Nekane Romero‐García</author><author>Rafael Badenes</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) may mitigate ischemic injury in controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) liver transplantation. We updated the most recent meta-analysis (search closed June 2023) by incorporating subsequent evidence and comparing NRP with non-NRP cDCD and with donation after brain death (DBD). We performed a systematic review of five databases and random-effects meta-analyses; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios, the Mantel-Haenszel estimator was preferred for rare events, pooled incidences used a logit-binomial model, risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-I and certainty with GRADE. Twenty observational studies were included (1776 NRP-cDCD liver recipients). Versus non-NRP cDCD, NRP reduced ischemic cholangiopathy (risk ratio 0.16, 95% confidence interval 0.09–0.28; number needed to treat 9), graft loss (0.41, 0.32–0.54), recipient death (0.46, 0.34–0.62), hepatic artery thrombosis (0.51, 0.30–0.85), other biliary complications (0.49, 0.32–0.73) and primary non-function (0.51, 0.28–0.94); these reductions persisted after excluding grafts managed with ex situ machine perfusion. Versus DBD, no outcome differed significantly. Pooled ischemic cholangiopathy incidence was 1.8%, 12.7% and 1.2% with NRP, non-NRP and DBD. NRP markedly reduces ischemic cholangiopathy and improves other outcomes versus non-NRP cDCD, approaching DBD; the evidence remains observational, with moderate-to-serious risk of bias.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD420261404939, identifier PROSPERO CRD420261404939.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17151</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17151</link>
        <title><![CDATA[The INTEGRITY guidelines – ethical guidance for research involving deceased donation and transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-18T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Guidelines</category>
        <author>Dominique E. Martin</author><author>Ali Abbasi</author><author>Riadh A. S. Fadhil</author><author>John L. R. Forsythe</author><author>Matthieu Le Dorze</author><author>Jayme E. Locke</author><author>Elmi Muller</author><author>Gabriel C. Oniscu</author><author>Helen Opdam</author><author>Karen Rockell</author><author>Marion J. Siebelink</author><author>Shih-Ning Then</author><author>Emma Tumilty</author>
        <description><![CDATA[The absence of ethical guidance for research that involves actual and prospective deceased donors of organs, cells or tissues for transplantation presents challenges for researchers, donation agencies, and participants in such research. To address this, the European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT), together with the International Society for Organ Donation Professionals (ISODP) and The Transplantation Society (TTS), convened an interdisciplinary, multinational team to develop the first international guidelines for ethical practice in research involving deceased donation and transplantation activities (INTEGRITY). The guidelines were developed over twelve months via an international, iterative consultative process. The resultant principles are presented in this article.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16959</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16959</link>
        <title><![CDATA[European society for organ transplantation clinical practice guideline on prevention and treatment of chronic lung allograft dysfunction]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-18T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Guidelines</category>
        <author>Saskia Bos</author><author>Merel Hellemons</author><author>Kavita Dave</author><author>Maarten F. M. Engel</author><author>Are Holm</author><author>Letizia Morlacchi</author><author>Veronika Müller</author><author>Stefano Pavanello</author><author>Clément Picard</author><author>Veronica Rossi</author><author>Berta Saez-Gimenez</author><author>Jens Gottlieb</author><author>Robin Vos</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) is the primary cause of late graft loss after lung transplantation, affecting up to half of lung transplant recipients within 5 years and presenting with heterogeneous phenotypes, most commonly bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) and restrictive allograft syndrome. Prevention and treatment of CLAD are challenging. This European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) clinical practice guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary Task Force, including patient and allied healthcare representation, using systematic reviews and GRADE methodology. Eight key PICO questions addressing prevention and treatment of CLAD were evaluated. In terms of prevention, recommendations are in favor of using tacrolimus over cyclosporine, either mycophenolate or azathioprine, and azithromycin to reduce the risk of CLAD. Regarding treatment, montelukast could be considered in early-stage BOS. Current data are inconclusive in demonstrating benefits of anti-thymocyte globulin, alemtuzumab or extracorporeal photopheresis compared with standard of care, and do not support the use of antifibrotics in BOS. The Task Force emphasizes the urgent need for high-quality clinical trials and standardized care pathways in CLAD management.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16664</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16664</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Five years after introduction of an opt-out consent system for organ donation; lessons learned from England and the Netherlands]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-15T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Nichon Esther Jansen</author><author>Tineke Jentina Wind</author><author>Martin B. A. Heemskerk</author><author>Aline C. Hemke</author><author>Claire Williment</author><author>Sue Madden</author><author>Dale Gardiner</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Five years after changing from opt-in to opt-out consent systems in England and the Netherlands, we examine the impact on donor registrations, consent rates, donor numbers, and reflect on lessons learned. Opt-out legislation was implemented in May 2020 in England and July 2020 in the Netherlands. In England, 44% of the population is now registered; 40% recording an opt-in decision and 4% an opt-out decision. In the Netherlands, mandated donor registration resulted in the entire adult population having their decision recorded: “Yes, I want to be a donor” (34%), “No objection” (24%), or “No, I don’t want to be a donor” (31%), while 11% leave the “Decision to next of kin”. Despite these structural changes, the consent categories created by opt-out legislation (“deemed” consent in England and “No objection” in the Netherlands) remain challenging in practice, with fewer than 50% of families agreeing to donation. In England, the family consent rate declined from 69% to 57% between 2020 and 2025 and the donor numbers remain below pre-pandemic levels. In contrast, the Netherlands experienced a modest increase in family consent rates and donor numbers compared to the opt-in consent system. Opt-out legislation provides an important policy framework, but sustained system-level commitment remains essential.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16585</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16585</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Developing European policy on xenotransplantation: instructive findings from the first representative UK sample survey on attitudes and views on animal to human transplants]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-15T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Mustafa Al-Haboubi</author><author>Paul Boadu</author><author>Agata Pacho</author><author>Nicholas Mays</author><author>Antonia J. Cronin</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Recent landmark advances, particularly those related to gene-editing technology and the pioneering pig-to-human transplants currently underway in the USA and China, mean that xenotransplantation (XTx) may become a realistic option for patients waiting for human organ transplants in the foreseeable future. XTx policy needs to be informed by understanding what the public thinks. We undertook what we believe to be the first representative population survey in the United Kingdom of attitudes and views towards XTx. Sixty-five percent of respondents were supportive. Fifty-nine percent would be willing to accept a transplant from a pig. The main concerns related to genetic modification and animal welfare. Public support was subject to rigorous oversight of safety and animal welfare by an independent regulator. There were significant differences in view related to age, sex, ethnicity, educational qualifications and religion with women, people from Black and Asian minority groups and Muslims less supportive of XTx. These findings highlight the importance of demonstrating to the public that XTx can be provided safely while ensuring high standards of animal welfare. We propose reproducing this survey in other European countries would enable comparative analysis and adapting it to incorporate professional opinion may help inform the development of XTx policy and practice in Europe.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16452</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16452</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Organ donation after euthanasia starting at home: a mixed-methods study of preliminary nationwide Dutch experiences]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-14T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Isabelle Manders</author><author>Nathalie van Dijk</author><author>Johan Sonneveld</author><author>Wim de Jongh</author><author>Jan Bollen</author><author>Nichon E. Jansen</author><author>Walther van Mook</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Organ Donation after Euthanasia starting at Home (ODEH) initiates the euthanasia trajectory at home with deep sedation, followed by transfer to the hospital for completion of euthanasia and organ procurement. We evaluated all eight Dutch ODEH procedures up to February 2024 using a mixed-methods design: descriptive analysis of anonymized case data (Dutch Transplant Foundation and hospital records) and semi-structured interviews (November 2023–February 2024) with involved professionals. All procedures were performed in three hospitals. Patients had neurodegenerative disease (n = 6) or psychiatric disorders (n = 2) and were aged from the mid-30s to the early-70s (mean 50.4 years). Professionals highlighted strict separation of euthanasia and donation decisions, time-critical coordination between home and hospital, variation in sedation/anesthesia and transport modality (regular ambulance vs. mobile ICU), regional constraints in staffing and infrastructure, emotional impact on professionals, and registry/coding considerations (including HSMR). ODEH is feasible within the existing Dutch legal framework and is valued for enabling a home farewell without compromising donation. A flexible practice manual defining core safeguards and decision points may support consistent implementation.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15874</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.15874</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Multi-site cytokine levels are predictive of primary graft dysfunction following lung transplantation]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-14T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Dianna Nord</author><author>Jason Cory Brunson</author><author>Logan Langerude</author><author>Hassan Moussa</author><author>Blake Gill</author><author>Mindaugas Rackauskas</author><author>Ashish Sharma</author><author>Christine Lin</author><author>Amir Emtiazjoo</author><author>Carl Atkinson</author>
        <description><![CDATA[There is an urgent need to better understand the pathophysiology of primary graft dysfunction (PGD) to develop point-of-care methods predicting those at risk. We utilized a multiplex multivariable approach to define cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors in patient-matched biospecimens to identify factors predictive of PGD. Biospecimens were collected from patients undergoing bilateral lung transplantation (LTx) from three sites: donor lung perfusate, post-transplant bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid (2h), and plasma (2h, 24h, 72h, and 1 and 2 wks). A 71-multiplex panel was performed on each. Cross-validated logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF) models determined whether analytes from each site, alone or combined with clinical data, discriminated PGD grade 0 (n = 9) vs. 3 (n = 8). BAL fluid at 2h was most predictive of PGD (LR, 0.825; RF, 0.919), followed by multi-timepoint plasma (LR, 0.841; RF, 0.653), then perfusate (LR, 0.565; RF, 0.448). Combined clinical, BAL, and plasma data yielded the strongest performance (LR, 1.000; RF, 1.000). BAL collected 2h post-transplant showed the strongest discriminatory signal for severe PGD in this exploratory cohort. This integrative approach identified IL-1RA, BCA-1, and Fractalkine as hypothesis-generating candidate biomarkers that warrant validation in larger independent studies.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16366</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16366</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Abatacept as maintenance therapy in kidney transplantation: a retrospective comparative study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-14T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Charlotte Uro-Coste</author><author>Inès Ramos</author><author>Aurélien Tiple</author><author>Marine Freist</author><author>Claire Chatron</author><author>Alba Atenza</author><author>Jimmy Garraud</author><author>Clarisse Grèze</author><author>Carole Philipponnet</author><author>Paul Rouzaire</author><author>Anne-elisabeth Heng</author><author>Cyril Garrouste</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Belatacept use is increasinging in kidney transplantation, as it has demonstrated improved graft survival compared with calcineurin inhibitors. However, its intravenous administration and recurrent supply shortages may limit its use. Abatacept has a similar mechanism of action. Although widely used in rheumatology, its use in kidney transplantation remains poorly documented. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of abatacept and belatacept as maintenance immunosuppressive therapy after kidney transplantation. We conducted a retrospective study including adult kidney transplant recipients who were switched to abatacept or belatacept between 2017 and 2023. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of rejection within the first year after conversion. A total of 74 patients were included: 21 in the abatacept group and 53 in the belatacept group. No significant difference was observed in rejection rates at 1 year (respectivily 9.5% vs. 9.4%; p > 0.999). Rates of viral and opportunistic infections were also comparable. These findings, which warrant confirmation in larger studies, suggest that abatacept is associated with acceptable safety outcomes relative to belatacept. Abatacept may thererefore be considered a potential alternative in selected situations, including drug shortage, limited venous access, pregnancy or the need for greater treatment autonomy.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17609</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17609</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Reshaping the landscape of HLA desensitization through immune engineering]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-14T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>News and Views</category>
        <author>Delphine Kervella</author><author>Oriol Bestard</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17124</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17124</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Whole pediatric liver graft in modified RAPID transplantation for unresectable colorectal liver metastases]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-10T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Brief Research Report</category>
        <author>Roberto Luca Meniconi</author><author>Nicola Guglielmo</author><author>Maria Lanzone</author><author>Francesca Mazzarotto</author><author>Marco Colasanti</author><author>Giammauro Berardi</author><author>Marco Angrisani</author><author>Germano Mariano</author><author>Davide Chiappori</author><author>Eleonora Garofalo</author><author>Giuseppe Maria Ettorre</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Liver transplantation has re-emerged as a therapeutic option for unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), but organ shortage and allocation concerns remain major limitations. The RAPID procedure combines auxiliary liver transplantation with delayed total hepatectomy, allowing small-graft use while the native liver provides temporary metabolic support. We report a modified RAPID transplantation, interpreted as a RAPID-derived staged auxiliary orthotopic liver transplantation (AOLT) strategy, using a whole pediatric graft in a 68-year-old woman with liver-only CRLM and sustained response to chemotherapy. The graft, from a 2-year-old donor (280 g; GRWR 0.4), had been declined by all pediatric centers due to non-standard infectious risk and was authorized by the Italian National Transplant Center within a regulated pathway. Favorable arterial anatomy preserved native right liver perfusion, while portal inflow management combined intentional surgical narrowing of the right portal vein with delayed portal vein embolization (PVE). At pre-PVE CT, graft volume was 350 cc (estimated GRWR 0.5); after PVE, it reached 580 cc (estimated GRWR 0.8), enabling completion hepatectomy at four weeks. At eight months, the patient had normal liver function and no recurrence. To our knowledge, this is the first reported use of a whole pediatric liver graft in modified RAPID transplantation.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17050</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.17050</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Donor-derived viral infections: the usual suspects and the new kids on the block]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-10T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Review</category>
        <author>Maddalena Peghin</author><author>Paolo Antonio Grossi</author>
        <description><![CDATA[The expansion of the transplant donor pool, driven by the need to reduce the disparity between supply and demand, carries the risk of use of marginal donors with viral infections, including classic viruses and emerging threats. This narrative review analyzes these challenges, including new opportunities in managing well known viruses such as Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C and Human Immunodeficiency Virus in both donors and recipients, thanks to new effective antivirals. Furthermore, we highlight the importance of monitoring emerging viral pathogens, such as Hepatitis E and Human Herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8) implementing both targeted pre-transplant donor screening and timely post-transplant diagnosis in the recipient, enabling earlier therapeutic intervention and potentially reducing recipient morbidity and mortality. Moreover, respiratory viral infections have gained significant attention as potential causes of donor derived infection (DDI) transmitted to the recipient, particularly within specific widespread and seasonal contexts, and require further attention and investigation. Continuous updates to surveillance and screening protocols are essential to optimize outcomes of recipients, ensuring transplant safety.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16427</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontierspartnerships.org/articles/10.3389/ti.2026.16427</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Locus-specific HLA matching and induction therapy in simultaneous pancreas–kidney transplantation: a national UK cohort study]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-09-09T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Abdullah K. Malik</author><author>Jenni Banks</author><author>Claire Counter</author><author>Lewis Simmonds</author><author>Samuel J. Tingle</author><author>Sanjay Sinha</author><author>Anand Muthasamy</author><author>Andrew Sutherland</author><author>John Casey</author><author>Martin Drage</author><author>David van Dellen</author><author>Chris J. Callaghan</author><author>Doruk Elker</author><author>Derek M. Manas</author><author>Gavin J. Pettigrew</author><author>Neil Russell</author><author>Neil S. Sheerin</author><author>Colin H. Wilson</author><author>Steven A. White</author>
        <description><![CDATA[The impact of HLA mismatch and induction therapy in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation on outcomes remains incompletely defined. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1705 SPK recipients transplanted in the UK between 2007 and 2019. Using national transplant registry data, we analysed the impact of locus-specific HLA mismatch and induction therapy (Alemtuzumab vs. Basiliximab) on pancreas graft survival primarily. Kidney graft and patient survival were also analysed as secondary outcomes. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for donor, recipient, and transplant variables. Pancreas graft survival at 1- and 10-year post-transplant was estimated to be 88.6% and 72.7%, respectively. Kidney graft and patient survival at 10 years were 76.7% and 75.3%. In adjusted analyses, donor age, cold ischaemic time, and HLA-DQ mismatch were significantly associated with pancreas graft loss. No significant survival difference was seen between Alemtuzumab and Basiliximab induction therapy. Induction therapy and HLA-mismatch status were not associated with pancreas graft outcome in this large registry study.]]></description>
      </item>
      </channel>
    </rss>