Notice: Users may be experiencing issues with displaying some pages on stanfordhealthcare.org. We are working closely with our technical teams to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience.
 

Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »

Stanford Health Care

Sex-Specific Patterns of Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA in Heart Transplant Rejection: An Analysis from the Genomic Research Alliance for Transplantation (GRAfT). The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation DeFilippis, E. M., Sweigart, B., Khush, K. K., Shah, P., Agbor-Enoh, S., Valantine, H. A., Vest, A. R. 2024

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Non-invasive methods for surveillance of acute rejection are increasingly used in heart transplantation (HT), including donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA). As other cardiac biomarkers differ by sex, we hypothesized that there may be sex-specific differences in performance of dd-cfDNA for detection of acute rejection. The purpose of the current study was to examine patterns of dd-cfDNA seen in quiescence and acute rejection in males and female transplant recipients.METHODS: Patients enrolled in the Genomic Research Alliance for Transplantation (GRAfT) who were =18 years at the time of HT were included. Rejection was defined by endomyocardial biopsy with ISHLT acute cellular rejection (ACR) grade =2R and/or antibody-mediated rejection = pAMR 1. dd-cfDNA was quantitated using shotgun sequencing. Median dd-cfDNA levels were compared between sexes during quiescence and rejection. The performance of dd-cfDNA by sex was assessed using AUROC. Allograft injury was defined as ddcfDNA =0.25%.RESULTS: 151 unique patients (49 female, 32%) were included in the analysis with 1119 available dd-cfDNA measurements. Baseline characteristics including demographics and comorbidities were not significantly different between sexes. During quiescence, there were no significant sex differences in median dd-cfDNA level (0.04% [IQR 0.00, 0.16] in females vs 0.03% [IQR 0.00, 0.12] in males, p = 0.22). There were no significant sex differences in median dd-cfDNA for ACR (0.33% [0.21, 0.36] in females vs 0.32% [0.21, 1.10] in males, p = 0.57). Overall, median dd-cfDNA levels were higher in AMR than ACR but did not significantly differ by sex (0.50% [IQR 0.18, 0.82] in females vs 0.63% [IQR 0.32, 1.95] in males, p = 0.51). Elevated dd-cfDNA detected ACR/AMR with an AUROC of 0.83 in females and 0.89 in males, p-value for comparison = 0.16.DISCUSSION: There were no significant sex differences in dd-cfDNA levels during quiescence and rejection. Performance characteristics were similar, suggesting that similar diagnostic thresholds can be used in men and women for rejection surveillance.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.healun.2024.03.001

View details for PubMedID 38460620