Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lack of Improvement in Renal Allograft Survival Despite a Marked Decrease in Acute Rejection Rates Over the Most Recent Era

Open access
Meier-Kriesche, Herwig-Ulf, Schold, Jesse D., Srinivas, Titte R., Kaplan, Bruce·2004·American Journal of Transplantation

Abstract

Acute rejection is known to have a strong impact on graft survival. Many studies suggest that very low acute rejection rates can be achieved with current immunosuppressive protocols. We wanted to investigate how acute rejection rates have evolved on a national level in the U.S. and how this has impacted graft survival in the most recent era of kidney transplantation. For this purpose, we analyzed data provided by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients regarding all adult first renal transplants between 1995 and 2000. We noted a significant decrease in overall acute rejection rates during the first 6 months, during the first year, and also in late rejections during the second year after transplantation. Despite this decrease in the rate of acute rejection, there was no significant improvement in overall graft survival; furthermore, we noted a statistically significant trend towards worse death-censored graft survival. There was also a trend for a greater proportion of rejection episodes to fail to recover to previous baseline function after treatment. Our data suggest that decreasing acute rejection rates between 1995 and 2000 have not led to an increase in long-term graft survival. Part of this discordance might be related to a higher proportion of acute rejections which have not resolved with full functional recovery in more recent years. However, the etiology of this concerning trend for worse death censored graft survival in recent years will warrant further investigation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00332.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,287

Metadata

Authors
Meier-Kriesche, H.-U., Schold, J. D., Srinivas, T. R., & Kaplan, B.
Venue
American Journal of Transplantation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-03
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
378-383
ISSN
1600-6135 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170264508
Cited by
1,287
References
1
FWCI
35.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Lack of Improvement in Renal Allograft Survival Despite a Marked Decrease in Acute Rejection Rates Over the Most Recent Era. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00332.x
The paper
Meier-Kriesche, H.-U., Schold, J. D., Srinivas, T. R., & Kaplan, B. (2004). Lack of Improvement in Renal Allograft Survival Despite a Marked Decrease in Acute Rejection Rates Over the Most Recent Era. American Journal of Transplantation. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00332.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.