ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Mixed Lymphocyte Reaction: Functional Immune Profiling in Transplantation and Beyond.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) is a classic functional assay that models in vitro interactions between responder T cells and allogeneic antigen-presenting cells (APCs). It quantifies the magnitude and quality of alloreactivity, integrating signals from allorecognition, co-stimulation, inflammatory context, and minor histocompatibility antigens that may not be captured by molecular matching alone. This review is narrative in nature and is intended as a practical, non-systematic synthesis of the field. To provide a modern, practice-oriented synthesis of MLR designs, readouts, and translational uses, highlighting how new technologies have expanded MLR from bulk proliferation into multidimensional immune profiling.We summarize why MLR remains valuable as a functional compatibility probe beyond HLA typing, including the high baseline frequency of alloreactive T cells that produces robust signals without priming. We then review key design options (one-way vs. two-way formats; stimulator inactivation; responder definition; APC source and maturation) and how these choices affect interpretation for rejection and graft-versus-host disease risk modeling, tolerance-focused studies, and immunomodulatory screening. Next, we outline major readouts-radiometric and flow cytometric proliferation (dye dilution, Ki-67), cytokine/chemokine profiling, cytotoxicity adaptations, and next-generation add-ons (e.g., scRNA-seq, TCR sequencing)-emphasizing complementary strengths and common pitfalls. Finally, we consolidate practical quality and reproducibility controls (donor variability, dynamic range, timing, batch effects, and acceptance criteria) to improve cross-study comparability and translational readiness. Modern MLR platforms combine controllable allogeneic stimulation with scalable, high-resolution readouts for mechanistic discovery, immune monitoring and translational immune profiling. Standardized modular design and rigorous quality control can improve reproducibility and support broader adoption across transplantation, immunotherapy, and immune-modulation research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.