ArticleHLA2026
Resolution-Aware Eight-Locus HLA Diversity Profiling and Rare Allele Interpretation in an Eastern Chinese Transplant-Typing Cohort.
Article in HLA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
HLA diversity profiling is essential for transplant-typing practice, yet its interpretation is complicated by heterogeneous typing resolution and ambiguity in routine clinical datasets. We analysed eight-locus HLA genotyping results from 1388 individuals in an Eastern Chinese transplant-typing cohort (2021-2026) using a resolution-aware two-stage analytical framework-an approach that explicitly distinguishes first-field (allele-group) summaries from strict two-field allele-level analysis. HLA diversity profiling is defined as the systematic characterisation of allele/allele-group frequency distributions, heterozygosity and diversity metrics (Shannon entropy, evenness). Stage 1 summarised assay-derived first-field (allele-group) codes with complete coverage across all loci (2776 allele copies per locus), whereas Stage 2 evaluated strict two-field alleles restricted to loci achieving a > 45% two-field resolution threshold. Observed heterozygosity varied markedly across loci, ranging from 0.484 at HLA-DPA1 to 0.923 at HLA-B. At Stage 1, 43 rare allele-group codes (< 1%) were identified, disproportionately contributed by HLA-DPB1 (51.2%), consistent with resolution- and ambiguity-related inflation of apparent rare categories. At Stage 2, 68 rare two-field alleles (< 1% within locus-specific resolvable subsets) were identified; all were officially assigned and listed in the IPD-IMGT/HLA Database and documented in the Allele Frequency Net Database, with 97.1% having reported Chinese population records. Classification using the Common, Intermediate and Well-Documented (CIWD) catalogue showed that most cohort-defined 'rare' alleles were not globally rare. Together, these findings demonstrate that apparent rare allele burden in transplant-typing cohorts is strongly influenced by typing resolution and ambiguity handling. The resolution-aware framework presented here provides a transparent template for HLA diversity reporting and rare allele interpretation in heterogeneous clinical transplant-typing datasets.
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.