RESUMO
Monitoring graft health and detecting graft rejection is crucial for the success of post-transplantation outcomes. In Western countries, the use of donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) has gained widespread recognition as a diagnostic tool for kidney transplant recipients. However, the role of dd-cfDNA among the Indian population remains unexplored. The recipients were categorized into two groups: the post-transplant recipient (PTR) group (n = 16) and the random recipient (RR) group (n = 87). Blood samples were collected daily from the PTR group over a 7-day period, whereas the RR group's samples were obtained at varying intervals. In this study, we used a targeted approach to identify dd-cfDNA, which eliminated the need for genotyping, and is based on the minor allele frequency of SNP assays. In the PTR group, elevated dd-cfDNA% levels were observed immediately after transplantation, but returned to normal levels within five days. Within the RR group, heightened serum creatinine levels were directly proportional to increased dd-cfDNA%. Sixteen recipients were advised to undergo biopsy due to elevated serum creatinine and other pathological markers. Among these sixteen recipients, six experienced antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR), two exhibited graft dysfunctions, two had active graft injury, and six (37.5%) recipients showed no rejection (NR). In cases of biopsy-proven ABMR and NR, recipients displayed a mean ± SD dd-cfDNA% of 2.80 ± 1.77 and 0.30 ± 0.35, respectively. This study found that the selected SNP assays exhibit a high proficiency in identifying donor DNA. This study also supports the use of dd-cfDNA as a routine diagnostic test for kidney transplant recipients, along with biopsies and serum creatinine, to attain better graft monitoring.
RESUMO
Background The rollout of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines has significantly enhanced immunity against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to a reduction in the severity of illness, hospitalizations, and deaths. While various side effects of the vaccine have been reported, its impact on the menstrual cycle remains unclear. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study involving university students who had received either partial or full vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Data was gathered through a questionnaire designed to assess the relationship between menstrual changes and the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Results A total of 773 participants, with a mean age of 20.6 ± 1.7 years, were included in this study. The participants reported a significant increase in the irregularity of the menstrual cycle. We observed a slight increase in the length of the menstrual cycle, from 30.0 ± 4.0 days (pre-vaccination) to 30.5 ± 5.6 days (post-vaccination), which was statistically significant (p<0.001). The duration of menstruation also increased, from 4.9 ± 1.7 days (pre-vaccination) to 5.0 ± 1.7 days (post-vaccination). However, this increase in menstrual length due to vaccination was not statistically significant (p = 0.898). Notably, there was a significant increase in pain reported by the participants after receiving the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (p = 0.004). Conclusion The SARS-CoV-2 vaccination significantly impacted the regularity of the menstrual cycle, length of the menstrual cycle, and pain during menstruation, though temporarily. Our study found no significant differences in menstrual changes or the type of vaccine administered (Covishield and Covaxin).
