Published online Jun 18, 2026. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v16.i2.117357
Revised: February 9, 2026
Accepted: April 2, 2026
Published online: June 18, 2026
Processing time: 175 Days and 11.1 Hours
Pediatric solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients paradoxically experience accelerated immune aging despite chronological youth, establishing a paradigm with profound implications for cancer risk and long-term outcomes. This comprehensive review synthesizes current evidence demon
Core Tip: Children who undergo organ transplantation often experience premature aging of the immune system, largely due to factors such as anti-thymocyte globulin exposure, cytomegalovirus reactivation, thymic dysfunction, and long-term immunosuppressive therapy. This accelerated immune decline substantially increases their risk of developing cancer both early and later in life. Adopting a biomarker-driven clinical approach, including senescence-related flow cytometry panels, T cell receptor excision circle/telomere assessments, and epigenetic aging markers, along with tailored immunosuppression strategies, vigilant cytomegalovirus management, and emerging therapies targeting senescent, thymic, or metabolic pathways may help lessen cancer risk and improve long-term patient outcomes.
- Citation: Arafat AMA, Soliman SMA, Elfandy H, Othman MO, Elsayed W, Lotfy MM, Ebrahim NAA. Immunosenescence and cancer predisposition in pediatric transplant recipients: An emerging paradigm. World J Transplant 2026; 16(2): 117357
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3230/full/v16/i2/117357.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5500/wjt.v16.i2.117357
The phenomenon of Immunosenescence, progressive deterioration of immune function with advancing age, has tradi
Immunosenescence encompasses multiple hallmarks. Thymic involution with reduced naive T cell output, telomere shortening in lymphocyte populations, accumulation of terminally differentiated memory T cells, loss of T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire diversity, chronic low-grade inflammation termed “inflammaging”, and development of the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP)[4,5]. In pediatric transplant recipients, these processes are dramatically acce
The clinical manifestation of accelerated immunosenescence is most evident in substantially elevated cancer incidence. Yanik et al[7] documented standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for cancer in pediatric SOT recipients ranging from 19.1 (95% confidence interval: 17.3-21.1) for all cancers combined to 159-1280 by organ for post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD), with excess risks extending beyond Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated malignancies to encompass solid tumors including skin cancers, renal cell carcinoma, and thyroid cancer. These risk profiles mirror those observed in elderly populations with naturally occurring immunosenescence, suggesting fundamental alterations in immunosurveillance mechanisms despite the patients’ youth. To contextualize the wide range of reported relative risks across organs, ages, follow-up windows, and eras of immunosuppression/viral prophylaxis, we summarize representative epidemiologic cohorts in pediatric SOT and HSCT survivors in Table 1[7-13].
| Ref. | Cohort | Country/registry | Transplant type | Age group | Sample size | Follow-up | Main reported risk estimates | Key notes (heterogeneity/era) |
| Yanik et al[7] | Transplant cancer match | United States; SRTR linked to 16 cancer registries | Pediatric SOT (kidney, liver, heart/Lung, intestine, multiorgan) | < 18 at transplant | 17958 transplants | Median 4 years (max 22) | All cancers SIR 19.1; NHL/PTLD SIR 212; organ-specific NHL/PTLD SIRs: Kidney 159, liver 197, heart/Lung 318, intestine 1280; highest in first year post-transplant; EBV-higher risk | Demonstrates strong organ heterogeneity and early post-transplant peak; EBV mismatch/seronegativity is a major driver |
| Kitchlu et al[8] | Hospital for sick children, Ontario population cohort | Canada (Ontario) | Pediatric SOT (kidney/Liver/heart/Lung/multiorgan) | Pediatric | 951 recipients | Mean 10.8 ± 7.1 years | Cumulative cancer incidence 20% vs 1.2% general population; incidence rate ratio 32.9; highest risk in first year (aHR 176); remains elevated > 10 years (aHR 10.8); lymphoproliferative disorders 77% | Highlights longer follow-up than many registry linkages and persistent excess risk beyond 10 years |
| Nordin et al[9] | Nordic liver transplant cohort | Nordic countries | Liver transplant (patients < 30 at liver transplantation; includes pediatric/young adult) | < 30 at transplant | 923 | 7846 person-years; cumulative incidence reported to 25 years | All cancers SIR 9.8; cumulative incidence 2% (10 years), 6% (20 years), 22% (25 years) | Illustrates lower overall SIR vs United States pediatric SOT cohorts but rising absolute risk with long-term follow-up into young adulthood |
| Endén et al[10] | Finland nationwide pediatric SOT survivors | Finland | Kidney/Liver/heart SOT | < 16 at transplant | 233 | Median follow-up 18 years | Cancer HR 14.7 vs controls; PTLD approximately 78% of cancers; many cancers after age 18 | Emphasizes late-occurring malignancy burden into adulthood and the need for lifelong surveillance |
| Ploos van Amstel et al[11] | Dutch pediatric ESRD transplant survivors | Netherlands | Mainly pediatric kidney transplant survivors (pediatric ESRD) | < 15 at transplant | 249 | Median 25.3 years; up to approximately 38 years | Overall malignancy risk IRR 21.7 vs general population; 41% cumulative incidence at 30 years (among survivors) | Demonstrates very long-term accumulation of malignancy risk decades after childhood transplant |
| Kahn et al[12] | CIBMTR; pediatric allogeneic HSCT for non-malignant diseases | International (CIBMTR) | HSCT (allogeneic; nonmalignant indications) | < 21 | 6028 | Median follow-up 7.8 years | Subsequent neoplasms 1.2% (71 cases); SIR 11 (vs general population) | PTLD excluded as “subsequent neoplasm” in this analysis; shows elevated cancer risk even in nonmalignant HSCT settings |
| Bomken and Skinner[13] | Pediatric HSCT late effects | Review | HSCT (pediatric) | Pediatric | SMNs up to approximately 7% by 20 years post-HSCT; PTLD often early (≤ 2 years) | Useful for framing latency differences (PTLD early vs solid SMNs later) and treatment-era drivers (radiation, GVHD, immune suppression) |
Across studies, cancer risk estimates vary substantially by transplanted organ, age at transplant, time since transplant, and the underlying indication for transplantation. In pediatric SOT, registry linkage data show particularly pronounced heterogeneity for PTLD/non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), with higher relative risks in intestine and thoracic (heart/Lung) recipients compared with kidney recipients, and a strong early post-transplant peak consistent with intense induction immunosuppression and primary EBV infection in EBV-naive children. Longer-term cohorts demonstrate that although early lymphoproliferative events dominate pediatric-onset cancers, solid tumor burden increases with extended follow-up into adolescence and young adulthood. In HSCT survivors, risk profiles differ again: PTLD tends to occur early, whereas therapy-related myeloid neoplasms and radiation-/graft-vs-host disease (GVHD)-associated solid tumors typically appear years later, underscoring the importance of era effects (conditioning intensity, T-cell depletion strategies, antiviral prophylaxis/monitoring practices) when interpreting pooled risk estimates[7].
This review critically examines the molecular and cellular mechanisms driving accelerated immune aging in pediatric transplant recipients, with particular emphasis on cancer predisposition pathways. We synthesize evidence across multiple transplant types, integrate emerging concepts including inflammaging and metabolic reprogramming, evaluate current biomarker strategies, and critically assess therapeutic interventions including senolytic agents, thymic regeneration approaches, and checkpoint inhibitor modulation. Our objective is to provide a comprehensive framework that positions accelerated immunosenescence as a central paradigm in pediatric transplant medicine, with immediate implications for clinical practice and future research directions.
Mechanisms of anti-thymocyte globulin-mediated T cell depletion: Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) represents a cornerstone induction therapy in pediatric transplantation, yet its profound impact on immune aging trajectories has only recently been elucidated. ATG consists of polyclonal antibodies targeting multiple T-cell surface antigens, resulting in rapid and profound lymphocyte depletion through complement-mediated lysis, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, and induction of apoptosis[14]. Critically, ATG demonstrates selective depletion patterns, preferentially eliminating naive CD45RA+ CD28+ T cells while relatively sparing CD45RO+ memory populations[15]. Crepin et al[15] provided seminal evidence that ATG administration induces sustained immunosenescent alterations characterized by reduced CD4+ CD28+ T cells, increased CD4+ CD28 null populations, shortened telomeres, and elevated inflammatory cytokines persisting years post-transplant. The preferential naive T cell depletion fundamentally alters the immune landscape, accelerating the transition toward an aged immune profile characterized by memory T cell predominance, reduced TCR repertoire diversity, and diminished capacity for de novo antigen responses.
Long-term consequences of lymphocyte reconstitution: Post-ATG immune reconstitution occurs primarily through homeostatic peripheral expansion rather than thymic regeneration, particularly problematic in pediatric recipients, where thymic function may be additionally compromised by conditioning regimens or concurrent surgical thymic injury[16]. This expansion-driven reconstitution preferentially involves memory T cells undergoing oligoclonal proliferation, resulting in repertoire restriction and accelerated telomere attrition due to repeated division cycles[17].
Lee et al[18] demonstrated that ATG treatment results in expansion of CD28-negative T cell populations, a hallmark immunosenescence marker, while simultaneously reducing telomerase activity and activating cellular senescence pathways including p53 and p16INK4a. These findings suggest that ATG not only depletes existing T cell populations but also fundamentally alters regenerative capacity, creating conditions conducive to accelerated aging that persist throug
CMV as a major driver of immunosenescence: CMV reactivation represents a critical driver of accelerated immunosenescence in pediatric transplant recipients, with effects extending far beyond acute infectious complications. CMV seropositivity is associated with premature immune aging markers, including telomere shortening, increased inflammatory cytokine production, expansion of highly differentiated CD28- CD57+ T cell populations, and TCR repertoire restriction[19]. These associations, well-documented in elderly populations where CMV infection correlates with increased mortality and “immune risk profile”, manifest with accelerated kinetics in immunosuppressed transplant recipients[20].
Mechanisms of CMV-induced immune aging: The mechanisms through which CMV accelerates immune aging are multifaceted. Semmes et al[21] described how CMV infection drives clonal expansion of virus-specific T cells, leading to “memory inflation”, progressive accumulation of CMV-specific effector memory T cells that can occupy up to 50% of the CD8+ T cell compartment in some individuals. This massive clonal expansion occurs at the expense of naive T cells and other antigen specificities, progressively narrowing the TCR repertoire and reducing capacity for responses to novel antigens, including tumor-associated antigens.
Jackson et al[22] further elucidated CMV’s sophisticated immune evasion strategies contributing to persistent viral replication and chronic immune activation. These viral mechanisms include interference with major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I antigen presentation through multiple viral proteins (US2, US3, US6, US11), inhibition of natural killer (NK) cell function via MHC class I homologs (UL18), modulation of cytokine responses, and induction of regulatory T cells. The cumulative effect is a state of chronic immune stimulation without effective viral clearance, promoting progressive shift toward terminally differentiated effector T cells (TEMRA) with reduced proliferative capacity, shortened telomeres, and functional exhaustion characteristic of aged immune systems[22].
CMV-specific interventions: The substantial contribution of CMV to accelerated immune aging suggests that aggressive CMV prevention and treatment strategies may mitigate immunosenescence. However, antiviral prophylaxis must be balanced against concerns that preventing CMV replication entirely may paradoxically increase late CMV disease through delayed immune priming. Emerging strategies, including letermovir, CMV-specific immunotherapy, and CMV vaccination in seronegative recipients, represent promising approaches requiring prospective evaluation in pediatric transplant populations[23].
Telomere attrition as a biomarker and mechanism: Telomere dysfunction emerges as both a mechanistic driver and a biomarker of accelerated immune aging in transplant recipients. Telomeres, TTAGGG repeat sequences protecting chromosome ends, shorten with each cell division, ultimately triggering replicative senescence when critically short telomeres activate DNA damage response pathways[24]. In pediatric transplant recipients, multiple factors converge to accelerate telomere attrition: Repeated T cell activation and proliferation in response to alloantigens and pathogens, oxidative stress from immunosuppressive medications, chronic inflammation, and reduced telomerase activity in immunosenescent cells[25].
Wang et al[26] demonstrated that pre-transplant short telomere length serves as a prognostic factor for post-transplant survival in patients with severe aplastic anemia undergoing HSCT, suggesting that telomere status represents a biomarker of cellular aging that influences transplant outcomes. Song et al[27] reported that childhood cancer survivors demonstrate shortened leukocyte telomere length associated with increased prevalence of chronic health conditions, establishing precedent for telomere-mediated complications in pediatric populations exposed to intensive medical interventions.
Molecular consequences of telomere dysfunction: Critically short telomeres trigger cellular senescence through activation of p53 and p16INK4a/Rb pathways, resulting in irreversible cell cycle arrest[28]. Senescent cells acquire the SASP, secreting pro-inflammatory cytokines [interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α], growth factors, proteases, and chemokines that promote chronic inflammation and tissue dysfunction[29]. In the context of transplantation, accumulation of senescent immune cells with SASP contributes to inflammaging, potentially promoting tumorigenesis through chronic inflammation while simultaneously compromising anti-tumor immunity through exhaustion of functional immune cells.
The relationship between telomere dysfunction and cancer predisposition is complex and bidirectional. While critically short telomeres can promote genomic instability and malignant transformation through breakage-fusion-bridge cycles, Zhang et al[28] demonstrated that genetic predisposition to longer telomere length is paradoxically associated with increased ependymoma risk, suggesting that optimal telomere maintenance represents a narrow therapeutic window. This complexity underscores the need for nuanced approaches to monitoring and potentially modulating telomere dynamics in pediatric transplant recipients.
The central role of thymic function: Thymic dysfunction represents a fundamental mechanism driving accelerated immunosenescence in pediatric transplant recipients, with effects persisting long after transplantation. The thymus serves as the primary site for T cell development, generating naive T cells with diverse TCR specificities through somatic recombination processes[30,31]. Thymic output, quantifiable through TCR excision circles (TRECs) and assessment of CD45RA+ CD31+ recent thymic emigrants (RTEs), declines with age but remains substantial in healthy children and adolescents[32].
In transplant recipients, thymic function is compromised through multiple mechanisms: Direct toxic effects of conditioning chemotherapy or radiation, immunosuppressive medications [particularly corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs)], chronic GVHD in HSCT recipients (Figure 1), and surgical thymectomy in congenital heart disease patients undergoing cardiac surgery[33]. Mengrelis et al[34] documented persistent T cell abnormalities in pediatric heart transplant recipients, attributed to both immunosuppression and concurrent thymectomy during cardiac surgery, with reduced naive T cell proportions and decreased TREC levels years post-transplant (Figure 1)[35].
Consequences of impaired thymic output: Reduced thymic output results in prolonged T cell lymphopenia and skewed immune reconstitution, favoring memory over naive T cell populations[36]. Mackall et al[37] demonstrated that thymic function can be substantially impaired even in young recipients, leading to repertoire restriction and reliance on peripheral expansion mechanisms for T cell reconstitution. Kanakry et al[38] showed that T cell repertoire reconstitution after post-transplantation cyclophosphamide relies heavily on peripheral expansion rather than de novo thymic generation, potentially limiting long-term immune competence and cancer immunosurveillance capabilities.
TCR repertoire diversity and functional implications: TCR repertoire diversity is essential for recognizing the vast array of potential antigens, including pathogen-derived peptides and tumor-associated antigens. Ciupe et al[39] demonstrated that thymic transplantation can restore TCR repertoire diversity in DiGeorge syndrome patients, highlighting the critical role of functional thymic tissue in maintaining immune competence. Conversely, transplant recipients with impaired thymic function demonstrate restricted repertoires dominated by oligoclonal populations, reducing capacity for novel antigen recognition and potentially compromising tumor immunosurveillance.
Chronic inflammation as a driver of aging: Inflammaging, chronic, low-grade, sterile inflammation characteristic of aging, emerges as a critical mechanism linking immunosuppression to accelerated aging and cancer predisposition[40]. Multiple sources contribute to inflammaging in transplant recipients: Senescent cells secreting SASP factors, persistent viral infections (CMV, EBV), chronic allograft inflammation, immunosuppressive medication effects, and gut dysbiosis with increased intestinal permeability and bacterial translocation[41].
Franzin et al[42] examined the complement system’s role in linking acute kidney injury to chronic graft damage through inflammaging pathways, demonstrating elevated inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β) and complement activation in transplant recipients. Singh et al[4] comprehensively reviewed aging and inflammation mechanisms, emphasizing the role of innate immune activation, inflammasome activation (particularly nod-like receptor protein 3), and disrupted autophagy in perpetuating chronic inflammatory states.
SASP as a pro-tumorigenic factor: The SASP encompasses over 50 secreted factors, including IL-6, IL-8, growth-regulated oncogene-α, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, matrix metalloproteinase-3, and others that create a pro-tumorigenic microenvironment[4]. SASP factors promote cancer development through multiple mechanisms: Stimulating proliferation of premalignant cells, inducing epithelial-mesenchymal transition, promoting angiogenesis, remodeling extracellular matrix, recruiting immunosuppressive myeloid cells, and exhausting anti-tumor T cells through chronic antigen stimulation[5]. In the context of post-transplant malignancy, SASP represents a mechanistic link between immunosenescence and cancer development independent of direct immunosuppression effects (Figure 2)[43].
Innate immune senescence: While most immunosenescence research focuses on adaptive immunity, innate immune aging significantly contributes to cancer predisposition. NK cells, critical for tumor immunosurveillance, undergo functional decline with aging, exhibiting reduced cytotoxicity, altered receptor expression (decreased NKG2D, increased NKG2A), and impaired proliferative capacity[44]. Macrophages demonstrate polarization toward M2 phenotypes with pro-tumorigenic and immunosuppressive functions[43]. Neutrophils show reduced chemotaxis and phagocytic capacity while exhibiting increased production of reactive oxygen species, contributing to chronic inflammation[45]. Transplant recipients demonstrate accelerated innate immune aging, warranting investigation as potential therapeutic targets.
Mechanistic target of rapamycin signaling and immune aging: The mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway emerges as a master regulator of cellular aging and immune function[46]. mTOR hyperactivation promotes cellular senescence, drives anabolic metabolism, inhibits autophagy, and accelerates aging across multiple tissues[47]. In T cells, mTOR signaling regulates differentiation, with mTOR activation driving effector T cell differentiation and memory T cell formation requiring mTOR inhibition[48].
Paradoxically, while mTOR inhibitors (rapamycin, everolimus) are used as immunosuppressants in transplantation, they may exert anti-aging effects, including enhanced autophagy, improved mitochondrial function, and reduced senescent cell accumulation[49]. Caloric restriction and ketogenic diets, which inhibit mTOR signaling, extend lifespan in multiple organisms and may offer therapeutic potential in mitigating accelerated aging in transplant recipients[50]. The complex interplay between mTOR’s immunosuppressive and anti-aging effects requires careful dissection to optimize therapeutic applications.
Mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress: Mitochondrial dysfunction represents a hallmark of aging and significantly impacts immune cell function[51]. Aged T cells demonstrate reduced mitochondrial membrane potential, decreased ATP production, increased reactive oxygen species generation, and impaired mitophagy, selective autophagy of damaged mitochondria[52]. CNIs (tacrolimus, cyclosporine), commonly used immunosuppressants, induce mitochondrial dysfunction in multiple cell types, including T cells, potentially accelerating immune aging through oxidative stress pathways[53].
Reactive oxygen species, while serving important signaling functions at physiological levels, cause cumulative oxidative damage to lipids, proteins, and DNA when chronically elevated[54]. Oxidative stress accelerates telomere attrition (telomeric DNA is particularly susceptible to oxidative damage), activates senescence pathways, and promotes inflammatory signaling through nuclear factor-κB activation[55]. Mitochondrial-targeted antioxidants (MitoQ, SkQ1) represent potential therapeutic interventions to mitigate oxidative stress-driven immune aging in transplant recipients.
Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide metabolism and sirtuins: Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) serves as a critical cofactor for sirtuins (SIRTs), NAD+-dependent deacetylases regulating multiple aging pathways[56]. NAD+ levels decline with aging, contributing to mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired DNA repair, and metabolic dysregulation[57]. SIRTs, particularly SIRT1, SIRT3, and SIRT6, regulate immune cell function, promote mitochondrial health, enhance DNA repair, and suppress inflammatory signaling[58].
NAD+ precursors, including nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN), restore NAD+ levels in aged animals, improving multiple aging hallmarks, including mitochondrial function, stem cell function, and cognitive performance[59]. Whether NAD+ supplementation can mitigate accelerated immune aging in pediatric transplant recipients represents an important research question with potential therapeutic implications.
Epigenetic aging in transplantation: Epigenetic modifications, particularly DNA methylation patterns, change predictably with chronological age, enabling the development of “epigenetic clocks” that estimate biological age[60]. The Horvath clock, based on the methylation status of 353 CpG sites, accurately predicts chronological age across tissues and exhibits acceleration in age-related diseases and conditions associated with accelerated aging[61]. Preliminary evidence suggests that transplant recipients, immunosuppressive medications, and chronic viral infections alter DNA methylation patterns, potentially accelerating epigenetic aging[62].
Histone modifications and chromatin remodeling: Beyond DNA methylation, histone modifications, and chromatin accessibility changes contribute to immune aging[63]. Aged T cells demonstrate altered histone acetylation and methylation patterns, affecting gene expression programs and functional capacity[64]. Immunosuppressive medications, particularly CNIs, directly affect chromatin remodeling through nuclear factor of activated T cells pathway modulation, potentially contributing to epigenetic aging acceleration[65]. Understanding epigenetic alterations in pediatric transplant recipients may identify novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets for age-related complications.
While accelerated immunosenescence represents a critical driver of increased cancer predisposition in pediatric transplant recipients, comprehensive risk assessment requires acknowledgment of multiple confounding factors that may independently or synergistically contribute to observed cancer incidence. Disentangling these interrelated contributors presents substantial methodological challenges, and few studies have adequately adjusted for the full constellation of potential confounders[66,67]. This section critically examines these confounding factors and evaluates how epidemiologic studies have attempted to address them.
The indications for transplantation themselves may confer independent cancer predisposition that predates immunosuppressive exposure. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients demonstrate elevated cancer risk even before transplantation, with SIRs of 1.16-1.35 in the pre-transplant period, rising to 3.27 post-transplantation[68]. This pre-existing elevation suggests that uremia, chronic inflammation associated with kidney failure, and dialysis-related factors contribute to baseline cancer risk independent of transplant-related immunosuppression.
Similarly, patients with autoimmune hepatitis or primary sclerosing cholangitis requiring liver transplantation carry elevated colorectal cancer risk associated with concurrent ulcerative colitis[29,69]. Chronic hepatitis B and C virus infections, common indications for liver transplantation, independently increase hepatocellular carcinoma risk through decades of hepatic inflammation and cirrhosis, complicating attribution of post-transplant liver cancers solely to immunosuppression[70].
In pediatric HSCT for non-malignant diseases such as severe aplastic anemia, Fanconi anemia, or inherited bone marrow failure syndromes, underlying genomic instability and defective DNA repair mechanisms inherent to these conditions confer independent malignancy risk[14]. Children with Fanconi anemia demonstrate a 500- to 700-fold increased risk of acute myeloid leukemia and solid tumors even without transplantation, attributable to germline mutations in DNA repair pathways[17].
Adjustment strategies: Rigorous epidemiologic studies employ several approaches to account for underlying disease effects. Landmark analyses comparing cancer incidence in the same ESRD patients across three distinct periods: Pre-renal replacement therapy, during dialysis, and post-transplantation, demonstrated progressive risk escalation that isolated transplant-specific effects from underlying kidney disease. Exclusion of cancers known to be caused by underlying conditions (e.g., multiple myeloma and kidney cancer in ESRD patients) from primary analyses provides conservative risk estimates[68]. However, complete adjustment remains challenging, as underlying diseases may share pathophysiologic mechanisms with immunosenescence, including chronic inflammation and immune dysregulation.
A substantial proportion of pediatric transplant recipients, particularly HSCT recipients for malignant diseases, have prior exposure to cytotoxic chemotherapy and radiation that independently elevate subsequent malignancy risk. Alkylating agents (cyclophosphamide, busulfan) used in conditioning regimens induce DNA damage and chromosomal instability, contributing to therapy-related myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukemia with latency periods of 3-7 years[18]. Topoisomerase II inhibitors (etoposide, doxorubicin) cause balanced chromosomal translocations predisposing to therapy-related leukemias with shorter latency (1-3 years)[22].
Radiation therapy, whether total body irradiation in conditioning regimens or therapeutic irradiation for prior malignancies, confers dose-dependent solid tumor risk with long latency periods extending decades[33]. Childhood Cancer Survivor Study data demonstrate that radiation doses exceeding 20 Gy to specific body regions increase second malignant neoplasm risk 5- to 10-fold, with risk persisting 30-40 years post-exposure[27]. Notably, cardiac surgery for congenital heart disease requiring concurrent thymectomy compounds immunologic impairment through surgical thymic ablation, synergizing with subsequent immunosuppression to accelerate immune aging[34].
The interaction between prior cytotoxic therapy and subsequent immunosuppression likely operates through multiple mechanisms: Cumulative DNA damage, telomere attrition from repeated cell cycling, stem cell exhaustion, and persistent bone marrow dysfunction that impairs immune reconstitution[25]. Critically, children transplanted for non-malignant conditions without prior chemotherapy or radiation still demonstrate markedly elevated cancer risk, confirming that immunosuppression alone suffices to drive malignancy, though prior therapy amplifies risk[38].
Adjustment strategies: Studies of HSCT recipients for non-malignant diseases (e.g., aplastic anemia, immunodeficiencies, hemoglobinopathies) provide natural cohorts minimizing chemotherapy/radiation confounding[36]. The CIBMTR pediatric allogeneic HSCT study of non-malignant indications (n = 6028) demonstrated subsequent neoplasm SIR of 11, comparable to malignant indication cohorts, isolating transplant-related effects[12]. Dose-response analyses incorporating cumulative chemotherapy exposure (e.g., alkylating agent dose) and radiation field/dose enable risk stratification, though residual confounding from disease severity correlated with treatment intensity remains challenging to eliminate[27].
Inherited cancer predisposition syndromes may independently contribute to post-transplant malignancy risk, though their prevalence in transplant cohorts and contribution to excess cancer burden remain inadequately characterized. Germline mutations in cancer susceptibility genes occur in approximately 8%-10% of pediatric cancer patients overall[71,72], but systematic screening of transplant recipients for such mutations is not standard practice, precluding accurate prevalence estimation.
Li-Fraumeni syndrome (germline TP53 mutations) confers > 90% lifetime cancer risk across diverse malignancy types, with early-onset characteristics[24]. Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency (biallelic mutations in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2) causes childhood onset of hematologic and solid malignancies[28]. Fanconi anemia, dyskeratosis congenita, and other inherited bone marrow failure syndromes requiring HSCT carry an intrinsic high malignancy risk through defective DNA repair and telomere maintenance[17]. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations), while typically manifesting in adulthood, may influence cancer risk in adolescent/young adult transplant recipients followed long-term[30].
The intersection of genetic predisposition and iatrogenic immunosuppression likely produces synergistic cancer risk through complementary mechanisms: Genomic instability from germline mutations combined with impaired immunosurveillance of malignant clones. However, distinguishing cancer attributable to genetic predisposition vs immunosuppression proves challenging without comprehensive germline testing and appropriately matched comparison groups.
Adjustment strategies: Contemporary epidemiologic studies increasingly incorporate germline genetic testing, though implementation in transplant cohorts lags behind oncology populations[71]. The St. Jude PeCan Data Portal and similar efforts systematically characterize germline variants in pediatric cancer survivors, providing frameworks applicable to transplant populations[27]. Exclusion of patients with known high-penetrance cancer predisposition syndromes from primary analyses enables more precise estimation of transplant-attributable risk, while stratified analyses can characterize risk modification by genetic factors[30]. However, such exclusions may underestimate true population-level risk if genetic predisposition prevalence differs between transplant and general populations.
Post-transplant cancer risk is modified by ongoing environmental carcinogen exposure, particularly ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and oncogenic viruses. Non-melanoma skin cancer, the most common malignancy in adult transplant recipients, demonstrates strong dose-response relationships with cumulative UVR exposure, with SIRs reaching 100-fold in fair-skinned recipients with high sun exposure. Lip cancer risk, elevated 30-fold post-transplant, similarly correlates with UVR exposure and fair phenotype[34].
Oncogenic virus exposure timing and serostatus critically modify PTLD risk. EBV-seronegative recipients experiencing primary EBV infection post-transplant demonstrate PTLD risk 5- to 10-fold higher than EBV-seropositive recipients undergoing viral reactivation[7]. Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection contributes to anogenital and oropharyngeal malignancies, with higher prevalence and persistence in immunosuppressed populations. Tobacco smoking amplifies lung, oropharyngeal, and bladder cancer risk in transplant recipients, operating synergistically with immunosuppression[22].
Adjustment strategies: Comprehensive cohort studies incorporate baseline and longitudinal assessment of sun exposure behaviors, smoking history, and viral serostatus, enabling multivariable adjustment[72]. Registry-based studies increasingly link transplant registries with cancer registries and viral surveillance databases, improving confounding control[7]. However, behavioral exposures are subject to measurement error and recall bias, and viral infection status may itself be affected by immunosuppression (reverse causation). Propensity score matching based on measured confounders provides one approach to balance exposure distributions between transplant recipients and comparison groups[5].
Methodological biases inherent to transplant outcome research may artificially inflate or deflate cancer risk estimates. Longevity bias (survivor treatment selection bias) arises because transplant recipients must survive long enough to receive transplantation, excluding the sickest patients who die while waitlisted. This selection process creates a survivor cohort healthier than the overall waitlisted population, potentially underestimating cancer risk if pre-existing occult malignancies or frailty associated with cancer predisposition cause waitlist mortality[40].
Conversely, transplant recipients undergo more intensive medical surveillance than the general population, increasing detection of asymptomatic cancers that might otherwise remain undiagnosed (surveillance bias). Routine imaging for graft assessment, frequent laboratory monitoring, and heightened clinical vigilance for infectious and malignant complications create opportunities for incidental cancer detection. This detection bias likely contributes to apparently elevated rates of renal cell carcinoma and thyroid cancer, tumors frequently discovered incidentally on imaging obtained for other indications[41].
Immortal time bias poses a particularly insidious threat to validity in observational transplant research[46]. This bias occurs when follow-up time during which the outcome (cancer) cannot occur by definition is inappropriately included in the exposed group’s follow-up. For example, comparing cancer rates in transplant recipients vs waitlisted patients without accounting for time spent on the waitlist before transplantation assigns “immortal time” to the transplanted group, as patients must survive waitlist duration cancer-free to receive a transplant, artificially lowering their apparent cancer rate[47].
Adjustment strategies: Landmark analysis addresses longevity bias by defining cohort entry at a common time point (e.g., 1-year post-transplant), excluding early events and patients who die before the landmark[32]. This approach sacrifices early follow-up data but ensures comparable survivor populations. Time-dependent covariate analysis and immortal time risk-period adjustment using time-varying exposure definitions prevent immortal time bias by correctly allocating person-time to exposed vs unexposed status[46,47]. Sensitivity analyses excluding cancers likely subject to surveillance bias (e.g., incidentally detected small renal masses) test the robustness of findings.
The intensity and modality of cancer surveillance in transplant recipients exceeds that in the general population, introducing systematic differences in cancer detection that confound true incidence comparisons. Transplant protocols mandate frequent clinic visits, comprehensive laboratory panels including tumor markers, and routine cross-sectional imaging to assess graft function and detect complications[33]. This intensive surveillance creates opportunities for incidental cancer detection substantially exceeding the general population’s exposure to diagnostic procedures.
Detection bias particularly affects tumors amenable to imaging or laboratory-based detection: Renal cell carcinoma (detected on routine abdominal imaging), thyroid cancer (detected on neck imaging), and early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (detected by surveillance ultrasound and alpha-fetoprotein monitoring)[73]. Yanik et al[7] noted that although thyroid cancer SIR was elevated 6-fold post-transplant, mortality from thyroid cancer was not increased, suggesting detection of indolent cancers that would not have caused clinical harm, classic overdiagnosis.
Conversely, certain cancers may be underdetected in transplant populations despite elevated true incidence. Prostate-specific antigen screening is complicated in chronic kidney disease patients by impaired antigen clearance, leading to artificially elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and diagnostic confusion, potentially reducing screening uptake[58]. Mammography interpretation is confounded by increased breast calcifications associated with renal disease and transplant medications[48]. These factors may explain the paradoxical absence of increased breast and prostate cancer in transplant cohorts despite immunosuppression that should theoretically impair tumor immunosurveillance[74].
Adjustment strategies: Calculating cancer-specific mortality in addition to incidence helps distinguish true increased risk from overdiagnosis[75], as aggressive cancers drive mortality, whereas indolent overdiagnosed cancers do not[7]. Excluding cancers with high probabilities of incidental detection (small renal masses, papillary thyroid microcarcinomas) in sensitivity analyses tests whether excess risk persists. Comparing cancer stage distribution between transplant recipients and the general population reveals detection bias: Stage shift toward earlier stages suggests surveillance-related detection, whereas similar or later stage distribution indicates true increased incidence of clinically significant disease. However, complete elimination of detection bias remains elusive without impractical randomized trials with standardized surveillance protocols[76].
Cancer risk after transplantation has evolved substantially across transplant eras, reflecting advances in immunosuppressive regimens, antiviral prophylaxis, graft preservation techniques, and patient selection[3]. Early transplant cohorts (1970s-1980s) received azathioprine-based immunosuppression with limited viral monitoring, experiencing extremely high PTLD rates. Introduction of cyclosporine (1980s), tacrolimus (1990s), and mycophenolate mofetil (late 1990s) altered both rejection rates and malignancy profiles[23].
Adoption of universal CMV prophylaxis with (val)ganciclovir and widespread EBV viral load monitoring in the 2000s reduced early PTLD incidence in some cohorts, though late-onset disease persists[23,77]. Conversely, prolonged survival enabled by improved graft outcomes increases person-time at risk for late malignancies, potentially elevating long-term cancer incidence despite improved short-term outcomes[10]. Registry-based studies spanning decades must account for these temporal trends, as crude incidence comparisons across eras conflate true changes in cancer risk with evolving practice patterns, patient populations, and follow-up duration[8]. Failure to adjust for era effects may produce misleading conclusions about cancer trends.
Adjustment strategies: Stratified analyses by transplant era with era-specific SIRs account for changing background cancer rates in the general population[7]. Multivariable models incorporating transplant year as a continuous or categorical covariate enable statistical adjustment, while interaction terms test whether risk factors’ effects vary across eras[26]. Restriction to contemporary cohorts (e.g., post-2000) improves generalizability to current practice but sacrifices long-term follow-up necessary to capture late malignancies[38].
Despite recognition of these multifaceted confounders, few published studies achieve comprehensive adjustment. The largest registry-based studies linking transplant registries to cancer registries (e.g., Yanik et al’s Transplant Cancer Match Study of 175732 transplants[7]) provide unparalleled sample size and unbiased cancer ascertainment but lack granular data on underlying disease severity, pre-transplant therapies, genetic factors, and environmental exposures[7]. These studies calculate SIRs adjusted for age, sex, race, and calendar period but cannot adjust for unmeasured confounders.
Single-center cohort studies with detailed clinical data enable multivariable adjustment but suffer from limited sample size, potential referral bias, and voluntary cancer reporting that may miss cases[33]. Emerging linked registry approaches combining transplant registries, cancer registries, health administrative databases, and biobanks with germline sequencing hold promise for comprehensive confounding adjustment while maintaining population-based rigor[49].
Critically, even the most sophisticated adjustment strategies cannot fully address unmeasured confounding or confounding by indication (wherein disease severity drives both treatment intensity and cancer risk through shared pathways)[4]. Recognizing these limitations, the field increasingly emphasizes triangulation: Converging evidence from complementary study designs (registry linkages, detailed cohort studies, natural experiments like transplant failure cohorts) that collectively strengthen causal inference despite individual studies’ limitations[10,68].
Implications for immunosenescence paradigm: While confounding factors clearly contribute to post-transplant cancer risk, several lines of evidence support immunosenescence as a primary driver rather than merely a correlate of confounding. First, cancer risk demonstrates dose-response relationships with immunosuppression intensity and duration, independent of underlying disease[59]. Second, cancer risk reverses upon graft failure and immunosuppression withdrawal, inconsistent with persistent confounders[34]. Third, the malignancy spectrum, dominated by EBV-driven lymphoproliferative disease, virus-associated epithelial cancers, and immunogenic tumors, mirrors patterns in other immunodeficiency states [human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, primary immunodeficiencies], suggesting immunosurveillance failure as a unifying mechanism. Fourth, pediatric recipients transplanted for non-malignant conditions without prior chemotherapy/radiation demonstrate cancer risk comparable to those with prior therapy, confirming sufficiency of immunosuppression alone[12,36].
Nonetheless, comprehensive cancer risk stratification must integrate immunosenescence biomarkers with assessment of confounding factors, underlying disease, prior therapies, genetic predisposition, environmental exposures, and surveillance intensity, to achieve precision in individual patient prognostication and population-level risk estimation. Future research prioritizing comprehensive covariate collection, germline sequencing, longitudinal biomarker assessment, and appropriate statistical methods will refine understanding of immunosenescence’s mechanistic role while acknowledging the multifactorial reality of post-transplant oncogenesis.
Molecular mechanisms of T cell exhaustion: T cell exhaustion represents a state of functional hyporesponsiveness characterized by progressive loss of effector functions, elevated expression of multiple inhibitory receptors [programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-containing protein 3, lymphocyte-activation gene 3, T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains], altered transcriptional programming, and metabolic dysfunction[78]. Angeletti et al[79] comprehensively reviewed T cell exhaustion in organ transplantation, demonstrating how chronic alloantigen exposure combined with immunosuppressive medications promotes exhausted T cell phenotypes with impaired anti-tumor capacity.
The transcriptional program of exhausted T cells is regulated by specific transcription factors, particularly TOX and TOX2, which establish and maintain the exhausted state[80]. Exhausted T cells exhibit epigenetic modifications that stabilize their dysfunction, creating a distinct differentiation state rather than simply a dysfunctional version of effector T cells[81]. Critically, exhausted T cells demonstrate reduced ability to eliminate malignant cells through impaired cytotoxic function, decreased proliferative capacity, and altered cytokine production, creating permissive conditions for tumor development and progression.
Shahbazi et al[82] highlighted that exhaustion affects multiple lymphocyte populations in transplantation, including CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, B cells, and NK cells, creating comprehensive immune dysfunction extending beyond traditional immunosuppression. Das et al[71] demonstrated that naive T cell deficits present at diagnosis and exacerbated by chemotherapy significantly impair adoptive cell therapy potential in pediatric cancers, findings directly relevant to transplant recipients, where similar mechanisms of T cell depletion and dysfunction compromise natural anti-tumor responses.
Bailur et al[72] identified risk-associated alterations in marrow T cells in pediatric leukemia, including increased exhaustion markers and reduced effector function, suggesting that immune dysfunction can both predispose to malignancy and complicate treatment responses. In transplant recipients, the combination of chronic immunosuppression, viral reactivation, and persistent alloantigen exposure creates ideal conditions for progressive T cell exhaustion with consequent cancer predisposition[83,84].
Epidemiology and risk factors: PTLD represents the paradigmatic malignancy illustrating the intersection of immunosenescence and cancer predisposition in pediatric transplant recipients. Using United States registry linkage data, PTLD/NHL risk is markedly elevated but heterogeneous by organ; Yanik et al[7] reported NHL/PTLD SIRs of 159 (kidney), 197 (liver), 318 (heart/Lung), and 1280 (intestine), with the greatest excess risk in the first post-transplant year and in EBV-seronegative recipients. The incidence of PTLD varies by organ type: Approximately 1%-5% in kidney recipients, 2%-5% in liver recipients, 2%-10% in heart recipients, and up to 10%-20% in intestinal transplant recipients[71].
Allen et al[85] identified critical risk factors for PTLD development, including EBV seronegativity at transplant (donor-positive/recipient-negative mismatch conferring the highest risk), young age (particularly < 5 years), intensive immunosuppression (especially ATG induction), and specific immunosuppressive agents (tacrolimus associated with higher risk than cyclosporine)[81]. These risk factors converge with mechanisms of accelerated immunosenescence: EBV-naive recipients require de novo immune responses that may be compromised by thymic dysfunction, T cell depletion, and exhaustion.
Pathogenesis of PTLD: Fulchiero and Amaral[86] emphasized that pediatric PTLD predominantly involves EBV-driven B cell proliferation, with over 80% of early PTLD cases being EBV-positive. EBV immortalizes B cells through expression of latency-associated proteins (LMP1, LMP2A, EBNA1, EBNA2, EBNA3A/B/C) that dysregulate cell cycle control, inhibit apoptosis, and promote proliferation[87]. Control of EBV-infected B cells requires robust CD8+ T cell responses targeting viral antigens; immunosenescence-associated reductions in naive T cells, TCR repertoire restriction, and T cell exhaustion fundamentally compromise this control mechanism.
Tajima et al[76] provided contemporary prospective data demonstrating persistently elevated PTLD risk despite advances in immunosuppressive protocols and viral monitoring, with EBV viral load monitoring improving early detection but not eliminating disease occurrence. Jia et al[88] characterized risk factors for EBV reactivation and progression to PTLD, identifying high EBV viral loads (> 10000 copies/mL), rapid viral load increases, and concurrent CMV infection as predictive factors. The management approaches described by Green et al[89] emphasize immunosuppression reduction as primary therapy, with rituximab, chemotherapy, and adoptive immunotherapy reserved for refractory cases, underscoring the fundamental relationship between immune competence and PTLD control.
Spectrum of post-transplant malignancies: Beyond lymphoproliferative disorders, pediatric transplant recipients demonstrate an increased incidence of solid tumors, suggesting broad-based immunosurveillance failure associated with accelerated immune aging. Yanik et al[7] documented elevated risks for renal cell carcinoma (SIR 15.5), thyroid cancer (SIR 6), and hepatocellular carcinoma, with risk profiles substantially exceeding age-matched healthy populations. Kitchlu et al[8] reported that childhood SOT recipients demonstrate an overall cancer SIR of 5.5, with risks increasing with duration of follow-up, suggesting cumulative effects of chronic immunosuppression and progressive immunosenescence (Table 1).
Endén et al[10] documented cancer incidence of 8% in Finnish pediatric SOT recipients with a median follow-up of 11 years, emphasizing the need for lifelong cancer surveillance. The spectrum of malignancies parallels that observed in elderly populations, including increased skin cancers (basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, melanoma), kidney cancers, and anogenital cancers associated with oncogenic viruses (HPV).
Mechanisms of immunosurveillance failure: The cancer immunosurveillance hypothesis, extensively validated through experiments in immunodeficient mice and clinical observations in immunosuppressed patients, posits that the immune system continuously recognizes and eliminates nascent malignant cells[8] Effective immunosurveillance requires: (1) Tumor antigen presentation by MHC molecules; (2) Recognition by T cells with appropriate TCR specificities; (3) Robust effector T cell responses with cytotoxic function; (4) NK cell-mediated killing of cells with downregulated MHC; and (5) Adequate inflammatory signaling to recruit and activate immune cells[10].
Accelerated immunosenescence in pediatric transplant recipients compromises multiple aspects of this multi-layered surveillance system. Reduced naive T cell populations and restricted TCR repertoires limit recognition of tumor neoantigens. Exhausted T cells demonstrate impaired cytotoxic function even when tumor antigens are recognized. Senescent NK cells exhibit reduced cytotoxicity. Chronic inflammation from inflammaging and SASP creates paradoxically immunosuppressive tumor microenvironments through recruitment of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and regulatory T cells[69].
Viral-associated malignancies: A substantial proportion of post-transplant malignancies are associated with oncogenic viruses, reflecting the dual role of immunosenescence in promoting both viral reactivation and reduced anti-tumor immunity. EBV associates with PTLD, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, and gastric carcinoma. HPV is associated with anogenital cancers and skin cancers. Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus (KSHV/HHV-8) associates with Kaposi sarcoma and primary effusion lymphoma. Hepatitis B and C viruses associate with hepatocellular carcinoma[90].
Viral oncogenesis requires chronic infection with insufficient immune control, allowing accumulation of infected cells and progressive malignant transformation. The accelerated immune aging in transplant recipients facilitates viral persistence through compromised T cell responses, creating ideal conditions for virus-associated cancer development. This mechanism is particularly relevant in pediatric recipients where EBV and HPV seroconversion often occurs post-transplant during periods of peak immunosuppression[90].
Beyond direct immunosurveillance failure, the pro-inflammatory microenvironment created by senescent cells actively promotes tumorigenesis[91]. SASP factors, including IL-6, IL-8, and growth-regulated oncogene-α, stimulate proliferation of premalignant cells through signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 and mitogen-activated protein kinases signaling[92]. Matrix metalloproteinases secreted by senescent cells remodel the extracellular matrix, facilitating invasion and metastasis[93]. Vascular endothelial growth factor and other angiogenic factors promote tumor vascularization. Chemokines recruit immunosuppressive myeloid cells that inhibit anti-tumor T cell responses[94].
This pro-tumorigenic microenvironment, combined with compromised immunosurveillance, creates a “perfect storm” for cancer development in pediatric transplant recipients. Senescent cells accumulate due to chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, and telomere dysfunction. These cells establish local and systemic pro-inflammatory environments that both promote malignant transformation and impair anti-tumor immunity, mechanistically linking immunosenescence to cancer predisposition independent of direct immunosuppression effects.
T cell senescence markers: Flow cytometric assessment of T cell senescence markers represents the most accessible and clinically applicable biomarker approach. Key markers include: CD28 loss. CD28, a costimulatory receptor essential for T cell activation, is progressively lost with repeated activation and aging. CD4+ CD28 null and CD8+ CD28 null T cells exhibit reduced proliferative capacity, shortened telomeres, and increased pro-inflammatory cytokine production[95]. Schaenman et al[96] demonstrated significant elevation of CD28-negative T cells in older kidney transplant recipients, with proportions correlating with age and clinical outcomes. Dedeoglu et al[97] showed that CD28 loss on peripheral T cells paradoxically correlates with decreased acute rejection risk, suggesting that immunosenescence biomarkers may guide immunosuppression intensity. Killer cell lectin-like receptor G1 expression: Killer cell lectin-like receptor G1 (KLRG1) marks terminally differentiated effector cells with limited proliferative capacity and short lifespan[98]. KLRG1+ T cells accumulate with aging and chronic viral infections, serving as markers of replicative senescence and exhaustion. CD57 expression: CD57 identifies highly differentiated T cells with reduced proliferative capacity and telomerase activity, accumulating preferentially in CMV-seropositive individuals[99]. CD28- CD57+ T cells represent the most senescent population with the poorest functional capacity. CD45RA+ CCR7- (TEMRA) cells: Terminally differentiated effector memory T cells re-expressing CD45RA represent end-stage differentiation with exhausted phenotypes[100].
RTEs and thymic function: Assessment of thymic output provides critical information about regenerative capacity. CD4+ CD45RA+ CD31+ cells represent RTEs, with CD31 expression distinguishing thymus-derived from peripherally expanded naive T cells[101]. Reduced RTE proportions indicate impaired thymic function and predict inferior immune reconstitution. TRECs, episomal DNA byproducts of TCR gene rearrangement, quantify thymic output, with low TREC levels indicating reduced thymic function[102].
Leukocyte telomere length measurement provides a biomarker of cumulative cellular replication and biological aging. Multiple methodologies exist: Flow-fluorescence in situ hybridization. Flow cytometry with fluorescence in situ hybridization enables telomere length measurement in specific cell populations, revealing heterogeneity across lymphocyte subsets[103]. This approach demonstrated shortened telomeres in transplant recipients, correlating with clinical outcomes. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR): QPCR provides high-throughput telomere length measurement, though it measures average telomere length across all cells without population-specific resolution[73]. Terminal restriction fragment analysis: Southern blot-based approach provides a gold standard measurement but requires substantial DNA and is labor-intensive[104]. Wang et al[26] demonstrated that pre-transplant short telomere length predicts post-transplant survival in severe aplastic anemia patients, validating telomere length as a clinically relevant biomarker. Song et al[27] showed that childhood cancer survivors with shortened telomeres demonstrate increased chronic health conditions, establishing precedent for telomere-based risk stratification in pediatric populations.
Chronic low-grade inflammation (inflammaging) can be quantified through circulating cytokine and acute phase reactant measurement: Pro-inflammatory cytokines. Elevated IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-18 characterize inflammaging and predict adverse outcomes, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, and mortality in elderly populations[105]. Similar elevations in pediatric transplant recipients may identify those with accelerated aging trajectories. C-reactive protein: Chronically elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein reflects systemic inflammation and predicts adverse outcomes. sCD163 and sCD14: Soluble markers of monocyte/macrophage activation correlate with inflammation and predict transplant outcomes[106]. Petrara et al[77] demonstrated that immune activation, exhaustion, and senescence profiles predict cancer development in liver transplant patients, providing proof-of-concept for biomarker-based risk stratification.
DNA methylation-based epigenetic clocks provide integrative biological aging measurements: Horvath multi-tissue clock. Predicts chronological age with high accuracy across tissues; acceleration predicts mortality and age-related diseases[63]. Hannum blood clock: Specific for blood cells; acceleration associates with mortality and aging phenotypes[66]. PhenoAge and GrimAge: Second-generation clocks trained on clinical phenotypes and mortality, providing superior prediction of health outcomes compared to first-generation clocks[103,107]. Preliminary evidence suggests transplant recipients demonstrate epigenetic age acceleration, though pediatric-specific data remain limited. Prospective studies quantifying epigenetic aging trajectories in pediatric transplant recipients and correlating with cancer outcomes represent critical research priorities.
Beyond static biomarkers, functional assays assess immune competence: T cell proliferation assays. Measure T cell proliferative responses to mitogens (PHA, ConA) or antigens, providing functional assessment of T cell capacity[108]. Cytokine production assays: Intracellular cytokine staining or ELISpot quantifies effector cytokine production (interferon-γ, TNF-α, IL-2), revealing functional exhaustion[109]. Cytotoxicity assays: Assess CD8+ T cell and NK cell killing capacity against target cells[110]. TCR repertoire sequencing: Next-generation sequencing of TCR β and α chains quantifies repertoire diversity, identifying oligoclonal expansions and repertoire restrictions associated with immunosenescence[111].
No single biomarker captures the multidimensional nature of immunosenescence. Integrated panels combining phenotypic markers (CD28, KLRG1, CD57), functional assessments (TREC levels, proliferation capacity), telomere length, inflammatory cytokines, and potentially epigenetic clocks provide comprehensive immune aging assessments. Machine learning approaches integrating multiple biomarkers may enable superior risk stratification compared to individual markers, identifying transplant recipients at the highest cancer risk for intensified surveillance or preventive inter
Standardization and reproducibility (minimum reporting and quality control): Translation of immunosenescence biomarkers into pediatric transplant care requires rigorous assay harmonization across centers to ensure reproducibility, especially because small shifts in marker prevalence can drive clinical classification.
Specimen requirements and preferred assays (what to measure, how to measure). (1) Flow cytometry immunophenotyping is the preferred first-line platform for clinical-scale immune-age monitoring because it enables simultaneous quantification of naive and differentiated subsets and senescence markers already highlighted in this review (e.g., loss of CD28, gain of CD57 and KLRG1, TEMRA phenotypes, and exhaustion markers such as PD1). For flow cytometry, laboratories should predefine specimen type (whole blood vs peripheral blood mononuclear cell), anticoagulant, processing time, storage/transport temperature, and freeze-thaw exposure; instrument quality control (daily quality control beads and longitudinal tracking); antibody clone/fluorochrome panels and titration; and compensation controls and gating controls (including viability dye and fluorescence-minus-one controls for dim/inhibitory markers). A practical expectation is that all publications and protocols provide a complete gating strategy and core instrument settings to permit cross-study comparison (i.e., “minimum information” approaches for cytometry) to support multi-center benchmarking and eventual clinical accreditation[112,113]. We recommend reporting markers both as percent of parent gate and absolute counts (when complete blood count or beads are available), because immunosuppression and lymphopenia can artifactually inflate percentages[114-116]; (2) Telomere assays should be selected based on purpose: QPCR is cost-effective for large-scale screening but provides relative average length and is sensitive to pre-analytic and extraction variability; flow-fluorescence in situ hybridization provides cell-subset-specific telomere readouts but requires fresh viable cells and specialized infrastructure; and southern/terminal restriction fragment approaches remain reference methods but are lower throughput. When the clinical concern is “critically short telomeres” (risk stratification rather than mean telomere length), single-telomere approaches (e.g., STELA-type methods) offer high resolution but are less scalable and typically confined to specialized laboratories[117,118]; and (3) Epigenetic clocks provide an integrative measure of biological aging, but results depend strongly on tissue source and clock selection. First-generation clocks (Horvath, Hannum) were trained to predict chronological age, while second-generation clocks (PhenoAge, GrimAge) were trained to predict age-associated morbidity and mortality, with GrimAge showing superior predictive performance. In pediatrics, interpretation must explicitly consider that methylation dynamics are developmentally nonlinear; therefore, where feasible, pediatric-validated clocks (or pediatric-appropriate calibration) should be prioritized over clocks trained solely in adults[119].
Pediatric reference data and normative ranges (what “abnormal” means in children): A central barrier to clinical adoption is the lack of consensus pediatric reference ranges for key immunosenescence readouts[116]. Many markers used in adults (e.g., frequency of CD28- or CD57+ T cells, KLRG1+ terminal differentiation, PD-1 expression intensity, and shifts in CD45RA/RO-defined naive/memory compartments) vary substantially with age, intercurrent infection, and vaccine history, and their “expected” levels differ across infancy, childhood, and adolescence. Therefore, clinical programs should: (1) Establish age-stratified local reference distributions (e.g., by narrow age bands)[116]; (2) Record CMV serostatus/reactivation history as a major covariate (given its known imprint on differentiated CD8 compartments); and (3) Define interpretive outputs as age-adjusted percentiles or z-scores rather than single universal cutoffs[19]. These steps are prerequisites for defensible “threshold-based interventions”, which the clinical framework in this review advocates.
Clinical thresholds and longitudinal interpretation (how to use results over time): Single-time-point testing can be misleading in transplant recipients because immunosuppression intensity, viral reactivation, and lymphocyte depletion/reconstitution can cause transient excursions. We therefore recommend interpreting immune-age biomarkers longitudinally, anchored to: (1) Each patient’s baseline (pre-transplant if available); (2) Clinically meaningful events (ATG exposure, rejection treatment pulses, CMV/EBV episodes); and (3) Trajectories rather than absolute values. Operationally, programs can define “concerning change” as persistent deviation beyond an age-adjusted reference band across ≥ 2 sequential time points, or a sustained directional shift (e.g., progressive loss of naïve compartments with expansion of terminally differentiated or exhausted phenotypes), rather than reacting to isolated results. This longitudinal approach aligns with the review’s proposal for serial post-transplant monitoring and threshold-triggered interventions while reducing false alarms[19].
Cost and feasibility (real-world deployment): From a scalability standpoint, flow cytometry immunophenotyping is typically the most implementable option in tertiary pediatric transplant centers (existing cytometry cores), whereas telomere and methylation assays may require batching, external laboratories, and additional cost. A pragmatic stepwise approach is: (1) Low-cost, high-frequency monitoring with standardized flow cytometry panels; (2) Targeted telomere or epigenetic assays for patients with discordant phenotypes, high-risk clinical trajectories, or research protocols; and (3) Iterative refinement of thresholds based on outcomes (infection burden, malignancy, graft survival).
Across all proposed interventions, pediatric-specific pharmacology, potential interactions with baseline immunosuppression, the risk of destabilizing graft tolerance (rejection/GVHD), risk of latent virus reactivation, and unknown long-term developmental effects must be considered explicitly; therefore, most approaches should be biomarker-guided and trial-based rather than empiric.
Rationale for personalized immunosuppression: The recognition of accelerated immune aging in pediatric transplant recipients necessitates fundamental reconsideration of immunosuppressive protocols. Traditional one-size-fits-all approaches fail to account for: (1) Pre-existing immune status at transplant; (2) Progressive immunosenescence developing post-transplant; (3) Individual variability in immune aging trajectories; and (4) Changing immune status over years to decades post-transplant[3].
Krenzien et al[3] provided a comprehensive rationale for age-adapted immunosuppression, emphasizing that aging affects immune responses in ways requiring specific therapeutic considerations. While this framework was developed primarily for elderly recipients, the principles apply equally to pediatric recipients with accelerated immune aging who may exhibit immune profiles resembling those of elderly individuals despite chronological youth.
Immunosuppression minimization and withdrawal: In recipients with established immunosenescent phenotypes, elevated CD28-negative T cells, reduced naive T cell populations, exhaustion markers, immunosuppression reduction may be feasible without increased rejection risk. Dedeoglu et al[97] demonstrated that CD28 loss correlates with decreased acute rejection risk, suggesting immunosenescence markers could guide immunosuppression tapering. Conversely, recipients maintaining robust immune function may require standard immunosuppression to prevent rejection.
CNI avoidance or withdrawal represents an attractive strategy given CNI nephrotoxicity, neurotoxicity, diabetogenicity, and potential immune aging effects. Harmon et al[120] demonstrated the feasibility of CNI avoidance in pediatric renal transplantation using daclizumab induction, sirolimus, and corticosteroids, achieving comparable rejection rates with potential advantages for long-term graft function. Liu and Mao[121], along with Karolin et al[122], documented CNI nephrotoxicity in children, providing rationale for CNI-sparing approaches.
mTOR inhibitors (sirolimus, everolimus) offer theoretical advantages through anti-aging effects, including enhanced autophagy, reduced senescent cell accumulation, and potential anti-tumor properties. However, these benefits must be balanced against side effects, including hyperlipidemia, impaired wound healing, and potential bone marrow suppression. Prospective trials comparing CNI-based and mTOR inhibitor-based regimens with immunosenescence biomarker monitoring are needed to optimize immunosuppression strategies.
Senolytics, eliminating senescent cells: Senolytics selectively eliminate senescent cells, which accumulate with aging and contribute to age-related pathology through SASP[123]. Multiple senolytic combinations have demonstrated efficacy in preclinical models: Dasatinib + quercetin (D + Q). This combination demonstrates broad senolytic activity across cell types. Dasatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, targets senescent adipocytes and other cells, while quercetin (a flavonoid) eliminates senescent endothelial cells[124]. In aged mice, D + Q treatment reduced senescent cell burden, decreased inflammatory cytokines, improved physical function, and extended healthspan[125]. Clinical trials in humans with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, diabetic kidney disease, and Alzheimer’s disease are ongoing[126]. Fisetin: A flavonoid with senolytic properties demonstrated to reduce senescent cell burden and extend healthspan in mice[127]. Fisetin may offer the advantages of single-agent therapy with a good safety profile. Navitoclax (ABT-263): A B cell lymphoma-2 family inhibitor with potent senolytic activity, particularly against senescent hematopoietic and immune cells[128]. However, on-target thrombocytopenia limits clinical utility, though intermittent dosing schedules may mitigate this toxicity.
Application of senolytics in pediatric transplant recipients represents a promising but unexplored therapeutic avenue. Senescent immune cells contributing to inflammaging and compromised immunosurveillance could be targeted for elimination, potentially restoring immune function. Critical questions include optimal timing (preventive vs therapeutic), dosing schedules, and safety in immunosuppressed populations. Proof-of-concept trials measuring senescence biomarkers and immune function pre- and post-senolytic treatment are warranted.
Senomorphics, suppressing SASP: Senomorphics modulate senescent cell function, particularly suppressing SASP, without necessarily eliminating senescent cells. Key senomorphics include: Rapamycin and rapalogs. mTOR inhibition suppresses SASP through multiple mechanisms, including nuclear factor-κB pathway inhibition[129]. As these agents are already used as immunosuppressants in transplantation, their potential senomorphic effects represent an unrecognized benefit warranting investigation. Metformin: The widely-used diabetes medication demonstrates anti-aging effects in preclinical models, including reduced inflammation, improved mitochondrial function, and potentially reduced senescent cell accumulation[130]. Observational studies suggest that metformin users demonstrate reduced cancer incidence and mortality[131]. Metformin’s safety profile and low cost make it attractive for clinical translation in transplant recipients, though rigorous trials are needed. Janus kinases (JAK) inhibitors: Inhibition of JAK/signal transducer and activator of transcription protein signaling suppresses SASP cytokine production and inflammation[132]. Ruxolitinib and other JAK inhibitors demonstrate efficacy in inflammatory conditions; their potential application in transplant-associated immunosenescence warrants investigation. P38 mitogen-activated protein kinases inhibitors: P38 regulates SASP production; inhibition reduces inflammatory cytokine secretion from senescent cells[133]. Although clinical development of p38 inhibitors has faced challenges, selective inhibitors may offer therapeutic benefits.
Risk-benefit and pediatric safety considerations: While senolytics/senomorphics could theoretically reduce SASP-driven inflammaging and improve immune surveillance[134], the transplant-pediatric context requires a higher safety bar[135]. In immunosuppressed children, additional cytopenias or impaired tissue repair may translate into serious infectious and wound-healing complications, and off-target effects on developing tissues (growth plate, endocrine maturation, neurodevelopment) remain largely unknown because most experience is derived from adult/aging models[136,137]. For agents with known on-target toxicities (e.g., thrombocytopenia with B cell lymphoma-2 family inhibition)[138,139], intermittent dosing and stringent hematologic monitoring would be essential[135], and any use should be restricted to carefully designed trials with age-appropriate pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic endpoints and long-term follow-up for growth, fertility, and secondary malignancy risk[137,140].
Cytokine-based approaches: Restoration of thymic function represents a fundamental strategy to combat accelerated immune aging by enhancing naive T cell generation and TCR repertoire diversity. IL-7 therapy: IL-7 promotes thymopoiesis, enhances peripheral T cell expansion, and improves T cell function[141]. Clinical trials in HIV infection and cancer demonstrated IL-7 therapy increases CD4+ and CD8+ T cell counts, enhances thymic output (measured by TREC increases), and improves T cell function[142]. In the transplant setting, carefully dosed IL-7 could potentially enhance immune reconstitution, though concerns about triggering rejection or GVHD require cautious investigation. Growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1): Growth hormone administration enhances thymic function and T cell reconstitution in HIV-infected individuals and following bone marrow transplantation[143]. Growth hormone effects are mediated partly through IGF-1, which promotes thymic epithelial cell function. However, concerns about potential tumor-promoting effects, particularly in cancer survivors, warrant careful consideration. Keratinocyte growth factor (KGF): KGF promotes thymic epithelial cell proliferation and protects against chemotherapy- and radiation-induced thymic damage[144]. Palifermin (recombinant KGF) is Food and Drug Administration-approved for preventing mucositis in HSCT recipients; its thymoprotective effects suggest potential utility in SOT.
Stem cell and regenerative approaches: Thymic tissue transplantation. Transplantation of cultured thymic tissue successfully restores T cell immunity in DiGeorge syndrome patients with congenital athymia[145]. While not applicable to most transplant recipients, this approach validates the principle that thymic tissue can successfully engraft and generate functional T cell repertoires. Bioengineered thymic organoids represent a potential future source of transplantable thymic tissue[146]. Thymus regeneration through tissue engineering: Decellularized thymic scaffolds repopulated with thymic epithelial cells and seeded with hematopoietic progenitors could provide bioengineered thymic grafts[147]. While this approach remains experimental, advances in tissue engineering and organoid technology may enable clinical translation.
Risk-benefit and pediatric safety considerations: Thymic restoration approaches are attractive in children because thymopoiesis is developmentally central to durable immune competence[148]; however, immune-augmenting strategies may also amplify alloreactivity[149]. In solid organ recipients, excessive immune reconstitution could precipitate rejection[150], and in HSCT recipients, it could exacerbate or trigger GVHD, particularly if immune recovery becomes uncoupled from tolerance[151]. In addition, growth hormone/IGF-1-based approaches require careful oncology-informed risk assessment given theoretical tumor-promoting concerns in a population already enriched for cancer susceptibility[152,153]. Accordingly, pediatric transplant applications should prioritize conservative dosing, real-time allograft/GVHD surveillance, and integration with immunosuppression adjustment algorithms rather than “immune boosting” in isolation[148,149].
NAD+ precursors: NR and NMN restore NAD+ levels in preclinical models, improving mitochondrial function, enhancing DNA repair, activating SIRTs, and improving multiple aging hallmarks[154]. Human clinical trials demonstrate NR/NMN safety and NAD+ level restoration[155]. Whether NAD+ augmentation can improve immune function and mitigate accelerated aging in pediatric transplant recipients represents an important research question amenable to clinical trial testing.
Risk-benefit and pediatric safety considerations: Metabolic interventions (e.g., NAD+ augmentation, mitochondrial support, dietary modulation) are appealing because they may improve cellular resilience without directly reversing immune checkpoints[58,156]; however, pediatric transplant recipients have unique vulnerabilities related to growth, pubertal development, drug-drug interactions, and organ function[157,158]. Even when adult studies suggest tolerability, pediatric-specific pharmacology and long-term developmental outcomes are incompletely defined[159,160], and effects on immunosurveillance vs tolerance must be monitored to avoid destabilizing graft acceptance[161,162]. In practice, these approaches should be framed as adjunctive and biomarker-guided (e.g., tied to objective immunosenescence measures), with prospective monitoring for metabolic derangements, infection frequency, and any signal of altered rejection risk over time[158].
Mitochondrial-targeted antioxidants: Mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress contribute to accelerated immune aging. Mitochondria-targeted antioxidants, including MitoQ (coenzyme Q10 conjugated to triphenylphosphonium cation) and SkQ1 (plastoquinone derivative), selectively accumulate in mitochondria, reducing oxidative damage[163]. Preclinical studies demonstrate beneficial effects on mitochondrial function, inflammation, and aging phenotypes[164]. Clinical trials in various conditions, including heart failure and metabolic syndrome, show promise[165].
Ketogenic diet and caloric restriction mimetics: Caloric restriction extends lifespan and healthspan across multiple species through mechanisms including mTOR inhibition, AMP-activated protein kinase activation, enhanced autophagy, improved mitochondrial function, and reduced inflammation[166]. Ketogenic diets and intermittent fasting regimens provide alternative approaches to achieve similar metabolic benefits without chronic caloric restriction[167]. In the transplant setting, dietary interventions represent relatively safe and accessible approaches that could potentially mitigate accelerated aging, though prospective trials with immune aging biomarker assessments are needed.
Rationale and challenges: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibodies blocking PD-1, programmed death ligand-1, or CTLA-4, revolutionized cancer treatment by reinvigorating exhausted T cells[164]. Given the central role of T cell exhaustion in accelerated immunosenescence and cancer predisposition in transplant recipients, ICIs represent an intellectually compelling therapeutic approach. However, ICIs carry a substantial risk of triggering allograft rejection through unleashing alloreactive T cells, creating a fundamental tension between cancer treatment and graft preservation[168,169].
Clinical experience with ICIs in transplant recipients: Kumar et al[170] systematically reviewed ICI use in solid organ transplant recipients, documenting substantial rejection risk (30%-40% across multiple case series) with variable outcomes depending on organ type, immunosuppression management, and ICI regimen. Liver transplant recipients demonstrated lower rejection rates compared to kidney recipients, possibly due to the liver’s tolerogenic properties[171]. Kayali et al[172] reported a pooled analysis of ICIs in liver transplant recipients showing an overall response rate of 29% with a rejection rate of 27%, suggesting therapeutic efficacy alongside significant risk.
Strategies to mitigate rejection risk while enabling ICI therapy include: (1) Maintaining baseline immunosuppression; (2) Using mTOR inhibitors that may synergize with ICIs while providing immunosuppression; (3) Local/regional ICI delivery to minimize systemic exposure; (4) Alternative checkpoint targeting (T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-containing protein 3, lymphocyte-activation gene 3) with potentially lower rejection risk; and (5) Careful patient selection favoring those with life-threatening malignancies where benefits outweigh risks[173]. Pediatric-specific data remain extremely limited, necessitating case-by-case decision-making in multidisciplinary teams.
Risk-benefit and pediatric safety considerations: In immunosuppressed pediatric transplant recipients, PD-1/programmed death ligand-1 or CTLA-4 blockade represents one of the clearest examples of a high-stakes risk-benefit tradeoff: Potential anti-tumor benefit must be weighed against a clinically meaningful probability of acute allograft rejection[170,174,175]. Given that the evidence base in children is extremely limited[10,176], ICI use should be reserved for life-threatening malignancies with no reasonable alternatives and undertaken with multidisciplinary consensus[177,178]. Risk mitigation should be explicit in the therapeutic framing (e.g., maintaining baseline immunosuppression, considering mTOR-based regimens, and careful patient selection)[179,180], while counseling families that immune activation may be incompatible with durable graft preservation even with mitigation attempts[174].
Alternative approaches to reversing exhaustion: Beyond checkpoint inhibitors, alternative approaches to reverse T cell exhaustion include. Adoptive cell therapy: Ex vivo expansion and activation of tumor-specific T cells or CAR-T cells bypasses exhaustion of endogenous T cells[181]. Ligon et al[182] reviewed adoptive cell therapy in pediatric solid tumors, demonstrating feasibility and efficacy in selected malignancies. Adapting these approaches to transplant recipients with post-transplant malignancies while minimizing rejection risk represents an important frontier. Epigenetic repro
Given CMV’s substantial contribution to accelerated immune aging, optimized CMV management represents a critical intervention: Prophylaxis vs preemptive therapy. Debate continues regarding optimal CMV management strategies. Universal prophylaxis prevents early CMV disease but delays immune priming, potentially increasing late CMV disease. Preemptive therapy (viral load monitoring with treatment of asymptomatic viremia) allows some immune priming while preventing disease[185]. Hybrid approaches tailored to immunosenescence risk may offer optimal outcomes. Letermovir: A novel anti-CMV agent with a distinct mechanism of action (viral terminase complex inhibition) offers improved tolerability compared to traditional agents (ganciclovir, valganciclovir). While currently approved only in HSCT recipients, extension to SOT recipients is under investigation. CMV-specific immunotherapy: Adoptive transfer of CMV-specific T cells generated from donors or third-party sources can restore CMV-specific immunity in high-risk recipients[186]. This approach directly addresses the immune deficit underlying CMV-driven immunosenescence. CMV vaccination: Vaccines preventing primary CMV infection in seronegative recipients or boosting immunity in seropositive recipients could substantially reduce CMV-driven immune aging[187]. Multiple vaccine candidates are in clinical development; successful vaccine development would represent a transformative advance in transplant medicine.
Risk-benefit and pediatric safety considerations: Because latent viral reactivation is both a driver of immune aging and a source of morbidity, CMV-directed strategies must balance near-term infection prevention with longer-term immune education and durability[21,184]. Universal prophylaxis may reduce early disease burden but could alter immune priming and shift risk to later reactivation[184-186], whereas preemptive approaches require reliable surveillance infrastructure and rapid treatment access to prevent progression[185-187]. In pediatric recipients, who may have more dynamic immune maturation and prolonged post-transplant life expectancy, strategy selection should explicitly consider cumulative antiviral exposure, adherence feasibility, and the downstream impact on broader herpesvirus control and malignancy risk[186,188-191].
Emerging evidence links gut microbiome dysbiosis to systemic inflammation, immune dysfunction, and accelerated aging[192]. Transplant recipients demonstrate altered microbiome composition driven by antibiotics, immunosuppression, and dietary changes[193-199]. Microbiome-targeted interventions include: Probiotics and prebiotics. Specific bacterial strains (Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium) and prebiotic fibers promoting beneficial bacteria may reduce inflammation and improve immune function[197,198]. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT): Transfer of a complete microbiome from healthy donors to recipients can restore microbiome diversity and function[199]. While primarily used for Clostridioides difficile infection, FMT is being explored for inflammatory and metabolic conditions; application to transplant recipients requires careful safety assessment. Dietary interventions: Mediterranean diet, high-fiber diet, and fermented foods promote beneficial microbiome composition and reduced inflammation[196].
Risk-benefit and pediatric safety considerations: Microbiome modulation is attractive because it may reduce systemic inflammation and improve immune tone[200,201]. However, in immunosuppressed children, the safety profile differs substantially from that of immunocompetent populations. Probiotics and diet are generally lower risk but still warrant caution in severely immunocompromised states[201-205], while FMT demands rigorous donor screening and transplant-specific safety protocols given the potential for transmission of pathogens or unintended immune effects. Therefore, microbiome interventions should be positioned as stepwise (diet/prebiotics/probiotics first, FMT only in selected indications) and ideally embedded in prospective studies that track infections, inflammation biomarkers, and graft outcomes[199].
Implementation of immunosenescence-focused care requires systematic risk stratification. Pre-transplant assessment: Baseline measurement of naive T cell populations, TREC levels, telomere length, inflammatory markers, and potentially epigenetic age establishes individualized risk profiles. Post-transplant monitoring: Serial assessments at standardized intervals (3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, then annually) track immune aging trajectories, identifying recipients with accelerated aging for intervention. Threshold-based interventions: Establishment of clinically validated thresholds for biomarkers triggers specific interventions (e.g., CD28-negative T cells > 60% prompts immunosuppression reduction consideration; TREC levels below threshold trigger thymic function enhancement strategies).
Enhanced cancer surveillance in high-risk recipients includes: (1) PTLD surveillance. Serial EBV viral load monitoring in high-risk recipients (EBV D+/R-, young age, high immunosuppression). Rising EBV viral loads trigger immunosuppression reduction and close monitoring; (2) Skin cancer screening. Annual dermatologic examination for all recipients; more frequent (every 3-6 months) for high-risk patients (fair skin, sun exposure). Patient education on self-examination and sun protection; (3) Colonoscopy. Earlier initiation and more frequent intervals compared to the general population, particularly in recipients with inflammatory bowel disease or other risk factors; and (4) HPV-related cancer screening. Age-appropriate cervical cancer screening; consideration of anal cancer screening in high-risk recipients. HPV vaccination pre- or early post-transplant.
Optimal management requires coordination across specialties: (1) Transplant specialists. Immunosuppression management, rejection surveillance, and treatment; (2) Oncologists. Cancer risk assessment, surveillance protocol implementation, malignancy management. Infectious disease specialists: CMV and EBV management, prophylaxis optimization. Immunologists: Immune function assessment, interpretation of advanced immune monitoring; and (3) Geriatricians/geroscience specialists: Expertise in aging biology applicable to accelerated aging in pediatric recipients.
Establishing comprehensive prospective cohorts with standardized biomarker assessments, clinical outcome tracking, and biospecimen banking is essential for: Validating immunosenescence biomarkers for cancer prediction; identifying modifiable risk factors for accelerated aging; enabling precision medicine approaches based on individual aging trajectories; and providing platforms for nested intervention trials.
Specific high-priority trials include: Senolytic therapy trial. Phase 2 randomized controlled trial of D + Q in transplant recipients with elevated senescence markers, with endpoints including senescent cell burden reduction, inflammatory marker changes, and immune function improvement. IL-7 immunotherapy trial: Dose-escalation and efficacy trial of recombinant IL-7 in recipients with low naive T cell counts and reduced thymic output, measuring TREC levels, T cell repertoire diversity, and rejection incidence. Metformin trial: Randomized trial of metformin vs placebo in non-diabetic transplant recipients, assessing inflammation, immune function, and cancer incidence. NAD+ augmentation trial: Trial of NR supplementation measuring NAD+ levels, mitochondrial function, immune parameters, and aging biomarkers.
Deeper mechanistic understanding requires: Single-cell multi-omics. Single-cell RNA sequencing, TCR sequencing, and ATAC-seq defining transcriptional and epigenetic landscapes of aging immune cells in transplant recipients. Longitudinal epigenetic aging studies. Serial epigenetic clock measurements correlating biological age acceleration with clinical outcomes and immunosuppression exposure. Metabolomics and lipidomics. Comprehensive metabolic profiling identifying aging-associated metabolic signatures and potential therapeutic targets. Microbiome-immune interactions. Mechanistic studies linking gut microbiome composition to systemic inflammation and immune aging in transplant recipients.
Systematic comparison of immunosuppressive regimens for their effects on immune aging: CNI vs mTOR inhibitor-based regimens. Head-to-head comparison with comprehensive immune aging biomarker assessment. ATG vs IL-2 receptor antagonist induction: Long-term immune aging outcomes comparing different induction strategies. Steroid mini
Point-of-care senescence assays. Development of rapid, accessible tests for senescence markers enabling real-time clinical decision-making. Artificial intelligence/machine learning models. Integration of multiple biomarkers, clinical variables, and genetic data to predict cancer risk and optimize immunosuppression. Wearable devices and digital health: Con
The emergence of accelerated immunosenescence as a central paradigm in pediatric transplant medicine fundamentally alters our understanding of post-transplant complications and long-term outcomes. The convergence of evidence demonstrating premature immune aging in pediatric recipients, mediated through ATG-induced T cell depletion, CMV reactivation, telomere dysfunction, thymic impairment, and inflammaging pathways, establishes a clear mechanistic framework linking transplantation-related interventions to cancer predisposition. This represents not merely an academic observation but an urgent clinical reality: Pediatric transplant recipients face cancer risks typically associated with individuals decades older, manifesting within years post-transplant and persisting throughout life.
The clinical implications extend far beyond immediate post-transplant management to encompass lifelong surveillance and intervention strategies. Recognition that immunosuppression inadvertently accelerates biological aging necessitates a comprehensive reconsideration of clinical approaches, emphasizing personalized, biomarker-driven immunosuppression strategies that account for individual immune aging trajectories while maintaining graft survival. The development of validated biomarker panels, integrating flow cytometric senescence markers, telomere length, inflammatory profiles, and potentially epigenetic clocks, enables risk stratification and targeted interventions in the highest-risk recipients.
Therapeutic horizons are expanding rapidly. Senolytic and senomorphic agents offer potential to eliminate or modulate senescent cells, driving inflammaging and immunosuppression. Thymic regeneration strategies, including IL-7 therapy, could restore immune competence through enhanced naive T cell generation. Metabolic interventions targeting NAD+ metabolism, mitochondrial function, and mTOR signaling may mitigate multiple aging hallmarks simultaneously. Careful application of checkpoint inhibitors in selected malignancies, optimized CMV prevention and treatment, and microbiome modulation represent additional therapeutic avenues. Each approach requires rigorous clinical trial evaluation with particular attention to safety in immunosuppressed pediatric populations.
The insights gained from studying accelerated immune aging in pediatric transplant recipients have broader implications extending beyond transplant medicine. This population represents a “natural experiment” in human aging, revealing mechanisms by which immune aging is accelerated and potentially providing insights into interventions applicable to physiological aging in the general population. The bidirectional translation of geroscience principles to transplant medicine and transplant-derived insights back to aging biology represents an exciting frontier with potential to benefit both transplant recipients and aging individuals generally.
Future research priorities are clear. Prospective longitudinal cohorts with comprehensive biomarker assessment and biospecimen banking; interventional trials of senolytics, immunomodulatory approaches, and metabolic interventions; mechanistic studies employing single-cell multi-omics technologies; and comparative effectiveness research systematically evaluating immunosuppressive regimens for their aging effects. These investigations will refine our understanding of accelerated aging mechanisms, validate biomarkers for clinical implementation, and establish evidence-based therapeutic strategies.
The ultimate goal is achieving optimal transplant outcomes while preserving immune competence sufficient for cancer surveillance and infection control, a paradigm shift toward precision medicine in pediatric transplantation that acknowledges the fundamental importance of immune aging in determining long-term success. Success in this endeavor requires sustained commitment from the transplant community, funding agencies, pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory bodies to prioritize aging biology in transplant research and clinical care. The vulnerable pediatric transplant population deserves no less than our comprehensive efforts to mitigate accelerated aging consequences and optimize their long-term health and quality of life.
| 1. | López-Otín C, Blasco MA, Partridge L, Serrano M, Kroemer G. The hallmarks of aging. Cell. 2013;153:1194-1217. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 13561] [Cited by in RCA: 11281] [Article Influence: 867.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (6)] |
| 2. | McGovern KE, Sonar SA, Watanabe M, Coplen CP, Bradshaw CM, Nikolich JŽ. The aging of the immune system and its implications for transplantation. Geroscience. 2023;45:1383-1400. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 16] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 3. | Krenzien F, ElKhal A, Quante M, Rodriguez Cetina Biefer H, Hirofumi U, Gabardi S, Tullius SG. A Rationale for Age-Adapted Immunosuppression in Organ Transplantation. Transplantation. 2015;99:2258-2268. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 64] [Cited by in RCA: 87] [Article Influence: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 4. | Singh A, Schurman SH, Bektas A, Kaileh M, Roy R, Wilson DM 3rd, Sen R, Ferrucci L. Aging and Inflammation. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2024;14:a041197. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 116] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 5. | Coppé JP, Desprez PY, Krtolica A, Campisi J. The senescence-associated secretory phenotype: the dark side of tumor suppression. Annu Rev Pathol. 2010;5:99-118. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 4512] [Cited by in RCA: 4017] [Article Influence: 251.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 6. | Kapse B, Budev MM, Singer JP, Greenland JR. Immune aging: biological mechanisms, clinical symptoms, and management in lung transplant recipients. Front Transplant. 2024;3:1356948. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 7. | Yanik EL, Smith JM, Shiels MS, Clarke CA, Lynch CF, Kahn AR, Koch L, Pawlish KS, Engels EA. Cancer Risk After Pediatric Solid Organ Transplantation. Pediatrics. 2017;139:e20163893. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 63] [Cited by in RCA: 56] [Article Influence: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 8. | Kitchlu A, Dixon S, Dirk JS, Chanchlani R, Vasilevska-Ristovska J, Borges K, Dipchand AI, Ng VL, Hebert D, Solomon M, Michael Paterson J, Gupta S, Joseph Kim S, Nathan PC, Parekh RS. Elevated Risk of Cancer After Solid Organ Transplant in Childhood: A Population-based Cohort Study. Transplantation. 2019;103:588-596. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 32] [Cited by in RCA: 32] [Article Influence: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 9. | Nordin A, Åberg F, Pukkala E, Pedersen CR, Storm HH, Rasmussen A, Bennet W, Olausson M, Wilczek H, Ericzon BG, Tretli S, Line PD, Karlsen TH, Boberg KM, Isoniemi H. Decreasing incidence of cancer after liver transplantation-A Nordic population-based study over 3 decades. Am J Transplant. 2018;18:952-963. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in RCA: 29] [Article Influence: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 10. | Endén K, Tainio J, Nikkilä A, Helanterä I, Nordin A, Pakarinen MP, Jalanko H, Jahnukainen K, Jahnukainen T. Cancer morbidity and mortality after pediatric solid organ transplantation-a nationwide register study. Pediatr Nephrol. 2020;35:1719-1728. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in RCA: 10] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 11. | Ploos van Amstel S, Vogelzang JL, Starink MV, Jager KJ, Groothoff JW. Long-Term Risk of Cancer in Survivors of Pediatric ESRD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;10:2198-2204. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 27] [Cited by in RCA: 27] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 12. | Kahn JM, Brazauskas R, Tecca HR, Bo-Subait S, Buchbinder D, Battiwala M, Flowers MED, Savani BN, Phelan R, Broglie L, Abraham AA, Keating AK, Daly A, Wirk B, George B, Alter BP, Ustun C, Freytes CO, Beitinjaneh AM, Duncan C, Copelan E, Hildebrandt GC, Murthy HS, Lazarus HM, Auletta JJ, Myers KC, Williams KM, Page KM, Vrooman LM, Norkin M, Byrne M, Diaz MA, Kamani N, Bhatt NS, Rezvani A, Farhadfar N, Mehta PA, Hematti P, Shaw PJ, Kamble RT, Schears R, Olsson RF, Hayashi RJ, Gale RP, Mayo SJ, Chhabra S, Rotz SJ, Badawy SM, Ganguly S, Pavletic S, Nishihori T, Prestidge T, Agrawal V, Hogan WJ, Inamoto Y, Shaw BE, Satwani P. Subsequent neoplasms and late mortality in children undergoing allogeneic transplantation for nonmalignant diseases. Blood Adv. 2020;4:2084-2094. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in RCA: 29] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 13. | Bomken S, Skinner R. Secondary Malignant Neoplasms Following Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Childhood. Children (Basel). 2015;2:146-173. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in RCA: 15] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 14. | Bosch M, Dhadda M, Hoegh-Petersen M, Liu Y, Hagel LM, Podgorny P, Ugarte-Torres A, Khan FM, Luider J, Auer-Grzesiak I, Mansoor A, Russell JA, Daly A, Stewart DA, Maloney D, Boeckh M, Storek J. Immune reconstitution after anti-thymocyte globulin-conditioned hematopoietic cell transplantation. Cytotherapy. 2012;14:1258-1275. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 110] [Cited by in RCA: 137] [Article Influence: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 15. | Crepin T, Carron C, Roubiou C, Gaugler B, Gaiffe E, Simula-Faivre D, Ferrand C, Tiberghien P, Chalopin JM, Moulin B, Frimat L, Rieu P, Saas P, Ducloux D, Bamoulid J. ATG-induced accelerated immune senescence: clinical implications in renal transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2015;15:1028-1038. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 69] [Cited by in RCA: 86] [Article Influence: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 16. | Servais S, Menten-Dedoyart C, Beguin Y, Seidel L, Gothot A, Daulne C, Willems E, Delens L, Humblet-Baron S, Hannon M, Baron F. Impact of Pre-Transplant Anti-T Cell Globulin (ATG) on Immune Recovery after Myeloablative Allogeneic Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0130026. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 28] [Cited by in RCA: 43] [Article Influence: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 17. | Xia CQ, Chernatynskaya AV, Wasserfall CH, Wan S, Looney BM, Eisenbeis S, Williams J, Clare-Salzler MJ, Atkinson MA. Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) differentially depletes naïve and memory T cells and permits memory-type regulatory T cells in nonobese diabetic mice. BMC Immunol. 2012;13:70. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in RCA: 32] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 18. | Lee GH, Lee JY, Jang J, Kang YJ, Choi SA, Kim HC, Park S, Kim MS, Lee WW. Anti-thymocyte globulin-mediated immunosenescent alterations of T cells in kidney transplant patients. Clin Transl Immunology. 2022;11:e1431. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 12] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 19. | Higdon LE, Gustafson CE, Ji X, Sahoo MK, Pinsky BA, Margulies KB, Maecker HT, Goronzy J, Maltzman JS. Association of Premature Immune Aging and Cytomegalovirus After Solid Organ Transplant. Front Immunol. 2021;12:661551. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in RCA: 22] [Article Influence: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 20. | Blackburn EH, Epel ES, Lin J. Human telomere biology: A contributory and interactive factor in aging, disease risks, and protection. Science. 2015;350:1193-1198. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1408] [Cited by in RCA: 1191] [Article Influence: 108.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 21. | Semmes EC, Hurst JH, Walsh KM, Permar SR. Cytomegalovirus as an immunomodulator across the lifespan. Curr Opin Virol. 2020;44:112-120. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in RCA: 32] [Article Influence: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 22. | Jackson SE, Noor M, Lim E, Wills M. The immune response to human cytomegalovirus: impact of age, co-morbidities and the significance of anti-viral activity assessment. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2025;380:20240408. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in RCA: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 23. | Müller L, Di Benedetto S. Immunosenescence and Cytomegalovirus: Exploring Their Connection in the Context of Aging, Health, and Disease. Int J Mol Sci. 2024;25:753. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 47] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 24. | d'Adda di Fagagna F, Reaper PM, Clay-Farrace L, Fiegler H, Carr P, Von Zglinicki T, Saretzki G, Carter NP, Jackson SP. A DNA damage checkpoint response in telomere-initiated senescence. Nature. 2003;426:194-198. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1925] [Cited by in RCA: 2072] [Article Influence: 90.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 25. | Coppé JP, Patil CK, Rodier F, Sun Y, Muñoz DP, Goldstein J, Nelson PS, Desprez PY, Campisi J. Senescence-associated secretory phenotypes reveal cell-nonautonomous functions of oncogenic RAS and the p53 tumor suppressor. PLoS Biol. 2008;6:2853-2868. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 3435] [Cited by in RCA: 3197] [Article Influence: 177.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 26. | Wang Y, McReynolds LJ, Dagnall C, Katki HA, Spellman SR, Wang T, Hicks B, Freedman ND, Jones K, Lee SJ, Savage SA, Gadalla SM. Pre-transplant short telomeres are associated with high mortality risk after unrelated donor haematopoietic cell transplant for severe aplastic anaemia. Br J Haematol. 2020;188:309-316. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in RCA: 16] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 27. | Song N, Li Z, Qin N, Howell CR, Wilson CL, Easton J, Mulder HL, Edmonson MN, Rusch MC, Zhang J, Hudson MM, Yasui Y, Robison LL, Ness KK, Wang Z. Shortened Leukocyte Telomere Length Associates with an Increased Prevalence of Chronic Health Conditions among Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report from the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort. Clin Cancer Res. 2020;26:2362-2371. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 21] [Cited by in RCA: 46] [Article Influence: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 28. | Zhang C, Ostrom QT, Semmes EC, Ramaswamy V, Hansen HM, Morimoto L, de Smith AJ, Pekmezci M, Vaksman Z, Hakonarson H, Diskin SJ, Metayer C; Glioma International Case-Control Study (GICC), Taylor MD, Wiemels JL, Bondy ML, Walsh KM. Genetic predisposition to longer telomere length and risk of childhood, adolescent and adult-onset ependymoma. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2020;8:173. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in RCA: 19] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 29. | Takaba H, Takayanagi H. The Mechanisms of T Cell Selection in the Thymus. Trends Immunol. 2017;38:805-816. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 170] [Cited by in RCA: 210] [Article Influence: 23.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 30. | Douek DC, McFarland RD, Keiser PH, Gage EA, Massey JM, Haynes BF, Polis MA, Haase AT, Feinberg MB, Sullivan JL, Jamieson BD, Zack JA, Picker LJ, Koup RA. Changes in thymic function with age and during the treatment of HIV infection. Nature. 1998;396:690-695. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1420] [Cited by in RCA: 1401] [Article Influence: 50.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (5)] |
| 31. | Lynch HE, Goldberg GL, Chidgey A, Van den Brink MR, Boyd R, Sempowski GD. Thymic involution and immune reconstitution. Trends Immunol. 2009;30:366-373. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 405] [Cited by in RCA: 382] [Article Influence: 22.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 32. | Junge S, Kloeckener-Gruissem B, Zufferey R, Keisker A, Salgo B, Fauchere JC, Scherer F, Shalaby T, Grotzer M, Siler U, Seger R, Güngör T. Correlation between recent thymic emigrants and CD31+ (PECAM-1) CD4+ T cells in normal individuals during aging and in lymphopenic children. Eur J Immunol. 2007;37:3270-3280. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 115] [Cited by in RCA: 133] [Article Influence: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 33. | Levy A, Rangel-Santos A, Torres LC, Silveira-Abreu G, Agena F, Carneiro-Sampaio M. T cell receptor excision circles as a tool for evaluating thymic function in young children. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2019;52:e8292. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in RCA: 6] [Article Influence: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 34. | Mengrelis K, Kucera F, Shahid N, Watt E, Ross S, Lau CI, Adams S, Gilmour K, Pils D, Crompton T, Burch M, Davies EG. T cell phenotype in paediatric heart transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant. 2021;25:e13930. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in RCA: 10] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 35. | Gaballa A, Clave E, Uhlin M, Toubert A, Arruda LCM. Evaluating Thymic Function After Human Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in the Personalized Medicine Era. Front Immunol. 2020;11:1341. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in RCA: 29] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 36. | Williams KM, Hakim FT, Gress RE. T cell immune reconstitution following lymphodepletion. Semin Immunol. 2007;19:318-330. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 269] [Cited by in RCA: 263] [Article Influence: 13.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 37. | Mackall CL, Punt JA, Morgan P, Farr AG, Gress RE. Thymic function in young/old chimeras: substantial thymic T cell regenerative capacity despite irreversible age-associated thymic involution. Eur J Immunol. 1998;28:1886-1893. [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] |
| 38. | Kanakry CG, Coffey DG, Towlerton AM, Vulic A, Storer BE, Chou J, Yeung CC, Gocke CD, Robins HS, O'Donnell PV, Luznik L, Warren EH. Origin and evolution of the T cell repertoire after posttransplantation cyclophosphamide. JCI Insight. 2016;1:e86252. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 78] [Cited by in RCA: 120] [Article Influence: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 39. | Ciupe SM, Devlin BH, Markert ML, Kepler TB. The dynamics of T-cell receptor repertoire diversity following thymus transplantation for DiGeorge anomaly. PLoS Comput Biol. 2009;5:e1000396. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in RCA: 20] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 40. | Franceschi C, Bonafè M, Valensin S, Olivieri F, De Luca M, Ottaviani E, De Benedictis G. Inflamm-aging. An evolutionary perspective on immunosenescence. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000;908:244-254. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 4418] [Cited by in RCA: 3729] [Article Influence: 143.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 41. | Ferrucci L, Fabbri E. Inflammageing: chronic inflammation in ageing, cardiovascular disease, and frailty. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2018;15:505-522. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1710] [Cited by in RCA: 2597] [Article Influence: 324.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 42. | Franzin R, Stasi A, Fiorentino M, Stallone G, Cantaluppi V, Gesualdo L, Castellano G. Inflammaging and Complement System: A Link Between Acute Kidney Injury and Chronic Graft Damage. Front Immunol. 2020;11:734. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 85] [Cited by in RCA: 76] [Article Influence: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 43. | Takasugi M, Yoshida Y, Ohtani N. Cellular senescence and the tumour microenvironment. Mol Oncol. 2022;16:3333-3351. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 52] [Cited by in RCA: 126] [Article Influence: 31.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 44. | Coppé JP, Patil CK, Rodier F, Krtolica A, Beauséjour CM, Parrinello S, Hodgson JG, Chin K, Desprez PY, Campisi J. A human-like senescence-associated secretory phenotype is conserved in mouse cells dependent on physiological oxygen. PLoS One. 2010;5:e9188. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 286] [Cited by in RCA: 355] [Article Influence: 22.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 45. | Solana R, Tarazona R, Aiello AE, Akbar AN, Appay V, Beswick M, Bosch JA, Campos C, Cantisán S, Cicin-Sain L, Derhovanessian E, Ferrando-Martínez S, Frasca D, Fulöp T, Govind S, Grubeck-Loebenstein B, Hill A, Hurme M, Kern F, Larbi A, López-Botet M, Maier AB, McElhaney JE, Moss P, Naumova E, Nikolich-Zugich J, Pera A, Rector JL, Riddell N, Sanchez-Correa B, Sansoni P, Sauce D, van Lier R, Wang GC, Wills MR, Zieliński M, Pawelec G. CMV and Immunosenescence: from basics to clinics. Immun Ageing. 2012;9:23. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 116] [Cited by in RCA: 136] [Article Influence: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 46. | Molony RD, Nguyen JT, Kong Y, Montgomery RR, Shaw AC, Iwasaki A. Aging impairs both primary and secondary RIG-I signaling for interferon induction in human monocytes. Sci Signal. 2017;10:eaan2392. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 108] [Cited by in RCA: 129] [Article Influence: 14.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 47. | Sapey E, Greenwood H, Walton G, Mann E, Love A, Aaronson N, Insall RH, Stockley RA, Lord JM. Phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibition restores neutrophil accuracy in the elderly: toward targeted treatments for immunosenescence. Blood. 2014;123:239-248. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 250] [Cited by in RCA: 274] [Article Influence: 22.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 48. | Johnson SC, Rabinovitch PS, Kaeberlein M. mTOR is a key modulator of ageing and age-related disease. Nature. 2013;493:338-345. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1093] [Cited by in RCA: 1300] [Article Influence: 100.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
| 49. | Saxton RA, Sabatini DM. mTOR Signaling in Growth, Metabolism, and Disease. Cell. 2017;168:960-976. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 5642] [Cited by in RCA: 4916] [Article Influence: 546.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (5)] |
| 50. | Pollizzi KN, Powell JD. Integrating canonical and metabolic signalling programmes in the regulation of T cell responses. Nat Rev Immunol. 2014;14:435-446. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 275] [Cited by in RCA: 318] [Article Influence: 26.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 51. | Blagosklonny MV. Rapamycin extends life- and health span because it slows aging. Aging (Albany NY). 2013;5:592-598. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 65] [Cited by in RCA: 67] [Article Influence: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 52. | Di Francesco A, Di Germanio C, Bernier M, de Cabo R. A time to fast. Science. 2018;362:770-775. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 355] [Cited by in RCA: 364] [Article Influence: 45.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 53. | Sun N, Youle RJ, Finkel T. The Mitochondrial Basis of Aging. Mol Cell. 2016;61:654-666. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 736] [Cited by in RCA: 1095] [Article Influence: 109.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 54. | Baixauli F, Acín-Pérez R, Villarroya-Beltrí C, Mazzeo C, Nuñez-Andrade N, Gabandé-Rodriguez E, Ledesma MD, Blázquez A, Martin MA, Falcón-Pérez JM, Redondo JM, Enríquez JA, Mittelbrunn M. Mitochondrial Respiration Controls Lysosomal Function during Inflammatory T Cell Responses. Cell Metab. 2015;22:485-498. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 192] [Cited by in RCA: 281] [Article Influence: 25.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 55. | Linares JF, Cordes T, Duran A, Reina-Campos M, Valencia T, Ahn CS, Castilla EA, Moscat J, Metallo CM, Diaz-Meco MT. ATF4-Induced Metabolic Reprograming Is a Synthetic Vulnerability of the p62-Deficient Tumor Stroma. Cell Metab. 2017;26:817-829.e6. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 65] [Cited by in RCA: 102] [Article Influence: 11.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 56. | Schieber M, Chandel NS. ROS function in redox signaling and oxidative stress. Curr Biol. 2014;24:R453-R462. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 6025] [Cited by in RCA: 4952] [Article Influence: 412.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 57. | Passos JF, Saretzki G, Ahmed S, Nelson G, Richter T, Peters H, Wappler I, Birket MJ, Harold G, Schaeuble K, Birch-Machin MA, Kirkwood TB, von Zglinicki T. Mitochondrial dysfunction accounts for the stochastic heterogeneity in telomere-dependent senescence. PLoS Biol. 2007;5:e110. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 625] [Cited by in RCA: 608] [Article Influence: 32.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 58. | Imai S, Guarente L. NAD+ and sirtuins in aging and disease. Trends Cell Biol. 2014;24:464-471. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1254] [Cited by in RCA: 1108] [Article Influence: 92.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 59. | Gomes AP, Price NL, Ling AJ, Moslehi JJ, Montgomery MK, Rajman L, White JP, Teodoro JS, Wrann CD, Hubbard BP, Mercken EM, Palmeira CM, de Cabo R, Rolo AP, Turner N, Bell EL, Sinclair DA. Declining NAD(+) induces a pseudohypoxic state disrupting nuclear-mitochondrial communication during aging. Cell. 2013;155:1624-1638. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1311] [Cited by in RCA: 1187] [Article Influence: 91.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 60. | Cheng HL, Mostoslavsky R, Saito S, Manis JP, Gu Y, Patel P, Bronson R, Appella E, Alt FW, Chua KF. Developmental defects and p53 hyperacetylation in Sir2 homolog (SIRT1)-deficient mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:10794-10799. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 863] [Cited by in RCA: 914] [Article Influence: 39.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 61. | Zhang H, Ryu D, Wu Y, Gariani K, Wang X, Luan P, D'Amico D, Ropelle ER, Lutolf MP, Aebersold R, Schoonjans K, Menzies KJ, Auwerx J. NAD⁺ repletion improves mitochondrial and stem cell function and enhances life span in mice. Science. 2016;352:1436-1443. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1153] [Cited by in RCA: 987] [Article Influence: 98.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 62. | Horvath S. DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol. 2013;14:R115. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 6065] [Cited by in RCA: 4904] [Article Influence: 377.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 63. | Horvath S, Raj K. DNA methylation-based biomarkers and the epigenetic clock theory of ageing. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19:371-384. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2736] [Cited by in RCA: 2073] [Article Influence: 259.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 64. | Quach A, Levine ME, Tanaka T, Lu AT, Chen BH, Ferrucci L, Ritz B, Bandinelli S, Neuhouser ML, Beasley JM, Snetselaar L, Wallace RB, Tsao PS, Absher D, Assimes TL, Stewart JD, Li Y, Hou L, Baccarelli AA, Whitsel EA, Horvath S. Epigenetic clock analysis of diet, exercise, education, and lifestyle factors. Aging (Albany NY). 2017;9:419-446. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 452] [Cited by in RCA: 556] [Article Influence: 61.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 65. | Sen P, Shah PP, Nativio R, Berger SL. Epigenetic Mechanisms of Longevity and Aging. Cell. 2016;166:822-839. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 838] [Cited by in RCA: 663] [Article Influence: 66.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 66. | Hannum G, Guinney J, Zhao L, Zhang L, Hughes G, Sadda S, Klotzle B, Bibikova M, Fan JB, Gao Y, Deconde R, Chen M, Rajapakse I, Friend S, Ideker T, Zhang K. Genome-wide methylation profiles reveal quantitative views of human aging rates. Mol Cell. 2013;49:359-367. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2689] [Cited by in RCA: 3073] [Article Influence: 236.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (15)] |
| 67. | Levine ME, Lu AT, Quach A, Chen BH, Assimes TL, Bandinelli S, Hou L, Baccarelli AA, Stewart JD, Li Y, Whitsel EA, Wilson JG, Reiner AP, Aviv A, Lohman K, Liu Y, Ferrucci L, Horvath S. An epigenetic biomarker of aging for lifespan and healthspan. Aging (Albany NY). 2018;10:573-591. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1006] [Cited by in RCA: 2531] [Article Influence: 316.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 68. | Engels EA, Pfeiffer RM, Fraumeni JF Jr, Kasiske BL, Israni AK, Snyder JJ, Wolfe RA, Goodrich NP, Bayakly AR, Clarke CA, Copeland G, Finch JL, Fleissner ML, Goodman MT, Kahn A, Koch L, Lynch CF, Madeleine MM, Pawlish K, Rao C, Williams MA, Castenson D, Curry M, Parsons R, Fant G, Lin M. Spectrum of cancer risk among US solid organ transplant recipients. JAMA. 2011;306:1891-1901. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1295] [Cited by in RCA: 1128] [Article Influence: 75.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 69. | Dunn GP, Old LJ, Schreiber RD. The three Es of cancer immunoediting. Annu Rev Immunol. 2004;22:329-360. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2363] [Cited by in RCA: 2047] [Article Influence: 93.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 70. | Schreiber RD, Old LJ, Smyth MJ. Cancer immunoediting: integrating immunity's roles in cancer suppression and promotion. Science. 2011;331:1565-1570. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 5267] [Cited by in RCA: 4686] [Article Influence: 312.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (6)] |
| 71. | Das RK, Vernau L, Grupp SA, Barrett DM. Naïve T-cell Deficits at Diagnosis and after Chemotherapy Impair Cell Therapy Potential in Pediatric Cancers. Cancer Discov. 2019;9:492-499. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 116] [Cited by in RCA: 209] [Article Influence: 29.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 72. | Bailur JK, McCachren SS, Pendleton K, Vasquez JC, Lim HS, Duffy A, Doxie DB, Kaushal A, Foster C, DeRyckere D, Castellino S, Kemp ML, Qiu P, Dhodapkar MV, Dhodapkar KM. Risk-associated alterations in marrow T cells in pediatric leukemia. JCI Insight. 2020;5:e140179. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 42] [Cited by in RCA: 51] [Article Influence: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 73. | Cawthon RM. Telomere measurement by quantitative PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:e47. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2447] [Cited by in RCA: 2817] [Article Influence: 117.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 74. | Tancredi S, Cullati S, Chiolero A. Screening and Surveillance Bias in Cancer. Epidemiologia (Basel). 2023;4:117-120. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 12] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 75. | Ahmed S, Silverberg MJ, Engels EA. Pretransplant screening and lower incidence of breast and prostate cancers among organ transplant recipients in the United States. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2025;9:pkaf080. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 76. | Tajima T, Martinez OM, Bernstein D, Boyd SD, Gratzinger D, Lum G, Sasaki K, Tan B, Twist CJ, Weinberg K, Armstrong B, Desai DM, Mazariegos GV, Chin C, Fishbein TM, Tekin A, Venick RS, Krams SM, Esquivel CO. Epstein-Barr virus-associated post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders in pediatric transplantation: A prospective multicenter study in the United States. Pediatr Transplant. 2024;28:e14763. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in RCA: 14] [Article Influence: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 77. | Petrara MR, Shalaby S, Ruffoni E, Taborelli M, Carmona F, Giunco S, Del Bianco P, Piselli P, Serraino D, Cillo U, Dolcetti R, Burra P, De Rossi A. Immune Activation, Exhaustion and Senescence Profiles as Possible Predictors of Cancer in Liver Transplanted Patients. Front Oncol. 2022;12:899170. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 78. | Rich NE, Parikh ND, Singal AG. Overdiagnosis: An Understudied Issue in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance. Semin Liver Dis. 2017;37:296-304. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in RCA: 32] [Article Influence: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 79. | Angeletti A, Cantarelli C, Riella LV, Fribourg M, Cravedi P. T-cell Exhaustion in Organ Transplantation. Transplantation. 2022;106:489-499. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in RCA: 30] [Article Influence: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 80. | Macián F, López-Rodríguez C, Rao A. Partners in transcription: NFAT and AP-1. Oncogene. 2001;20:2476-2489. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 575] [Cited by in RCA: 582] [Article Influence: 23.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 81. | Wherry EJ, Kurachi M. Molecular and cellular insights into T cell exhaustion. Nat Rev Immunol. 2015;15:486-499. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 3975] [Cited by in RCA: 3592] [Article Influence: 326.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (6)] |
| 82. | Shahbazi M, Soltanzadeh-Yamchi M, Mohammadnia-Afrouzi M. T cell exhaustion implications during transplantation. Immunol Lett. 2018;202:52-58. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in RCA: 12] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 83. | Alfei F, Kanev K, Hofmann M, Wu M, Ghoneim HE, Roelli P, Utzschneider DT, von Hoesslin M, Cullen JG, Fan Y, Eisenberg V, Wohlleber D, Steiger K, Merkler D, Delorenzi M, Knolle PA, Cohen CJ, Thimme R, Youngblood B, Zehn D. TOX reinforces the phenotype and longevity of exhausted T cells in chronic viral infection. Nature. 2019;571:265-269. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 804] [Cited by in RCA: 719] [Article Influence: 102.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 84. | Pauken KE, Sammons MA, Odorizzi PM, Manne S, Godec J, Khan O, Drake AM, Chen Z, Sen DR, Kurachi M, Barnitz RA, Bartman C, Bengsch B, Huang AC, Schenkel JM, Vahedi G, Haining WN, Berger SL, Wherry EJ. Epigenetic stability of exhausted T cells limits durability of reinvigoration by PD-1 blockade. Science. 2016;354:1160-1165. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1176] [Cited by in RCA: 1067] [Article Influence: 106.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 85. | Allen UD, Farkas G, Hébert D, Weitzman S, Stephens D, Petric M, Tellier R, Ngan B, Fecteau A, West L, Wasfy S. Risk factors for post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in pediatric patients: a case-control study. Pediatr Transplant. 2005;9:450-455. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 95] [Cited by in RCA: 74] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 86. | Fulchiero R, Amaral S. Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease after pediatric kidney transplant. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:1087864. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 18] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 87. | Young LS, Yap LF, Murray PG. Epstein-Barr virus: more than 50 years old and still providing surprises. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016;16:789-802. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 738] [Cited by in RCA: 668] [Article Influence: 66.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 88. | Jia L, Yang H, Zhou Y, Meng Y, Zhang L, Lei X, Guan X, Yu J, Dou Y. Analysis of risk factors for Epstein-Barr virus reactivation and progression to post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in pediatric patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Front Pediatr. 2025;13:1627990. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 5] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 89. | Green M, Michaels MG, Webber SA, Rowe D, Reyes J. The management of Epstein-Barr virus associated post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders in pediatric solid-organ transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant. 1999;3:271-281. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 104] [Cited by in RCA: 76] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 90. | Seyed-Khorami SM, Azadi A, Habibian A, Hosseini M, Fan X, Soleimanjahi H, Pourkarim MR. Oncogenic Viruses in Organ Transplantation: Implications of Virus-Host Interactions for Cancer Development. Viruses. 2025;17:1299. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 91. | Gabrilovich DI, Ostrand-Rosenberg S, Bronte V. Coordinated regulation of myeloid cells by tumours. Nat Rev Immunol. 2012;12:253-268. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 3097] [Cited by in RCA: 2939] [Article Influence: 209.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (7)] |
| 92. | Campisi J. Aging, cellular senescence, and cancer. Annu Rev Physiol. 2013;75:685-705. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1620] [Cited by in RCA: 2182] [Article Influence: 155.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 93. | Kuilman T, Michaloglou C, Vredeveld LC, Douma S, van Doorn R, Desmet CJ, Aarden LA, Mooi WJ, Peeper DS. Oncogene-induced senescence relayed by an interleukin-dependent inflammatory network. Cell. 2008;133:1019-1031. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1769] [Cited by in RCA: 1629] [Article Influence: 90.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 94. | Egeblad M, Werb Z. New functions for the matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002;2:161-174. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 4853] [Cited by in RCA: 4437] [Article Influence: 184.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 95. | Vallejo AN. CD28 extinction in human T cells: altered functions and the program of T-cell senescence. Immunol Rev. 2005;205:158-169. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 276] [Cited by in RCA: 321] [Article Influence: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 96. | Schaenman JM, Rossetti M, Sidwell T, Groysberg V, Sunga G, Korin Y, Liang E, Zhou X, Abdalla B, Lum E, Bunnapradist S, Pham T, Danovitch G, Reed EF. Increased T cell immunosenescence and accelerated maturation phenotypes in older kidney transplant recipients. Hum Immunol. 2018;79:659-667. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 36] [Cited by in RCA: 47] [Article Influence: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 97. | Dedeoglu B, Meijers RW, Klepper M, Hesselink DA, Baan CC, Litjens NH, Betjes MG. Loss of CD28 on Peripheral T Cells Decreases the Risk for Early Acute Rejection after Kidney Transplantation. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0150826. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 37] [Cited by in RCA: 39] [Article Influence: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 98. | Voehringer D, Koschella M, Pircher H. Lack of proliferative capacity of human effector and memory T cells expressing killer cell lectinlike receptor G1 (KLRG1). Blood. 2002;100:3698-3702. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 247] [Cited by in RCA: 275] [Article Influence: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 99. | Brenchley JM, Karandikar NJ, Betts MR, Ambrozak DR, Hill BJ, Crotty LE, Casazza JP, Kuruppu J, Migueles SA, Connors M, Roederer M, Douek DC, Koup RA. Expression of CD57 defines replicative senescence and antigen-induced apoptotic death of CD8+ T cells. Blood. 2003;101:2711-2720. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 879] [Cited by in RCA: 849] [Article Influence: 36.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 100. | Sallusto F, Lenig D, Förster R, Lipp M, Lanzavecchia A. Two subsets of memory T lymphocytes with distinct homing potentials and effector functions. Nature. 1999;401:708-712. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 4426] [Cited by in RCA: 4594] [Article Influence: 170.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 101. | Kohler S, Thiel A. Life after the thymus: CD31+ and CD31- human naive CD4+ T-cell subsets. Blood. 2009;113:769-774. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 234] [Cited by in RCA: 239] [Article Influence: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 102. | Hazenberg MD, Verschuren MC, Hamann D, Miedema F, van Dongen JJ. T cell receptor excision circles as markers for recent thymic emigrants: basic aspects, technical approach, and guidelines for interpretation. J Mol Med (Berl). 2001;79:631-640. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 237] [Cited by in RCA: 239] [Article Influence: 9.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 103. | Baerlocher GM, Vulto I, de Jong G, Lansdorp PM. Flow cytometry and FISH to measure the average length of telomeres (flow FISH). Nat Protoc. 2006;1:2365-2376. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 309] [Cited by in RCA: 348] [Article Influence: 18.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 104. | Kimura M, Stone RC, Hunt SC, Skurnick J, Lu X, Cao X, Harley CB, Aviv A. Measurement of telomere length by the Southern blot analysis of terminal restriction fragment lengths. Nat Protoc. 2010;5:1596-1607. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 312] [Cited by in RCA: 347] [Article Influence: 21.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 105. | Ferrucci L, Corsi A, Lauretani F, Bandinelli S, Bartali B, Taub DD, Guralnik JM, Longo DL. The origins of age-related proinflammatory state. Blood. 2005;105:2294-2299. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 614] [Cited by in RCA: 696] [Article Influence: 33.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 106. | Axelsson J, Møller HJ, Witasp A, Qureshi AR, Carrero JJ, Heimbürger O, Bárány P, Alvestrand A, Lindholm B, Moestrup SK, Stenvinkel P. Changes in fat mass correlate with changes in soluble sCD163, a marker of mature macrophages, in patients with CKD. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;48:916-925. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 52] [Cited by in RCA: 56] [Article Influence: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 107. | Lu AT, Quach A, Wilson JG, Reiner AP, Aviv A, Raj K, Hou L, Baccarelli AA, Li Y, Stewart JD, Whitsel EA, Assimes TL, Ferrucci L, Horvath S. DNA methylation GrimAge strongly predicts lifespan and healthspan. Aging (Albany NY). 2019;11:303-327. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 539] [Cited by in RCA: 1755] [Article Influence: 292.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 108. | Cossarizza A, Chang HD, Radbruch A, Acs A, Adam D, Adam-Klages S, Agace WW, Aghaeepour N, Akdis M, Allez M, Almeida LN, Alvisi G, Anderson G, Andrä I, Annunziato F, Anselmo A, Bacher P, Baldari CT, Bari S, Barnaba V, Barros-Martins J, Battistini L, Bauer W, Baumgart S, Baumgarth N, Baumjohann D, Baying B, Bebawy M, Becher B, Beisker W, Benes V, Beyaert R, Blanco A, Boardman DA, Bogdan C, Borger JG, Borsellino G, Boulais PE, Bradford JA, Brenner D, Brinkman RR, Brooks AES, Busch DH, Büscher M, Bushnell TP, Calzetti F, Cameron G, Cammarata I, Cao X, Cardell SL, Casola S, Cassatella MA, Cavani A, Celada A, Chatenoud L, Chattopadhyay PK, Chow S, Christakou E, Čičin-Šain L, Clerici M, Colombo FS, Cook L, Cooke A, Cooper AM, Corbett AJ, Cosma A, Cosmi L, Coulie PG, Cumano A, Cvetkovic L, Dang VD, Dang-Heine C, Davey MS, Davies D, De Biasi S, Del Zotto G, Dela Cruz GV, Delacher M, Della Bella S, Dellabona P, Deniz G, Dessing M, Di Santo JP, Diefenbach A, Dieli F, Dolf A, Dörner T, Dress RJ, Dudziak D, Dustin M, Dutertre CA, Ebner F, Eckle SBG, Edinger M, Eede P, Ehrhardt GRA, Eich M, Engel P, Engelhardt B, Erdei A, Esser C, Everts B, Evrard M, Falk CS, Fehniger TA, Felipo-Benavent M, Ferry H, Feuerer M, Filby A, Filkor K, Fillatreau S, Follo M, Förster I, Foster J, Foulds GA, Frehse B, Frenette PS, Frischbutter S, Fritzsche W, Galbraith DW, Gangaev A, Garbi N, Gaudilliere B, Gazzinelli RT, Geginat J, Gerner W, Gherardin NA, Ghoreschi K, Gibellini L, Ginhoux F, Goda K, Godfrey DI, Goettlinger C, González-Navajas JM, Goodyear CS, Gori A, Grogan JL, Grummitt D, Grützkau A, Haftmann C, Hahn J, Hammad H, Hämmerling G, Hansmann L, Hansson G, Harpur CM, Hartmann S, Hauser A, Hauser AE, Haviland DL, Hedley D, Hernández DC, Herrera G, Herrmann M, Hess C, Höfer T, Hoffmann P, Hogquist K, Holland T, Höllt T, Holmdahl R, Hombrink P, Houston JP, Hoyer BF, Huang B, Huang FP, Huber JE, Huehn J, Hundemer M, Hunter CA, Hwang WYK, Iannone A, Ingelfinger F, Ivison SM, Jäck HM, Jani PK, Jávega B, Jonjic S, Kaiser T, Kalina T, Kamradt T, Kaufmann SHE, Keller B, Ketelaars SLC, Khalilnezhad A, Khan S, Kisielow J, Klenerman P, Knopf J, Koay HF, Kobow K, Kolls JK, Kong WT, Kopf M, Korn T, Kriegsmann K, Kristyanto H, Kroneis T, Krueger A, Kühne J, Kukat C, Kunkel D, Kunze-Schumacher H, Kurosaki T, Kurts C, Kvistborg P, Kwok I, Landry J, Lantz O, Lanuti P, LaRosa F, Lehuen A, LeibundGut-Landmann S, Leipold MD, Leung LYT, Levings MK, Lino AC, Liotta F, Litwin V, Liu Y, Ljunggren HG, Lohoff M, Lombardi G, Lopez L, López-Botet M, Lovett-Racke AE, Lubberts E, Luche H, Ludewig B, Lugli E, Lunemann S, Maecker HT, Maggi L, Maguire O, Mair F, Mair KH, Mantovani A, Manz RA, Marshall AJ, Martínez-Romero A, Martrus G, Marventano I, Maslinski W, Matarese G, Mattioli AV, Maueröder C, Mazzoni A, McCluskey J, McGrath M, McGuire HM, McInnes IB, Mei HE, Melchers F, Melzer S, Mielenz D, Miller SD, Mills KHG, Minderman H, Mjösberg J, Moore J, Moran B, Moretta L, Mosmann TR, Müller S, Multhoff G, Muñoz LE, Münz C, Nakayama T, Nasi M, Neumann K, Ng LG, Niedobitek A, Nourshargh S, Núñez G, O'Connor JE, Ochel A, Oja A, Ordonez D, Orfao A, Orlowski-Oliver E, Ouyang W, Oxenius A, Palankar R, Panse I, Pattanapanyasat K, Paulsen M, Pavlinic D, Penter L, Peterson P, Peth C, Petriz J, Piancone F, Pickl WF, Piconese S, Pinti M, Pockley AG, Podolska MJ, Poon Z, Pracht K, Prinz I, Pucillo CEM, Quataert SA, Quatrini L, Quinn KM, Radbruch H, Radstake TRDJ, Rahmig S, Rahn HP, Rajwa B, Ravichandran G, Raz Y, Rebhahn JA, Recktenwald D, Reimer D, Reis e Sousa C, Remmerswaal EBM, Richter L, Rico LG, Riddell A, Rieger AM, Robinson JP, Romagnani C, Rubartelli A, Ruland J, Saalmüller A, Saeys Y, Saito T, Sakaguchi S, Sala-de-Oyanguren F, Samstag Y, Sanderson S, Sandrock I, Santoni A, Sanz RB, Saresella M, Sautes-Fridman C, Sawitzki B, Schadt L, Scheffold A, Scherer HU, Schiemann M, Schildberg FA, Schimisky E, Schlitzer A, Schlosser J, Schmid S, Schmitt S, Schober K, Schraivogel D, Schuh W, Schüler T, Schulte R, Schulz AR, Schulz SR, Scottá C, Scott-Algara D, Sester DP, Shankey TV, Silva-Santos B, Simon AK, Sitnik KM, Sozzani S, Speiser DE, Spidlen J, Stahlberg A, Stall AM, Stanley N, Stark R, Stehle C, Steinmetz T, Stockinger H, Takahama Y, Takeda K, Tan L, Tárnok A, Tiegs G, Toldi G, Tornack J, Traggiai E, Trebak M, Tree TIM, Trotter J, Trowsdale J, Tsoumakidou M, Ulrich H, Urbanczyk S, van de Veen W, van den Broek M, van der Pol E, Van Gassen S, Van Isterdael G, van Lier RAW, Veldhoen M, Vento-Asturias S, Vieira P, Voehringer D, Volk HD, von Borstel A, von Volkmann K, Waisman A, Walker RV, Wallace PK, Wang SA, Wang XM, Ward MD, Ward-Hartstonge KA, Warnatz K, Warnes G, Warth S, Waskow C, Watson JV, Watzl C, Wegener L, Weisenburger T, Wiedemann A, Wienands J, Wilharm A, Wilkinson RJ, Willimsky G, Wing JB, Winkelmann R, Winkler TH, Wirz OF, Wong A, Wurst P, Yang JHM, Yang J, Yazdanbakhsh M, Yu L, Yue A, Zhang H, Zhao Y, Ziegler SM, Zielinski C, Zimmermann J, Zychlinsky A. Guidelines for the use of flow cytometry and cell sorting in immunological studies (second edition). Eur J Immunol. 2019;49:1457-1973. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 786] [Cited by in RCA: 805] [Article Influence: 115.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 109. | Maecker HT, Hassler J, Payne JK, Summers A, Comatas K, Ghanayem M, Morse MA, Clay TM, Lyerly HK, Bhatia S, Ghanekar SA, Maino VC, Delarosa C, Disis ML. Precision and linearity targets for validation of an IFNgamma ELISPOT, cytokine flow cytometry, and tetramer assay using CMV peptides. BMC Immunol. 2008;9:9. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 66] [Cited by in RCA: 61] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 110. | Balagopal A, Barin B, Quinn J, Rogers R, Sulkowski MS, Stock PG. Immunologic Predictors of Liver Transplantation Outcomes in HIV-HCV Co-Infected Persons. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0135882. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in RCA: 5] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 111. | Zhu T, He Y, Wang Y, Zhao L. GrimAge and GrimAge2 Age Acceleration effectively predict mortality risk: a retrospective cohort study. Epigenetics. 2025;20:2530618. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 112. | Kalina T. Reproducibility of Flow Cytometry Through Standardization: Opportunities and Challenges. Cytometry A. 2020;97:137-147. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in RCA: 59] [Article Influence: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 113. | Cossarizza A, Chang HD, Radbruch A, Abrignani S, Addo R, Akdis M, Andrä I, Andreata F, Annunziato F, Arranz E, Bacher P, Bari S, Barnaba V, Barros-Martins J, Baumjohann D, Beccaria CG, Bernardo D, Boardman DA, Borger J, Böttcher C, Brockmann L, Burns M, Busch DH, Cameron G, Cammarata I, Cassotta A, Chang Y, Chirdo FG, Christakou E, Čičin-Šain L, Cook L, Corbett AJ, Cornelis R, Cosmi L, Davey MS, De Biasi S, De Simone G, Del Zotto G, Delacher M, Di Rosa F, Di Santo J, Diefenbach A, Dong J, Dörner T, Dress RJ, Dutertre CA, Eckle SBG, Eede P, Evrard M, Falk CS, Feuerer M, Fillatreau S, Fiz-Lopez A, Follo M, Foulds GA, Fröbel J, Gagliani N, Galletti G, Gangaev A, Garbi N, Garrote JA, Geginat J, Gherardin NA, Gibellini L, Ginhoux F, Godfrey DI, Gruarin P, Haftmann C, Hansmann L, Harpur CM, Hayday AC, Heine G, Hernández DC, Herrmann M, Hoelsken O, Huang Q, Huber S, Huber JE, Huehn J, Hundemer M, Hwang WYK, Iannacone M, Ivison SM, Jäck HM, Jani PK, Keller B, Kessler N, Ketelaars S, Knop L, Knopf J, Koay HF, Kobow K, Kriegsmann K, Kristyanto H, Krueger A, Kuehne JF, Kunze-Schumacher H, Kvistborg P, Kwok I, Latorre D, Lenz D, Levings MK, Lino AC, Liotta F, Long HM, Lugli E, MacDonald KN, Maggi L, Maini MK, Mair F, Manta C, Manz RA, Mashreghi MF, Mazzoni A, McCluskey J, Mei HE, Melchers F, Melzer S, Mielenz D, Monin L, Moretta L, Multhoff G, Muñoz LE, Muñoz-Ruiz M, Muscate F, Natalini A, Neumann K, Ng LG, Niedobitek A, Niemz J, Almeida LN, Notarbartolo S, Ostendorf L, Pallett LJ, Patel AA, Percin GI, Peruzzi G, Pinti M, Pockley AG, Pracht K, Prinz I, Pujol-Autonell I, Pulvirenti N, Quatrini L, Quinn KM, Radbruch H, Rhys H, Rodrigo MB, Romagnani C, Saggau C, Sakaguchi S, Sallusto F, Sanderink L, Sandrock I, Schauer C, Scheffold A, Scherer HU, Schiemann M, Schildberg FA, Schober K, Schoen J, Schuh W, Schüler T, Schulz AR, Schulz S, Schulze J, Simonetti S, Singh J, Sitnik KM, Stark R, Starossom S, Stehle C, Szelinski F, Tan L, Tarnok A, Tornack J, Tree TIM, van Beek JJP, van de Veen W, van Gisbergen K, Vasco C, Verheyden NA, von Borstel A, Ward-Hartstonge KA, Warnatz K, Waskow C, Wiedemann A, Wilharm A, Wing J, Wirz O, Wittner J, Yang JHM, Yang J. Guidelines for the use of flow cytometry and cell sorting in immunological studies (third edition). Eur J Immunol. 2021;51:2708-3145. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 271] [Cited by in RCA: 374] [Article Influence: 74.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (30)] |
| 114. | Kelleher P, Greathead L, Whitby L, Brando B; UK NEQAS Leucocyte Immunophenotyping Steering Committee, Barnett D, Bloxham D, deTute R, Dunlop A, Farren T, Francis S, Payne D, Scott S, Snowden JA, Sorour Y, Stansfield E, Virgo P, Whitby A. European flow cytometry quality assurance guidelines for the diagnosis of primary immune deficiencies and assessment of immune reconstitution following B cell depletion therapies and transplantation. Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2024;106:424-436. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 115. | Huang B, Liu R, Wang P, Yuan Z, Yang J, Xiong H, Zhang N, Huang Q, Fu X, Sun W, Li L. CD8(+)CD57(+) T cells exhibit distinct features in human non-small cell lung cancer. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8:e000639. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in RCA: 45] [Article Influence: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 116. | Garcia-Prat M, Álvarez-Sierra D, Aguiló-Cucurull A, Salgado-Perandrés S, Briongos-Sebastian S, Franco-Jarava C, Martin-Nalda A, Colobran R, Montserrat I, Hernández-González M, Pujol-Borrell R, Soler-Palacin P, Martínez-Gallo M. Extended immunophenotyping reference values in a healthy pediatric population. Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2019;96:223-233. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 86] [Cited by in RCA: 82] [Article Influence: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 117. | Gutierrez-Rodrigues F, Santana-Lemos BA, Scheucher PS, Alves-Paiva RM, Calado RT. Direct comparison of flow-FISH and qPCR as diagnostic tests for telomere length measurement in humans. PLoS One. 2014;9:e113747. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 104] [Cited by in RCA: 138] [Article Influence: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 118. | Pearce EE, Horvath S, Katta S, Dagnall C, Aubert G, Hicks BD, Spellman SR, Katki H, Savage SA, Alsaggaf R, Gadalla SM. DNA-methylation-based telomere length estimator: comparisons with measurements from flow FISH and qPCR. Aging (Albany NY). 2021;13:14675-14686. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in RCA: 27] [Article Influence: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 119. | McCrory C, Fiorito G, Hernandez B, Polidoro S, O'Halloran AM, Hever A, Ni Cheallaigh C, Lu AT, Horvath S, Vineis P, Kenny RA. GrimAge Outperforms Other Epigenetic Clocks in the Prediction of Age-Related Clinical Phenotypes and All-Cause Mortality. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021;76:741-749. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 83] [Cited by in RCA: 353] [Article Influence: 70.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 120. | Harmon W, Meyers K, Ingelfinger J, McDonald R, McIntosh M, Ho M, Spaneas L, Palmer JA, Hawk M, Geehan C, Tinckam K, Hancock WW, Sayegh MH. Safety and efficacy of a calcineurin inhibitor avoidance regimen in pediatric renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;17:1735-1745. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 53] [Cited by in RCA: 36] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 121. | Liu F, Mao JH. Calcineurin inhibitors and nephrotoxicity in children. World J Pediatr. 2018;14:121-126. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in RCA: 14] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 122. | Karolin A, Genitsch V, Sidler D. Calcineurin Inhibitor Toxicity in Solid Organ Transplantation. Pharmacology. 2021;106:347-355. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 57] [Cited by in RCA: 45] [Article Influence: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 123. | Kirkland JL, Tchkonia T. Senolytic drugs: from discovery to translation. J Intern Med. 2020;288:518-536. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 327] [Cited by in RCA: 850] [Article Influence: 141.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 124. | Zhu Y, Tchkonia T, Pirtskhalava T, Gower AC, Ding H, Giorgadze N, Palmer AK, Ikeno Y, Hubbard GB, Lenburg M, O'Hara SP, LaRusso NF, Miller JD, Roos CM, Verzosa GC, LeBrasseur NK, Wren JD, Farr JN, Khosla S, Stout MB, McGowan SJ, Fuhrmann-Stroissnigg H, Gurkar AU, Zhao J, Colangelo D, Dorronsoro A, Ling YY, Barghouthy AS, Navarro DC, Sano T, Robbins PD, Niedernhofer LJ, Kirkland JL. The Achilles' heel of senescent cells: from transcriptome to senolytic drugs. Aging Cell. 2015;14:644-658. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 2150] [Cited by in RCA: 1898] [Article Influence: 172.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (6)] |
| 125. | Xu M, Pirtskhalava T, Farr JN, Weigand BM, Palmer AK, Weivoda MM, Inman CL, Ogrodnik MB, Hachfeld CM, Fraser DG, Onken JL, Johnson KO, Verzosa GC, Langhi LGP, Weigl M, Giorgadze N, LeBrasseur NK, Miller JD, Jurk D, Singh RJ, Allison DB, Ejima K, Hubbard GB, Ikeno Y, Cubro H, Garovic VD, Hou X, Weroha SJ, Robbins PD, Niedernhofer LJ, Khosla S, Tchkonia T, Kirkland JL. Senolytics improve physical function and increase lifespan in old age. Nat Med. 2018;24:1246-1256. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1414] [Cited by in RCA: 1707] [Article Influence: 213.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 126. | Justice JN, Nambiar AM, Tchkonia T, LeBrasseur NK, Pascual R, Hashmi SK, Prata L, Masternak MM, Kritchevsky SB, Musi N, Kirkland JL. Senolytics in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: Results from a first-in-human, open-label, pilot study. EBioMedicine. 2019;40:554-563. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 482] [Cited by in RCA: 945] [Article Influence: 135.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 127. | Yousefzadeh MJ, Zhu Y, McGowan SJ, Angelini L, Fuhrmann-Stroissnigg H, Xu M, Ling YY, Melos KI, Pirtskhalava T, Inman CL, McGuckian C, Wade EA, Kato JI, Grassi D, Wentworth M, Burd CE, Arriaga EA, Ladiges WL, Tchkonia T, Kirkland JL, Robbins PD, Niedernhofer LJ. Fisetin is a senotherapeutic that extends health and lifespan. EBioMedicine. 2018;36:18-28. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 552] [Cited by in RCA: 751] [Article Influence: 93.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 128. | Chang J, Wang Y, Shao L, Laberge RM, Demaria M, Campisi J, Janakiraman K, Sharpless NE, Ding S, Feng W, Luo Y, Wang X, Aykin-Burns N, Krager K, Ponnappan U, Hauer-Jensen M, Meng A, Zhou D. Clearance of senescent cells by ABT263 rejuvenates aged hematopoietic stem cells in mice. Nat Med. 2016;22:78-83. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 962] [Cited by in RCA: 1449] [Article Influence: 131.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 129. | Laberge RM, Sun Y, Orjalo AV, Patil CK, Freund A, Zhou L, Curran SC, Davalos AR, Wilson-Edell KA, Liu S, Limbad C, Demaria M, Li P, Hubbard GB, Ikeno Y, Javors M, Desprez PY, Benz CC, Kapahi P, Nelson PS, Campisi J. MTOR regulates the pro-tumorigenic senescence-associated secretory phenotype by promoting IL1A translation. Nat Cell Biol. 2015;17:1049-1061. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1004] [Cited by in RCA: 919] [Article Influence: 83.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 130. | Barzilai N, Crandall JP, Kritchevsky SB, Espeland MA. Metformin as a Tool to Target Aging. Cell Metab. 2016;23:1060-1065. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 720] [Cited by in RCA: 804] [Article Influence: 80.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 131. | Bannister CA, Holden SE, Jenkins-Jones S, Morgan CL, Halcox JP, Schernthaner G, Mukherjee J, Currie CJ. Can people with type 2 diabetes live longer than those without? A comparison of mortality in people initiated with metformin or sulphonylurea monotherapy and matched, non-diabetic controls. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014;16:1165-1173. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 242] [Cited by in RCA: 265] [Article Influence: 22.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 132. | Xu M, Tchkonia T, Ding H, Ogrodnik M, Lubbers ER, Pirtskhalava T, White TA, Johnson KO, Stout MB, Mezera V, Giorgadze N, Jensen MD, LeBrasseur NK, Kirkland JL. JAK inhibition alleviates the cellular senescence-associated secretory phenotype and frailty in old age. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112:E6301-E6310. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 380] [Cited by in RCA: 700] [Article Influence: 63.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 133. | Freund A, Patil CK, Campisi J. p38MAPK is a novel DNA damage response-independent regulator of the senescence-associated secretory phenotype. EMBO J. 2011;30:1536-1548. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 592] [Cited by in RCA: 808] [Article Influence: 53.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 134. | Lelarge V, Capelle R, Oger F, Mathieu T, Le Calvé B. Senolytics: from pharmacological inhibitors to immunotherapies, a promising future for patients' treatment. NPJ Aging. 2024;10:12. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in RCA: 79] [Article Influence: 39.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 135. | Carpenter VJ, Saleh T, Gewirtz DA. Senolytics for Cancer Therapy: Is All That Glitters Really Gold? Cancers (Basel). 2021;13:723. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 37] [Cited by in RCA: 101] [Article Influence: 20.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 136. | Romashkan S, Chang H, Hadley EC. National Institute on Aging Workshop: Repurposing Drugs or Dietary Supplements for Their Senolytic or Senomorphic Effects: Considerations for Clinical Trials. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021;76:1144-1152. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in RCA: 36] [Article Influence: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 137. | Chaib S, Tchkonia T, Kirkland JL. Cellular senescence and senolytics: the path to the clinic. Nat Med. 2022;28:1556-1568. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 569] [Cited by in RCA: 779] [Article Influence: 194.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 138. | Debrincat MA, Pleines I, Lebois M, Lane RM, Holmes ML, Corbin J, Vandenberg CJ, Alexander WS, Ng AP, Strasser A, Bouillet P, Sola-Visner M, Kile BT, Josefsson EC. BCL-2 is dispensable for thrombopoiesis and platelet survival. Cell Death Dis. 2015;6:e1721. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 66] [Cited by in RCA: 77] [Article Influence: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 139. | Ludwig LM, Nassin ML, Hadji A, LaBelle JL. Killing Two Cells with One Stone: Pharmacologic BCL-2 Family Targeting for Cancer Cell Death and Immune Modulation. Front Pediatr. 2016;4:135. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in RCA: 18] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 140. | Kirkland JL, Tchkonia T, Zhu Y, Niedernhofer LJ, Robbins PD. The Clinical Potential of Senolytic Drugs. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017;65:2297-2301. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 329] [Cited by in RCA: 412] [Article Influence: 45.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 141. | Sportès C, Hakim FT, Memon SA, Zhang H, Chua KS, Brown MR, Fleisher TA, Krumlauf MC, Babb RR, Chow CK, Fry TJ, Engels J, Buffet R, Morre M, Amato RJ, Venzon DJ, Korngold R, Pecora A, Gress RE, Mackall CL. Administration of rhIL-7 in humans increases in vivo TCR repertoire diversity by preferential expansion of naive T cell subsets. J Exp Med. 2008;205:1701-1714. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 392] [Cited by in RCA: 378] [Article Influence: 21.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 142. | Mackall CL, Fry TJ, Gress RE. Harnessing the biology of IL-7 for therapeutic application. Nat Rev Immunol. 2011;11:330-342. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 505] [Cited by in RCA: 452] [Article Influence: 30.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 143. | Napolitano LA, Schmidt D, Gotway MB, Ameli N, Filbert EL, Ng MM, Clor JL, Epling L, Sinclair E, Baum PD, Li K, Killian ML, Bacchetti P, McCune JM. Growth hormone enhances thymic function in HIV-1-infected adults. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:1085-1098. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in RCA: 78] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 144. | Rossi SW, Jeker LT, Ueno T, Kuse S, Keller MP, Zuklys S, Gudkov AV, Takahama Y, Krenger W, Blazar BR, Holländer GA. Keratinocyte growth factor (KGF) enhances postnatal T-cell development via enhancements in proliferation and function of thymic epithelial cells. Blood. 2007;109:3803-3811. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 142] [Cited by in RCA: 153] [Article Influence: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 145. | Markert ML, Devlin BH, Alexieff MJ, Li J, McCarthy EA, Gupton SE, Chinn IK, Hale LP, Kepler TB, He M, Sarzotti M, Skinner MA, Rice HE, Hoehner JC. Review of 54 patients with complete DiGeorge anomaly enrolled in protocols for thymus transplantation: outcome of 44 consecutive transplants. Blood. 2007;109:4539-4547. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 164] [Cited by in RCA: 156] [Article Influence: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 146. | Parent AV, Russ HA, Khan IS, LaFlam TN, Metzger TC, Anderson MS, Hebrok M. Generation of functional thymic epithelium from human embryonic stem cells that supports host T cell development. Cell Stem Cell. 2013;13:219-229. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 114] [Cited by in RCA: 134] [Article Influence: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 147. | Bredenkamp N, Ulyanchenko S, O'Neill KE, Manley NR, Vaidya HJ, Blackburn CC. An organized and functional thymus generated from FOXN1-reprogrammed fibroblasts. Nat Cell Biol. 2014;16:902-908. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 126] [Cited by in RCA: 129] [Article Influence: 10.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 148. | Yanir A, Schulz A, Lawitschka A, Nierkens S, Eyrich M. Immune Reconstitution After Allogeneic Haematopoietic Cell Transplantation: From Observational Studies to Targeted Interventions. Front Pediatr. 2021;9:786017. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in RCA: 34] [Article Influence: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 149. | Teshima T, Boelens JJ, Matsuoka KI. Novel insights into GVHD and immune reconstitution after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Blood Cell Ther. 2023;6:42-48. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 150. | Courivaud C, Bamoulid J, Crepin T, Gaiffe E, Laheurte C, Saas P, Ducloux D. Pre-transplant Thymic Function Predicts Is Associated With Patient Death After Kidney Transplantation. Front Immunol. 2020;11:1653. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in RCA: 15] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 151. | Ferrara JL, Levine JE, Reddy P, Holler E. Graft-versus-host disease. Lancet. 2009;373:1550-1561. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 2091] [Cited by in RCA: 1891] [Article Influence: 111.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 152. | Junnila RK, List EO, Berryman DE, Murrey JW, Kopchick JJ. The GH/IGF-1 axis in ageing and longevity. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2013;9:366-376. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 399] [Cited by in RCA: 445] [Article Influence: 34.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 153. | Chhabra Y, Waters MJ, Brooks AJ. Role of the growth hormone-IGF-1 axis in cancer. Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab. 2011;6:71-84. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 56] [Cited by in RCA: 65] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 154. | Rajman L, Chwalek K, Sinclair DA. Therapeutic Potential of NAD-Boosting Molecules: The In Vivo Evidence. Cell Metab. 2018;27:529-547. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 438] [Cited by in RCA: 667] [Article Influence: 83.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 155. | Martens CR, Denman BA, Mazzo MR, Armstrong ML, Reisdorph N, McQueen MB, Chonchol M, Seals DR. Chronic nicotinamide riboside supplementation is well-tolerated and elevates NAD(+) in healthy middle-aged and older adults. Nat Commun. 2018;9:1286. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 387] [Cited by in RCA: 454] [Article Influence: 56.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 156. | Cantó C, Auwerx J. NAD+ as a signaling molecule modulating metabolism. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2011;76:291-298. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 67] [Cited by in RCA: 86] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 157. | Filler G, Feber J. The transplanted child: New immunosuppressive agents and the need for pharmacokinetic monitoring. Paediatr Child Health. 2002;7:525-532. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in RCA: 9] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 158. | Al Riyami MS, Al Gaithi B, Al Kalbani N, Al Saidi S. Immunosuppressive Therapy in Pediatric Kidney Transplantation: Evolution, Current Practices, and Future Directions. Biomedicines. 2025;13:3084. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 159. | Damgaard MV, Treebak JT. What is really known about the effects of nicotinamide riboside supplementation in humans. Sci Adv. 2023;9:eadi4862. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in RCA: 75] [Article Influence: 25.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 160. | Freeberg KA, Udovich CC, Martens CR, Seals DR, Craighead DH. Dietary Supplementation With NAD+-Boosting Compounds in Humans: Current Knowledge and Future Directions. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2023;78:2435-2448. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 40] [Cited by in RCA: 33] [Article Influence: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 161. | Gerner RR, Macheiner S, Reider S, Siegmund K, Grabherr F, Mayr L, Texler B, Moser P, Effenberger M, Schwaighofer H, Moschen AR, Kircher B, Oberacher H, Zeiser R, Tilg H, Nachbaur D. Targeting NAD immunometabolism limits severe graft-versus-host disease and has potent antileukemic activity. Leukemia. 2020;34:1885-1897. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in RCA: 21] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 162. | Chancharoenthana W, Traitanon O, Leelahavanichkul A, Tasanarong A. Molecular immune monitoring in kidney transplant rejection: a state-of-the-art review. Front Immunol. 2023;14:1206929. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 14] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 163. | Murphy MP, Smith RA. Targeting antioxidants to mitochondria by conjugation to lipophilic cations. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2007;47:629-656. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1044] [Cited by in RCA: 894] [Article Influence: 47.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 164. | Skulachev VP, Anisimov VN, Antonenko YN, Bakeeva LE, Chernyak BV, Erichev VP, Filenko OF, Kalinina NI, Kapelko VI, Kolosova NG, Kopnin BP, Korshunova GA, Lichinitser MR, Obukhova LA, Pasyukova EG, Pisarenko OI, Roginsky VA, Ruuge EK, Senin II, Severina II, Skulachev MV, Spivak IM, Tashlitsky VN, Tkachuk VA, Vyssokikh MY, Yaguzhinsky LS, Zorov DB. An attempt to prevent senescence: a mitochondrial approach. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2009;1787:437-461. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 349] [Cited by in RCA: 292] [Article Influence: 17.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
| 165. | Gioscia-Ryan RA, LaRocca TJ, Sindler AL, Zigler MC, Murphy MP, Seals DR. Mitochondria-targeted antioxidant (MitoQ) ameliorates age-related arterial endothelial dysfunction in mice. J Physiol. 2014;592:2549-2561. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 226] [Cited by in RCA: 211] [Article Influence: 17.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 166. | Fontana L, Partridge L, Longo VD. Extending healthy life span--from yeast to humans. Science. 2010;328:321-326. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 2588] [Cited by in RCA: 2258] [Article Influence: 141.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 167. | Longo VD, Mattson MP. Fasting: molecular mechanisms and clinical applications. Cell Metab. 2014;19:181-192. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 780] [Cited by in RCA: 989] [Article Influence: 82.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
| 168. | Sharma P, Allison JP. The future of immune checkpoint therapy. Science. 2015;348:56-61. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 4219] [Cited by in RCA: 3739] [Article Influence: 339.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (6)] |
| 169. | Lipson EJ, Bodell MA, Kraus ES, Sharfman WH. Successful administration of ipilimumab to two kidney transplantation patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:e69-e71. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 141] [Cited by in RCA: 132] [Article Influence: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 170. | Kumar V, Shinagare AB, Rennke HG, Ghai S, Lorch JH, Ott PA, Rahma OE. The Safety and Efficacy of Checkpoint Inhibitors in Transplant Recipients: A Case Series and Systematic Review of Literature. Oncologist. 2020;25:505-514. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 132] [Cited by in RCA: 124] [Article Influence: 20.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 171. | Gassmann D, Weiler S, Mertens JC, Reiner CS, Vrugt B, Nägeli M, Mangana J, Müllhaupt B, Jenni F, Misselwitz B. Liver Allograft Failure After Nivolumab Treatment-A Case Report With Systematic Literature Research. Transplant Direct. 2018;4:e376. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 115] [Cited by in RCA: 109] [Article Influence: 13.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 172. | Kayali S, Pasta A, Plaz Torres MC, Jaffe A, Strazzabosco M, Marenco S, Giannini EG. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in malignancies after liver transplantation: A systematic review and pooled analysis. Liver Int. 2023;43:8-17. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 46] [Cited by in RCA: 39] [Article Influence: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 173. | Anugwom CM, Leventhal TM, Debes JD. Understanding immune perspectives and options for the use of checkpoint immunotherapy in HCC post liver transplant. Hepatoma Res. 2022;8:7. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in RCA: 5] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 174. | Aguirre LE, Guzman ME, Lopes G, Hurley J. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and the Risk of Allograft Rejection: A Comprehensive Analysis on an Emerging Issue. Oncologist. 2019;24:394-401. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 65] [Cited by in RCA: 59] [Article Influence: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 175. | Morrison SA, Vinson AJ. Acute Allograft Rejection in Kidney Transplant Recipients Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: An Educational Case Report. Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2024;11:20543581241289191. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 176. | Robinson CH, Coughlin CC, Chanchlani R, Dharnidharka VR. Post-transplant malignancies in pediatric organ transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant. 2021;25:e13884. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in RCA: 12] [Article Influence: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 177. | Bolufer M, Soler J, Molina M, Taco O, Vila A, Macía M. Immunotherapy for Cancer in Kidney Transplant Patients: A Difficult Balance Between Risks and Benefits. Transpl Int. 2024;37:13204. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 178. | Liu X, Lu Y, Zhou W, Peng T, Zhou J, Bi H, Xia F, Chen X. Chinese Multidisciplinary Expert Consensus on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Based Combination Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (2023 Edition). Liver Cancer. 2024;13:355-375. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in RCA: 11] [Article Influence: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 179. | Carroll RP, Boyer M, Gebski V, Hockley B, Johnston JK, Kireta S, Tan H, Taylor A, Wyburn K, Zalcberg JR. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in kidney transplant recipients: a multicentre, single-arm, phase 1 study. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23:1078-1086. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in RCA: 67] [Article Influence: 16.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 180. | Kawashima S, Joachim K, Abdelrahim M, Abudayyeh A, Jhaveri KD, Murakami N. Immune checkpoint inhibitors for solid organ transplant recipients: clinical updates. Korean J Transplant. 2022;36:82-98. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 26] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 181. | June CH, O'Connor RS, Kawalekar OU, Ghassemi S, Milone MC. CAR T cell immunotherapy for human cancer. Science. 2018;359:1361-1365. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2742] [Cited by in RCA: 2320] [Article Influence: 290.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 182. | Ligon JA, Wessel KM, Shah NN, Glod J. Adoptive Cell Therapy in Pediatric and Young Adult Solid Tumors: Current Status and Future Directions. Front Immunol. 2022;13:846346. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in RCA: 10] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 183. | Ghoneim HE, Fan Y, Moustaki A, Abdelsamed HA, Dash P, Dogra P, Carter R, Awad W, Neale G, Thomas PG, Youngblood B. De Novo Epigenetic Programs Inhibit PD-1 Blockade-Mediated T Cell Rejuvenation. Cell. 2017;170:142-157.e19. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 386] [Cited by in RCA: 638] [Article Influence: 70.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 184. | Bengsch B, Johnson AL, Kurachi M, Odorizzi PM, Pauken KE, Attanasio J, Stelekati E, McLane LM, Paley MA, Delgoffe GM, Wherry EJ. Bioenergetic Insufficiencies Due to Metabolic Alterations Regulated by the Inhibitory Receptor PD-1 Are an Early Driver of CD8(+) T Cell Exhaustion. Immunity. 2016;45:358-373. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 422] [Cited by in RCA: 683] [Article Influence: 68.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
| 185. | Razonable RR, Humar A. Cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplant recipients-Guidelines of the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice. Clin Transplant. 2019;33:e13512. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 664] [Cited by in RCA: 550] [Article Influence: 78.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
| 186. | Tzannou I, Papadopoulou A, Naik S, Leung K, Martinez CA, Ramos CA, Carrum G, Sasa G, Lulla P, Watanabe A, Kuvalekar M, Gee AP, Wu MF, Liu H, Grilley BJ, Krance RA, Gottschalk S, Brenner MK, Rooney CM, Heslop HE, Leen AM, Omer B. Off-the-Shelf Virus-Specific T Cells to Treat BK Virus, Human Herpesvirus 6, Cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr Virus, and Adenovirus Infections After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3547-3557. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 415] [Cited by in RCA: 382] [Article Influence: 42.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 187. | Pass RF, Zhang C, Evans A, Simpson T, Andrews W, Huang ML, Corey L, Hill J, Davis E, Flanigan C, Cloud G. Vaccine prevention of maternal cytomegalovirus infection. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1191-1199. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 634] [Cited by in RCA: 539] [Article Influence: 31.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (11)] |
| 188. | Sperotto A, Candoni A, Gottardi M, Facchin G, Stella R, De Marchi R, Michelutti A, Cavallin M, Rosignoli C, Patriarca F, Fanin R. Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis versus Pre-emptive Strategy: Different CD4(+) and CD8(+) T Cell Reconstitution after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation. Transplant Cell Ther. 2021;27:518.e1-518.e4. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in RCA: 23] [Article Influence: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 189. | Legendre C, Pascual M. Improving outcomes for solid-organ transplant recipients at risk from cytomegalovirus infection: late-onset disease and indirect consequences. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:732-740. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 68] [Cited by in RCA: 73] [Article Influence: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 190. | Foca M, Demirhan S, Munoz FM, Valencia Deray KG, Bocchini CE, Sharma TS, Sherman G, Muller WJ, Heald-Sargent T, Danziger-Isakov L, Blum S, Boguniewicz J, Bacon S, Joseph T, Smith J, Ardura MI, Su Y, Maron GM, Ferrolino J, Herold BC. Multicenter Analysis of Valganciclovir Prophylaxis in Pediatric Solid Organ Transplant Recipients. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2024;11:ofae353. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 191. | Kotton CN. CMV: Prevention, Diagnosis and Therapy. Am J Transplant. 2013;13 Suppl 3:24-40; quiz 40. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 253] [Cited by in RCA: 213] [Article Influence: 16.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
| 192. | Otto WR, Green A. Antiviral Therapeutics in Pediatric Transplant Recipients. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2022;36:125-146. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in RCA: 4] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 193. | Hoegy D, Bleyzac N, Robinson P, Bertrand Y, Dussart C, Janoly-Dumenil A. Medication adherence in pediatric transplantation and assessment methods: a systematic review. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13:705-719. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in RCA: 33] [Article Influence: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 194. | Jenkins FJ, Rowe DT, Rinaldo CR Jr. Herpesvirus infections in organ transplant recipients. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2003;10:1-7. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 34] [Cited by in RCA: 42] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 195. | Sen P, Wilkie AR, Ji F, Yang Y, Taylor IJ, Velazquez-Palafox M, Vanni EAH, Pesola JM, Fernandez R, Chen H, Morsett LM, Abels ER, Piper M, Lane RJ, Hickman SE, Means TK, Rosenberg ES, Sadreyev RI, Li B, Coen DM, Fishman JA, El Khoury J. Linking indirect effects of cytomegalovirus in transplantation to modulation of monocyte innate immune function. Sci Adv. 2020;6:eaax9856. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in RCA: 29] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 196. | Vaiserman AM, Koliada AK, Marotta F. Gut microbiota: A player in aging and a target for anti-aging intervention. Ageing Res Rev. 2017;35:36-45. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 403] [Cited by in RCA: 335] [Article Influence: 37.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 197. | Lee JR, Muthukumar T, Dadhania D, Taur Y, Jenq RR, Toussaint NC, Ling L, Pamer E, Suthanthiran M. Gut microbiota and tacrolimus dosing in kidney transplantation. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0122399. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 160] [Cited by in RCA: 151] [Article Influence: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 198. | Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G, Gibson GR, Merenstein DJ, Pot B, Morelli L, Canani RB, Flint HJ, Salminen S, Calder PC, Sanders ME. Expert consensus document. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;11:506-514. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 8109] [Cited by in RCA: 6153] [Article Influence: 512.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (13)] |
| 199. | Cammarota G, Ianiro G, Tilg H, Rajilić-Stojanović M, Kump P, Satokari R, Sokol H, Arkkila P, Pintus C, Hart A, Segal J, Aloi M, Masucci L, Molinaro A, Scaldaferri F, Gasbarrini G, Lopez-Sanroman A, Link A, de Groot P, de Vos WM, Högenauer C, Malfertheiner P, Mattila E, Milosavljević T, Nieuwdorp M, Sanguinetti M, Simren M, Gasbarrini A; European FMT Working Group. European consensus conference on faecal microbiota transplantation in clinical practice. Gut. 2017;66:569-580. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 974] [Cited by in RCA: 868] [Article Influence: 96.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (9)] |
| 200. | De Filippis F, Pellegrini N, Vannini L, Jeffery IB, La Storia A, Laghi L, Serrazanetti DI, Di Cagno R, Ferrocino I, Lazzi C, Turroni S, Cocolin L, Brigidi P, Neviani E, Gobbetti M, O'Toole PW, Ercolini D. High-level adherence to a Mediterranean diet beneficially impacts the gut microbiota and associated metabolome. Gut. 2016;65:1812-1821. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 1352] [Cited by in RCA: 1142] [Article Influence: 114.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 201. | Ebrahim NAA, Farghaly TA, Soliman SMA. "Exosomal blueprint of lung-tropic metastasis: molecular signatures, microenvironmental conditioning, and translational implications in cancer". Med Oncol. 2025;43:93. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 2] [Reference Citation Analysis (3)] |
| 202. | Andermann TM, Rezvani A, Bhatt AS. Microbiota Manipulation With Prebiotics and Probiotics in Patients Undergoing Stem Cell Transplantation. Curr Hematol Malig Rep. 2016;11:19-28. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in Crossref: 50] [Cited by in RCA: 55] [Article Influence: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 203. | Ebrahim NAA, Farghaly TA, Soliman SMA. Rewiring the transcriptome: diagnostic and therapeutic implications of alternative splicing in solid cancers. Mol Biol Rep. 2025;53:125. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
| 204. | Liu Y, Wang J, Wu C. Modulation of Gut Microbiota and Immune System by Probiotics, Pre-biotics, and Post-biotics. Front Nutr. 2021;8:634897. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Full Text (PDF)] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in RCA: 197] [Article Influence: 49.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
| 205. | Ebrahim NAA, Farghaly TA, Soliman SMA. 4D-printed microdevices for spatiotemporal detection of ctDNA and miRNA in pancreatic cancer: an in-depth review. Med Oncol. 2025;42:462. [RCA] [PubMed] [DOI] [Full Text] [Cited by in RCA: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |