Citations

Background. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) has emerged as a promising noninvasive biomarker for detecting allograft rejection in solid organ transplantation. However, its diagnostic utility in pancreas transplantation, including in multiorgan recipients, remains underexplored. Methods. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 42 pancreas transplant recipients (38 simultaneous pancreas-kidney, 4 pancreas transplant alone) who underwent for-cause organ biopsy and dd-cfDNA testing between April 2020 and December 2024. dd-cfDNA was measured using the Prospera assay, with a threshold of ≥1% considered high risk and <1% low-risk. Biopsy results were correlated with dd-cfDNA to assess test performance. Results. A total of 50 dd-cfDNA tests and 45 organ biopsies were analyzed. Among simultaneous pancreas-kidney recipients, dd-cfDNA demonstrated a sensitivity of 86.7%, specificity of 52.2%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 54.2%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 85.7% for rejection. In pancreas transplant alone recipients, all high-risk dd-cfDNA results corresponded to biopsy-proven rejection, yielding 100% sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV. When combining both cohorts, dd-cfDNA testing achieved an overall sensitivity of 88.2%, specificity of 57.7%, PPV of 57.7%, and NPV of 88.2%. Additionally, dd-cfDNA kinetics suggested its potential utility as a surveillance tool posttreatment, potentially reducing the need for closure biopsies. Conclusions. dd-cfDNA is a valuable noninvasive adjunct for monitoring of rejection in pancreas transplant recipients. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and define the optimal role of dd-cfDNA in posttransplant care.

Importance Treatment for cognitive dysfunction due to postacute sequelae of long COVID (ie, symptoms of fatigue, malaise, weakness, confusion that persist beyond 12 weeks after an initial COVID infection) remains a significant unmet need. Objective To test evidence-based rehabilitation strategies for improving cognitive symptoms in persons with long COVID. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a 5-arm, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of 3 remotely delivered interventions conducted between August 17, 2023, and June 10, 2024. The study took place at 22 trial sites and included the screening of individuals with cognitive long COVID. Interventions Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 arms: adaptive computerized cognitive training (BrainHQ [Posit Science]), cognitive-behavioral rehabilitation involving both group and individual counseling sessions (PASC-Cognitive Recovery [PASC-CoRE]) paired with BrainHQ, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) paired with BrainHQ. Two comparator arms were included as follows: unstructured computer puzzles and games (active comparator) and sham tDCS paired with BrainHQ. The interventions occurred 5 times per week over 10 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Cognitive and behavioral in-person assessments were performed at baseline, midintervention, at the end of intervention, and 3 months after the end of the intervention. The primary outcome measure was the modified Everyday Cognition Scale 2 (ECog2) completed at the end of the intervention compared to the baseline visit based on participant self-report looking back over the prior 7 days. Results A total of 378 individuals were screened, from which there were 328 participants (median [IQR] age, 48.0 [37.0-58.0] years; 241 female [73.5%]; race: 15 Asian [4.6%], 47 Black [14.3%], and 235 White [71.6%]; ethnicity: 52 Hispanic [15.9%]). None of the 3 active interventions demonstrated benefits on the modified ECog2 in the intention-to-treat population by the end of the intervention period. The adjusted differences in mean change were 0.0 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.2) for BrainHQ vs active comparator, 0.1 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.3) for PASC-CoRE + BrainHQ vs active comparator, 0.0 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.2) for tDCS-active + BrainHQ vs tDCS-sham + BrainHQ, and 0.1 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.3) for PASC-CoRE + BrainHQ vs BrainHQ alone. Secondary participant-reported outcomes and neuropsychological tests showed no differential benefits for any treatment arm. All 5 arms demonstrated some improvements over time on the modified ECog2 and on secondary outcomes. There were no serious adverse events attributable to the interventions. Conclusions and Relevance This phase 2 randomized clinical trial failed to demonstrate differential benefits for online cognitive training, a structured cognitive rehabilitation program, and tDCS for cognitive long COVID. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05965739 .