The added value of a matching score may change across the graft course: early after transplant it could reflect susceptibility while ischemia-reperfusion injury confounds dd-cfDNA, whereas later it might modify the prior probability of rejection before a marker rise. Test this with interaction terms for time since transplant and injury context, then assess whether the score improves calibration and discrimination beyond the full preceding dd-cfDNA trajectory. Post-treatment declines should be analyzed separately from untreated rises, since response kinetics answer a different question from diagnosis. The genetic matching study is a methodological starting point, but its title alone does not establish longitudinal biomarker utility.
0 karmaView comment