Kidney Rejection Risk Marker Set Analysis
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for determining the risk of kidney rejection after transplantation are limited in accuracy and rely on individual substances, whereas a combination of multiple markers is necessary for high accuracy, with existing markers not fully optimizing the analysis performance.
Innovation Solution
A novel marker set comprising at least three substances chosen from a specific group, including 3-hydroxy isovalerate, acetyl carnitine, alanine, dimethylamine, glucuronate, phenylacetylglutamine, and urea, is used to predict kidney rejection by calculating a score indicative of the risk, which can be grouped into predefined risk categories for easier medical assessment.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If individual substances are used as markers, then the analysis method is simple, but the accuracy of kidney rejection risk determination is insufficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent combines multiple marker substances (at least three from the specified group including 3-hydroxy isovalerate, acetyl carnitine, alanine, citrate, dimethylamine, glucose, glucuronate, hippurate, lactate, malonate, methyl guanidine, methyl malonate, methyl succinate, p-cresol, phenyl acetate, phenylacetylglycine, phenylacetylglutamine, taurine, trigonelline, and urea) into a comprehensive marker set. This combination approach merges the diagnostic information from individual markers to achieve high accuracy in kidney rejection risk determination, directly resolving the contradiction between simplicity and accuracy.
2Measurement precision
If a marker set with at least three substances is used, then the accuracy of analysis method is sufficiently high, but the complexity of the method increases
Solution Approach 1:
The marker set is designed to be universally applicable for kidney rejection risk determination across different clinical scenarios. The standardized combination of at least three marker substances from the specified group creates a multi-functional diagnostic tool that maintains high accuracy while providing a unified, easy-to-apply methodology. This universal marker set resolves the contradiction by making the complex multi-marker approach systematically manageable and clinically applicable.
3Reliability
If newly identified marker substances (alanine, dimethylamine, glucuronate, phenylacetylglutamine, urea) are necessarily included, then the performance and accuracy are improved, but the selection complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent specifies that the marker set must include at least one substance from the group of newly identified markers (alanine, dimethylamine, glucuronate, phenylacetylglutamine, or urea). This parameter change requirement ensures that the marker set incorporates substances with proven superior performance characteristics for kidney rejection detection. By mandating the inclusion of these specific high-performance markers, the patent resolves the contradiction between reliability and complexity through evidence-based parameter specification.
Data Source
AI summary
Provided is an in vitro method for determining the risk of kidney rejection of an individual after having obtained a kidney donation using a marker set including at least three substances chosen from the group consisting of 3-hydroxy isovalerate, acetyl carnitine, alanine, citrate, dimethylamine, glucose, glucuronate, hippurate, lactate, malonate, methyl guanidine, methyl malonate, methyl succinate, p-cresol, phenyl acetate, phenylacetylglycine, phenylacetylglutamine, taurine, trigonelline, and urea. The marker set also includes at least one substance chosen from the group consisting of alanine, dimethylamine, glucuronate, phenylacetylglutamine, and urea.