INTRODUCTION BK polyomavirus (BKV) infection is associated with injury and subsequent graft loss due to the extent of injury or rejection. However, the molecular mechanisms driving injury and subsequent adverse outcomes remain poorly understood.METHODS In a cross-sectional study, single-cell RNA-seq from kidney allograft biopsies was used to assess cell type–specific responses between uninfected controls and 2 distinct phases of BKV infection: peaking (increasing viral blood titers) and resolving (decreasing viral titers following immunosuppression reduction).RESULTS Genes upregulated in BK viral nephropathy (BKVN) were enriched for polyomavirus infection hallmarks, including ribosome biogenesis, translation, and energy restructuring. Additionally, enriched pathways included wound healing, cellular stress, antigen presentation and immune signaling. Even without BKVN (peaking BK viremia alone), epithelial cells expressed signatures for wound healing, cellular stress, and extracellular matrix remodeling. In vivo tubular cell responses at single-cell resolution were validated against single cell transcriptomic data of BKV-infected cells in a cell culture model. Despite similarities, in vivo tubular cells underwent metabolic adaptation favoring fatty acid oxidation and proinflammatory responses not observed in culture models, likely due to an absent innate and adaptive immune system. Despite lymphopenia and immunosuppressive therapies, the proportion of recipient-derived intrarenal adaptive immune cells was increased in biopsies associated with peaking viremia alongside activation of innate immune responses. Adaptive immune cells exhibited persistent inflammatory signaling and remodeling of energy metabolism during the resolving phase of infection.CONCLUSION These not previously reported insights into BKV-associated injury may have implications for clinical management and improved allograft outcomes.
Tess Marvin, Rachel Sealfon, Phillip J. McCown, Fadhl AlAkwaa, Evan A. Farkash, Edgar A. Otto, Felix Eichinger, Ping An, Rajasree Menon, Celine C. Berthier, Tavis J. Reed, Paula Arrowsmith, Lalita Subramanian, Kelly J. Shaffer, Silas P. Norman, Ramnika Gumber, Michael J. Imperiale, James M. Pipas, Olga G. Troyanskaya, Matthias Kretzler, Chandra L. Theesfeld, Abhijit S. Naik
Usage data is cumulative from March 2026 through May 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 1,310 | 0 |
| 454 | 0 | |
| Figure | 191 | 0 |
| Table | 119 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 216 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 85 | 0 |
| Totals | 2,375 | 0 |
| Total Views | 2,375 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.