Microcirculation Inflammation Associates With Outcome in Renal Transplant Patients With De Novo Donor‐Specific Antibodies

In renal transplant patients with de novo donor‐specific antibodies (dnDSA) we studied the value of microcirculation inflammation (MI; defined by the addition of glomerulitis (g) and peritubular capillaritis (ptc) scores) to assess long‐term graft survival in a retrospective cohort study. Out of all transplant patients with standard immunological risk (n = 638), 79 (12.4%) developed dnDSA and 58/79 (73%) had an indication biopsy at or after dnDSA development. Based on the MI score on that indication biopsy patients were categorized, MI0 (n = 26), MI1 + 2 (n = 21) and MI ≥ 3 (n = 11). The MI groups did not differ significantly pretransplantation, whereas posttransplantation higher MI scores developed more anti‐HLA class I + II DSA (p = 0.011), showed more TCMR (p < 0.001) and showed a trend to C4d‐positive staining (p = 0.059). Four‐year graft survival estimates from time of indication biopsy were MI0 96.1%, MI1 + 2 76.1% and MI ≥ 3 17.1%; resulting in a 24‐fold increased risk of graft failure in the MI ≥ 3 compared to the MI0 group (p = 0.003; 95% CI [3.0–196.0]). When adjusted for C4d, MI ≥ 3 still had a 21‐fold increased risk of graft failure (p = 0.005; 95% CI [2.5–180.0]), while C4d positivity on indication biopsy lost significance. In renal transplant patients with de novo DSA, microcirculation inflammation, defined by g + ptc, associates with graft survival.     

Antibody-Mediated Rejection of a Pancreas Allograft

The role of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in pancreas transplantation is poorly understood. Here, we report on a patient who developed AMR of his pancreas allograft after receiving a simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant. Pre-operative enhanced cytotoxicity and flow cytometry T-cell crossmatches were negative; B-cell crossmatches were not performed as per institutional protocol. The patient's post-operative course was significant for elevated serum amylase levels and development of hyperglycemia approximately 1 month after transplantation. A pancreatic biopsy at this time showed no cellular infiltrate but strong immunofluorescent staining for C4d in the interacinar capillaries. Analysis of the patient's serum identified donor-specific HLA-DR alloantibodies. He received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), rituximab and plasmapheresis, and his pancreatic function normalized. We conclude that clinically significant AMR can develop in a pancreas allograft and recommend that pancreatic biopsies be assessed for C4d deposition if the patient has risk factors for AMR and/or the pathologic evidence for cell-mediated rejection is underwhelming.     

The Impact of C4d Pattern and Donor‐Specific Antibody on Graft Survival in Recipients Requiring Indication Renal Allograft Biopsy

We examined the pattern of PTC C4d by immunohistochemistry and DSA in 297 kidney recipients with indication biopsies, and evaluated their predictive value for graft survival. Median biopsy time was 5.1 months posttransplant. Patients were followed for 17.9 ± 9.4 months postbiopsy. An 18.5% had focal and 15.2% had diffuse C4d, with comparable graft survival (adjusted graft failure HR: 2.3, p = 0.001; HR:1.9, p < 0.02, respectively). 31.3% were DSA+, 19.5% class I and 22.9% class II DSA. Only those with class II DSA had worse outcome (adjusted HR:2.5, p = 0.001 for class II only; HR:2.7, p < 0.001 for class I/II DSA). Among patients with <10%C4d, 23.9% had DSA, compared to 68.9% with diffuse staining. For patients biopsied in first‐year posttransplant presence of DSA, regardless of C4d positivity in biopsy, was a poor prognostic factor (adjusted graft failure HR: 4.2, p < 0.02 for C4d?/DSA+; HR:4.9, p = 0.001 for C4d+/DSA+), unlike those biopsied later. We have shown that focal C4d had similar impact on graft survival as diffuse pattern. During the first‐year posttransplant either class I or II DSA, and afterward only class II DSA were associated with worse graft survival. DSA was predictive of worse outcome regardless of C4d for patients biopsied in first year and only with C4d positivity afterward, supporting the importance of assessment of both DSA and C4d pattern in biopsy.     

Use of C4d as a Diagnostic Adjunct in Lung Allograft Biopsies

PURPOSE: Humoral allograft rejection is a defined mechanism for cardiac and renal graft dysfunction; C4d deposition, a stable component of complement activation, inversely correlates with graft survival. With the recent recognition of humoral rejection in lung grafts, we examined C4d's role as a prognostic adjunct in lung allografts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-three lung recipients underwent biopsies for deterioration in clinical status or routine surveillance. Clinically unwell patients possessed acute rejection or bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS). Biopsies attributable to infection were excluded from the study. In addition to routine light microscopy, an attempt was made to correlate the clinical status and morphologic findings with the pattern of C4d deposition and also to compare these clinical and morphologic parameters with the other assessed immunoreactants. Panel reactive antibody testing was also carried out at various points in their post transplantation course whereby in 6 of the cases the samples were procured at exactly the same time as the tissue samples. RESULTS: The patients were segregated into two groups: those patients with recurrent acute rejection and those with BOS. In those patients with symptomatic acute rejection, all biopsies showed light microscopic and immunofluorescent evidence of humoral allograft rejection. The level of C4d was positively correlated with the degree of parenchymal injury, the hallmark being one of septal capillary necrosis. In addition, high and intermediate levels of C4d correlated with a clinical diagnosis of acute rejection. C4d was the strongest predictor of parenchymal injury and of the clinical status (p <.0001) compared to other the immunoreactants C1q, C5b-9 and immunoglobulin. There was no specific correlation between C4d deposition and the presence of acute cellular rejection. In those patients fulfilling clinical criteria of BOS, deposits of C4d as well as other immunoreactants were found in the bronchial wall as opposed to the rarity of this finding in bon-BOS patients. However the only statistically significant predictor of BOS was bronchial wall deposition of C1q. In no case were panel reactive antibodies at significant levels discovered post transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of acute rejection, C4d deposition correlates with clinical evidence of rejection and the degree of humoral rejection assessed pathologically; there is no association with the presence of histocompatibility related antibodies. It is a more specific predictor of allograft status compared to other immunoreactants. C4d deposition within the bronchial wall is a feature of BOS and hence may be used as a marker of chronic graft dysfunction. The antigenic target resulting in C4d deposition may not be histocompatibility related.     

Significance of C4d Banff Scores in Early Protocol Biopsies of Kidney Transplant Recipients with Preformed Donor‐Specific Antibodies (DSA)

The significance of C4d‐Banff scores in protocol biopsies of kidney transplant recipients with preformed donor‐specific antibodies (DSA) has not been determined. We reviewed 157 protocol biopsies from 80 DSA+ patients obtained at 3 months and 1 year post‐transplant. The C4d Banff scores (1,2,3) were associated with significant increments of microcirculation inflammation (MI) at both 3 months and 1 year post‐transplant, worse transplant glomerulopathy and higher class II DSA‐MFI (p < 0.01). Minimal‐C4d had injury intermediate between negative and focal, while focal and diffuse‐C4d had the same degree of microvascular injury. A total of 54% of patients had variation of C4d score between 3 months and 1 year post‐transplant. Cumulative (3 month + 1 year) C4d scores correlated with long‐term renal function worsening (p = 0.006). However, C4d staining was not a sensitive indicator of parenchymal disease, 55% of C4d‐negative biopsies having evidence of concomitant MI. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the presence of MI and class II DSA at 3 months were associated with a fourfold increased risk of progression to chronic antibody‐mediated rejection independently of C4d (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the substantial fluctuation of C4d status in the first year post‐transplant reflects a dynamic humoral process. However, C4d may not be a sufficiently sensitive indicator of activity, MI and DSA being more robust predictors of bad outcome.     

Outcome of Patients with Preformed Donor‐Specific Antibodies Following Alemtuzumab Induction and Tacrolimus Monotherapy

It has been shown that low‐level preformed donor‐specific antibodies (DSAbs) detected by luminex beads in the setting of a negative CDC and flow cytometry crossmatch (CDC/FCXM) are associated with inferior allograft outcomes. The relevance of preformed DSAbs in patients receiving alemtuzumab induction and tacrolimus monotherapy has not been studied. Four hundred and eighty renal transplant recipients with a negative CDC/FCXM had their pretransplant sera retrospectively screened for DSAbs. 45/480 (9.4%) of patients were found to have preformed DSAbs. Females and patients receiving regrafts were more likely to have a DSAb (p = 0.008 and p < 0.0001, respectively). Patients with DSAbs had inferior allograft survival (p = 0.047), increased incidence of antibody‐mediated rejection (p < 0.0001) and inferior allograft function at 6 months posttransplant (p = 0.017). Patients with HLA class I DSAb (alone or in combination with a Class II DSAb) with high mean fluorescence intensities (MFIs) were at highest risk. We conclude that patients with preformed DSAb are at high risk of adverse outcomes when receiving a minimal immunosuppressive regime incorporating alemtuzumab induction. Patients found to have a preformed DSAb despite a negative crossmatch might benefit from augmented immunosuppression.     

Preformed donor‐specific antibodies do not affect the 1‐year allograft survival in living donor liver transplantation

The effect of preformed donor‐specific antibodies (DSAs) on liver transplantation (LT) remains unclear, especially in the field of living donor LT (LDLT). Herein, we evaluated the prevalence of preformed DSAs and their effect on graft outcome in LDLT in the first year following surgery. Using the Luminex^® Single Antigen assay, we analyzed the preoperative sera of 61 adult LDLT recipients between 2014 and 2015. Clinical outcomes and pathologic findings including complement component 4d (C4d) expression in the first year after LT were retrospectively reviewed. Regardless of the class of DSA, DSAs with mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) ≥1000 were defined as positive and preformed DSA with MFI ≥5000 was defined as strongly positive. Fifteen patients (24.6%) had preformed DSAs, and 8 patients (13.1%) showed strongly positive preformed DSAs. Among 15 DSA positive patients, 2 (13.3%) showed persistent DSAs after LDLT. No de novo DSAs were noted in patients without preformed DSAs. Preformed DSAs were not related to graft dysfunction, laboratory values, or C4d expression or other pathologic findings in the first year of LDLT. In conclusion, preformed DSAs persisted during follow‐up in 13.3% of cases and did not have adverse effect on histologic or clinical outcomes in the first year of LDLT.     

Outcome of Kidney Transplantations Performed With Preformed Donor‐Specific Antibodies of Unknown Etiology

The detection of preformed donor‐specific alloantibodies (DSA) with multiplex‐bead arrays has led to the common observation that individuals without a history of pregnancy, transfusion or transplantation can have circulating anti‐HLA antibodies of unknown etiology. We retrospectively analyzed the risk of antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) and graft outcome in 41 kidney transplant recipients with DSA of unknown etiology (DSA cause‐unk) at the time of transplantation. Twenty‐one patients received a posttransplantation desensitization protocol, and 20 received standard immunosuppressive therapy. The mean number of DSA was 1.4 ± 0.8, ranging from 1 to 5. Complement‐dependent cytotoxicity crossmatches were negative for all the patients. Flow cytometry crossmatches were positive in 47.6% of cases. The incidence of acute AMR was 14.6% at 1 year, regardless of the immunosuppressive regimen. No patients experienced graft loss following AMR. At month 12, across the entire population of patients with DSA cause‐unk, the outcomes were favorable: the measured glomerular filtration rate was 63.8 ± 16.4 mL/min/1.73 m², the screening biopsies showed low frequencies of microvascular inflammation and no transplant glomerulopathy, and graft and patient survival were 100%. In conclusion, patients with DSA cause‐unk are able to mount AMR but have favorable 1‐year outcomes.     

Determining donor‐specific antibody C1q‐binding ability improves the prediction of antibody‐mediated rejection in human leucocyte antigen‐incompatible kidney transplantation

Detrimental impact of preformed donor‐specific antibodies (DSAs) against human leucocyte antigens on outcomes after kidney transplantation are well documented, however, the value of their capacity to bind complement for predicting antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) and graft survival still needs to be confirmed. We aimed to study DSA characteristics (strength and C1q binding) that might distinguish harmful DSA from clinically irrelevant ones. We retrospectively studied 60 kidney‐transplanted patients with preformed DSA detected by single antigen bead (SAB) assays (IgG and C1q kits), from a cohort of 517 kidney graft recipients (124 with detectable anti‐HLA antibodies). Patients were divided into DSA strength (MFI < vs. ≥ 15 000) and C1q‐binding ability. AMR frequency was high (30%) and it increased with DSA strength (P = 0.002) and C1q+ DSA (P < 0.001). The performance of DSA C1q‐binding ability as a predictor of AMR was better than DSA strength (diagnostic odds ratio 16.3 vs. 6.4, respectively). Furthermore, a multivariable logistic regression showed that C1q+ DSA was a risk factor for AMR (OR = 16.80, P = 0.001), while high MFI DSAs were not. Graft survival was lower in high MFI C1q+ DSA in comparison with patients with C1q? high or low MFI DSA (at 6 years, 38%, 83% and 80%, respectively; P = 0.001). Both DSA strength and C1q‐binding ability assessment seem valuable for improving pretransplant risk assessment. Since DSA C1q‐binding ability was a better predictor of AMR and correlated with graft survival, C1q‐SAB may be a particularly useful tool.     

Antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) after pancreas and pancreas–kidney transplantation

Antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) requires specific diagnostic tools and treatment and is associated with lower graft survival. We prospectively screened C4d in pancreas (n = 35, in 27 patients) and kidney (n = 33, in 21 patients) for cause biopsies. Serum amylase and lipase, amylasuria, fasting blood glucose (FBG) and 2‐h capillary glucose (CG) were also analysed. We found that 27.3% of kidney biopsies and 43% of pancreatic biopsies showed C4d staining (66.7% and 53.3% diffuse in peritubular and interacinar capillaries respectively). Isolated exocrine dysfunction was the main indication for pancreas biopsy (54.3%) and was followed by both exocrine and endocrine dysfunctions (37.1%) and isolated endocrine dysfunction (8.6%). Laboratorial parameters were comparable between T‐cell mediated rejection and AMR: amylase 151.5 vs. 149 U/l (P = 0.075), lipase 1120 vs. 1288.5 U/l (P = 0.83), amylasuria variation 46.5 vs. 61% (P = 0.97), FBG 69 vs. 97 mg/dl (P = 0.20) and 2‐h CG maximum 149.5 vs. 197.5 mg/dl (P = 0.49) respectively. Amylasuria values after treatment correlated with pancreas allograft loss (P = 0.015). These data suggest that C4d staining should be routinely investigated when pancreas allograft dysfunction is present because of its high detection rate in cases of rejection.     

Kidney Intragraft Donor‐Specific Antibodies as Determinant of Antibody‐Mediated Lesions and Poor Graft Outcome

Allograft pathology, antibody–tissue interaction as demonstrated by C4d deposition and serological evidence of donor‐specific antibodies (DSA) are the cardinal diagnostic features of antibody‐mediated lesions (AML) in kidney transplantation. However, discrepancy between histological and serological findings is common, and more reliable diagnostic tools are called for. Here, we asked whether the in situ detection of DSA could serve as marker for AML. To that end, we applied the anti‐HLA single antigen flow bead assay to eluates from 51 needle core graft biopsies performed for cause. Intragraft antibody profiles were correlated to serum DSA (sDSA), histological data and transplant outcome. The prevalence and the mean number of intragraft DSA (gDSA) were lower than that of sDSA (15/51 gDSA+ vs. 37/51 sDSA+ patients; 1.64 gDSA vs. 2.24 sDSA per patient). DSA were detected in all anti‐HLA antibody‐positive biopsies (15/15). The presence of gDSA was significantly associated with (1) microcirculation lesions taken individually (g, cg) and analyzed in functional clusters (ptc + g + cg > 0, cg + mm > 0), (2) C4d positivity and (3) a worse short‐term transplant outcome (p = 0.05). These associations were not found for patients presenting only sDSA. Taken together, these results indicate that gDSA is a severity marker of antibody‐mediated pathogenic process.     

C4d immunostaining is an independent predictor of cardiac allograft vasculopathy and death in heart transplant recipients

Antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) occurs in 10–20% of patients after heart transplantation. C4d immunostaining is one parameter used in its diagnosis. This study aimed to determine whether C4d staining has prognostic significance for mortality, coronary allograft vasculopathy (CAV), cell‐mediated rejection (CMR), and graft dysfunction in patients post‐transplantation. Consecutive patients receiving an endomyocardial biopsy between 2007 and 2008 were selected. Left ventricular function, angiography, episodes of AMR/CMR, and death were noted. C4d was graded from 0 to 3 (immunostaining). Cox proportional models (recurrent events analysis) were used to evaluate C4d staining with mortality, graft dysfunction, CAV (≥grade 2), and episodes of ≥2R‐CMR. We analyzed 2525 biopsy specimens (n = 217). During a follow‐up of 4.5 ± 2 years, 35 died, 49 had graft dysfunction, seven had ≥grade 2 CAV, and 95 episodes of CMR occurred. A one‐grade increase in C4d staining was associated with an increase in mortality (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.0–2.5), a higher risk of CAV (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.04–5.4), and a trend toward graft dysfunction (HR 1.42; 95% CI 1.0–2.09). C4d was not associated with CMR. C4d immunostaining was a significant predictor of CAV and death but not subsequent episodes of CMR. There was also a trend toward increased graft failure.     

Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Antibody‐Mediated Rejection in Pancreas Allografts—Updated Banff Grading Schema

The first Banff proposal for the diagnosis of pancreas rejection (Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 237) dealt primarily with the diagnosis of acute T‐cell‐mediated rejection (ACMR), while only tentatively addressing issues pertaining to antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR). This document presents comprehensive guidelines for the diagnosis of AMR, first proposed at the 10th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology and refined by a broad‐based multidisciplinary panel. Pancreatic AMR is best identified by a combination of serological and immunohistopathological findings consisting of (i) identification of circulating donor‐specific antibodies, and histopathological data including (ii) morphological evidence of microvascular tissue injury and (iii) C4d staining in interacinar capillaries. Acute AMR is diagnosed conclusively if these three elements are present, whereas a diagnosis of suspicious for AMR is rendered if only two elements are identified. The identification of only one diagnostic element is not sufficient for the diagnosis of AMR but should prompt heightened clinical vigilance. AMR and ACMR may coexist, and should be recognized and graded independently. This proposal is based on our current knowledge of the pathogenesis of pancreas rejection and currently available tools for diagnosis. A systematized clinicopathological approach to AMR is essential for the development and assessment of much needed therapeutic interventions.     

Donor‐specific HLA antibody‐mediated complement activation is a significant indicator of antibody‐mediated rejection and poor long‐term graft outcome during lung transplantation: a single center cohort study

Complement‐mediated allograft injury, elicited by donor‐specific HLA antibodies (DSA ), is a defining pathophysiological characteristic of allograft damage. We aimed to study DSA ‐induced complement activation as a diagnostic marker of antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR ) and a risk stratification tool for graft loss in the context of lung transplantation (LT ). We identified 38 DSA ‐positive patients whose serum samples were submitted for C3d deposition testing via the C3d assay. Among these 38 patients, 15 had AMR (DSA^{P os}AMR^{P os}). Results were reported for each patient as the C3d ratio for each DSA , the immunodominant DSA , and the C3d ratio for all DSA present in a sample (C3d ratio_SUM ). DSA^{P os}AMR^{P os} patients had higher C3d ratio_SUM values (58.66 (?1.32 to 118.6) vs. 1.52 (0.30 to 2.74), P  = 0.0016) and increased immunodominant C3d ratios (41.87 (1.72 to 82.02) vs. 0.69 (0.21 to 1.19), P  = 0.001) when compared with DSA^{P os}AMR^{N eg} patients. Specificity and calculated positive predictive value of the immunodominant C3d ratio and BCM sum tests for AMR diagnosis were both 100% (CI  = 17.4–100) in this cohort. Worst graft survival was associated with both immunodominant C3d ratio ≥4 or C3d ratio_SUM ≥10 or BCM sum >7000, suggesting that the antibody composition and/or strength are the principal determinants of an HLA DSA 's capacity to activate complement.