Banff 07 Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology: Updates and Future Directions

The 9th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology was held in La Coruna, Spain on June 23–29, 2007. A total of 235 pathologists, clinicians and scientists met to address unsolved issues in transplantation and adapt the Banff schema for renal allograft rejection in response to emerging data and technologies. The outcome of the consensus discussions on renal pathology is provided in this article. Major updates from the 2007 Banff Conference were: inclusion of peritubular capillaritis grading, C4d scoring, interpretation of C4d deposition without morphological evidence of active rejection, application of the Banff criteria to zero-time and protocol biopsies and introduction of a new scoring for total interstitial inflammation (ti-score). In addition, emerging research data led to the establishment of collaborative working groups addressing issues like isolated 'v' lesion and incorporation of omics-technologies, paving the way for future combination of graft biopsy and molecular parameters within the Banff process.     

Banff 2011 Meeting Report: New Concepts in Antibody‐Mediated Rejection

The 11th Banff meeting was held in Paris, France, from June 5 to 10, 2011, with a focus on refining diagnostic criteria for antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). The major outcome was the acknowledgment of C4d‐negative ABMR in kidney transplants. Diagnostic criteria for ABMR have also been revisited in other types of transplants. It was recognized that ABMR is associated with heterogeneous phenotypes even within the same type of transplant. This highlights the necessity of further refining the respective diagnostic criteria, and is of particular significance for the design of randomized clinical trials. A reliable phenotyping will allow for definition of robust end‐points. To address this unmet need and to allow for an evidence‐based refinement of the Banff classification, Banff Working Groups presented multicenter data regarding the reproducibility of features relevant to the diagnosis of ABMR. However, the consensus was that more data are necessary and further Banff Working Group activities were initiated. A new Banff working group was created to define diagnostic criteria for ABMR in kidneys independent of C4d. Results are expected to be presented at the 12th Banff meeting to be held in 2013 in Brazil. No change to the Banff classification occurred in 2011.     

Banff Schema for Grading Pancreas Allograft Rejection: Working Proposal by a Multi-Disciplinary International Consensus Panel

Accurate diagnosis and grading of rejection and other pathological processes are of paramount importance to guide therapeutic interventions in patients with pancreas allograft dysfunction. A multi-disciplinary panel of pathologists, surgeons and nephrologists was convened for the purpose of developing a consensus document delineating the histopathological features for diagnosis and grading of rejection in pancreas transplant biopsies. Based on the available published data and the collective experience, criteria for the diagnosis of acute cell-mediated allograft rejection (ACMR) were established. Three severity grades (I/mild, II/moderate and III/severe) were defined based on lesions known to be more or less responsive to treatment and associated with better- or worse-graft outcomes, respectively. The features of chronic rejection/graft sclerosis were reassessed, and three histological stages were established. Tentative criteria for the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection were also characterized, in anticipation of future studies that ought to provide more information on this process. Criteria for needle core biopsy adequacy and guidelines for pathology reporting were also defined.
The availability of a simple, reproducible, clinically relevant and internationally accepted schema for grading rejection should improve the level of diagnostic accuracy and facilitate communication between all parties involved in the care of pancreas transplant recipients.     

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.     

The XIIIth Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology: The Banff 2015 Heart Meeting Report: Improving Antibody‐Mediated Rejection Diagnostics: Strengths,Unmet Needs,and Future Directions

The 13th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology was held in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada from October 5 to 10, 2015. The cardiac session was devoted to current diagnostic issues in heart transplantation with a focus on antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) and small vessel arteriopathy. Specific topics included the strengths and limitations of the current rejection grading system, the central role of microvascular injury in AMR and approaches to semiquantitative assessment of histopathologic and immunophenotypic indicators, the role of AMR in the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy, the important role of serologic antibody detection in the management of transplant recipients, and the potential application of new molecular approaches to the elucidation of the pathophysiology of AMR and potential for improving the current diagnostic system. Herein we summarize the key points from the presentations, the comprehensive, open and wide‐ranging multidisciplinary discussion that was generated, and considerations for future endeavors.     

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.     

IVIG and rituximab for treatment of chronic antibody‐mediated rejection: a prospective study in paediatric renal transplantation with a 2‐year follow‐up

Chronic antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) is the major cause of late renal allograft loss. There is, however, no established treatment for this condition. We report the results of a prospective pilot study on an antihumoral therapy (AHT) consisting of high‐dose intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIG) and rituximab in 20 paediatric renal transplant recipients. Donor‐specific HLA antibodies (HLA DSA) were quantified by Luminex‐based bead array technology. Loss of eGFR decreased significantly from 7.6 ml/min/1.73 m² during 6 months prior to AHT to 2.1 ml/min/1.73 m² (P = 0.0013) during 6 months after AHT. Fourteen patients (70%) responded: nine of nine patients (100%) without and five of 11 (45%) with transplant glomerulopathy (P = 0.014). C4d positivity in PTC decreased from 40 ± 18.5% in the index biopsy to 11.6 ± 12.2% (P = 0.002) in the follow‐up biopsy. In four of nine biopsies (44%) C4d staining turned negative. During 2 years of follow‐up, the median loss of eGFR in each of the four 6‐month periods remained significantly lower compared with prior to AHT. Class I DSA declined in response to AHT by 61% (p = 0.044), class II DSA by 63% (p = 0.033) 12 months after intervention. AHT with IVIG and rituximab significantly reduces or stabilizes the progressive loss of transplant function in paediatric patients with chronic AMR over an observation period of 2 years, apparently by lowering circulating DSA and reducing intrarenal complement activation.     

The Banff 2019 Kidney Meeting Report (I): Updates on and clarification of criteria for T cell– and antibody‐mediated rejection

The XV. Banff conference for allograft pathology was held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics in Pittsburgh, PA (USA) and focused on refining recent updates to the classification, advances from the Banff working groups, and standardization of molecular diagnostics. This report on kidney transplant pathology details clarifications and refinements to the criteria for chronic active (CA) T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR), borderline, and antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). The main focus of kidney sessions was on how to address biopsies meeting criteria for CA TCMR plus borderline or acute TCMR. Recent studies on the clinical impact of borderline infiltrates were also presented to clarify whether the threshold for interstitial inflammation in diagnosis of borderline should be i0 or i1. Sessions on ABMR focused on biopsies showing microvascular inflammation in the absence of C4d staining or detectable donor‐specific antibodies; the potential value of molecular diagnostics in such cases and recommendations for use of the latter in the setting of solid organ transplantation are presented in the accompanying meeting report. Finally, several speakers discussed the capabilities of artificial intelligence and the potential for use of machine learning algorithms in diagnosis and personalized therapeutics in solid organ transplantation.     

Banff Lung Report: Current knowledge and future research perspectives for diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR)

The Lung session of the 2017 14th Banff Foundation for Allograft Pathology Conference, Barcelona focused on the multiple aspects of antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) in lung transplantation. Multidimensional approaches for AMR diagnosis, including classification, histological and immunohistochemical analysis, and donor‐ specific antibody (DSA) characterization with their current strengths and limitations were reviewed in view of recent research. The group also discussed the role of tissue gene expression analysis in the context of unmet needs in lung transplantation. The current best practice for monitoring of AMR and the therapeutic approach are summarized and highlighted in this report. The working group reached consensus of the major gaps in current knowledge and focused on the unanswered questions regarding pulmonary AMR. An important outcome of the meeting was agreement on the need for future collaborative research projects to address these gaps in the field of lung transplantation.     

Cluster Analysis of Lesions in Nonselected Kidney Transplant Biopsies: Microcirculation Changes,Tubulointerstitial Inflammation and Scarring

Banff classification empirically established scoring of histologic lesions, but the relationships of lesions to each other and to underlying biologic processes remain unclear. We hypothesized that class discovery tools would reveal new relationships between individual lesions, and relate lesions to C4d staining, anti‐HLA donor‐specific antibody (DSA) and time posttransplant. We studied 234 nonselected renal allograft biopsies for clinical indications from 173 patients. Silhouette plotting and principal component analysis revealed three groups of lesions: microcirculation changes, including inflammation (glomerulitis, capillaritis) and deterioration (double contours, mesangial expansion); scarring/hyalinosis; and tubulointerstitial inflammation. DSA and C4d grouped with microcirculation inflammation, whereas time posttransplant grouped with scarring/hyalinosis lesions. Intimal arteritis clustered with DSA, C4d and microcirculation inflammation, but also showed correlations with tubulitis. Fibrous intimal thickening in arteries clustered with scarring/hyalinosis. Capillary basement membrane multilayering showed intermediary relationships between microcirculation deterioration and time‐dependent scarring. Correlation analysis and hierarchical clustering confirmed the lesion relationships. Thus, we propose that the pathologic lesions in biopsies are not independent but are members of groups that represent distinct pathogenic forces: microcirculation changes, reflecting the stress of DSA; scarring, hyalinosis and arterial fibrosis, reflecting the cumulative burden of injury over time; and tubulointerstitial inflammation. Interpretation of lesions should reflect these associations.