Treatment of early mixed cellular and humoral renal allograft rejection with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil

This prospective study investigated the efficiency of the tacrolimus (Tac) combined with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) alone without immunoadsorption (IA) or plasmapheresis (PPH) as treatment for early (within 2 weeks) acute humoral rejection (AHR) in non-sensitized renal allograft recipients. Of 160 patients enrolled in this prospective study, 11 patients had histologically and clinically confirmed early steroid-resistant acute rejection with an antibody response and received Tac-MMF therapy. No other aggressive rescue methods such as IA, PPH were used, according to the study design. Patients (n=11) were followed for 13.8+/-3.5 months; nine were females. The complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch was negative before transplantation in all patients and only positive for panel-reactive antibody in one patient. Most of the rejection episodes were mixed with cellular rejection (four patients met Banff IIA criteria, five patients met Banff IIB, one patient met Banff IB, and one patient met Banff borderline). After 16.19+/-6.16 days of treatment, all rejection episodes were successfully reversed and all graft functions were stable, with a mean serum creatinine level of 1.12+/-0.32 mg/dl during follow-up. No patient suffered from severe infectious complications (except one case of urinary infection). Our investigation suggests that Tac combined with MMF alone is adequate to reverse early mixed cellular and humoral C4d-positive rejection in non-sensitized renal allograft recipients.     

Development of posttransplant antidonor HLA antibodies is associated with acute humoral rejection and early graft dysfunction

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to determine whether the production of posttransplant antibodies directed against donor HLA mismatches (donor specific antibody; DSA) is associated with renal allograft rejection and early graft dysfunction. METHODS: Forty-nine adult renal allograft recipients with increased risk of rejection were enrolled during the period of October 2001 through May 2003 and were prospectively monitored for the development of anti-HLA antibodies. RESULTS: Of 49 patients, eight (16.3 %) patients were diagnosed with acute humoral rejection (AHR) and 11/49 (22.4%) patients were diagnosed with acute cellular rejection (ACR). A strong association between pretransplant HLA sensitization and AHR was found (P=0.005). Of the eight patients diagnosed with AHR, the majority developed DSA before or concomitant with episodes of rejection (P<0.001). Only 3 of 41 patients (7.3%) without AHR developed DSA. The pathogenic role of alloantibodies was further substantiated by analyzing their association with graft function as measured by serum creatinine levels. The average serum creatinine after the third month posttransplantation in DSA producers was 2.24+/-1.01 mg/dL, while in non-DSA patients the average serum creatinine was 1.41+/-0.37 mg/dL (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: This study reveals a strong association between the production of DSA, AHR, and early graft dysfunction. Our findings indicate that prospective monitoring for anti-HLA antibodies following transplantation is a useful test for the diagnosis and classification of AHR for identifying patients at risk of early graft dysfunction.     

Therapy with plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin for acute humoral rejection in kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND: Acute humoral rejection (AHR) is characterized by acute graft dysfunction associated with de novo production of donor-specific alloantibodies (DSA) and C4d deposition in peritubular capillaries of the renal allograft. It has been reported the combination of plasmapheresis (PP) and intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG) as effective rescue therapy for established AHR. METHODS: Between 1999 and 2004, seven kidney allografts recipients suffered from AHR diagnosed by severe rejection and C4d staining in peritubular capillaries. All patients had a negative cross-match before renal transplantation. RESULTS: All patients were treated with daily sessions of PP and in four cases IVIG was added after the last PP session. Tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil were employed as maintenance immunosuppressive regimen. In one case, rituximab was added to PP and IVIG owing to refractory humoral rejection. At 1 year, patient survival was 100%, allograft survival was 70%, and the mean serum creatinine was 201 micromol/L. CONCLUSIONS: AHR is a severe form of rejection associated with a poor prognosis, but its early diagnosis and treatment with PP and IVIG allows reversal of AHR reaching a 70% graft survival at 1 year.     

C4d-positive acute humoral renal allograft rejection: rescue therapy by immunoadsorption in combination with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the efficacy of immunoadsorption (IA) in combination with tacrolimus (FK506) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) rescue therapy for C4d-positive acute humoral rejection (AHR) of renal transplants. METHODS: Six of 185 cadaveric renal allograft recipients developed AHR at a mean of 4.8 +/- 0.8 days after the operation. C4d deposits were observed in peritubular capillaries (PTC) with accumulation of granulocytes. IA with staphylococcal protein A and FK506-MMF combination therapy were administered. RESULTS: After treatment with IA for 6.3 +/- 1.03 sessions combined with FK506 (0.14 to 0.16 mg.kg(-1).d(-1)) and MMF (1.5 g/d) therapy, renal function recovered in all the patients. The mean duration of treatment to a serum creatinine decrease was 14 +/- 2.9 days. The pre-IA panel reactive antibody reactivity (PRA) peaked at 50.2% +/- 6.1%, and was significantly reduced to 8.3% +/- 2.9% after IA. In four of six patients repeat allograft biopsy revealed a remission of AHR. With a mean follow-up of 18.8 +/- 5.46 months, patient and allograft survival are 100% and renal function remains stable with a mean serum creatinine of 1.2 +/- 0.22 mg/dL. CONCLUSION: The optimal treatment for alloantibody-mediated AHR remains uncertain. Our findings suggest that a therapeutic approach combining IA and FK506-MMF rescue improves the outcome of AHR.     

Novel rescue therapy for C4d-positive acute humoral renal allograft rejection

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of immunoadsorption (IA) in combination with tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) rescue therapy for C4d-positive acute humoral rejection (AHR) of renal transplants. METHODOLOGY: Six of 185 cadaveric renal allograft recipients transplanted at our institute developed AHR over a mean period of 4.8 +/- 0.8 d after operation. The ages ranged from 35 to 51 yr (mean 42.6 +/- 5.6 yr). C4d deposits in peritubular capillaries (PTC) and accumulation of granulocytes in PTC were observed. IA with staphylococcal protein A and TAC-MMF combination therapy were given. RESULTS: After subjected to IA for 6.3 +/- 1.03 sessions combined with TAC (0.14-0.16 mg/kg/d) and MMF (1.5 g/d) therapy, renal function recovered in all the patients. The mean duration of treatment when serum creatinine decreased was 14 +/- 2.9 d. The pre-IA panel reactive antibody reactivity was as high as 50.2 +/- 6.1%, and was significantly reduced to 8.3 +/- 2.9% after IA. Repeated allograft kidney biopsy in four of six patients revealed a favorable remission of AHR. With a mean follow-up of 18.8 +/- 5.46 months, patient and allograft survival are 100%, renal function remained stable with a mean serum creatinine of 1.2 +/- 0.22 mg/dL. CONCLUSION: The optimal treatment for alloantibody-mediated AHR remains undefined. Our findings suggest that a therapeutic approach combining IA and TAC-MMF rescue has excellence to improve the outcome of AHR.     

Plasmapheresis and intravenous immune globulin provides effective rescue therapy for refractory humoral rejection and allows kidneys to be successfully transplanted into cross-match-positive recipients

BACKGROUND: Hyperacute rejection (HAR) and acute humoral rejection (AHR) remain recalcitrant conditions without effective treatments, and usually result in graft loss. Plasmapheresis (PP) has been shown to remove HLA- specific antibody (Ab) in many different clinical settings. Intravenous gamma globulin (IVIG) has been used to suppress alloantibody and modulate immune responses. Our hypothesis was that a combination of PP and IVIG could effectively and durably remove donor-specific, anti-HLA antibody (Ab), rescuing patients with established AHR and preemptively desensitizing recipients who had positive crossmatches with a potential live donor. METHODS: The study patients consisted of seven live donor kidney transplant recipients who experienced AHR and had donor-specific Ab (DSA) for one or more mismatched donor HLA antigens. The patients segregated into two groups: three patients were treated for established AHR (rescue group) and four cross-match-positive patients received therapy before transplantation (preemptive group). RESULTS: Using PP/IVIG we have successfully reversed established AHR in three patients. Four patients who were cross-match-positive (3 by flow cytometry and 1 by cytotoxic assay) and had DSA before treatment underwent successful renal transplantation utilizing their live donor. The overall mean creatinine for both treatment groups is 1.4+/-0.8 with a mean follow up of 58+/-40 weeks (range 17-116 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we present seven patients for whom the combined therapies of PP/IVIG were successful in reversing AHR mediated by Ab specific for donor HLA antigens. Furthermore, this protocol shows promise for eliminating DSA preemptively among patients with low-titer positive antihuman globulin-enhanced, complement-dependent cytotoxicity (AHG-CDC) cross-matches, allowing the successful transplantation of these patients using a live donor without any cases of HAR.     

Renal Transplantation in Patients With Pre-Transplant Donor-Specific Antibodies and Negative Flow Cytometry Crossmatches

The clinical significance of pre-transplant donor-specific antibodies (DSA), despite negative cytotoxicity and flow cytometry crossmatches (FCXMs), is unknown. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 60 living donor renal transplant recipients, all with pre-transplant cytotoxicity and T-cell and B-cell FCXMs that were negative. Twenty recipients had pre-transplant DSA detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and/or microbead methods. Forty contemporaneous DSA-negative controls were selected. In the DSA-positive group, after a median follow-up of 8.2 months (25-75% range, 5.4-22.8 months), patient survival was 100% and allograft survival was 95.0%. Acute humoral rejection (AHR) developed in four patients (20.0%). Three of the AHR episodes occurred within the first month post-transplant. Median serum creatinine at last follow-up was 1.3 mg/dL (25-75% range, 1.0-1.6 mg/dL), versus 1.1 mg/dL (25-75% range, 0.9-1.4 mg/dL) in the DSA-negative controls (p = 0.29). Only one of the 40 controls developed AHR (2.5%). Pre-transplant DSA was associated with a significantly increased incidence of AHR (p = 0.02 by log-rank test). In conclusion, despite negative pre-transplant cytotoxicity and FCXMs, renal transplant recipients with pre-transplant DSA detected by solid-phase methods may have an increased incidence of AHR and require close monitoring post-transplant.     

Successful rescue therapy with plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin for acute humoral renal transplant rejection

Plasmapheresis (PP) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) remove donor-specific antibodies, a cause of acute humoral rejection (AHR). We describe the use of PP and IVIg as rescue therapy for AHR. The records of 143 renal transplants performed between October 1, 2000 and April 1, 2002 were reviewed. Patients who underwent PP and IVIg therapy for AHR were identified. The data reviewed included age, sex, source of transplant, number of human leukocyte antigen mismatches, transplant number, number of PP and IVIg treatments, dose of IVIg, time of AHR, serum creatinine (SCr) level at AHR, SCr level after PP and IVIg at 3 months, days to achieve 30% decline in SCr, and graft survival. Immunosuppression included basiliximab induction, tacrolimus, and prednisone (+/- sirolimus or mycophenolate mofetil [CellCept, Roche Pharmaceutical, Nutley, NJ]). PP was followed by IVIg infusion. Nine patients were treated for AHR with PP and IVIg. All nine patients demonstrated biopsy-proven AHR. One graft was lost. Mean 3-month and 1-year SCr levels were 1.9 and 1.8, respectively, in the remaining eight patients. AHR in renal transplantation can be effectively treated with PP and IVIg.     

Prevalence and significance of anti-HLA and donor-specific antibodies long-term after renal transplantation

Post-transplant circulating anti-human leukocyte antigens (HLA)-antibodies and C4d in allograft biopsies may be important in chronic rejection in renal transplant recipients (RTR). We determined the prevalence and significance of anti-HLA-antibodies and donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Sera were collected from 251 RTR >6 months post-transplant. Sera were tested using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) screening for anti-HLA antibodies. Positive sera were retested with ELISA-specific panel for antibody specificity. A 11.2% of patients had anti-HLA antibodies and 4.4% had DSA. Anti-HLA antibodies were significantly associated with pretransplant sensitization, acute rejection and in multivariate analysis, higher serum creatinine (2.15 +/- 0.98 vs. 1.57 +/- 0.69 mg/dl in negative anti-HLA antibodies group). Allograft biopsies performed in a subset of patients with anti-HLA antibodies revealed that 66% had C4d in peritubular capillaries (0% in patients without antibodies). Anti-HLA antibodies were associated with a worse allograft function and in situ evidence of anti-donor humoral alloreactivity. Long-term RTR with an increase in creatinine could be screened for anti-HLA antibodies and C4d in biopsy.     

Rituximab therapy for acute humoral rejection after kidney transplantation

A pilot study was performed on eight consecutive renal-transplant (RT) patients presenting with acute humoral rejection (AHR) to assess the efficacy of monoclonal anti-B cell antibodies, such as rituximab (375 mg/m weekly) for 3 to 5 consecutive weeks, in addition to plasma exchange (PE), steroids, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus. AHR was associated with increased serum creatinine, the appearance of donor-specific alloantibodies (DSA), and the presence of C4d in a transplant biopsy. After a follow-up of 10 months (range 7-23), patient and graft survivals were 100% and 75%, respectively. Renal function improved in six cases in which serum creatinine decreased from 297+/-140 to 156+/-53 micromol/L (P=0.015); graft loss occurred in two cases; and four patients had infectious complications. At last follow-up, DSA had disappeared or decreased in four cases. Rituximab therapy, in addition to PE, might be of benefit for RT patients presenting with AHR.     

C4d-positive acute humoral renal allograft rejection: effective treatment by immunoadsorption.

There is increasing evidence for an important pathogenetic role of alloantibodies in acute renal allograft rejection. Acute humoral rejection (AHR) has been reported to be associated with a poor transplant survival. Although treatment modalities for cellular rejection are fairly well established, the optimal treatment for AHR remains undefined. Ten of 352 kidney allograft recipients transplanted at the authors' institution between November 1998 and September 2000 were diagnosed as having AHR, supported by severe graft dysfunction, C4d deposits in peritubular capillaries (PTC), and accumulation of granulocytes in PTC. AHR was diagnosed 18.9 +/- 17.5 d posttransplantation. All patients were subjected to immunoadsorption (IA) with protein A (median number of treatment sessions, 9; range, 3 to 17). Seven recipients with additional signs of cellular rejection (according to the Banff classification) received also antithymocyte globulin. In nine of ten patients, AHR was associated with an increase in panel reactive antibody reactivity. A pathogenetic role of alloantibodies was further supported by a positive posttransplant cytotoxic crossmatch in all tested recipients (n = 4). In nine of ten recipients, renal function recovered after initiation of anti-humoral therapy. One patient lost his graft shortly after initiation of specific therapy. Another recipient with partial reversal of AHR returned to dialysis 8 mo after transplantation. Mean serum creatinine in functioning grafts was 2.2 +/- 1.2 mg/dl after the last IA session (n = 9) and 1.5 +/- 0.5 mg/dl after a follow-up of 14.2 +/- 7.1 mo (n = 8). In conclusion, this study suggests that AHR, characterized by severe graft dysfunction, C4d staining, and peritubular granulocytes, can be effectively treated by timely IA. In the majority of patients, IA treatment can restore excellent graft function over a prolonged time period.     

Beneficial effect of plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin on renal allograft survival of patients with acute humoral rejection

BACKGROUND: Acute humoral rejection (AHR) has been associated with enhanced graft loss. Our study compared the renal allograft survival of patients with AHR treated with plasmapheresis (PP) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) with allograft survival in patients with acute cellular rejection (ACR). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all kidney transplants performed at our institution between January 1999 and August 2001 (n=286). Recipients were classified into three groups according to biopsy reports: AHR, ACR, or no rejection. The ACR group was further divided into early and late rejection (<90 and >90 days posttransplant, respectively). RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 569+/-19 days, the incidence of AHR was 5.6% (n=16). Recipient presensitization, delayed graft function, early rejection, and higher creatinine at diagnosis were characteristic of AHR. Most AHR patients (14/16) were treated with PP and IVIG. One patient received only IVIG, whereas another received only PP. All AHR patients were given steroid pulses, but only four received antilymphocyte therapy because of concomitant severe ACR. The ACR group comprised 43 patients (15%). One patient with mild rejection received no therapy, 20 improved with steroids alone, and 22 required additional antilymphocyte therapy. One-year graft survival by Kaplan Meier analysis was 81% and 84% in the AHR and ACR groups, respectively (P=NS). Outcomes remained similar when AHR patients were compared with those with early ACR. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that AHR, when diagnosed early and treated aggressively with PP and IVIG, carries a short-term prognosis that is similar to ACR.     

Late developing C4d-positive humoral renal allograft rejection associated with withdrawal of mycophenolate mofetil

In renal transplantation, C4d-positive acute humoral rejection (AHR) usually develops in the early stage posttransplantation. It is clear C4d can be detected late after the operation, when it is associated with chronic renal allograft rejection. We report a case of a renal allograft recipient who experienced C4d-positive acute renal allograft rejection associated with withdrawal of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) at 10 months after transplantation. This 21-year-old single male patient received his first cadaveric renal allograft under immunosuppression with cyclosporine, MMF, and prednisolone. The serum creatinine recovered to the normal range within 4 days. A protocol biopsy performed at 1 month after transplantation revealed no signs of rejection. The graft function was stable until 10 months postoperation, when MMF was converted to mizoribin. Three days later a biopsy showed a C4d-positive rejection. Patient had no response to the MMF combined with tacrolimus and steroid bolus therapy, which generally improves 85% of AHR among Chinese. He finally returned to dialysis. Our report suggested that C4d positive AHR may occur late after transplantation. MMF is important to suppress the body's humoral response to allograft; when MMF was converted to a weaker immunosuppressant, the dose of the other immunosuppressants (cyclosporine for example) must be adjusted properly.     

Allograft glomerulitis: histologic characteristics to detect chronic humoral rejection

The aim of this study was to clarify the histopathologic significance of allograft glomerulitis in chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN). Review of our renal allograft biopsy files revealed 140 specimens with CAN among 115 selected patients. They were classified into two groups: one had CAN with glomerulitis (group G), and the other was free of this finding (group NG). We evaluated the clinicopathologic parameters as follows: levels of serum creatinine and proteinuria in the biopsy; presence of circulating anti-donor antibodies; allograft failure rate; history of biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection (ACR) and acute humoral rejection (AHR); complications of ACR and chronic rejection (CR); and results of immunofluorescence studies for C4d and HLA-DR. The glomerulitis group showed a significantly greater incidence of CR complications, the presence of circulating anti-donor antibodies, and C4d deposition in peritubular and glomerular capillaries. This group also showed higher levels of serum creatinine and proteinuria, higher graft loss rate, and increased AHR incidence, although the differences were not significant. There was also no statistical significance in the HLA-DR expression on tubular epithelial cells. The present results strongly suggest that humoral factors may play an important role in the progression of glomerulitis in CAN. Therefore, we suspect that glomerulitis in CAN is one of the main histologic markers for CR. The presence of glomerulitis may represent humoral factor-dependent inflammation. It should be considered an important diagnostic criterion for CR in addition to double-contour formation and elastica disruptions with or without subendothelial inflammation (Banff '97).     

Acute humoral rejection in renal allograft recipients: I. Incidence, serology and clinical characteristics

BACKGROUND: Acute rejection (AR) associated with de novo production of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) is a clinicopathological entity that carries a poor prognosis (acute humoral rejection, AHR). The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and clinical characteristics of AHR in renal allograft recipients, and to further analyze the antibodies involved. METHODS: During a 4-year period, 232 renal transplants (Tx) were performed at our institution. Assays for DSA included T and B cell cytotoxic and/or flow cytometric cross-matches and cytotoxic antibody screens (PRA). C4d complement staining was performed on frozen biopsy tissue. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients (35%) suffered at least one episode of AR within the first 3 months: 51 had steroid-insensitive AR whereas the remaining 30 had steroid-sensitive AR. No DSA were found in patients with steroid-sensitive AR. In contrast, circulating DSA were found in 19/51 patients (37%) with steroid-insensitive AR, and widespread C4d deposits in peritubular capillaries were present in 18 of these 19 (95%). In at least three cases, antibodies were against donor HLA class II antigens. DSA were not found in the remaining 32 patients but C4d staining was positive in 2 of 32. The DSA/C4d positive (n=18) and DSA/C4d negative (n=30) groups differed in pre-Tx PRA levels, percentage of re-Tx patients, refractoriness to antilymphocyte therapy, and outcome. Plasmapheresis and tacrolimus-mycophenolate mofetil rescue reversed rejection in 9 of 10 recipients with refractory AHR. CONCLUSION: More than one-third of the patients with steroid-insensitive AR had evidence of AHR, often resistant to antilymphocyte therapy. Most cases (95%) with DSA at the time of rejection had widespread C4d deposits in peritubular capillaries, suggesting a pathogenic role of the circulating alloantibody. Combined DSA testing and C4d staining provides a useful approach for the early diagnosis of AHR, a condition that often necessitates a more intensive therapeutic rescue regimen.     

Rescue therapy by immunoadsorption in combination with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil for C4d-positive acute humoral renal allograft rejection

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of immunoadsorption (IA) in combination with tacrolimus (TAC; 0.14 to 0.16 mg/kg/d) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; 1.5 to 2.0 g/d) rescue therapy for C4d-positive acute humoral rejection in nine cadaveric renal allograft recipients. Initial Panel reactive antibody (PRA-I and PRA-II levels were as high as 28.8% ± 16.2% and 15.3% ± 8.9%, IA therapy significantly decreased PRA-I and PRA-II levels to 5.9% ± 2.9% and 2.2% ± 0.6%, respectively. Total serum immunoglobulin levels were markedly decreased. Repeated allograft renal biopsy in nine patients revealed remission of acute humoral rejection (AHR), and the deposition of C4d disappeared and reduced. With a mean follow-up of 29.4 ± 5.4 months, patient and allograft survivals were 100%, and renal function remained stable with a mean serum creatinine of 1.1 ± 0.3 mg/dL. Our findings suggested that a therapeutic approach combining IA and TAC and MMF rescue improved the outcomes of AHR.     

Hepatitis C, acute humoral rejection, and renal allograft survival

The effect of recipient hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection on renal allograft loss and acute rejection in kidney transplantation remains controversial. We studied 354 renal allograft recipients transplanted during 1996 to 2001 who had HCV antibodies (Ab) measured before transplantation. The primary outcome was death-censored allograft loss and the secondary outcome was acute humoral rejection (AHR). Compared with HCV Ab-negative patients, those with positive HCV Ab had longer time on dialysis before transplantation, higher percentage of panel-reactive antibodies (PRA), were more likely to receive a cadaveric transplant, and were more likely to develop delayed graft function (DGF). In univariate analyses, predictors of renal allograft loss included HCV, cadaveric graft, PRA >20%, HLA mismatch > or =5, retransplantation, DGF, induction therapy, and AHR. When adjusted for PRA >20%, HLA mismatch > or =5, and multiple transplant status, HCV was not a statistically significant predictor of allograft loss. HCV was also associated with AHR but lost significance when adjusted for PRA >20%. HCV Ab-positive patients were more likely to have longer duration of dialysis before transplantation prior to kidney transplants, higher PRA, and to receive cadaveric transplants. These characteristics likely resulted in more DGF and AHR after transplantation. After adjusting for these confounding factors, the association between HCV Ab positivity and renal allograft loss was notably attenuated and no longer statistically significant.     

Acute humoral rejection in kidney transplantation: II. Morphology, immunopathology, and pathologic classification

The incidence of acute humoral rejection (AHR) in renal allograft biopsies has been difficult to determine because widely accepted diagnostic criteria have not been established. C4d deposition in peritubular capillaries (PTC) of renal allografts has been proposed as a useful marker for AHR. This study was designed to test the relative value of C4d staining, histology, and serology in the diagnosis of AHR. Of 232 consecutive kidney transplants performed at a single institution from July 1995 to July 1999, all patients (n = 67) who developed acute rejection within the first 3 mo and had a renal biopsy with available frozen tissue at acute rejection onset, as well as posttransplant sera within 30 d of the biopsy, were included in this study. Hematoxylin and eosin and periodic acid-Schiff stained sections were scored for glomerular, vascular, and tubulointerstitial pathology. C4d staining of cryostat sections was done by a sensitive three-layer immunofluorescence method. Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) were detected in posttransplant recipient sera using antihuman-globulin-enhanced T cell and B cell cytotoxicity assays and/or flow cytometry. Widespread C4d staining in PTC was present in 30% (20 of 67) of all acute rejection biopsies. The initial histologic diagnoses of the C4d(+) acute rejection cases were as follows: AHR only, 30%; acute cellular rejection (ACR) and AHR, 45%; ACR (CCTT types 1 or 2) alone, 15%; and acute tubular injury (ATI), 10%. The distinguishing morphologic features in C4d(+) versus C4d(-) acute rejection cases included the following: neutrophils in PTC, 65% versus 9%; neutrophilic glomerulitis, 55% versus 4%; neutrophilic tubulitis, 55% versus 9%; severe ATI, 75% versus 9%; and fibrinoid necrosis in glomeruli, 20% versus 0%, or arteries, 25% versus 0%; all P < 0.01. Mononuclear cell tubulitis was more common in the C4d(-) group (70% versus 100%; P < 0.01). No significant difference between C4d(+) and C4d(-) acute rejection was noted for endarteritis, 25% versus 32%; interstitial inflammation (mean % cortex), 27.2 +/- 27% versus 38 +/- 21%; interstitial hemorrhage, 25% versus 15%; or infarcts, 5% versus 2%. DSA were present in 90% (18 of 20) of the C4d(+) cases compared with 2% (1 of 47) in the C4d(-) acute rejection cases (P < 0.001). The pathology of the C4d(+) but DSA(-) cases was not distinguishable from the C4d(+), DSA(+) cases. The C4d(+) DSA(-) cases may be due to non-HLA antibodies or subthreshold levels of DSA. The sensitivity of C4d staining is 95% in the diagnosis of AHR compared with the donor-specific antibody test (90%). Overall, eight grafts were lost to acute rejection in the first year, of which 75% (6 of 8) had AHR. The 1-yr graft failure rate was 27% (4 of 15) for those AHR cases with only capillary neutrophils versus 40% (2 of 5) for those who also had fibrinoid necrosis of arteries. In comparison, the 1-yr graft failure rates were 3% and 7%, respectively, in ACR 1 (Banff/CCTT type 1) and ACR 2 (Banff/CCTT type 2) C4d(-) groups. A substantial fraction (30%) of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection episodes have a component of AHR as judged by C4d staining; most (90%), but not all, have detectable DSA. AHR may be overlooked in the presence of ACR or ATI by histology or negative serology, arguing for routine C4d staining of renal allograft biopsies. Because AHR has a distinct therapy and prognosis, we propose that it should be classified separately from ACR, with further sub-classification into AHR 1 (neutrophilic capillary involvement) and AHR 2 (arterial fibrinoid necrosis).     

Treatment of humoral rejection in kidney transplantation

Acute antibody-mediated rejection (acute humoral rejection [AHR]) of organ allografts presents most of the time as severe dysfunction with a high risk of allograft loss. Peritubular capillary complement C4d deposition is diagnostic of AHR in kidney allografts and is associated with circulating donor-specific anti-HLA alloantibodies. Removal of alloantibodies with suppression of antibody production and rejection reversal is now possible. Therapeutic strategies that include combinations of plasmapheresis (or immunoadsorption), mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, and/or intravenous immunoglobulins have been used to successfully treat AHR. The optimal protocol to treat humoral rejection remains to be defined. Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy (rituximab) aiming at depleting B cells and suppressing antibody production has been used as a rescue therapy in some episodes of refractory humoral rejection. Plasmapheresis and/or intravenous polyclonal immunoglobulin, as well as rituximab, have also been used to successfully “desensitize” selected high-immunologic risk patients who were in anticipation of crossmatch-positive (or ABO-incompatible) kidney transplantation. Recent data suggest that chronic kidney allograft rejection might also be monitored by complement C4d in biopsies. The efficacy and safety of immunosuppressive drugs such as tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil (or enteric-coated mycophenolic acid), sirolimus, or everolimus in controlling antidonor humoral responses in patients with chronic allograft dysfunction remains to be studied prospectively. The combination of tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil appears to effectively suppress antidonor antibody production. In the near future, the possible role of specific anti–B-cell approaches with drugs, such as rituximab, or possibly of new anti–T-cell activation approaches using selective agents such as belatacept should be assessed to refine the management of chronic allograft dysfunction.     

Non-human leukocyte antigen antibodies reactive with endothelial cells could be involved in early loss of renal allografts

Preformed donor-specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies have been associated with allograft dysfunction and failure. However, recipients of HLA-identical kidneys can develop acute humoral rejection, implicating putative pathogenic antibodies that are directed against non-HLA antigens. We investigated the presence of endothelial cell-reactive antibodies in 11 patients who experienced early loss of their transplanted kidneys owing to humoral rejection and 1 loss from renal venal thrombosis. We examined the potential efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin to block the binding of these antibodies, as previously suggested for anti-HLA antibodies.