Safety and Efficacy of a Steroid Avoidance Immunosuppression Regimen in Renal Transplant Patients With De Novo or Preformed Donor-Specific Antibodies: A Single-Center Study

Although interest in the role of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) in kidney transplant rejection, graft survival, and histopathological outcomes is increasing, their impact on steroid avoidance or minimization in renal transplant populations is poorly understood. Primary outcomes of graft survival, rejection, and histopathological findings were assessed in 188 patients who received transplants between 2012 and 2015 at the Scripps Center for Organ Transplantation, which follows a steroid avoidance protocol. Analyses were performed using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing. Cohorts included kidney transplant recipients with de novo DSAs (dnDSAs; n = 27), preformed DSAs (pfDSAs; n = 15), and no DSAs (nDSAs; n = 146). Median time to dnDSA development (classes I and II) was shorter (102 days) than in previous studies. Rejection of any type was associated with DSAs to class I HLA (P < .05) and class II HLA (P < .01) but not with graft loss. Although mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) independently showed no association with rejection, an MFI >5000 showed a trend toward more antibody-mediated rejection (P < .06), though graft loss was not independently associated. Banff chronic allograft nephropathy scores and a modified chronic injury score were increased in the dnDSA cohort at 6 months, but not at 2 years (P < .001 and P < .08, respectively). Our data suggest that dnDSAs and pfDSAs impact short-term rejection rates but do not negatively impact graft survival or histopathological outcomes at 2 years. Periodic protocol post-transplant DSA monitoring may preemptively identify patients who develop dnDSAs who are at a higher risk for rejection.     

Negative Impact of Underlying Non–Insulin-dependent Diabetes Mellitus Nephropathy on Long-term Allograft Survival in Kidney Transplantation: A 10-Year Analysis From a Single Center

IntroductionWe analyzed the relationship between underlying nephropathy and long-term outcomes in kidney transplant recipients.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from 678 patients who underwent kidney transplantation (KTx) between 1998 and 2011. Recipients with 13 major nephropathies were evaluated for graft and patient survival, and causes of graft loss.ResultsThe best 10-year graft survival rates (100%) were in the patients with autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease, preeclampsia, Alport syndrome, and purpura nephritis. The worst rate (50.8%) was in patients with non–insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus nephropathy (NIDDMN; P = .039). Causes of graft-loss in the NIDDM patients included chronic rejection (6 cases), acute rejection (3 cases), infection (2 cases), and cardiovascular event (2 cases). Significant risk factors for graft loss were donor age (P < .01) and NIDDMN (P < .01).ConclusionUnderlying NIDDMN before KTx was a significant risk factor for long-term graft function. Immunologic factors and nonimmunologic factors influenced the long-term outcomes in patients with underlying NIDDMN.     

Long-Term Follow-Up of Renal Transplant Recipients Treated With IVIG for De Novo Donor-Specific Antibodies

BackgroundRenal allograft survival is negatively affected by the development of de novo posttransplant donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA). We sought to determine whether treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) could remove or reduce the intensity of dnDSA.MethodsA single-center study of 12 recipients with dnDSA and stable function who received IVIG 1 g/kg monthly for 6 months were compared with a contemporaneous cohort of 24 recipients with dnDSA who did not receive IVIG.ResultsThe median time to first dnDSA was 6 months (interquartile range [IQR], 1-12), and follow-up was 83 months (IQR, 58-94) posttransplant. Resolution of dnDSA occurred in 27% of IVIG vs 46% of control recipients (P = .48). Fifty-eight percent of recipients in both cohorts demonstrated a reduction in the intensity of the dominant DSA at last follow-up (P =1.0). A reduction in the number of dnDSAs occurred in 58% vs 62% of the IVIG and control cohorts, respectively (P = .81). Post-dnDSA, acute rejection occurred in 8% of the IVIG vs 42% in the control group (P = .06). Forty-two percent of IVIG-treated vs 49% of control recipients had a deterioration in function from first dnDSA until most recent follow-up (P = .81). Actuarial graft survivals were equivalent between groups.ConclusionsIVIG treatment of dnDSA in recipients with stable graft function had no impact on DSA clearance or MFI reduction, but this outcome may also be owing to sample size. Larger studies or alternate dosing regimens may be required to determine if there is any role for the use of IVIG as a treatment for dnDSA.     

Lower tacrolimus exposure and time in therapeutic range increase the risk of de novo donor‐specific antibodies in the first year of kidney transplantation

De novo donor‐specific antibodies (dnDSAs) have been associated with reduced graft survival. Tacrolimus (TAC)–based regimens are the most common among immunosuppressive approaches used in in clinical practice today, yet an optimal therapeutic dose to prevent dnDSAs has not been established. We evaluated mean TAC C₀ (tacrolimus trough concentration) and TAC time in therapeutic range for the risk of dnDSAs in a cohort of 538 patients in the first year after kidney transplantation. A mean TAC C₀ < 8 ng/mL was associated with dnDSAs by 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 2.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32–4.79, P = .005) and by 12 months (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.30–4.15, P = .004), and there was a graded increase in risk with lower mean TAC C₀. TAC time in the therapeutic range of <60% was associated with dnDSAs (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.28‐3.30, P = .003) and acute rejection (hazard ratio [HR] 4.18, 95% CI 2.31–7.58, P < .001) by 12 months and death‐censored graft loss by 5 years (HR 3.12, 95% CI 1.53–6.37, P = .002). TAC minimization may come at a cost of higher rates of dnDSAs, and TAC time in therapeutic range may be a valuable strategy to stratify patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes.     

Risk factors for acute rejection in liver transplantation and its impact on the outcomes of recipients

ObjectiveTo determine the risk factors for acute rejection in liver transplantation and its impact on the outcomes of the recipients.MethodsClinicopathological data of 290 patients who underwent liver transplantation from January 2012 to December 2021 at our center were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were grouped into an acute rejection (AR) group and a normal (NM) group based on the confirmed histopathological diagnosis of acute rejection. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to determine the risk factors for acute rejection.Results244 patients were included in the study. Acute rejection occurred in 27 (11.1%) of the patients. Warm ischemia time (P = 0.137), cold ischemia time (P = 0.064) and chronic liver failure (P = 0.001) were potential risk factors for acute rejection. Chronic liver failure (P < 0.001, OR = 8.22, 95% CI = 2.47–27.32) was the independent risk factor. There was no significant difference in overall survival between recipients with acute rejection and those without it (P = 0.985). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival in the NM group was 98.1%, 85.7% and 78.6% respectively vs 88.9%, 82.5% and 82.5% respectively in the AR group.ConclusionAcute rejection does not appear to affect the long-term survival of the recipients. Only chronic liver failure was an independent risk factor for acute rejection. Our findings further illustrate that contradictions still exist on which factors influence acute rejection in liver transplant recipients.SummaryClinicopathological data of 290 liver transplant recipients at our center between January 2012 and December 2021 were retrospectively evaluated to determine the risk factors for acute rejection and its impact on the outcomes of the recipients. 244 patients were included in the analysis. 27 of the 244 experienced acute rejection. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce the confounding effect. Patients were assigned to an acute rejection group (n = 27) and a normal group (n = 54). Chronic liver failure (P < 0.001, OR = 8.22, 95% CI = 2.47–27.32) was the determined to be independent risk factor for acute rejection. Acute rejection did not appear to affect the long-term survival of the recipients and there was no significant difference in overall survival between the patients with acute rejection and those without it.     

Second Kidney Transplant Outcomes in Dialysis Dependent Recipients by Induction Type in the United States

BackgroundWe examined the association between induction type for a second kidney transplant in dialysis-dependent recipients and the long-term outcomes.MethodsUsing the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified all second kidney transplant recipients who returned to dialysis before re-transplantation. Exclusion criteria included: missing, unusual, or no-induction regimens, maintenance regimens other than tacrolimus and mycophenolate, and positive crossmatch status. We grouped recipients by induction type into 3 groups: the anti-thymocyte group (N = 9899), the alemtuzumab group (N = 1982), and the interleukin 2 receptor antagonist group (N = 1904). We analyzed recipient and death-censored graft survival (DCGS) using the Kaplan-Meier survival function with follow-up censored at 10 years post-transplant. We used Cox proportional hazard models to examine the association between induction and the outcomes of interest. To account for the center-specific effect, we included the center as a random effect. We adjusted the models for the pertinent recipient and organ variables.ResultsIn the Kaplan-Meier analyses, induction type did not alter recipient survival (log-rank P = .419) or DCGS (log-rank P = .146). Similarly, in the adjusted models, induction type was not a predictor of recipient or graft survival. Live-donor kidneys were associated with better recipient survival (HR 0.73, 95% CI [0.65, 0.83], P < .001) and graft survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI [0.64, 0.82], P < .001). Publicly insured recipients had worse recipient and allograft outcomes.ConclusionIn this large cohort of average immunologic-risk dialysis-dependent second kidney transplant recipients, who were discharged on tacrolimus and mycophenolate maintenance, induction type did not influence the long-term outcomes of recipient or graft survival. Live-donor kidneys improved recipient and graft survival.     

Induction with ATG in DCD kidney transplantation; efficacy and relation of dose and cell markers on delayed graft function and renal function

AimWe aimed to analyse the efficacy of the Thymoglobulin dose used for induction in controlled DCD kidneys, and its initial impact on blood cell and CD3 count, as predictors of efficacy.Methods140 DCD patients who received ATG induction, were analysed. Intended dose was 1.25 mg/kg/day over 5 days, rounded to nearest 25 mg and not exceeding 125 mg/dose. Outcomes included the total dose in relation with rejection, DGF, graft survival, eGFR. The cell count response to ATG was assessed as predictors of outcome.ResultsGraft survival, was 96.2%, 92.4%, 85% at 1, 3 and 5 years. Rejection was 7% at 1 year and associated with eGFR at 3 (p = 0.003) and 5 years. ATG dose was not predictive of rejection but was associated with the day5 leucocyte and lymphocyte count (p < 0.001) and negatively with DGF (p = 0.05). In 31 patients day3 CD3 count was available and it was associated with rejection (p = 0.002), less DGF (p = 0.09), and 3 years eGFR (p = 0.01).ConclusionThymoglobulin provides excellent results in DCD kidneys that do not significantly differ with small dose variations. In higher doses it reduces DGF. Lymphocytes and CD3 count, may be useful surrogate markers of efficacy and outcome.     

Hepatitis E virus infection and rejection in kidney transplant recipients

BackgroundHepatitis E virus (HEV) infection has been associated with immune-mediated kidney diseases in developing countries. However, its relationship with kidney transplant outcomes has never been studied. We investigated the association between HEV infection and kidney graft rejection among kidney transplant recipients (KTRs).MethodsWe conducted a matched cohort and longitudinal study utilizing banked sera following kidney transplantation during 1988–2012. Studies with evidence of post-transplantation HEV infection were identified by positive ELISA tests (anti-HEV IgM or anti-HEV IgG seroconversion) or positive HEV PCR and matched to KTR controls with negative HEV ELISA and PCR tests in a 1:5 ratio by age, sex, crossmatch status, immunosuppression era, and time of HEV testing. Outcome data collected included time to first kidney graft rejection, transaminases, and glomerular filtration rates. Log-ranked test was used to analyze survival.ResultsOf 271 KTRs, 9 (3%) had evidence of post-transplantation HEV infection and were compared to 45 negative, matched controls. Median age at transplantation was 46 years. Kidney graft rejection was reported in 8 (89%) of cases and 21 (47%) of controls. Median time to first episode of kidney graft rejection was 17.4 months in cases and 30.8 months in controls (p = 0.029), with a higher hazard of developing kidney graft rejection in cases (HR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.19–8.79). Lower mean glomerular filtration rates over time were observed in cases (35 mL/min/1.73m²) versus controls (42.4 mL/min/1.73m²) but did not reach significance (p = 0.24).ConclusionSubjects with evidence of post-transplantation HEV infection demonstrated earlier kidney graft rejection compared to controls.     

Patient and Graft Survival Outcomes During 2 Eras of Immunosuppression Protocols in Kidney Transplantation: Indiana University Retrospective Cohort Experience

BackgroundSince 1964 when Indiana University performed its first kidney transplant, immunosuppression protocol was steroid-based until 2004 when steroid-free immunosuppression protocol was adopted. We describe clinical outcomes on our patients administered early steroid withdrawal (ESW) protocol (5 days) compared with our historical cohort (HC), who were on chronic steroid-based immunosuppression.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study evaluating kidney transplant recipients between 1993 and 2003 (HC, n = 1689) and between 2005 and 2016 (ESW cohort, n = 2097) at the Indiana University program, with a median follow-up of 10.5 years and 6.1 years, respectively. Primary outcomes were patient and death-censored graft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years in both study cohorts. Secondary outcomes were 1-year rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection; graft function at 1, 3, and 5 years; and risk of post-transplant infection (BK virus and cytomegalovirus) in the ESW cohort. Cox proportional model and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to estimate survival probabilities. Fisher exact tests were used to compare episodes of acute rejection in the ESW cohort.ResultsNo difference was observed in patient survival between the ESW and HC cohorts (P = .13). Compared with the ESW cohort, death-censored graft survival was significantly worse in the HC (5 year: 86.4% vs 90.6%, log-rank P < .001). One-year acute rejection reported in the ESW cohort alone was 15.7% and significantly worse in Black patients and younger patients (P < .05).ConclusionsIn this sizeable single-center cohort study with significant ethnic diversity, ESW is a viable alternative to steroid-based immunosuppression protocol in kidney transplant recipients.     

The impact of induction therapy in low-immunological risk kidney transplant recipients regardless of HLA matching

BackgroundInduction agents have proved to reduce the rate of acute rejection (AR) in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) without improving long-term graft and patient survival (PS).ObjectiveThis study evaluates the utility of induction therapy in low immunological risk KTRs regardless of donor-to-recipient HLA matching.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of 218 patients undergoing kidney transplantation (KT). These patients were divided into two groups according to the usage of induction therapy: 82 did not receive any induction therapy (Group I), and 136 patients received either Anti-IL2 receptor antibodies or anti-thymocyte globulin (Group II). All patients had panel reactive antibody (PRA) < 20% and absence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA). The difference in outcomes were assessed at different intervals following KT.ResultsThe rate of bacterial infections at one year (p-value = 0.032) and the frequency of CMV disease (p-value = 0.044) were significantly higher in Group II (with induction therapy). The duration of hospital stay, the rate and severity of acute rejection, the occurrence of delayed graft function, the rate and type of surgical complications at one year, and the graft function and survival at one and three years were similar between the two groups (p-value = NS). In addition, the financial burden is much less in Group I (without induction therapy), reducing the total cost of the transplant procedure.ConclusionWe conclude that induction therapy in low-immunological risk kidney transplant patients is not a must regardless of donor-to-recipient HLA matching. Therefore, induction therapy did not yield significant health results, but had negative financial consequences.     

Patient and Graft Survival After Dual Kidney Transplantation With Marginal Donors in Comparison to Matched Control Groups

BackgroundPostmortal organ donor rates remain low in Germany, whereas donor age has been increasing considerably in the last decades. As a consequence of low donation rates older and more marginal donor kidneys are accepted for transplantation. However, procured kidneys from very old a/o marginal donors may be considered as not suitable for transplantation as a single organ and subsequently be discarded. However, dual transplantation of both kidneys from such donors may provide an opportunity to nevertheless use these organs for renal transplantation, thereby providing the twofold nephron mass as a single kidney transplantation.MethodsWe compared in this retrospective analysis the outcome of 10 recipients of a dual kidney transplantation (DKT) with 40 matched recipients of a single kidney transplantation (SKT). Recipients were matched for donor and recipient age (ie, a maximum age difference of ±10 years in a ratio of 1:4 for DKT vs SKT recipients). In addition, a second SKT control group of 10 SKT recipients being transplanted immediately before each DKT recipient with a kidney from a donor aged ≥65 years was used for comparison. All renal transplant recipients were observed for up to 3 years or until July 31, 2020.ResultsMean donor and recipient age was 77.2 ± 4.6/75.1 ± 6.6/82.1 ± 7.9 and 66.4 ± 5.8/66.1 ± 6.0/64.8 ± 8.4 for SKT group 1/SKT group 2/DKT, respectively. Procurement serum creatinine concentrations were significantly higher in the DKT group in comparison to the SKT control group 1 (P = .019) as was the rate of transplant artery atherosclerosis (P = .021). Furthermore, Kidney Donor Profile Index, and Kidney Donor Risk Index were significantly higher (P = .0138/P = .064, and P < .001/P = .038) in the DKT group than in SKT group 1 and 2. Rates of acute rejection and delayed graft function were not significantly different between groups, though biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically higher in the SKT groups. Patient survival and overall and death-censored graft survival rates were also not significantly different between groups, although they tended to be higher after DKT.ConclusionsDKT provides an opportunity to successfully use postmortal kidneys even from donors aged >80 years and a Kidney Donor Profile Index ≥95% for renal transplantation. DKT may thereby increase the available pool of donors to better serve patients with end-stage renal disease on the waiting list.     

Kidney Retransplantation Outcomes: A Paired Recipient Control Study

BackgroundDespite progressive improvements in graft and patient survival after kidney transplantation over the last decades, an increasing number of patients are waitlisted for retransplantation. Identifying the risk factors for second graft failure can help us improve management for such patients. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of kidney retransplantation with those of first transplantation.MethodsThis retrospective study included all the recipients of a second kidney transplant between January 2008 and December 2019. For each patient with a second kidney transplant, we selected the paired recipient from the same donor. We excluded recipients of donations from living donors, patient-and-donor pairs with more than 1 transplant, and patients without a pair. The follow-up took place December 31, 2020. We included 152 patients, corresponding to 76 pairs of recipients.ResultsPatients who underwent a second transplant had significantly higher panel reactive antibody values and longer waiting time for retransplantation. Biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes were doubled in patients undergoing a second transplant (P = .12). There was a lower survival of second grafts at the first, fifth, and 10th year (P < .05). The main factor influencing graft loss for both groups was acute rejection, and, in patients, with a second transplant, acute rejection increased the risk of graft loss by 17 times (odds ratio, 17.5; 95% confidence interval, 4.19-98).ConclusionsThe clinical results of second kidney transplants still fall short of first transplants, with the main factor of poor prognosis being acute rejection. In young patients, allocation and immunosuppression management should consider this risk to improve long-term outcomes.     

Borderline Changes in Renal Transplantation: Are We Aware of the Real Impact in Graft Survival?

BackgroundBorderline changes suspicious for acute T-cell–mediated rejection (BC) are frequently seen on biopsy specimens, but their clinical significance and clinical management are still controversial. Our goal was to compare clinical outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with biopsy-proven BC vs acute T-cell–mediated rejection (aTCMR) and the influence of treating BC on graft outcomes.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed in all kidney transplant recipients with biopsy-proven BC and aTCMR between January 2012 and December 2018, according to Banff 2017 criteria; patients with concomitant antibody-mediated rejection were excluded.ResultsWe included 85 patients, 30 with BC (35.3%) and 55 with aTCMR (64.7%). There was no difference between groups regarding demographics, HLA matching and sensitization, immunosuppression, or time of transplant. Treatment with steroids was started in 15 patients with BC (50%) and in all patients with aTCMR, with 4 of the latter additionally receiving thymoglobulin (7.2%). At 1 year post biopsy, overall graft survival was 71%, and despite presenting better estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at biopsy (33.3 ± 23.4 vs 19.9 ± 13.2 mL/min/1.73 m², P = .008), patients in the BC group presented the same graft survival as the aTCMR group according to Kaplan-Meyer survival curves. When analyzing the BC group (n = 30) and comparing the patients who were treated (n = 15) vs a conservative approach (n = 15), graft survival at 1 year was 87% for treated patients and 73% for nontreated patients (P = .651), with no difference in eGFR for patients with functioning graft. However, at longer follow-up, survival curves showed a trend for better graft survival in treated patients (70.2 ± 9.2 vs 38.4 ± 8.4 months, P = .087).ConclusionOur study showed that patients with BC did not present better graft survival or graft function at 1 year after biopsy or at follow-up compared with the aTCMR group, despite better eGFR at diagnosis. We found a trend for better graft survival in patients with BC treated with steroids compared with a conservative approach. These results reinforce the importance of borderline changes in graft outcomes and that the decision to treat can influence long-term outcomes.     

Association of positive pre-transplant angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies with clinical outcomes in lung transplant recipients

IntroductionAutoantibodies against the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R-Ab) have been previously associated with de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA) formation in lung transplantation. However, data regarding the clinical significance of AT1R-Ab in long-term graft function after lung transplantation are lacking.MethodsSeventy-one patients who underwent lung transplantation between July 2016 and January 2020 were enrolled in this study. We examined the relationship between pre-transplant AT1R-Ab levels and graft function, clinical outcomes, and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) DSA levels during the first 3 years post-transplantation.ResultsSeventeen (23.9%) patients were AT1R-Ab-positive, and 54 (76.1%) were AT1R-Ab-negative. The median antibody value of the AT1R-Ab-positive group was 18 [18–22.5] U/mL, while that of the AT1R-Ab-negative group was 5.1 [3.5–8.0] U/mL (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the median acute cellular rejection (ACR) scores between the two groups (median [interquartile range] 1 [0.8–3] vs. 0.7 [0–1]; p = 0.145). However, there was a significant difference in the distribution of the ACR scores between the two groups (p = 0.015). Most (41.2%) patients in the pre-transplant AT1R-positive group scored above 1. The incidence of de novo DSA was also higher in AT1R-Ab-positive than in AT1R-Ab-negative patients (52.9% vs. 20.4%, p = 0.009). The incidence of chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) within 3 years was significantly higher in AT1R-Ab-positive than in AT1R-Ab-negative patients (58.3% vs. 11.8%; p < 0.001). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, AT1R-Ab positivity (hazard ratio, 9.46; 95% confidence interval, 2.89–30.94; p < 0.001) was significantly associated with early CLAD. Furthermore, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that AT1R-Ab-positive patients had a shorter survival time (χ² = 39.62, p < 0.001).ConclusionHigh AT1R-Ab levels in the pre-transplant serum of lung recipients were associated with the development of de novo HLA-DSA, ACR, early CLAD, and short survival.     

Short-term decreased post transplant lymphoproliferative disorder risk after kidney transplantation using two novel regimens

BackgroundBelatacept is employed alongside calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) therapy to prevent graft rejection in kidney transplant patients who are Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) seropositive. Preliminary data suggested that rates of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) were higher in individuals treated with belatacept compared to CNI therapy alone.MethodsThe records of 354 adults who underwent kidney only transplantation from January 2015 through September 2021 at one medical center were evaluated. Patients underwent treatment with either low-doses of mycophenolate, tacrolimus and sirolimus (B⁰, n = 235) or low-doses of mycophenolate, tacrolimus and belatacept (B¹, n = 119). All recipients underwent induction with antithymocyte globulin and a rapid glucocorticosteroid taper. Relevant donor and recipient information were analyzed and endpoints of PTLD were assessed.ResultsThere were no cases of PTLD in either cohort within the study period. Recipients in the belatacept cohort experienced lower estimated glomerular filtration rates at 12 months (B⁰: 67.48 vs. B¹: 59.10, p = 0.0014). Graft failure at 12 (B⁰: 1.28% vs. B¹: 0.84%, p = 1.0) and 24 months (B⁰:2.55% vs. B¹: 0.84%, p = 0.431) were similar. There was no difference in rejection rates at 12 (B⁰: 1.27% vs. B¹: 2.52%, p = 0.408) or 24 months (B⁰: 2.12% vs. B¹: 2.52%, p = 1.000). Both groups had similar rates of malignancy, mortality and CMV/BK viremia.ConclusionNon-belatacept (MMF, tacrolimus and sirolimus) and belatacept-based (MMF, tacrolimus and belatacept) regimens do not appear to pose any increased risk of early onset PTLD. Both cohorts benefited from low rates of rejection, malignancy, mortality and graft failure. Recipients will continue to be monitored as PTLD can manifest as a long-term complication.     

Intestinal Transplantation at a Single Institution in Japan

BackgroundThis study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of intestinal transplantation (ITX) between 2 groups by using medications for induction treatment and assess the utility of the current protocol.MethodsFrom 2003 to 2020, 11 patients underwent ITX. Recipients were classified into 2 groups: group IL-2Ra (interleukin-2 receptor antagonist therapy, n = 6) and ATG (rabbit antithymocyte globulin therapy, n = 5). We conducted a retrospective review of patient and graft survival rates and the postoperative course.ResultsThe 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient and graft survival rates of the 11 primary grafts in the 11 recipients were 100%, 88.9%, 62.2% and 90.0%, 78.8%, 56.3%, respectively. The median duration of follow-up for the IL-2Ra and ATG groups was 197.3 and 87.3 months, respectively. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival rates were 100%, 83.3%, 50% and 100%, 100%, 100% for the IL-2Ra and ATG groups, respectively (P = .25) and 83.3%, 66.7%, 33.3% and 100%, 100%, 100% for graft survival in the IL-2Ra and ATG groups, respectively (P = .08). The incidence of moderate and severe acute rejection was 100% and 20% in the IL-2Ra and ATG groups, respectively (P = .02). The 1- and 5-year moderate and severe rejection-free survival rates were 33.3%, 0% and 80%, 80% in the IL-2Ra and ATG groups, respectively (P = .04).ConclusionsATG significantly suppressed moderate and severe acute rejection compared with IL-2Ra, thereby showing better short- and mid-term rejection-free survival rates. Additional clinical experience is needed to determine the optimal regimen for the management of ITX recipients.     

Impact of BK Polyomavirus Plasma Viral Load in Kidney Transplant Outcomes

BackgroundBK polyomavirus infection (BKVi) is an important cause of kidney transplant (KT) loss, but there is scarce evidence on the impact of BK plasma viral load on graft function and long-term KT survival.MethodsA retrospective cohort study including all KT recipients with BKVi (BK viremia identified in ≥3 consecutive samples by polymerase chain reaction) in our center from January 2010 to December 2020 was performed. A case-control study (1:2) was performed. We grouped the cases according to their highest peak viral load: low-level viremia (<10,000 copies/mL) and high-level viremia (≥10,000 copies/mL). To identify risk factors for BKVi, a logistic regression analysis was achieved, and a multivariable Cox regression was used to describe risk factors for graft loss.ResultsA total of 849 KTs were performed, and 67 presented BKVi (low-level viremia, n = 35 and high-level viremia, n = 26). In logistic regression analysis male sex (odds ratio [OR], 4.226; 95% CI, 1.660-10.758, P = .002), age (OR, 1.047; 95% CI, 1.008-1.088; P = .018), and retransplant (OR, 4.162; 95% CI, 1.018-17.015; P = .047) were predictors of BKVi. Acute rejection was more frequent in the BKVi group (18% vs 4.9%, P = .004), and graft survival was lower in patients with BKVi and high-level viremia (P = .027). In Cox regression analysis, BKVi (hazard ratio, 3.657; 95% CI, 1.146-11.670; P = .029) and specific BKV (BK polyomavirus) high-level viremia (hazard ratio, 1.988; 95% CI, 1.012-3.907; P = .046) were predictors of shorter graft survival.ConclusionsBKV high-level viremia was associated with BKV nephropathy and poorer graft survival. Additionally, acute rejection is more frequent after BKVi. It is necessary to develop strategies safe and effective for these patients.     

Preemptive Second Kidney Transplant Outcomes by Induction Type in the United States

BackgroundThe role of induction in preemptive second kidney recipients is unclear. We examined the association between induction therapy and the long-term graft and recipient survival in the settings of tacrolimus and mycophenolate maintenance.MethodsWe identified all preemptive second kidney transplant recipients between 2000 and 2020 in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. We excluded those with missing or mixed induction regimens and positive crossmatch. We grouped recipients by induction type into 3 groups: anti-thymocyte globulin (n = 1442), alemtuzumab (n = 362), and interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2RA; n = 481). We generated Kaplan-Meier curves of the recipient and death-censored graft survival (DCGS) with follow-up censored at 10 years. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to examine the association between induction and the above outcomes. We adjusted the models for recipient and donor variables.ResultsRates of delayed graft function, rejection, hospitalization, and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder at one year were not statistically different. Recipient survival did not vary by induction type in the Kaplan-Meier analysis (log-rank P = .189) or in the multivariable model. However, DCGS was the lowest in the Alemtuzumab group (log-rank P = .01). In the multivariable models, alemtuzumab was associated with a 57% increased risk of graft loss (1.57, 95% confidence interval (1.08, 2.30), P = .019) compared to anti-thymocyte. Live-donor kidneys were associated with significantly better recipient survival and DCGS.ConclusionsCompared to anti-thymocyte induction, alemtuzumab, but not IL-2RA, was associated with inferior graft survival in preemptive second transplant recipients discharged on tacrolimus and mycophenolate.     

Pre- and post-transplant monitoring of granzyme B enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay in pediatric liver recipients

This study aims to investigate potential role of granzyme B enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (GrB ELISPOT) for immunological monitoring in pediatric liver transplantation.Patients and methodsPeripheral blood mononuclear cells from 28 pediatric recipients were serially tested for GrB-producing donor-reactive cells at day 0 pre-transplantation (baseline) and days 7, 14, and 28 post-transplantation.ResultsAt baseline, no difference of GrB value was found in acute rejection (14/28) compared to normal graft function patients (day 0: 4(3.9) spots versus 5(2.9) spots, respectively: p = 0.65). At day 7 post-transplantation, acute rejection patients showed frequencies of GrB ELISPOT higher than those with normal graft function, but the differences observed were not statistically significant (day 7: 15(4.9) spots versus 10(4.0) spots, respectively: p = 0.55). GrB increased significantly at day 7 from baseline in the rejection group (15(4.9) spots versus 4(3.9), respectively p = 0.04), whereas corresponding changes were not significant in the group without rejection (10(4.0) versus 5(2.9), respectively: p = 0.15). Conclusion: GrB ELISPOT pre-transplantation could not predict the occurrence of early post-transplant acute rejection; similarly frequencies at days 7, 14 and 28 could not be correlated with acute rejection in pediatric liver recipients. However, a kinetic study of GrB ELISPOT could be helpful to predict or confirm early rejection in the small group of liver allograft recipients analyzed in this study.     

Influence of pretransplant class I and II non-donor-specific anti-HLA immunization on immunologic outcome and graft survival in kidney transplant recipients

BackgroundAnti-HLA immunization determined by Panel Reactive Antibody (PRA) is known to have a negative impact on patient and graft survival. The predictive value of peak PRA (pPRA) on immunologic outcome, however, and the individual effects of anti-HLA class I and II antibodies remain uncertain.MethodsThe influence of HLA immunization on immunologic outcome parameters and graft survival was investigated in 1150 adult patients without pretransplant donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and in a subgroup of elderly kidney recipients aged ≥ 65 (n = 264). Anti-HLA immunization was defined as a pPRA > 0%. We investigated the influence of class I and II pPRA by dividing all kidney recipients into four pPRA groups (0%, 1–20%, 21–80%, >80%).ResultsPatients with non-donor-specific pretransplant anti-HLA immunization were at a higher risk for developing de novo DSA (49.9% vs. 18.7% p < 0.001), antibody mediated rejections (ABMR) (15.7% vs. 5.1%; p < 0.001), had a poorer death censored graft survival (69.2% vs. 86.2%; p < 0.001) and a higher decline of the calculated GFR. In elderly patients anti-HLA immunization only had a significant influence on the development of DSA (40.5% vs. 27.4%; p = 0.004). A multivariate model adjusted for all relevant factors revealed only class I but not class II pretransplant HLA immunization as a significant independent risk factor for de novo DSA, ABMR and death censored graft loss (HR 2.76, p < 0.001, HR 4.16, p < 0.001 and HR 2.07, p < 0.001, respectively).ConclusionMainly non-donor-specific pretransplant HLA class I immunization is an independent risk factor for the development of de novo DSA, ABMR and graft loss.