Efficacy of plasmapheresis and semi-selective immunoadsorption for removal of anti-HLA antibodies

Desensitization in Crossmatch-positive Kidney Transplant Candidates

Access to kidney transplantation is limited by HLA-specific sensitization. Desensitization strategies enable crossmatch-positive kidney transplantation. In this review, we describe clinical experience gained over the last 20 y using desensitization strategies before kidney transplantation and describe the different tools used (both drugs and apheresis options), including IVIg, rituximab, apheresis techniques, interleukin-6 interference, proteasome inhibition, enzymatic degradation of HLA antibodies, complement inhibition, and B cytokine interference. Although access to transplantation for highly sensitized kidney transplantation candidates has been vastly improved by desensitization strategies, it remains, however, limited by the recurrence of HLA antibodies after transplantation and the occurrence of antibody-mediated rejection.

Novel insights in the clinical management of hyperimmune patients before and after transplantation

Despite improvements in anti-Human Leucocyte Antigens antibody detection, identification, and characterization offer a better in peri-operative management techniques, antibodies remain a serious cause of morbidity and mortality for patients both before and after organ transplantation. Hyperimmune patients are disadvantaged by having to wait longer to receive an organ from a suitably matched donor. They could benefit from desensitization protocols in both pre- and post-transplantation period. Clinical studies are underway to highlight which best desensitization strategies could be assure the best outcome in both heart and kidney transplantation. Although most clinical evidence about desensitization strategies by using anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, proteasome inhibitors, anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, interleukin-6 blockade, cysteine protease and complement inhibitors, comes from kidney transplantation studies, many of the debated novel concepts can be easily applied to desensitization also in heart transplantation. Here, we discuss the candidates and recipients' management by using most common standard of care and novel therapeutics, desensitization endpoints, and strategies for future studies.

Efficacy of Combined Desensitization Therapy Based on Protein A Immunoadsorption on Anti-human Leukocyte Antigen Antibodies in Sensitized Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Retrospective Study

Background and objectives

Protein A immunoadsorption (PA-IA) therapy is an immunoglobulin selective apheresis for pre-transplantation desensitization therapy and treatment of post-transplantation antibody-mediated rejection. There is no unified protocol for the timing of PA-IA therapy or its combination with other drug therapy. This study aimed to investigate and analyze the clearance effects of desensitization therapy on human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies to provide a reference for the formulation of clinical desensitization therapy regimens.

Materials and methods

Overall, 27 kidney transplant recipients who received preoperative/postoperative desensitization therapy based on PA-IA therapy in combination with drug therapy were enrolled. The pre-treatment mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of 1324 human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody specificities (MFI >2000) and the post-treatment MFI of the corresponding antibody specificities (after one, four, seven, and 10 sessions) were recorded to analyze the changes in antibody level reduction for the different antibody classes and MFI ranges.

Results

After 10 sessions of PA-IA therapy, the MFI of class I antibodies decreased from 8298.56 to 3196.15 (reduction of 66.80%), while the MFI of class II antibodies decreased from 13,521.09 to 2773.29 (reduction of 71.14%). The pre-treatment level of class II antibodies was significantly higher than that of class I antibodies (p<0.001), whereas the post-treatment levels of class I and II antibodies were comparable (p>0.05). The clearance effects of PA-IA therapy were greater for strongly positive (MFI>10,000) class II antibodies than for strongly positive class I antibodies, showing a reduction of 62.59% (25.17% to 91.04%) and 45.13% (32.70% to 73.94%), respectively (p=0.015).

Conclusions

We confirmed the removal efficacy of PA-IA for HLA antibodies. The removal efficacy of class II antibodies on PA-IA is not inferior to that of class I. Under an adequate number of treatment sessions, the clearance effect of PA-IA therapy for strongly positive class II antibodies may be greater than that for strongly positive class I antibodies.