Acute Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Renal Transplantation: Current Clinical Management

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With Advanced Skin Cancers-Emerging Strategies for Clinical Management

Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) with advanced skin cancers presents a significant clinical management dilemma. SOTRs and other immunosuppressed patients have been routinely excluded from ICI clinical trials with good reason: immune checkpoints play an important role in self- and allograft-tolerance and risk of acute allograft rejection reported in retrospective studies affects 10% to 65% of cases. These reports also confirm that cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma respond to ICI therapy, although response rates are generally lower than those observed in immunocompetent populations. Prospective trials are now of critical importance in further establishing ICI efficacy and safety. However, based on current knowledge, we recommend that ICIs should be offered to kidney transplant recipients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, melanoma, or Merkel cell carcinoma if surgery and/or radiotherapy have failed. For kidney transplant recipients, this should be first line ahead of chemotherapy and targeted therapies. In SOTRs, the use of ICIs should be carefully considered with the benefits of ICIs versus risks of allograft rejection weighed up on a case-by-case basis as part of shared decision-making with patients. In all cases, parallel management of immunosuppression may be key to ICI responsiveness. We recommend maintaining immunosuppression before ICI initiation with a dual immunosuppressive regimen combining mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and either corticosteroids or calcineurin inhibitors. Such modification of immunosuppression must be considered in the context of allograft risk (both rejection and also its subsequent treatment) and risk of tumor progression. Ultimately, a multidisciplinary approach should underpin all clinical decision-making in this challenging scenario.

Histopathologic Features of Antibody Mediated Rejection: The Banff Classification and Beyond

Antibody mediated rejection (ABMR) in the kidney can show a wide range of clinical presentations and histopathologic patterns. The Banff 2019 classification currently recognizes four diagnostic categories: 1. Active ABMR, 2. Chronic active ABMR, 3. Chronic (inactive) ABMR, and 4. C4d staining without evidence of rejection. This categorization is limited in that it does not adequately represent the spectrum of antibody associated injury in allograft, it is based on biopsy findings without incorporating clinical features (e.g., time post-transplant, de novo versus preformed DSA, protocol versus indication biopsy, complement inhibitor drugs), the scoring is not adequately reproducible, and the terminology is confusing. These limitations are particularly relevant in patients undergoing desensitization or positive crossmatch kidney transplantation. In this article, I discuss Banff criteria for these ABMR categories, with a focus on patients with pre-transplant DSA, and offer a framework for considering the continuum of allograft injury associated with donor specific antibody in these patients.

Abrogating biologics interference in flow cytometric crossmatching

The flow cytometric crossmatch is currently the gold standard for evaluating donor and recipient histocompatibility. The assay however does have limitations and is sensitive to false positive reactions resulting from the presence of non-HLA antibodies or therapy related immune biologics. Such false positive reactions can lead to the inappropriate decline of an acceptable donor organ or unnecessary therapeutic intervention. Here we describe the successful validation of anti-idiotype blocking antibodies in prevention of false positive flow crossmatch results caused by biologic therapy. Blocking antibodies specific for the Fab portion of Rituximab and/or Alemtuzumab were incubated with biologic containing patient serum prior to use in flow cytometric crossmatching. Biologic blocking successfully negated false positive crossmatch results with Rituximab (B cell ave. % change = -97%) or Alemtuzumab (T cell ave. % change = -99%, B cell ave. % change = -95%) infused sera respectively. Simultaneous blocking of these biologics was also successful. A complex case is presented to demonstrate the application of this procedure.

Inflammaging and Complement System: A Link Between Acute Kidney Injury and Chronic Graft Damage

The aberrant activation of complement system in several kidney diseases suggests that this pillar of innate immunity has a critical role in the pathophysiology of renal damage of different etiologies. A growing body of experimental evidence indicates that complement activation contributes to the pathogenesis of acute kidney injury (AKI) such as delayed graft function (DGF) in transplant patients. AKI is characterized by the rapid loss of the kidney's excretory function and is a complex syndrome currently lacking a specific medical treatment to arrest or attenuate progression in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Recent evidence suggests that independently from the initial trigger (i.e., sepsis or ischemia/reperfusions injury), an episode of AKI is strongly associated with an increased risk of subsequent CKD. The AKI-to-CKD transition may involve a wide range of mechanisms including scar-forming myofibroblasts generated from different sources, microvascular rarefaction, mitochondrial dysfunction, or cell cycle arrest by the involvement of epigenetic, gene, and protein alterations leading to common final signaling pathways [i.e., transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β), p16 ink4a , Wnt/β-catenin pathway] involved in renal aging. Research in recent years has revealed that several stressors or complications such as rejection after renal transplantation can lead to accelerated renal aging with detrimental effects with the establishment of chronic proinflammatory cellular phenotypes within the kidney. Despite a greater understanding of these mechanisms, the role of complement system in the context of the AKI-to-CKD transition and renal inflammaging is still poorly explored. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent findings describing the role of complement in AKI-to-CKD transition. We will also address how and when complement inhibitors might be used to prevent AKI and CKD progression, therefore improving graft function.

Successful treatment of early acute antibody-mediated rejection in an human leukocyte antigen-incompatible and ABO-incompatible living-donor kidney transplant patient

For successful human leukocyte antigen-incompatible (HLAi) or ABO-incompatible (ABOi) living-donor kidney transplantations (LDKTs), pretransplant desensitization is essential; however, early antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) remains the most important complication after HLAi or ABOi transplantation. Here, we report a case of early acute ABMR in simultaneous HLAi and ABOi LDKT with preformed donor-specific antibody (DSA), despite desensitization. Dialysis-dependent, severe ABMR occurred with a rebound of pre-existing DSA and appearance of de novo DSA after initial normalization of renal function, 8 days postoperatively. However, a low anti-ABO antibody titer (1:8) was maintained after transplantation. Combination therapy of plasmapheresis, high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin, and bortezomib improved both ABMR and renal functions. Thus, an appropriate preventive and therapeutic management for early ABMR is important among high-risk LDKT patients. Furthermore, early AMBR can occur despite pretransplant desensitization as seen in this case, and close monitoring of the patient and prompt management are considered vital for better therapeutic outcomes.

Use of Eculizumab for Active Antibody-mediated Rejection That Occurs Early Post-kidney Transplantation: A Consecutive Series of 15 Cases

BACKGROUND

Active antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) that occurs during the amnestic response within the first month posttransplant is a rare but devastating cause of early allograft loss after kidney transplant. Prior reports of eculizumab treatment for AMR have been in heterogeneous patient groups needing salvage therapy or presenting at varied time points. We investigated the role of eculizumab as primary therapy for active AMR early posttransplant.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study of a consecutive cohort of solitary kidney transplant recipients who were transplanted between January 1, 2014, and January 31, 2018, and had AMR within the first 30 days posttransplant and treated with eculizumab ± plasmapheresis.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients had early active AMR at a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 10 (7-11) days posttransplant and were treated with eculizumab ± plasmapheresis. Thirteen cases were biopsy proven, and 2 cases were presumed on the basis of donor-specific antibody trends and allograft function. Within 1 week of treatment, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate increased from 21 to 34 mL/min (P = 0.001); and persistent active AMR was only found in 16.7% (2/12) of biopsied patients within 4-6 months. No graft losses occurred, and at last follow-up (median [IQR] of 13 [12-19] mo), the median IQR estimated glomerular filtration rate increased to 52 (46-60) mL/min.

CONCLUSIONS

Prompt eculizumab treatment as primary therapy is safe and effective for early active AMR after kidney transplant or abrupt increases in donor-specific antibodies when biopsy cannot be performed for diagnosis confirmation.

Safety and efficacy of eculizumab for the prevention of antibody-mediated rejection after deceased-donor kidney transplantation in patients with preformed donor-specific antibodies

The presence of preformed donor-specific antibodies in transplant recipients increases the risk of acute antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). Results of an open-label single-arm trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of eculizumab in preventing acute AMR in recipients of deceased-donor kidney transplants with preformed donor-specific antibodies are reported. Participants received eculizumab as follows: 1200 mg immediately before reperfusion; 900 mg on posttransplant days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 28; and 1200 mg at weeks 5, 7, and 9. All patients received thymoglobulin induction therapy and standard maintenance immunosuppression including steroids. The primary end point was treatment failure rate, a composite of biopsy-proved grade II/III AMR (Banff 2007 criteria), graft loss, death, or loss to follow-up, within 9 weeks posttransplant. Eighty patients received transplants (48 women); the median age was 52 years (range 24-70 years). Observed treatment failure rate (8.8%) was significantly lower than expected for standard care (40%; P < .001). By 9 weeks, 3 of 80 patients had experienced AMR, and 4 of 80 had experienced graft loss. At 36 months, graft and patient survival rates were 83.4% and 91.5%, respectively. Eculizumab was well tolerated and no new safety concerns were identified. Eculizumab has the potential to provide prophylaxis against injury caused by acute AMR in such patients (EudraCT 2010-019631-35).

Regulatory B cells and advances in transplantation

The effects of B cell subsets with regulatory activity on the immune response to an allograft have evoked increasing interest. Here, we summarize the function and signaling of regulatory B cells (Bregs) and their potential effects on transplantation. These cells are able to suppress the immune system directly via ligand-receptor interactions and indirectly by secretion of immunosuppressive cytokines, particularly IL-10. In experimental animal models, the extensively studied IL-10-producing B cells have shown unique therapeutic advantages in the transplant field. In addition, adoptive transfer of B cell subsets with regulatory activity may reveal a new approach to prolonging allograft survival. Recent clinical observations on currently available therapies targeting B cells have revealed that Bregs play an important role in immune tolerance and that these cells are expected to become a new target of immunotherapy for transplant-related diseases.

Early Versus Late Acute Antibody-Mediated Rejection Among Renal Transplant Recipients in Terms of Response to Rituximab Therapy: A Single Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

There are no comparable trials concerning the use of rituximab among renal transplant recipients with acute antibody-mediated rejection. Here, we compared early and late acute antibody-mediated rejection in renal transplant recipients in terms of response to rituximab therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of 1230 kidney transplants performed at Hamed Al-Essa Organ Transplant Center (Kuwait) over the past 10 years, 103 recipients developed acute antibody-mediated rejections and were subcategorized into 4 groups according to the onset of rejection and rituximab treatment. All patients received the standard treatment for acute antibody-mediated rejection according to our protocol (plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin). We added rituximab to the treatment regimen in 2 groups of patients: 27 patients with early rejection (group 1) and 38 patients with late rejection (group 2). Groups 3 and 4 represented nonrituximab groups, with 20 patients with early (group 3) and 18 patients with late rejection (group 4). We compared the 4 groups regarding graft and patient outcomes.

RESULTS

All patients were comparable regarding patient age, sex, pretransplant type of dialysis, viral profile, type of induction, donor criteria, and pretransplant comorbidities. We observed that delayed and slow graft function were significantly higher in groups 1 and 3 (P = .016); however, we found no significant differences in the 4 groups regarding new-onset diabetes after transplant, BK viral infection, and malignancy. Graft outcomes were significantly better in groups 1 and 2 than in groups 3 and 4 (P = .028). However, patient outcomes were comparable in the 4 groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Early acute antibody-mediated rejection in renal transplant recipients had significantly better outcomes when rituximab was added to the standard treatment regimen.

Antibody-Mediated Rejection: A Review

BACKGROUND

Chronic antibody injury is a serious threat to allograft outcomes and is therefore the center of active research. In the continuum of allograft rejection, the development of antibodies plays a critical role. In recent years, an increased recognition of molecular and histologic changes has provided a better understanding of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), as well as potential therapeutic interventions. However, several pathways are still unknown, which accounts for the lack of efficacy of some of the currently available agents that are used to treat rejection.

METHODS

We review the current diagnostic criteria for AMR; AMR paradigms; and desensitization, treatment, and prevention strategies.

RESULTS

Chronic antibody-mediated endothelial injury results in transplant glomerulopathy, manifested as glomerular basement membrane duplication, double contouring, or splitting. Clinical manifestations of AMR include proteinuria and a rise in serum creatinine. Current strategies for the treatment of AMR include antibody depletion with plasmapheresis (PLEX), immunoadsorption (IA), immunomodulation with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and T cell- or B cell-depleting agents. Some treatment benefits have been found in using PLEX and IA, and some small nonrandomized trials have identified some benefits in using rituximab and the proteasome inhibitor-based therapy bortezomib. More recent histologic follow-ups of patients treated with bortezomib have not shown significant benefits in terms of allograft outcomes. Furthermore, no specific treatment approaches have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Other agents used for more difficult rejections include bortezomib and eculizumab (an anti-C5 monoclonal antibody).

CONCLUSION

AMR is a fascinating field with ample opportunities for research and progress in the future. Despite the use of advanced techniques for the detection of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) or non-HLA donor-specific antibodies, alloimmune response remains an important barrier for successful long-term allograft function. Treatment of AMR with currently available therapies has produced a variety of results, some of them suboptimal, precluding the development of standardized protocols. New therapies are promising, but randomized controlled trials are needed to find surrogate markers and improve the efficacy of therapy.

Effectiveness of Intravenous Immunoglobulin Plus Plasmapheresis on Antibody-mediated Rejection or Thrombotic Microangiopathy in Iranian Kidney Transplant Recipient

Background:

Antibody mediated rejection (AMR) and thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) after kidney transplantation are difficult to differentiate most of the times and both play important roles in kidney allograft loss. Common treatment strategies of these two conditions include plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and rituximab.

Objectives:

This study was designed to assess the efficacy of routine treatment of AMR/TMA in Iranian kidney transplant recipients, which comprises of plasmapheresis and IVIG.

Patients and Methods:

This one-year cross-sectional study was performed in the Kidney Transplantation Ward of Imam-Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran, Iran. All kidney transplant recipients who were administered plasmapheresis and IVIG to treat definite or suggested AMR or TMA were assessed clinically and also evaluated on laboratory data.

Results:

During 2014, we encountered five patients with suspicious AMR or TMA at our kidney transplant center. Renal biopsy was performed for two of them, suggesting AMR for one patient and TMA for another patient. All patients were treated with plasmapheresis plus IVIG. In this center, as a routine practice, the cumulative dose of 2 g/kg of IVIG was divided to 300 - 400 mg/kg after each plasmapheresis. Only one out of the five patients showed response, albeit not completely.

Conclusions:

Due to daily plasmapheresis within the first several days after AMR or TMA, administering high amounts of the cumulative dose of IVIG after plasmapheresis may result in high amounts of IVIG withdrawal by plasmapheresis and response failure. Our suggestion is to reduce the IVIG dose after each plasmapheresis to 100 mg/kg (i.e. replacement dose) to reach a cumulative dose of 2 g/Kg. If plasmapheresis treatment is initiated sooner than the completion of the IVIG cumulative dose of 2 g/kg, the remaining dose can be administered during one injection.