Surgical considerations for cardiac allograft rejection

Exploring personalized treatment for cardiac graft rejection based on a four-archetype analysis model and bioinformatics analysis

Heart transplantation is the gold standard for treating patients with advanced heart failure. Although improvements in immunosuppressive therapies have significantly reduced the frequency of cardiac graft rejection, the incidences of T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody-mediated rejection remain almost unchanged. A four-archetype analysis (4AA) model, developed by Philip F. Halloran, illustrated this problem well. It provided a new dimension to improve the accuracy of diagnoses and an independent system for recalibrating the histology guidelines. However, this model was based on the invasive method of endocardial biopsy, which undoubtedly increased the postoperative risk of heart transplant patients. Currently, little is known regarding the associated genes and specific functions of the different phenotypes. We performed bioinformatics analysis (using machine-learning methods and the WGCNA algorithm) to screen for hub-specific genes related to different phenotypes, based Gene Expression Omnibus accession number GSE124897. More immune cell infiltration was observed with the ABMR, TCMR, and injury phenotypes than with the stable phenotype. Hub-specific genes for each of the four archetypes were verified successfully using an external test set (accession number GSE2596). Logistic-regression models based on TCMR-specific hub genes and common hub genes were constructed with accurate diagnostic utility (area under the curve > 0.95). RELA, NFKB1, and SOX14 were identified as transcription factors important for TCMR/injury phenotypes and common genes, respectively. Additionally, 11 Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs were chosen from the DrugBank Database for each four-archetype model. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors may be a promising new option for transplant rejection treatment. KRAS signaling in cardiac transplant rejection is worth further investigation. Our results showed that heart transplant rejection subtypes can be accurately diagnosed by detecting expression of the corresponding specific genes, thereby enabling precise treatment or medication.

Strategies for surface coatings of implantable cardiac medical devices

Cardiac medical devices (CMDs) are required when the patient's cardiac capacity or activity is compromised. To guarantee its correct functionality, the building materials in the development of CMDs must focus on several fundamental properties such as strength, stiffness, rigidity, corrosion resistance, etc. The challenge is more significant because CMDs are generally built with at least one metallic and one polymeric part. However, not only the properties of the materials need to be taken into consideration. The biocompatibility of the materials represents one of the major causes of the success of CMDs in the short and long term. Otherwise, the material will lead to several problems of hemocompatibility (e.g., protein adsorption, platelet aggregation, thrombus formation, bacterial infection, and finally, the rejection of the CMDs). To enhance the hemocompatibility of selected materials, surface modification represents a suitable solution. The surface modification involves the attachment of chemical compounds or bioactive compounds to the surface of the material. These coatings interact with the blood and avoid hemocompatibility and infection issues. This work reviews two main topics: 1) the materials employed in developing CMDs and their key characteristics, and 2) the surface modifications reported in the literature, clinical trials, and those that have reached the market. With the aim of providing to the research community, considerations regarding the choice of materials for CMDs, together with the advantages and disadvantages of the surface modifications and the limitations of the studies performed.

Investigation of hub genes and immune status in heart transplant rejection using endomyocardial biopsies

T cell‒mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR) are severe post‐transplantation complications for heart transplantation (HTx), whose molecular and immunological pathogenesis remains unclear. In the present study, the mRNA microarray data set GSE124897 containing 645 stable, 52 TCMR and 144 ABMR endomyocardial biopsies was obtained to screen for differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between rejected and stable HTx samples and to investigate immune cell infiltration. Functional enrichment analyses indicated roles of the DEGs primarily in immune‐related mechanisms. Protein‐protein interaction networks were then constructed, and ICAM1, CD44, HLA‐A and HLA‐B were identified as hub genes using the maximal clique centrality method. Immune cell infiltration analysis revealed differences in adaptive and innate immune cell populations between TCMR, ABMR and stable HTx samples. Additionally, hub gene expression levels significantly correlated with the degree and composition of immune cell infiltration in HTx rejection samples. Furthermore, drug‐gene interactions were constructed, and 12 FDA‐approved drugs were predicted to target hub genes. Finally, an external GSE2596 data set was used to validate the expression of the hub genes, and ROC curves indicated all four hub genes had promising diagnostic value for HTx rejection. This study provides a comprehensive perspective of molecular and immunological regulatory mechanisms underlying HTx rejection.

Antibody-medicated rejection after heart transplantation: diagnosis and clinical implications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present article will review the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplant recipients and further explore the clinical implications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Improved diagnostic techniques have led to increased recognition of antibody-mediated rejection and better understanding of the long-term consequences in heart transplant recipients. Endomyocardial biopsy remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of antibody-medicated ejection; however, several advances in molecular testing have emerged, including the use of gene expression profiling, messenger RNA, and microRNA. Routine surveillance of donor-specific antibodies identifies recipients at high risk for graft compromise. Additionally, new monoclonal antibody therapies have broadened our repertoire in the treatment of rejection.

SUMMARY

Advances in molecular testing for antibody-mediated rejection may improve the associated long-term complication, while minimizing risk to the patient.

Cardiac allograft rejection in the current era of continuous flow left ventricular assist devices

OBJECTIVE

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation has been shown to increase allosensitization before orthotopic heart transplantation, but the influence of LVAD support on posttransplant rejection is controversial. This study examines the postoperative incidence of acute cellular rejection (ACR) in patients bridged with continuous flow LVAD (CF-LVAD) relative to primary transplant (Primary Tx).

METHODS

All patients who underwent orthotopic heart transplantation at our institution between July 2006 and March 2019 were retrospectively reviewed (n = 395). Patients were classified into Primary Tx (n = 145) and CF-LVAD (n = 207) groups. Propensity score matching on 13 covariates implemented a 0.1 caliper logistic model with nearest neighbor 1:1 matching. Development of moderate to severe (ie, 2R/3R) rejection was evaluated using a competing risks model. Potential predictors of 2R/3R ACR were evaluated using Fine-Gray regression on the marginal subdistribution hazard.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching yielded 122 patients in each group (n = 244). At 12 and 24 months, the cumulative incidence of 2R/3R ACR was 17% and 23% for the CF-LVAD group and 26% and 31%, respectively, for the Primary Tx group (P = .170). CF-LVAD was not predictive of 2R/3R rejection on multivariable Fine-Gray regression (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.33; P = .301). There was no difference in the 5-year incidence of antibody mediated rejection (10% [n = 12] vs 9% [n = 11]; P = .827).

CONCLUSIONS

After adjusting for covariates, CF-LVAD was not associated with an increased risk of moderate to severe ACR during the 24 months after cardiac transplantation. Further investigation is warranted with larger cohorts, but CF-LVAD may have minimal influence on posttransplant ACR.