Virtual Crossmatching in Kidney Transplantation: The Wait Is Over

BSHI and BTS UK guideline on the detection of alloantibodies in solid organ (and islet) transplantation

Solid organ transplantation represents the best (and in many cases only) treatment option for patients with end-stage organ failure. The effectiveness and functioning life of these transplants has improved each decade due to surgical and clinical advances, and accurate histocompatibility assessment. Patient exposure to alloantigen from another individual is a common occurrence and takes place through pregnancies, blood transfusions or previous transplantation. Such exposure to alloantigen's can lead to the formation of circulating alloreactive antibodies which can be deleterious to solid organ transplant outcome. The purpose of these guidelines is to update to the previous BSHI/BTS guidelines 2016 on the relevance, assessment, and management of alloantibodies within solid organ transplantation.

Utilizing proficiency testing survey data to create advanced educational content: the virtual crossmatch challenge model

Proficiency testing (PT) surveys include data from laboratories across the world and are ideal for creating advanced educational content, beyond just consensus grading. Educational challenges provide a unique opportunity to probe common laboratory practices and risk assessment, especially in cases where there is no "analyte" tested. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) compatibility evaluation between donor and recipient pairs has been traditionally assessed using T-cell and B-cell physical crossmatches. However, advancements in our ability to identify and characterize HLA antibodies using solid phase assays, in combination with changing deceased donor allocation schemes and improved HLA typing, have shifted the paradigm from performing physical crossmatches to the use of the virtual crossmatch (VXM). VXM is a compatibility assessment relying on the interpretation of pre-transplant HLA laboratory data and as such, it is not an "analyte". However, VXM results are used in clinical decision-making. The VXM assessment depends on patient characteristics as well as laboratory and transplant center practices but must ensure safe transplantation outcomes while maintaining equity in access to transplantation. In this manuscript, we describe the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics (ASHI) PT Educational VXM Challenge, as a model for creating educational content using PT survey data. We discuss the different components of the VXM Challenge and highlight major findings and learning points acquired from ASHI VXM Challenges performed between 2018-2022, such as the lack of correlation between the VXM and the physical crossmatch in the presence of low level donor-specific antibodies (DSA), or when the DSA were aimed against donor alleles that are not present on the antibody panel, and in the presence of an antibody to a shared eplet. Finally, we show that the VXM Educational Challenge serves as a valuable tool to highlight the strengths and pitfalls of the VXM assessment and reveals differences in testing and result interpretation among participating HLA laboratories.

Virtual crossmatch for deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States: A survey of histocompatibility lab directors and transplant surgeons

Virtual crossmatch (VXM) is used as an alternative to or in conjunction with a cell-based physical crossmatch (PXM) for assessing HLA (human leukocyte antigen) compatibility prior to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). Data on practice patterns and perceptions regarding VXM use in the US are limited. We performed a survey of US HLA directors and transplant surgeons regarding HLA testing and crossmatch strategies. 53 (56 %) HLA directors and 68 surgeons (representing ∼ 23 % of US transplant centers) completed the survey. Both groups agreed that VXM could reduce cold ischemia time (CIT), costs and improve allocation efficiency. VXM use increased following the 2021 kidney allocation change. Reducing CIT was the primary reason for favoring VXM over PXM. Preference for VXM reduced as candidates' panel reactive antibodies increased. Regulations, program policies and limitations of HLA technology were cited as important reasons for preferring PXM over VXM. Surgeons reported similar perceptions, but findings are limited by the low response rate. Finally, half the labs reported lacking specific protocols for VXM use. In conclusion, improved HLA technology and protocols along with changes to institutional procedures and policy regulations are needed for safer expansion of VXM in DDKT.

Early Effect of the Circular Model of Kidney Allocation in the United States

BACKGROUND

In March 2021, the United States implemented a new kidney allocation system (KAS250) for deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT), which eliminated the donation service area-based allocation and replaced it with a system on the basis of distance from donor hospital to transplant center within/outside a radius of 250 nautical miles. The effect of this policy on kidney discards and logistics is unknown.

METHODS

We examined discards, donor-recipient characteristics, cold ischemia time (CIT), and delayed graft function (DGF) during the first 9 months of KAS250 compared with a pre-KAS250 cohort from the preceding 2 years. Changes in discards and CIT after the onset of COVID-19 and the implementation of KAS250 were evaluated using an interrupted time-series model. Changes in allocation practices (biopsy, machine perfusion, and virtual cross-match) were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Post-KAS250 saw a two-fold increase in kidneys imported from nonlocal organ procurement organizations (OPO) and a higher proportion of recipients with calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) 81%-98% (12% versus 8%; P <0.001) and those with >5 years of pretransplant dialysis (35% versus 33%; P <0.001). CIT increased (mean 2 hours), including among local OPO kidneys. DGF was similar on adjusted analysis. Discards after KAS250 did not immediately change, but we observed a statistically significant increase over time that was independent of donor quality. Machine perfusion use decreased, whereas reliance on virtual cross-match increased, which was associated with shorter CIT.

CONCLUSIONS

Early trends after KAS250 show an increase in transplant access to patients with cPRA>80% and those with longer dialysis duration, but this was accompanied by an increase in CIT and a suggestion of worsening kidney discards.

Virtual crossmatching and epitope analysis in kidney transplantation: What the physician involved in kidney transplantation should know?

Solid-phase single antigen bead (SAB) assay for detection of anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies and high-resolution HLA typing have enabled tremendous progress in virtual crossmatch (VXM) technology in recent years. However, misinterpretation of the SAB assay may result in detrimental consequences after kidney transplantation. Meanwhile, epitope analysis could be an effective method to estimate immunizing eplets, which may provide ancillary information for better understanding of the SAB assay. To perform epitope analysis appropriately, it is necessary to understand the basic principles related to histocompatibility testing and the characteristics of the SAB assay. Therefore, knowledge of the properties and limitations of the SAB assay is critical. In this review, we aim to describe the fundamental concepts regarding immunobiological assessment, including HLA, anti-HLA antibodies, and SAB assay, and explain epitope analysis using examples.

Kidney utility and futility

Changes in kidney allocation coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic have placed tremendous strain on current systems of organ distribution and logistics. Although the number of deceased donors continues to rise annually in the United States, the proportion of marginal deceased donors (MDDs) is disproportionately growing. Cold ischemia times and kidney discard rates are rising in part related to inadequate planning, resources, and shortages. Complexity in kidney allocation and distribution has contributed to this dilemma. Logistical issues and the ability to reperfuse the kidney within acceptable time constraints increasingly determine clinical decision-making for organ acceptance. We have a good understanding of the phenotype of "hard to place" MDD kidneys, yet continue to promote a "one size fits all" approach to organ allocation. Allocation and transportation systems need to be agile, mobile, and flexible in order to accommodate the expanding numbers of MDD organs. By identifying "hard to place" MDD kidneys early and implementing a "fast-track" or open offer policy to expedite placement, the utilization rate of MDDs would improve dramatically. Organ allocation and distribution based on location, motivation, and innovation must lead the way. In the absence of change, we are sacrificing utility for futility and discard rates will continue to escalate.

Aspectos técnicos y clínicos de la prueba cruzada de histocompatibilidad en el trasplante de órganos sólidos

La presencia de anticuerpos dirigidos contra los antígenos leucocitarios humanos (Human Leukocyte Antigens, HLA) que se expresan en las células del donante, es uno de los factores de riesgo más importantes asociados con las complicaciones clínicas después del trasplante. La prueba cruzada es una de las pruebas de histocompatibilidad más eficaces para la detección de anticuerpos específicos contra el donante en los receptores de injertos. En los primeros métodos de la prueba cruzada, se utilizaba la citotoxicidad dependiente del complemento, que es útil para detectar dichos anticuerpos responsables del rechazo hiperagudo del injerto, pero carece de la sensibilidad adecuada. Por ello, se desarrollaron métodos de pruebas cruzadas más sensibles, entre ellas, la prueba cruzada por citometría de flujo que hoy se considera el método preferido.

En este artículo se revisa la evolución de la prueba cruzada y los factores más importantes que deben tenerse en cuenta al realizarla y al interpretar los resultados de esta prueba fundamental para la supervivencia a largo plazo del injerto.

Early Assessment of National Kidney Allocation Policy Change

BACKGROUND

The new kidney allocation changes with elimination of donor service areas (DSAs) and Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network regions were initiated to improve equity in organ allocation. The aim of this evaluation was to determine the operational, financial, and recipient-related effect of the new allocation system on a large rural transplantation program.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of organ offers, allograft outcomes, and attributed costs in a comparative time cohort, before (December 16, 2020 to March 14, 2021) and after (March 15, 2021 to June 13, 2021) the allocation change was performed. Outcomes were limited to adult, solitary, deceased donor kidney transplantations.

RESULTS

We received 198,881 organ offers from 3,886 organ donors at our transplantation center from December 16, 2020 to June 31, 2021: 87,643 (1,792 organ donors) before the change and 111,238 (2094 organ donors) after the change, for a difference of +23,595 more offers (+302 organ donors). This resulted in 6.5 more organs transplanted vs a predicted loss of 4.9 per month. Local organ offers dropped from 70% to 23%. There was a statistically significantly increase in donor terminal serum creatinine (1.2 ± 0.86 mg/dL vs 2.2 ± 2.3 mg/dL, p < 0.001), kidney donor profile index (KDPI) (39 ± 20 vs 48 ± 22, p = 0.017), cold ischemia time (16 ± 7 hours vs 21 ± 6 hours, p < 0.001), and delayed graft function rates (23% vs 40%, p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

The new kidney allocation policy has led to an increase in KDPI of donors with longer cold ischemia time, leading to higher delayed graft function rates. This has resulted in increasing logistical and financial burdens on the system. Implementing large-scale changes in allocation based predominantly on predictive modeling needs to be intensely reassessed during a longer follow up.

Principles of Virtual Crossmatch Testing for Kidney Transplantation

Human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) are the primary determinants of alloimmunity. A crossmatch test is a test that determines the immunologic risk of a recipient with a potential donor by ensuring that there are no transplant-relevant circulating antibodies in the recipient directed against donor antigens. Physical crossmatch (PXM) tests, such as complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch (CDCXM) and flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM), require mixing of patient serum and donor cells, are labor intensive, and are logistically challenging. Virtual crossmatch (VXM) test assesses immunologic compatibility between recipient and potential donor by analyzing the results of 2 independently done physical laboratory tests—patient anti-HLA antibody and donor HLA typing. The goal of VXM is pretransplant risk stratification—though there is no consensus on whether such risk assessment involves predicting the PXM result or the posttransplant outcome. Although the concept of VXM is not new, the advent of solid-phase assays for detecting circulating antibodies in the recipient directed against individual HLA and DNA-based methods for typing donor HLA specificities at a higher resolution makes the routine use of VXM a reality. Accordingly, VXM may be applied at different scenarios—both for sensitized and nonsensitized patients. Implementation of VXM-based approach has resulted in statistically significant reduction in cold ischemia time without an increase in hyperacute rejection episodes. Though there are considerable challenges, VXM is expected to be used more often in the future, depending on the transplant center’s tolerance of immunologic risk.

BSHI/BTS guidance on crossmatching before deceased donor kidney transplantation

All UK H&I laboratories and transplant units operate under a single national kidney offering policy, but there have been variations in approach regarding when to undertake the pre‐transplant crossmatch test. In order to minimize cold ischaemia times for deceased donor kidney transplantation we sought to find ways to be able to report a crossmatch result as early as possible in the donation process. A panel of experts in transplant surgery, nephrology, specialist nursing in organ donation and H&I (all relevant UK laboratories represented) assessed evidence and opinion concerning five factors that relate to the effectiveness of the crossmatch process, as follows: when the result should be ready for reporting; what level of donor HLA typing is needed; crossmatch sample type and availability; fairness and equity; risks and patient safety. Guidelines aimed at improving practice based on these issues are presented, and we expect that following these will allow H&I laboratories to contribute to reducing CIT in deceased donor kidney transplantation.

Trends and impact on cold ischemia time and clinical outcomes using virtual crossmatch for deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States

For assessing human leukocyte antigen compatibility in deceased donor kidney transplantation, virtual crossmatch is used as an alternative to physical crossmatch and has potential to reduce cold ischemia time. The 2014 United States kidney allocation system prioritized highly sensitized candidates but led to increased shipping of kidneys. Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we evaluated changes in virtual crossmatch use with the new allocation policy and the impact of virtual crossmatch use on cold ischemia time and transplant outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of adult deceased donor kidney recipients in the United States (2011-2018) transplanted with either 9,632 virtual or 71,839 physical crossmatches. Before allocation change, only 9% of transplants were performed relying on a virtual crossmatch. After the 2014 allocation change, this increased by 2.4%/year so that 18% transplants in 2018 were performed with just a virtual crossmatch. There was significant variation in virtual crossmatch use among transplant regions (range 0.7-36%) and higher use was noted among large volume centers. Compared to physical crossmatches, virtual crossmatches were significantly associated with shorter cold ischemia times (mean 15.0 vs 16.5 hours) and similar death-censored graft loss and mortality (both hazard ratios HR 0.99) at a median follow-up of 2.9 years. Thus, our results show that virtual crossmatch is an attractive strategy for shortening cold ischemia time without negatively impacting transplant outcomes. Hence, strategies to optimize use and reduce practice variation may allow for maximizing benefits from virtual crossmatch.