Virtual crossmatching for deceased donor transplantation becomes reality

Introduction of the donor centre virtual crossmatch in Eurotransplant

On 24 January 2023, Eurotransplant has introduced the virtual crossmatch for kidney and pancreas allocation as a better alternative for the physical Complement Dependent Cytotoxicity (CDC) crossmatches at the donor centre, which were associated with a longer cold ischaemia time and false positive reactions. For the time being, the physical CDC crossmatch at the recipient centre will remain in place as the final histocompatibility check. While Eurotransplant is certainly not the first organ allocation organisation to introduce virtual crossmatching, several novel aspects have been introduced, such as calculation of the virtual panel reactive antibody (vPRA) on 11 loci at the second-field level in addition to the serological broad and split level, electronic HLA typing data transmission using Histoimmunogenetics Markup Language (HML) file format, and the actual virtual crossmatch based on ambiguous, second-field HLA typing of the donor on all 11 loci. This short communication will focus on these novel aspects of the virtual crossmatch in Eurotransplant.

Complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch in solid organ transplantation: The gold standard or golden history?

Complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch (CDC-XM) has been considered for many years the standard of practice for determining compatibility in solid organ transplantation (SOT). However, as this method is laborious, time intensive and lacks sensitivity and specificity, it has been replaced in many laboratories worldwide by flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM) and/or virtual crossmatch (vXM). With this study we intend to show the relevance of performing CDC-XM in the era of virtual crossmatching. We retrospectively analyzed 1,007 consecutive T and B cell deceased donor (DD) CDC-XMs performed in parallel using non-treated and dithiothreitol (DTT) treated sera between May 2022 and January 2023 in waitlisted patients with no donor specific antibodies (DSA) against HLA-A, B and/or DR antigens. Thirty five of 1,007 (3.5%) T cell crossmatches and 132 of 1,007 (13.1%) B cell crossmatches were positive with non-treated sera. Correlation with the vXM demonstrated no DSA in any of the positive T cell crossmatches. DSA were also absent in 126/132 positive B cell crossmatches, indicating a high rate of false positive CDC-XM. Indeed, only 4/35 T cell and 13/132 B cell CDC-XM remained positive after treatment with DTT, confirming that false positive reactivity with non-treated sera is high. Class I HLA DSA against C locus antigens were present in 17/1,007 T cell crossmatches and none were detected by CDC-XM (sensitivity = 0%). Similarly, only 6/77 B cell crossmatches with DSA targeting HLA-C, DQ and/or DP antigens were CDC-XM positive (sensitivity = 7.8%). Furthermore, only 4/6 positive B cell CDC-XM were confirmed to have complement binding potential using the C1q assay, suggesting additional false positive reactivity in 2/6 of the positive CDC-XM. Our study demonstrates that CDC-XM exhibits poor sensitivity, high false positive reactivity (especially without DTT treatment) and does not meaningfully contribute to pre-transplant compatibility testing in the context of vXM based allocation. Furthermore, the use of CDC-XM can unnecessarily delay or even prevent safe and appropriate transplant allocation.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Implementation of molecular matching in transplantation requires further characterization of both immunogenicity and antigenicity of individual HLA epitopes

Over the past decade, high HLA epitope mismatch scores have been associated with inferior transplant outcomes using several tools, of which HLAMatchmaker is most well-known. This software uses theoretically defined polymorphic amino acid configurations, called eplets, for HLA compatibility analysis. Although consideration of eplet mismatch loads has potential for immunological risk stratification of transplant patients, the use of eplet matching in organ allocation algorithms is hindered by lacking knowledge of the immunogenicity of individual eplets, and the possibility that single mismatched amino acids, rather than complete eplets, are responsible for HLA antibody induction. There are several approaches to define eplet immunogenicity, such as antibody verification of individual eplets, and data-driven approaches using large datasets that correlate specific eplet mismatches to donor specific antibody formation or inferior transplant outcomes. Data-driven approaches can also be used to define whether single amino acid mismatches may be more informative than eplet mismatches for predicting HLA antibody induction. When using epitope knowledge for the assignment of unacceptable antigens, it important to realize that alleles sharing an eplet to which antibodies have formed are not automatically all unacceptable since multiple contact sites determine the binding strength and thus biological function and pathogenicity of an antibody, which may differ between reactive alleles. While the future looks bright for using HLA epitopes in clinical decision making, major steps need to be taken to make this a clinical reality.

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.

A Retrospective Study on Human Leukocyte Antigen Types and Haplotypes in a South African Population

CONTEXT.—

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) is a polymorphic protein of the immune system with a central role in organ transplantation. Organ recipients can be sensitized against HLA from previous exposure, which increases the likelihood of antidonor immune responses and subsequently organ rejection. HLA matching represents an attractive option to improve graft function, reduce sensitization of recipients in first transplantations, and improve organ allocation.

OBJECTIVE.—

To examine the feasibility of the reintroduction of HLA matching into the criteria in the Johannesburg program, we retrospectively assessed HLA types in our donor population.

DESIGN.—

HLA types of 782 deceased and related living donors from 2015 until 2019 were recorded and analyzed to identify the most common HLA types and haplotypes. A virtual crossmatch was also done to examine the anti-HLA antibodies in the recipient population compared with the common HLA types identified in this study.

RESULTS.—

Of the most common HLA types identified, at least 1 was present in 732 (93.6%) of the renal donors assessed. The virtual crossmatch confirmed that most recipients are sensitized against most donors, and this greatly impacts the number of recipients who can receive organ transplants.

CONCLUSIONS.—

This study determined the most common HLA types and haplotypes in a South African organ donor population. This information, combined with the evidence suggesting the immunogenic potential of these common types, the high number of recipients with antibodies against common HLA types, and the ethnic distribution of the donor and recipient populations, informs the recommendation that the pretransplantation workup should not reinclude HLA matching.