Insights into subclinical rejection

Monitoring T cell alloreactivity

Currently, immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients is center-specific, protocol-driven, and adjusted according to functional or histological evaluation of the allograft and/or signs of drug toxicity or infection. As a result, a large fraction of patients receive too much or too little immunosuppression, exposing them to higher rates of infection, malignancy and drug toxicity, or increased risk of acute and chronic graft injury from rejection, respectively. The individualization of immunosuppression requires the development of assays able to reliably quantify and/or predict the magnitude of the recipient's immune response toward the allograft. As alloreactive T cells are central mediators of allograft rejection, monitoring T cell alloreactivity has become a priority for the transplant community. Among available assays, flow cytometry based phenotyping, T cell proliferation, T cell cytokine secretion, and ATP release (ImmuKnow), have been the most thoroughly tested. While numerous cross-sectional studies have found associations between the results of these assays and the presence of clinically relevant post-transplantation outcomes, data from prospective studies are still scanty, thereby preventing widespread implementation in the clinic. Future studies are required to test the hypothesis that tailoring immunosuppression on the basis of results offered by these biomarkers leads to better outcomes than current standard clinical practice.

Noninvasive methods to assess the risk of kidney transplant rejection

In current clinical practice, immune reactivity of kidney transplant recipients is estimated by monitoring the levels of immunosuppressive drugs, and by functional and/or histological evaluation of the allograft. The availability of assays that could directly quantify the extent of the recipient's immune response towards the allograft would help clinicians to customize the prescription of immunosuppressive drugs to individual patients. Importantly, these assays might provide a more in-depth understanding of the complex mechanisms of acute rejection, chronic injury, and tolerance in organ transplantation, allowing the design of new and potentially more effective strategies for the minimization of immunosuppression, or even for the induction of immunological tolerance. The purpose of this review is to summarize results from recent studies in this field.

Gene expression changes are associated with loss of kidney graft function and interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy: diagnosis versus prediction

BACKGROUND

Loss of kidney graft function due to interstitial fibrosis (IF) and tubular atrophy (TA) is the most common cause of kidney allograft loss.

METHODS

One hundred one allograft tissues (26 samples with IF/TA, 17 normal allografts, and an independent biopsy group collected at 3 month [n=34] posttransplantation) underwent microarray analysis to identify early detection/diagnostic biomarkers of IF/TA. Profiling of 24 allograft biopsies collected at or after 9-month posttransplantation (range 9-18 months) was used for validation. Three-month posttransplantation biopsies were classified as IF/TA nonprogressors (group 1) or progressors (group 2) using graft function and histology at 9-month posttransplantation.

RESULTS

We identified 2223 differentially expressed probe sets between IF/TA and normal allograft biopsies using a Bonferroni correction. Genes up-regulated in IF/TA were primarily involved in pathways related to T-cell activation, natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity, and programmed cell death. A least absolute shrinkage and selection operator model was derived from the differentially expressed probe sets, resulting in a final model that included 10 probe sets and had 100% training set accuracy. The N-fold crossvalidated error was 2.4% (sensitivity 95.8% and specificity 100%). When 3-month biopsies were tested using the model, all the samples were classified as normal. However, evaluating gene expression of the 3-month biopsies and fitting a new penalized model, 100% sensitivity was observed in classifying the samples as group1 or 2. This model was evaluated in the sample set collected at or after 9-month posttransplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

An IF/TA gene expression signature was identified, and it was useful for diagnosis but not prediction. However, gene expression profiles at 3 months might predict IF/TA progression.

Impact of Banff borderline acute rejection among renal allograft recipients

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to determine the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of Banff borderline acute rejection (AR) among renal transplant recipients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the courses of adult kidney transplant recipients with borderline AR on clinically indicated biopsies performed at our center from January 2003 to July 2006. Patients with complete transplant records and serum creatinine values at 6 and 12 months were included in this study. The primary outcome measures were serum creatinine values at 1 to 2 weeks after treatment, and at 6 and 12 months after graft biopsy.

RESULTS

Among 428 renal graft biopsies, borderline AR was observed in 100 cases (23%). Patients were maintained on the same immunosuppression. The 86 who had complete data were included in the study. Seventy-eight percent of the patients received treatment with 3 days of methylprednisolone, while 22% were untreated. Mean serum creatinine values in the treated group were 2.9 +/- 1.0, 2.6 +/- 2.5, and 3.0 +/- 2.9 mg/dL at the time of biopsy, and at 6 and 12 months thereafter, respectively. In the untreated group, mean serum creatinine values were 2.2 +/- 1.0, 1.9 +/- 0.8, and 2.3 +/- 1.2 mg/dL during biopsy, and at 6 and 12 months thereafter, respectively. There was no significant difference in the serum creatinine at any of the measured time points between the 2 groups. Twelve patients had repeat renal graft biopsies which showed AR (6%), chronic allograft nephropathy (2.4%), and borderline changes (3.8%). Nine of the patients in the treated group eventually developed graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with borderline AR showed a progressive increase in serum creatinine over time. They should be followed closely; immunosuppression may need to be intensified.

Protocol Biopsy: Today’s Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy?

This counter view of protocol biopsy suggests that the widespread clinical use of this technique may be questionable. It may remain primarily a valuable research tool. Cost and risk remain as major issues. Be it screening by routine computed tomography scan for apparently normal people or routine biopsy of normal functioning kidneys there is always the risk that more harm than good might be done. The proof of benefit should be strong (scientifically strong), which requires confirmation and reproducibility of controlled trials. Patients need to know how protocol biopsy is to be used (research, management or both) and the strength of the scientific evidence concerning benefit in long-term management.

Surveillance renal transplant biopsies and subclinical rejection at three months post-transplant in pediatric recipients

Subclinical acute rejection (SCR) has been increasingly recognized in adult renal transplant recipients with the advent of surveillance biopsies. However, in children, surveillance biopsies are not routinely performed at most centers. Therefore, the incidence, predisposing factors, treatment, and clinical outcomes of SCR remain unclear in children. From August 2004 to December 2005, we performed 36 protocol biopsies at three months post-transplantation. All patients had received induction therapy with basiliximab and were maintained on prednisone, MMF, and tacrolimus. Sixteen cases of SCR were detected by biopsy (44%). Age, gender, race, donor source, or serum creatinine did not discriminate between children with SCR and those with normal biopsies. All cases of SCR were treated with high doses of methylprednisolone. At one yr post-transplant, renal function was similar in children with SCR to those with normal surveillance biopsies (p = 0.62). Because of the high incidence of SCR, the maintenance dose of MMF was increased by 50% in 20 children transplanted after December 2005. This resulted in a significant decline in the incidence of SCR from 44 to 15% (p < 0.05). However, the incidence of polyomavirus (BK) viremia also increased significantly in these children (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

A high incidence of SCR was found on surveillance biopsies at three months post-transplant and could not be predicted by age, gender, race, donor source, or serum creatinine. The occurrence of SCR declined significantly by increasing the dose of MMF, but resulted in an increase in BK viremia. We conclude that surveillance biopsies provide valuable information in the management of pediatric renal transplant recipients. Increasing immunosuppression to avoid SCR should be weighed against the risk for infection.

Can mTOR inhibitors reduce the risk of late kidney allograft failure?

The most frequent causes of late kidney allograft failure are chronic rejection, nonalloimmune injury and death, all of which may depend on the characteristics of the donor and recipient, but may also be influenced by the type of immunosuppression. Combining calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) and corticosteroids offers potent immunosuppression, but may also cause side effects leading to progressive graft dysfunction or an increased risk of death. New immunosuppressive strategies may come from the availability of inhibitors of mTOR, a downstream effector of phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase that provides the signal for cell proliferation by phosphorylating a cascade of kinases. Recent trials have shown that it is possible to minimize the dose or withdraw CNIs a few weeks after transplantation when they are combined with mTOR inhibitors and their combination may also make it possible to minimize or avoid the use of corticosteroids. Moreover, by inhibiting the signal for cell proliferation, mTOR inhibitors may reduce the replication of cytomegalovirus inside host cells, prevent transplant vasculopathy, and exert anti-oncogenic activity. All of these characteristics offer a ray of hope for reducing the risk of long-term allograft failure.