Plasmapheresis in C4d-positive Acute Humoral Rejection Following Kidney Transplantation: A Review of 4 Cases

Treatment options and strategies for antibody mediated rejection after renal transplantation

Antibody mediated rejection is a significant clinical problem encountered in a subset of renal transplant recipients. This type of rejection has a variable pathogenesis from the presence of donor specific antibodies with no overt disease to immediate hyperacute rejection and many variations between. Antibody mediated rejection is more common in human leukocyte antigen sensitized patients. In general, transplant graft survival after antibody mediated rejection is jeopardized, with less than 50% graft survival 5 years after this diagnosis. A variety of agents have been utilized singly and in combinations to treat antibody mediated rejection with differing results and significant research efforts are being placed on developing new targets for intervention. These same agents have been used in desensitization protocols with some success. In this review, we describe the biology of antibody mediated rejection, review the available agents to treat this form of rejection, and highlight areas of ongoing and future research into this difficult clinical problem.

Prevention and treatment of alloantibody-mediated kidney transplant rejection

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), which is commonly caused by preformed and/or de novo HLA alloantibodies, has evolved as a leading cause of early and late kidney allograft injury. In recent years, effective treatment strategies have been established to counteract the deleterious effects of humoral alloreactivity. One major therapeutic challenge is the barrier of a positive pretransplant lymphocytotoxic crossmatch. Several apheresis- and/or IVIG-based protocols have been shown to enable successful crossmatch conversion, including a strategy of peritransplant immunoadsorption for rapid crossmatch conversion immediately before deceased donor transplantation. While such protocols may increase transplant rates and allow for acceptable graft survival, at least in the short-term, it has become evident that, despite intense treatment, many patients still experience clinical or subclinical AMR. This reinforces the need for innovative strategies, such as complementary allocation programs to improve transplant outcomes. For acute AMR, various studies have suggested efficiency of plasmapheresis- or immunoadsorption-based protocols. There is, however, no established treatment for chronic AMR and the development of strategies to reverse or at least halt chronic active rejection remains a big challenge. Major improvements can be expected from studies evaluating innovative therapeutic concepts, such as proteasome inhibition or complement blocking agents.

Antibody-mediated rejection: treatment alternatives and outcomes

Over the past 10 years, thanks to the development of sensitive methods of antibody detection and markers of antibody injury such as C4d staining, the role of anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and non-HLA alloantibodies as effectors of acute and chronic immune allograft injury has been revisited. Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) defines all allograft rejection caused by antibodies directed against donor-specific HLA molecules, blood group antigen (ABO)-isoagglutinins, or endothelial cell antigens. Antibody-mediated rejection can be a recalcitrant process, resistant to therapy and carries an ominous prognosis to the graft. In concordance with these views, treatment protocols for AMR use permutations of a multiple-prong approach that include (1) the suppression of the T-cell dependent antibody response, (2) the removal of donor reactive antibody, (3) the blockade of the residual alloantibody, and (4) the depletion of naive and memory B-cells. Although all published protocols report a variable rate of success, a major weakness of all current protocols is the lack of effective anti-plasma cell agents. In comparison to acute AMR, the treatment for chronic AMR (CAMR) is not well characterized. Although in acute AMR large titers of pre-existent alloantibodies result in massive activation of the complement system and lytic injury of the graft endothelium, thereby requiring aggressive and fast removal of the offending agents, in CAMR, complement activation results in sublytic endothelial cell injury and activation. Although this type of injury results in chronic graft failure, its slow progression likely renders it amenable of suppression by heightening of maintenance immunosuppression and anti-idiotypic blockade of the circulating alloantibody without the need of plasma exchange. In this review, we will discuss the rationale behind the design of treatment protocols for acute AMR and CAMR as well as their reported results and complications.

Focal peritubular capillary C4d deposition in acute rejection

BACKGROUND

Diffuse peritubular capillary (PTC) C4d deposition has been shown to be associated with relatively poor graft outcome. The significance of focal PTC C4d staining in the early post-transplant period is uncertain.

METHODS

Sixty-five biopsies from 53 patients with acute rejection were graded (Banff '97 criteria), stained for C4d, monocytes and T cells, and divided into three groups according to PTC C4d: (i) focal C4d (F) (14 biopsies, 14 patients), (ii) diffuse C4d (D) (23 biopsies, 15 patients) and (iii) no C4d (N) (28 biopsies, 24 patients). The three groups were compared with respect to a variety of biopsy and clinical parameters including outcome.

RESULTS

The incidence of transplant glomerulitis and glomerular monocyte infiltration were significantly greater in F (64% and 2.0+/-2.0) and D (57% and 3.4+/-2.0) than in N (11% and 0.2+/-0.2). A significantly higher proportion of F (93%) demonstrated acute cellular rejection (Banff '97 grade > or = 1A) than did D (35%). The F and D groups included significantly more females (50 and 67%, respectively) than did N (21%). The percentage of patients with a second or third transplant was higher in F (29%) and D (40%) than in N (8%) (P = 0.0589). The proportion of patients with glomerular filtration rate < 30 ml/min at 12, 24 and 48 months was higher in the D and F groups than in the N, and there was a statistically significant increasing trend in odds of this outcome occurring at 48 months across the three groups (D > F > N group) (P = 0.0416).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the biopsy findings and clinical course in patients with focal PTC C4d staining are similar to those associated with diffuse C4d.

Overcoming Immunologic Incompatibility: Transplanting the Difficult to Transplant Patient

Immunologic incompatibilities between donor and recipient have limited the access to renal transplantation for many patients. Previously the presence of donor-specific alloantibodies directed against donor major histocompatibility complex (MHC) antigens or natural antibodies directed against donor ABO blood group antigens was considered an absolute contraindication to renal transplantation. However, with the current understanding of humoral immune responses, superior immunosuppressive agents, and improved diagnosis and treatment of antibody-mediated rejection, renal transplantation can be safely performed with outstanding results despite the presence of donor-specific antibody. In this review we discuss the biology of antibody-mediated rejection and sensitization. We discuss the diagnostic tests necessary to characterize the type, affinity, and avidity of the donor-directed antibodies. Current methods for performing renal transplants across ABO and human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-sensitized barriers are covered, including the potential morbidities. The rest of the review focuses on advances in managing these antibodies to increase the likelihood of receiving a deceased donor kidney or allow transplantation from a living donor against whom one has a prohibitive antibody.

Chronic allograft nephropathy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic allograft nephropathy is the major cause of late renal allograft loss. This disease is heterogeneous and the diagnosis is nonspecific, with both immune and nonimmune causes. Increasingly, we are able to recognize specific contributors to the disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Further understanding of chronic allograft nephropathy comes from a large study detailing the natural history of the disease, from protocol biopsies revealing subclinical cellular rejection, and from studies using C4d staining to distinguish antibody-mediated chronic rejection from nonspecific causes. Also made more clear are nonimmune mechanisms of chronic allograft nephropathy, such as the effect of decreased dosing of calcineurin inhibitors, and the concept of senescence as a mechanism of the disease.

SUMMARY

Chronic allograft nephropathy is a heterogeneous disease with immune and nonimmune causes. Some features recognizable by histology and detected by other laboratory tests can help to categorize specific causes of the disease in particular cases. In addition, recent studies have contributed to our knowledge of the pathogenesis of the disease. In order to advance our understanding, we must be able to distinguish the various recognizable causes of chronic allograft dysfunction. Further research is warranted on the subset of the disease with indeterminate cause.

Current approaches to treatment of antibody-mediated rejection

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has recently been recognized as a significant and unique form of rejection that is not amenable to treatment with standard immunosuppressive medications aimed at modification of T-cell function. Recent interest in AMR and the role of B cells in rejection has been aided by the concomitant discovery that C4d staining of renal biopsy tissue is strongly associated with AMR and a poor prognosis, and the emergence of desensitization protocols for treatment of highly human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-sensitized patients. Treatment options include: (i) the use of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) which works by blocking anti-HLA antibody activity and through complement inhibition, (ii) the use of Rituxan (anti-CD20 chimeric antibody) to deplete B cells and interfere with antigen-presenting cell (APC) activity of B cells subsequently decreasing T-cell activation, and (iii) the use of plasmapheresis (PE) + anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) immunoglobulin G (IgG) or IVIG in lower doses. This protocol removes deleterious anti-HLA antibodies and may also allow complexing of anti-HLA with anti-idiotypes in the anti-CMV IgG. Although early, data support the efficacy of all three approaches. Many centers are now designing protocols that utilize a combination of all three agents. In summary, recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of AMR has allowed for significant improvements in outcomes of a condition usually associated with rapid graft failure. However, much work needs to be done to better understand the immunologic processes leading to AMR and how current therapies can be best used to effectively prevent and treat it.

Humoral Theory of Transplantation: Mechanism, Prevention, and Treatment

We discuss the potential mechanisms of antibody-induced primary endothelium injury, which includes complement-dependent pathway (membrane attack complex formation, recruitment of inflammatory cells, and complement-complement receptor-mediated phagocytosis) and complement independent pathway antibody-dependent cell cytotoxicity. Secondary to endothelium injury, the following pathological reactions are found to be responsible for progressive tissue injury and final graft function loss: platelet activation and thrombosis, pathological smooth muscle and endothelial cell proliferation, and humoral and/or cellular infiltrate-mediated parenchyma damage after endothelium injury. We also introduce three categories of therapeutic strategy in the prevention and treatment of antibody-mediated rejection: (1) inhibition and depletion of antibody producing cells (immunosuppressants, antilymphocyte antibodies, splenectomy); (2) removal or blockage of preexisting or newly developed antibodies (immunoadsorption, plasmapheresis/plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin); and (3) impediment or postponement of antibody-mediated primary and secondary tissue injury (anticoagulation, glucosteroids). In conclusion, because alloantibodies have destructive effect on allografts, alloantibody monitoring becomes extremely important. It will help clinicians to determine a patient's humoral responses against allograft and will therefore direct clinicians to optimize and/or minimize immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Combined Therapy of Deoxyspergualin and Plasmapheresis: A Useful Treatment for Antibody-Mediated Acute Rejection After Kidney Transplantation

Antibody-mediated acute rejection (AbAR) is one of the primary causes of graft impairment in kidney transplant recipients. Deoxyspergualin (DSG), which displays an antiproliferative action against antigen-stimulated B cells inhibiting antibody production, may be effective to rescue AbAR in combination with plasmapheresis by suppressing antibody production and elimination. In the present study, we report our experience with DSG/plasmapheresis therapy for the treatment of AbAR. Five kidney transplant patients experienced a steroid-resistant acute rejection requiring dialysis followed by an AbAR that was confirmed by biopsy and flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM) results. DSG was administration at 3 mg/kg per day for 10 days with plasmapheresis reduce antidonor antibody. Treatment outcome, effectiveness, and adverse events were examined; in two cases sequential FCXM examinations were performed to evaluate antibody status. All five patients received DSG/plasmapheresis therapy. The number of plasmapheresis treatments ranged from 1 to 9 according to treatment outcomes. Four patients recovered graft function following treatment; whereas one showed no response to the treatment, and the graft was lost. No serious side effects or infections were observed during or after treatment. Monitoring of sequential FCXM correlated with the clinical course. AbAR shows a worse prognosis than cellular rejection. It is refractory to conventional antirejection therapy. In the present study, DSG/plasmapheresis therapy was effective in four of five patients (80%) with AbAR. It may be considered the first choice of treatment for cases of acute humoral rejection.

Therapeutic plasma exchange as a nephrological procedure: A single-center experience

In the United States, therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) is both performed and requested by a wide range of services, often on an empiric basis (before a diagnosis is established). Whether empiric therapy is beneficial has not been established. Patients were identified from an electronic procedure log that included those patients who received plasmapheresis at Walter Reed Army Medical Center from 1996 to 2003. The clinical indications, referring service, and outcomes (including deaths) that occurred were tabulated. Between March 1997 and August 2003, 568 TPE treatments were performed in 54 patients. The majority of the diagnoses were either neurologic (48%) or hematologic (37%). Thirty-three patients (61%) received TPE for a Category I indication. Twelve cases were performed empirically (without an established diagnosis) at the request of the referring service, most (7) performed for presumed thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP). Almost 80% of patients required central venous catheters for treatment. Twelve patients (22%) experienced a major complication including death, and six patients (11%) died. Of the patients who died, 5 (83%) were treated empirically versus one death (17%) among patients not treated empirically, P < 0.001 by Chi Square. Only one of the seven patients treated empirically for TTP died, however. In logistic regression analysis, empiric treatment was the only factor independently associated with death, adjusted odds ratio, 34.2, 95% CI, 3.4, 334.8, P = 0.003. The most common indication for TPE was neurological disease, which also accounted for the highest proportion of complications. With the exception of presumed TTP, performing TPE in the absence of a confirmed diagnosis was not beneficial.