Early renal graft function deterioration in recipients with preformed anti-MICA antibodies: partial contribution of complement-dependent cytotoxicity

Early and late antibody mediated rejection: Which game is the complement playing?

The role of the complement system in antibody mediated rejection (AMR) emerged in the last decades, and the demonstration of the presence of complement fragments in renal allograft biopsies is a consolidated diagnostic sign of AMR. However, antibodies against donor antigens may lead to microvascular inflammation and endothelial injury even in the absence of complement activation, and growing evidence suggests that complement-independent mechanisms may be prominent in late (i.e., occurring >6 months after transplantation) vs early AMR. Different donor specific antibodies (DSA) with different biological features and complement activation ability may be involved in late or early AMR. Downregulation of tissue complement inhibitors may happen early after transplantation, partially due to ischemia reperfusion injury, and could facilitate complement activation in early vs late AMR. Clinical and histological features of late AMR and C4d negative AMR seem to converge, and this narrative review analyzes the evidence that supports lower complement activation in late vs early AMR, including differential C4d staining prevalence based on the time after transplantation, differential response to anti-complement therapy and other direct and indirect signs of the complement system activation. The therapeutic approach in early vs late AMR should take into account possible differences in the pathophysiological mechanisms of microvascular inflammation and endothelial injury in early vs late AMR.

Sensitization in transplantation: Assessment of Risk 2022 Working Group Meeting Report

The Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk workgroup is a collaborative effort of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics that aims at providing recommendations for clinical testing, highlights gaps in current knowledge, and proposes areas for further research to enhance histocompatibility testing in support of solid organ transplantation. This report provides updates on topics discussed by the previous Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk working groups and introduces 2 areas of exploration: non-human leukocyte antigen antibodies and utilization of human leukocyte antigen antibody testing measurement to evaluate the efficacy of antibody-removal therapies.

Antigen and Cell-Based Assays for the Detection of Non-HLA Antibodies

To date, human leukocyte antigens (HLA) have been the major focus in the approach to acute and chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMBR) in solid-organ transplantation. However, evidence from the clinic and published studies has shown that non-HLA antibodies, particularly anti-endothelial cell antibodies (AECAs), are found either in the context of AMBR or synergistically in the presence of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA). Numerous studies have explored the influence of AECAs on clinical outcomes, yet the determination of the exact clinical relevance of non-HLA antibodies in organ transplantation is not fully established. This is due to highly heterogeneous study designs including differences in testing methods and outcome measures. Efforts to develop reliable and sensitive diagnostic non-HLA antibody tests are continuously made. This is essential considering the technical difficulties of non-HLA antibody assays and the large variation in reported incidences of antibodies. In addition, it is important to take donor specificity into account in order to draw clinically relevant conclusions from non-HLA antibody assays. Here, we provide an overview of non-HLA solid-phase and cell-based crossmatch assays for use in solid-organ transplantation that are currently available, either in a research setting or commercially.

MHC Class I Related Chain A (MICA) Antibodies - A Potential Cause of Renal Allograft Rejection

MHC class I related chain A (MICA) antibodies, especially those directed against the donor in absence of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies have been reported to be possibly associated with renal allograft rejection in sensitized recipients. We are the first ones to present a case series of five patients who underwent primary live related donor renal transplantation in non-sensitized recipients either in the presence of donor-specific MICA antibodies (MICA-DSA) or developed de novo. Four of them presented characteristics of either accelerated, acute or chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) attributable to the presence of MICA DSA. This case series emphasizes that AMR due to MICA-DSA is amenable to treatment with conventional regimens for treatment of AMR and there is a need for screening of MICA antibodies especially those directed against the donor on case to case basis.

Non-HLA Antibodies and Epitope Mismatches in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Histological Antibody-Mediated Rejection

Background

Correlation between antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) and circulating HLA donor-specific antibodies (HLA-DSA) is strong but imperfect in kidney transplant (KT) recipients, raising the possibility of undetected HLA-DSA or non-HLA antibodies contributing to ABMR. Detailed evaluation of the degree of HLA matching together with the identification of non-HLA antibodies in KT may help to decipher the antibody involved.

Methods

We retrospectively assessed patients with transplant biopsies scored following Banff'15 classification. Pre- and post-transplant serum samples were checked for HLA and non-HLA antibodies [MICA-Ab, angiotensin-II type-1-receptor (AT1R)-Ab, endothelin-1 type-A-receptor (ETAR)-Ab and crossmatches with primary aortic endothelial cells (EC-XM)]. We also analyzed HLA epitope mismatches (HLA-EM) between donors and recipients to explore their role in ABMR histology (ABMRh) with and without HLA-DSA.

Results

One-hundred eighteen patients with normal histology (n = 19), ABMRh (n = 52) or IFTA (n = 47) were studied. ABMRh patients were HLA-DSApos (n = 38, 73%) or HLA-DSAneg (n = 14, 27%). Pre-transplant HLA-DSA and AT1R-Ab were more frequent in ABMRh compared with IFTA and normal histology cases (p = 0.006 and 0.003), without differences in other non-HLA antibodies. Only three ABMRhDSAneg cases showed non-HLA antibodies. ABMRhDSAneg and ABMRhDSApos cases showed similar biopsy changes and graft-survival. Both total class II and DRB1 HLA-EM were associated with ABMRhDSApos but not with ABMRhDSAneg. Multivariate analysis showed that pre-transplant HLA-DSA (OR: 3.69 [1.31-10.37], p = 0.013) and AT1R-Ab (OR: 5.47 [1.78-16.76], p = 0.003) were independent predictors of ABMRhDSApos.

Conclusions

In conclusion, pre-transplant AT1R-Ab is frequently found in ABMRhDSApos patients. However, AT1R-Ab, MICA-Ab, ETAR-Ab or EC-XM+ are rarely found among ABMRhDSAneg patients. Pre-transplant AT1R-Ab may act synergistically with preformed or de novo HLA-DSA to produce ABMRhDSApos but not ABMRhDSAneg. HLA epitope mismatch associates with ABMRhDSApos compared with ABMRhDSAneg, suggesting factors other than HLA are responsible for the damage.

Clinical relevance of major histocompatibility complex class I chain-related molecule A (MICA) antibodies in live donor renal transplantation - Indian Experience

Antibody-mediated rejections (AMR) in the absence of circulating anti-HLA-DSA have highlighted the role of non-HLA antibodies, particularly those directed against endothelial cells. Of these, MICA (major histocompatibility complex class I chain-related molecule A) antibodies are the most notable and important because of their potential in promoting graft rejections. Limited studies have focused on the impact of MICA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) on graft outcome as compared to those that are not donor-specific (NDSA). We evaluated pre- and post-transplant sera at POD 7, 30, 90, 180 and the time of biopsy from 206 consecutive primary live donor renal transplant recipients for anti-MICA and anti-HLA antibodies using single antigen bead assay on a Luminex platform. Recipients who developed MICA antibodies and their donors were phenotyped for MICA alleles. For the purpose of antibody analysis, patients were categorized into three major groups: biopsy-proven AMR, acute cellular rejection (ACR) and those with no rejection episodes (NRE). During the mean follow-up period of 17.37 ± 6.88 months, 16 of the 206 recipients developed AMR, while ACR was observed in only 13 cases. A quarter (25%) of the AMR cases had anti-MICA antibodies as compared to 7.7% of those experiencing ACR and 6.2% of the NRE group. Allelic typing revealed that all MICA Ab +ve AMR cases were due to the presence of donor-specific antibodies. MICA-DSA even in the absence of HLA-DSA was significantly associated with AMR but not with ACR when compared with the NRE group (P = <.01).

Non-HLA Abs in Solid Organ Transplantation

The role of anti-HLA antibodies in solid organ rejection is well established and these antibodies are routinely monitored both in patients in the waiting list and in the post-transplant setting. More recently, the presence of other antibodies directed towards non-HLA antigens, or the so-called minor histocompatibility antigens, has drawn the attention of the transplant community; however, their possible involvement in the graft outcome remains uncertain. These antibodies have been described to possibly have a role in rejection and allograft failure. This review focuses on the most studied non-HLA antibodies and their association with different clinical outcomes considered in solid organ transplantation with the aim of clarifying their clinical implication and potential relevance for routine testing.

Non-HLA donor-recipient mismatches in kidney transplantation-A stone left unturned

In kidney transplantation, short-term allograft survival has improved due to improvements in acute rejection episodes without corresponding improvements in long-term survival. Although current organ allocation algorithms take into account human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching to reduce antidonor alloimmune responses, it is likely that genomic variation at non-HLA loci (ie, non-HLA donor-recipient [D-R] pair mismatches) play a role in the "non-self" responses and ultimately affect long-term allograft survival. Existing data from both animal models and human studies suggest an association between non-HLA D-R mismatches and kidney allograft outcomes. In this minireview, we examine existing and emerging data and discuss putative mechanisms on the role of non-HLA D-R mismatches on long-term allograft outcomes in kidney transplantation.

Outcome of kidney transplantation from young pediatric donors (aged less than 6 years) to young size-matched recipients

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric donation is underutilized because of presumed increased risk of vascular thrombosis (VT) and graft loss. Using young pediatric donors (YPDs) for young pediatric recipients (YPRs) is suggested to be even at greater risk and therefore precluded in many centers. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of kidney transplantation (KT) from YPD to age-matched YPR.

PATIENT AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 118 pediatric KT performed between January 2007-July 2017. The authors identified KT with YPD (considered as those aged <6 years) and age-matched YPR. Organ allocation was performed based on the best paired size (YPR for YPR). Data were collected regarding donor and recipient characteristics, surgical and urological complications, graft loss, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty cases of YPD to age-matched YPR were identified (33.89% of the cohort). Mean recipient and donor age were 2.9 years (SD 1.68) and 2.24 years (SD 1.5), respectively. Mean recipient and donor weight were 12.7 kg (SD 4.1) and 13.7 kg (SD 4.15), respectively. Thirty of those young recipients (75%) weighed <15 kg. The most frequent primary renal disease was the congenital nephrotic syndrome. Nine out of 40 patients (22.5%) had received a previous KT before. Three received a combined liver-KT. Eight (20%) were classified as high immunological risk and 19 (47.5%) as high thrombotic risk. All allografts were implanted extraperitoneally and anastomosed to the iliac vessels. Major complications requiring reintervention occurred in seven patients (17.5%): three VT, three bleeding episodes, and one ureteral necrosis. Remarkably, only one surgical complication (VT) resulted in graft loss. Regarding long-term urological complications, four patients (10%) all with obstructive uropathy-developed vesicoureteral reflux to the graft. Actuarial graft survival at 1,5, and 10 years in the YPD to age-matched YPR cohort was 83% -78% -78%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 3.6 years (SD 3.2) (r = 7-10). Over time, eight patients lost their graft, not related to surgical factors in seven out of eight cases.

CONCLUSION

The authors suggest that KT using YPD for age-match YPR yields good results in expert centers, even in high-risk patients and is associated with good graft survival. In this series, surgical complications were rarely related to graft loss.

Clinical Impact of Pre-transplant Antibodies Against Angiotensin II Type I Receptor and Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I-Related Chain A in Kidney Transplant Patients

Background

Evidence of antibody-mediated injury in the absence of donor-specific HLA antibodies (HLA-DSA) has recently emerged, suggesting a role of antibodies in targeting non-HLA antigens expressed on renal allograft tissue. However, the clinical significance of pre-transplant non-HLA antibodies remains unclear. We compared the histological and clinical impact of pre-transplant HLA-DSA and non-HLA antibodies, especially angiotensin II type I receptor (anti-AT1R) and MHC class I-related chain A (anti-MICA), in kidney transplant patients.

Methods

Pre-transplant HLA-DSA, anti-AT1R, and anti-MICA were retrospectively examined in 359 kidney transplant patients to determine the effect of each antibody on allograft survival and clinical characteristics.

Results

Pre-transplant HLA-DSA, anti-AT1R, and anti-MICA were detected in 37 (10.3%), 174 (48.5%), and 50 patients (13.9%), respectively. Post-transplant antibody-mediated rejection was associated with a pre-transplant HLA-DSA (+) status only. The development of microvascular inflammation (MVI) was associated with pre-transplant HLA-DSA (P=0.001) and anti-AT1R (P=0.036). Anti-AT1R (+) patients had significantly lower allograft survival compared with anti-AT1R (−) patients (P=0.042). Only pre-transplant anti-AT1R positivity was an independent risk factor for allograft failure (hazard ratio 4.824, confidence interval 1.017–24.888; P=0.038). MVI was the most common histological feature of allograft failure in patients with pre-transplant anti-AT1R.

Conclusions

Pre-transplant anti-AT1R is an important risk factor for allograft failure, which may be mediated by MVI induction in the allograft tissue.

Role of Anti-MICA Antibodies in Graft Survival of Renal Transplant Recipients of India

INTRODUCTION

The MIC (MHC class I chain-related) genes are a group of nonclassical MHC genes, located in the MHC class 1 region of chromosome 6. The aim of the present study was to find the prevalence of MHC class 1 chain-related (MICA) alloantibodies in patients undergoing live-related donor renal transplantation and its role in short-term graft survival. The role of blood transfusion in the formation of these antibodies was also studied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pretransplant samples of patients undergoing renal allograft transplantation were tested for anti-MICA antibodies. Association of various demographics, HLA-A + B + DRB1 mismatches, anti-HLA antibody screen, and anti-MICA antibodies was assessed using Pearson's chi-square test.

RESULTS

Out of 646 serum samples, 94 (14.6%) were positive and 552 (85.4%) were negative for anti-MICA antibodies. Patients with anti-MICA antibody had a graft survival 89.3% as compared to 94.7% in patients without anti-MICA antibody (P < 0.05). The hazard ratio for all patients was 3.0701 (P < 0.05). Out of the 340 patients with no HLA antibodies, the presence of anti-MICA antibodies without any HLA antibodies (n = 43) was associated with poor outcome in the patients (hazard ratio of 2.768, P < 0.05). The presence of MICA antibodies with HLA antibodies did not decrease the graft survival (hazards ratio of 1.3750, P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preformed MICA antibodies independently increase the risk of kidney rejection and therefore recommend that guidelines should be formed for mandatory testing of these antibodies prior to renal transplant.

Not All Antibodies Are Created Equal: Factors That Influence Antibody Mediated Rejection

Consistent with Dr. Paul Terasaki's "humoral theory of rejection" numerous studies have shown that HLA antibodies can cause acute and chronic antibody mediated rejection (AMR) and decreased graft survival. New evidence also supports a role for antibodies to non-HLA antigens in AMR and allograft injury. Despite the remarkable efforts by leaders in the field who pioneered single antigen bead technology for detection of donor specific antibodies, a considerable amount of work is still needed to better define the antibody attributes that are associated with AMR pathology. This review highlights what is currently known about the clinical context of pre and posttransplant antibodies, antibody characteristics that influence AMR, and the paths after donor specific antibody production (no rejection, subclinical rejection, and clinical dysfunction with AMR).

Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I Chain-Related A (MICA) Molecules: Relevance in Solid Organ Transplantation

An ever growing number of reports on graft rejection and/or failure even with good HLA matches have highlighted an important role of non-HLA antigens in influencing allograft immunity. The list of non-HLA antigens that have been implicated in graft rejection in different types of organ transplantation has already grown long. Of these, the Major Histocompatibility Complex class I chain-related molecule A (MICA) is one of the most polymorphic and extensively studied non-HLA antigenic targets especially in the kidney transplantation. Humoral response to MICA antigens has repeatedly been associated with lower graft survival and an increased risk of acute and chronic rejection following kidney and liver transplantation with few studies showing conflicting results. Although there are clear indications of MICA antibodies being associated with adverse graft outcome, a definitive consensus on this relationship has not been arrived yet. Furthermore, only a few studies have dealt with the impact of MICA donor-specific antibodies as compared to those that are not donor specific on graft outcome. In addition to the membrane bound form, a soluble isoform of MICA (sMICA), which has the potential to engage the natural killer cell-activating receptor NKG2D resulting in endocytosis and degradation of receptor–ligand interaction complex leading to suppression of NKG2D-mediated host innate immunity, has been a subject of intense discussion. Most studies on sMICA have been directed toward understanding their influence on tumor growth, with limited literature focusing its role in transplant biology. Furthermore, a unique dimorphism (methionine to valine) at position 129 in the α2 domain categorizes MICA alleles into strong (MICA-129 met) and weak (MICA-129 val) binders of NKG2D receptor depending on whether they have methionine or valine at this position. Although the implications of MICA 129 dimorphism have been highlighted in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, its role in solid organ transplantation is yet to be explored. This review summarizes the currently available information on MICA antibodies, soluble MICA, and MICA-129 dimorphism in a setting of solid organ transplantation.

MICA and NKG2D: Is There an Impact on Kidney Transplant Outcome?

This paper aims to present an overview of MICA and natural killer group 2 member D (NKG2D) genetic and functional interactions and their impact on kidney transplant outcome. Organ transplantation has gone from what can accurately be called a “clinical experiment” to a routine and reliable practice, which has proven to be clinically relevant, life-saving and cost-effective when compared with non-transplantation management strategies of both chronic and acute end-stage organ failures. The kidney is the most frequently transplanted organ in the world (transplant-observatory¹). The two treatment options for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are dialysis and/or transplantation. Compared with dialysis, transplantation is associated with significant improvements in quality of life and overall longevity. A strong relationship exists between allograft loss and human leukocyte antigens (HLA) antibodies (Abs). HLA Abs are not the only factor involved in graft loss, as multiple studies have shown that non-HLA antigens are also involved, even when a patient has a good HLA matche and receives standard immunosuppressive therapy. A deeper understanding of other biomarkers is therefore important, as it is likely to lead to better monitoring (and consequent success) of organ transplants. The objective is to fill the void left by extensive reviews that do not often dive this deep into the importance of MICA and NKG2D in allograft acceptance and their partnership in the immune response. There are few papers that explore the relationship between these two protagonists when it comes to kidney transplantation. This is especially true for the role of NKG2D in kidney transplantation. These reasons give a special importance to this review, which aims to be a helpful tool in the hands of researchers in this field.

Endothelial Cells in Antibody-Mediated Rejection of Kidney Transplantation: Pathogenesis Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has been identified as a main obstacle for stable immune tolerance and long survival of kidney allografts. In spite of new insights into the underlying mechanisms of AMR, accurate diagnosis and efficient treatment are still challenges in clinical practice. Endothelium is the first barrier between recipients' immune systems and grafts in vascularized organ transplants. Considering that endothelial cells express a number of antigens that can be attacked by various allo- and autoantibodies, endothelial cells act as main targets for the recipients' humoral immune responses. Importantly, emerging evidence has shown that endothelial cells in transplants could also initiate protective mechanisms in response to immune injuries. A better understanding of the role of endothelial cells during the pathogenesis of AMR might provide novel therapeutic targets. In the present review, we summarize the antigens expressed by endothelial cells and also discuss the activation and accommodation of endothelial cells as well as their clinical implications. Collectively, the progress discussed in this review indicates endothelial cells as promising targets to improve current diagnosis and therapeutic regimens for AMR.

Moving Biomarkers toward Clinical Implementation in Kidney Transplantation

Long-term kidney transplant outcomes remain suboptimal, delineating an unmet medical need. Although current immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients is effective, dosing is conventionally adjusted empirically on the basis of time after transplant or altered in response to detection of kidney dysfunction, histologic evidence of allograft damage, or infection. Such strategies tend to detect allograft rejection after significant injury has already occurred, fail to detect chronic subclinical inflammation that can negatively affect graft survival, and ignore specific risks and immune mechanisms that differentially contribute to allograft damage among transplant recipients. Assays and biomarkers that reliably quantify and/or predict the risk of allograft injury have the potential to overcome these deficits and thereby, aid clinicians in optimizing immunosuppressive regimens. Herein, we review the data on candidate biomarkers that we contend have the highest potential to become clinically useful surrogates in kidney transplant recipients, including functional T cell assays, urinary gene and protein assays, peripheral blood cell gene expression profiles, and allograft gene expression profiles. We identify barriers to clinical biomarker adoption in the transplant field and suggest strategies for moving biomarker-based individualization of transplant care from a research hypothesis to clinical implementation.