Novel solid phase-based ELISA assays contribute to an improved detection of anti-HLA antibodies and to an increased reliability of pre- and post-transplant crossmatching

Impact of pretransplant antibodies on outcomes after heart transplantation

Purpose of review

Since the discovery of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) in the 1950s, there has been great interest in the role of antibodies in posttransplant rejection. The development of the lymphocyte toxicity test by Terasaki et al. in the 1960s was the first step toward understanding the role of antibodies in posttransplant rejection.

Recent findings

Subsequently, various organs have been transplanted and improving posttransplant outcomes have become a focus of research. In particular, methods to measure antibodies that affect posttransplant outcomes, including anti-HLA antibodies, and methods to desensitize patients from specific antibodies have been explored. One recent method for measuring antibodies is called the solid-phase assay, which uses purified HLA fixed to microbeads. This assay does not use donor lymphocytes and allows clinicians to test the reactivity of patient serum against a panel of antibodies. It has also enabled the identification of specific anti-HLA antibodies using a single HLA.

Summary

In addition to advances in methods to measure and analyze anti-HLA antibodies, the clinical impact of non-HLA antibodies has also received much attention recently.

ELISA-Based Crossmatching Allowing the Detection of Emerging Donor-Specific Anti-HLA Antibodies through the Use of Stored Donors' Cell Lysates

About forty years ago the complement-dependent crossmatch assay (CDC-CM) was developed as standard procedure in order to select recipients without donor-specific antibodies directed against human leukocyte antigens of their given donors since the negative outcome of pretransplant crossmatching represents one of the most important requirements for a successful kidney graft survival. However, as a functional assay the CDC-CM strongly depends on the availability of donors' isolated lymphocytes and in particular on their vitality highly limiting its applicability for recipients treated with special drugs and therapeutic antibodies or suffering from underlying autoimmune diseases. In the great majority of these cases ELISA-based crossmatching has been demonstrated to be an adequate alternative procedure nevertheless leading to valid results. With these case reports we show for the first time that ELISA-based crossmatching is suitable to demonstrate the upcoming donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies as a consequence of allografting using deep-frozen deceased donor's material such as blood or spleen detergent lysate. Thus, this ELISA-based procedure first provides the option to routinely perform crossmatching using stored material of deceased donors in order to substitute or at least to complement virtual crossmatching, that is, the comparison of the recipients' anti-HLA antibody specificities with the donors' historically identified HLA types.

Solid phase-based cross-matching as solution for kidney allograft recipients pretreated with therapeutic antibodies

In order to select recipients without donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies, the complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch (CDC-CM) was established as the standard procedure about 40 years ago. However, the interpretability of this functional assay strongly depends on the vitality of isolated donors' lymphocytes. Since the application of therapeutic antibodies for the immunosuppressive regimen falsifies the outcome of the CDC-crossmatch as a result of these antibodies' complement-activating capacity in the recipients' sera, we looked for an alternative methodical approach. We here present 27 examples of AB0 blood group-incompatible living kidney allograft recipients who, due to their treatment with the humanized chimeric monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody Rituximab, did not present valid outcomes of CDC-based pretransplant cross-matching. Additionally, four cases of posttransplant cross-matching after living kidney allografting and consequent treatment with the therapeutic anti-CD25 antibody Basiliximab (Simulect) due to acute biopsy-proven rejection episodes are presented and compared regarding CDC- and ELISA-based crossmatch outcomes. In all cases, it became evident that the classical CDC-based crossmatch was completely unfeasible for the detection of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies, whereas ELISA-based cross-matching not requiring vital cells was not artificially affected. We conclude that ELISA-based cross-matching is a valuable tool to methodically circumvent false positive CDC-based crossmatch results in the presence of therapeutically applied antibodies.

Artificially Positive Crossmatches Not Leading to the Refusal of Kidney Donations due to the Usage of Adequate Diagnostic Tools

Allografting patients with human leukocyte antigens (HLA) which are recognized by preformed antibodies constitutes the main cause for hyper-acute or acute rejections. In order to select recipients without these donor-specific antibodies, the complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch (CDC-CM) assay was developed as a standard procedure about forty years ago. The negative outcome of pretransplant crossmatching represents the most important requirement for a successful kidney graft survival. The artificially positive outcomes of CDC-based crossmatches due to the underlying disease Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), however, may lead to the unjustified refusal of adequate kidney grafts. Two prospective female recipients destined for a living as well as for a cadaver kidney donation, respectively, exhibited positive CDC-based crossmatch outcomes although for both patients no historical immunizing events were known. Furthermore, solid phase-based screening or antibody differentiation analyses never led to positive results. Immediate reruns of the CDC-based crossmatch assays using the alternative antibody monitoring system (AMS-)crossmatch ELISA resulted in unequivocally negative outcomes. Consequently both transplantations were performed without any immunological complications for the hitherto follow-up time of 25 and 28 months, respectively. We here show two case reports demonstrating an alternative methodical approach to circumvent CDC-based artefacts and point to the urgent need to substitute the CDC-based crossmatch procedure at least for special groups of patients.

Thoracic organ transplantation: laboratory methods

Although great progress has been achieved in thoracic organ transplantation through the development of effective immunosuppression, there is still significant risk of rejection during the early post-transplant period, creating a need for routine monitoring for both acute antibody and cellular mediated rejection. The currently available multiplexed, microbead assays utilizing solubilized HLA antigens afford the capability of sensitive detection and identification of HLA and non-HLA specific antibodies. These assays are being used to assess the relative strength of donor specific antibodies; to permit performance of virtual crossmatches which can reduce the waiting time to transplantation; to monitor antibody levels during desensitization; and for heart transplants to monitor antibodies post-transplant. For cell mediated immune responses, the recent development of gene expression profiling has allowed noninvasive monitoring of heart transplant recipients yielding predictive values for acute cellular rejection. T cell immune monitoring in heart and lung transplant recipients has allowed individual tailoring of immunosuppression, particularly to minimize risk of infection. While the current antibody and cellular laboratory techniques have enhanced the ability to manage thoracic organ transplant recipients, future developments from improved understanding of microchimerism and graft tolerance may allow more refined allograft monitoring techniques.