Plasma exchange in acute renal allograft rejection. A controlled trial

New Therapies for Highly Sensitized Patients on the Waiting List

Exposure to HLA alloantigens through pregnancy, blood products, and previous transplantations induce powerful immunologic responses that create an immunologic barrier to successful transplantation. This is commonly detected through screening for HLA antibodies using Luminex beads coated with HLA antigens at transplant evaluation. Currently accepted approaches to desensitization include plasmapheresis/low-dose or high-dose intravenous Ig plus anti-CD20. However, these approaches are often unsuccessful because of the inability to remove high titer circulating HLA antibodies and limit rebound responses by long-lived anti-HLA antibody secreting plasma cells (PCs) and memory B cells (B MEM ). This is especially significant for patients with a calculated panel reactive antibody of 99%-100%. Newer desensitization approaches, such as imlifidase (IgG endopeptidase), rapidly inactivate IgG molecules and create an antibody-free zone by cleaving IgG into F(ab'2) and Fc fragments, thus eliminating complement and cell-mediated injury to the graft. This represents an important advancement in desensitization. However, the efficacy of imlifidase is limited by pathogenic antibody rebound, increasing the potential for antibody-mediated rejection. Controlling antibody rebound requires new strategies that address the issues of antibody depletion and inhibition of B MEM and PC responses. This will likely require a combination of agents that effectively and rapidly deplete pathogenic antibodies and prevent immune cell activation pathways responsible for antibody rebound. Here, using anti-IL-6 receptor (tocilizumab) or anti-IL-6 (clazakizumab) could offer long-term control of B MEM and PC donor-specific HLA antibody responses. Agents aimed at eliminating long-lived PCs (anti-CD38 and anti-B-cell maturation antigen×CD3) are likely to benefit highly HLA sensitized patients. Complement inhibitors and novel agents aimed at inhibiting Fc neonatal receptor IgG recycling will be important in desensitization. Administering these agents alone or in combination will advance our ability to effectively desensitize patients and maintain durable suppression post-transplant. After many years of limited options, advanced therapeutics will likely improve efficacy of desensitization and improve access to kidney transplantation for highly HLA sensitized patients.

Translating B cell immunology to the treatment of antibody-mediated allograft rejection

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), including chronic AMR (cAMR), causes ~50% of kidney allograft losses each year. Despite attempts to develop well-tolerated and effective therapeutics for the management of AMR, to date, none has obtained FDA approval, thereby highlighting an urgent unmet medical need. Discoveries over the past decade from basic, translational and clinical studies of transplant recipients have provided a foundation for developing novel therapeutic approaches to preventing and treating AMR and cAMR. These interventions are aimed at reducing donor-specific antibody levels, decreasing graft injury and fibrosis, and preserving kidney function. Innovative approaches emerging from basic science findings include targeting interactions between alloreactive T cells and B cells, and depleting alloreactive memory B cells, as well as donor-specific antibody-producing plasmablasts and plasma cells. Therapies aimed at reducing the cytotoxic antibody effector functions mediated by natural killer cells and the complement system, and their associated pro-inflammatory cytokines, are also undergoing evaluation. The complexity of the pathogenesis of AMR and cAMR suggest that multiple approaches will probably be required to treat these disease processes effectively. Definitive answers await results from large, double-blind, multicentre, randomized controlled clinical trials.

Current Therapies in Kidney Transplant Rejection

Despite significant advancements in immunosuppressive therapies, kidney transplant rejection continues to pose a substantial challenge, impacting the long-term survival of grafts. This article provides an overview of the diagnosis, current therapies, and management strategies for acute T-cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR). TCMR is diagnosed through histological examination of kidney biopsy samples, which reveal the infiltration of mononuclear cells into the allograft tissue. Corticosteroids serve as the primary treatment for TCMR, while severe or steroid-resistant cases may require T-cell-depleting agents, like Thymoglobulin. ABMR occurs due to the binding of antibodies to graft endothelial cells. The most common treatment for ABMR is plasmapheresis, although its efficacy is still a subject of debate. Other current therapies, such as intravenous immunoglobulins, anti-CD20 antibodies, complement inhibitors, and proteasome inhibitors, are also utilized to varying degrees, but their efficacy remains questionable. Management decisions for ABMR depend on the timing of the rejection episode and the presence of chronic changes. In managing both TCMR and ABMR, it is crucial to optimize immunosuppression and address adherence. However, further research is needed to explore newer therapeutics and evaluate their efficacy.

On a Long and Winding Road: Alloantibodies in Organ Transplantation

Today we know that both the humoral and the cellular arm of the immune system are engaged in severe immunological challenges. A close interaction between B and T cells can be observed in most "natural" challenges, including infections, malignancies, and autoimmune diseases. The importance and power of humoral immunity are impressively demonstrated by the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Organ transplant rejection is a normal immune response to a completely "artificial" challenge. It took a long time before the multifaceted action of different immunological forces was recognized and a unified, generally accepted opinion could be formed. Here, we address prominent paradigms and paradigm shifts in the field of transplantation immunology. We identify several instances in which the transplant community missed a timely paradigm shift because essential, available knowledge was ignored. Moreover, we discuss key findings that critically contributed to our understanding of transplant immunology but sometimes developed with delay and in a roundabout way, as was the case with antibody-mediated rejection-a main focus of this article. These include the discovery of the molecular principles of histocompatibility, the recognition of the microcirculation as a key interface of immune damage, the refinement of alloantibody detection, the description of C4d as a footmark of endothelium-bound antibody, and last but not least, the developments in biopsy-based diagnostics beyond conventional morphology, which only now give us a glimpse of the enormous complexity and pathogenetic diversity of rejection.

Antibody-mediated rejection: prevention, monitoring and treatment dilemmas

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has emerged as the leading cause of late graft loss in kidney transplant recipients. Donor-specific antibodies are an independent risk factor for AMR and graft loss. However, not all donor-specific antibodies are pathogenic. AMR treatment is heterogeneous due to the lack of robust trials to support clinical decisions. This review provides an overview and comments on practical but relevant dilemmas physicians experience in managing kidney transplant recipients with AMR.

RECENT FINDINGS

Active AMR with donor-specific antibodies may be treated with plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin and corticosteroids with additional therapies considered on a case-by-case basis. On the contrary, no treatment has been shown to be effective against chronic active AMR. Various biomarkers and prediction models to assess the individual risk of graft failure and response to rejection treatment show promise.

SUMMARY

The ability to personalize management for a given kidney transplant recipient and identify treatments that will improve their long-term outcome remains a critical unmet need. Earlier identification of AMR with noninvasive biomarkers and prediction models to assess the individual risk of graft failure should be considered. Enrolling patients with AMR in clinical trials to assess novel therapeutic agents is highly encouraged.

Emerging drugs for antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation: a focus on phase II & III trials

INTRODUCTION

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure. Its therapy continues to be challenge, and no treatment has been approved for the market thus far.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we discuss the pathophysiology and phenotypic presentation of ABMR, the current level of evidence to support the use of available therapeutic strategies, and the emergence of tailored drugs now being evaluated in systematic clinical trials. We searched PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov and Citeline's Pharmaprojects for pertinent information on emerging anti-rejection strategies, laying a focus on phase II and III trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, we rely on the use of apheresis for alloantibody depletion and intravenous immunoglobulin (referred to as standard of care), preferentially in early active ABMR. Recent systematic trials have questioned the benefits of using the CD20 antibody rituximab or the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. However, there are now several promising treatment approaches in the pipeline, which are being trialed in phase II and III studies. These include interleukin-6 antagonism, CD38-targeting antibodies, and selective inhibitors of complement. On the basis of the information that has emerged so far, it seems that innovative treatment strategies for clinical use in ABMR may be available within the next 5-10 years.

Lung Allograft Rejection

Rejection is a major complication following lung transplantation. Acute cellular rejection (ACR), and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) are risk factors for the subsequent development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction and worse outcomes after transplantation. Although ACR has well-defined histopathologic diagnostic criteria and grading, the diagnosis of AMR requires a multidisciplinary diagnostic approach. This article reviews the identification, clinical and pathologic features of, and therapeutic options for ACR and AMR.

Differential Treatment Effects for Renal Transplant Recipients With DSA-Positive or DSA-Negative Antibody-Mediated Rejection

Background

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is the main cause of renal allograft loss. The most common treatment strategy is based on plasmapheresis plus the subsequent administration of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). Unfortunately, no approved long-term therapy is available for ABMR. The current study was designed to analyze the effect of various ABMR treatment approaches on allograft survival and to compare treatment effects in the presence or absence of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs).

Methods

This single-center study retrospectively analyzed 102 renal allograft recipients who had biopsy-proven ABMR after transplant. DSA was detectable in 61 of the 102 patients. Initial standard treatment of ABMR consisted of plasmapheresis (PS) or immunoadsorption (IA), followed by a single course of IVIG. In case of nonresponse or recurrence, additional immunosuppressive medications, such as rituximab, bortezomib, thymoglobulin, or eculizumab, were administered. In a second step, persistent ABMR was treated with increased maintenance immunosuppression, long-term therapy with IVIG (more than 1 year), or both.

Results

Overall graft survival among transplant patients with ABMR was <50% after 3 years of follow-up. Compared to the use of PS/IA and IVIG alone, the use of additional immunosuppressive medications had no beneficial effect on allograft survival (p = 0.83). Remarkably, allografts survival rates were comparable between patients treated with the combination of PS/IA and IVIG and those treated with a single administration of IVIG (p = 0.18). Renal transplant patients with ABMR but without DSAs benefited more from increased maintenance immunosuppression than did DSA-positive patients with ABMR (p = 0.01). Recipients with DSA-positive ABMR exhibited significantly better allograft survival after long-term application of IVIG for more than 1 year than did recipients with DSA-negative ABMR (p = 0.02).

Conclusions

The results of our single-center cohort study involving kidney transplant recipients with ABMR suggest that long-term application of IVIG is more favorable for DSA-positive recipients, whereas intensification of maintenance immunosuppression is more effective for recipients with DSA-negative ABMR.

Therapeutic apheresis in kidney transplantation: An updated review

Therapeutic apheresis is a cornerstone of therapy for several conditions in transplantation medicine and is available in different technical variants. In the setting of kidney transplantation, immunological barriers such as ABO blood group incompatibility and preformed donor-specific antibodies can complicate the outcome of deceased- or living- donor transplantation. Postoperatively, additional problems such as antibody-mediated rejection and a recurrence of primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis can limit therapeutic success and decrease graft survival. Therapeutic apheresis techniques find application in these issues by separating and selectively removing exchanging or modifying pathogenic material from the patient by an extracorporeal aphaeresis system. The purpose of this review is to describe the available techniques of therapeutic aphaeresis with their specific advantages and disadvantages and examine the evidence supporting the application of therapeutic aphaeresis as an adjunctive therapeutic option to immunosuppressive agents in protocols before and after kidney transplantation.

The Treatment of Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Kidney Transplantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Current treatments for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in kidney transplantation are based on low-quality data from a small number of controlled trials. Novel agents targeting B cells, plasma cells, and the complement system have featured in recent studies of AMR.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials in kidney transplant recipients using Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from inception to February 2017.

RESULTS

Of 14 380 citations, we identified 21 studies, including 10 randomized controlled trials, involving 751 participants. Since the last systematic review conducted in 2011, we found nine additional studies evaluating plasmapheresis + intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (two), rituximab (two), bortezomib (two), C1 inhibitor (two), and eculizumab (one). Risk of bias was serious or unclear overall and evidence quality was low for the majority of treatment strategies. Sufficient RCTs for pooled analysis were available only for antibody removal, and here there was no significant difference between groups for graft survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.35-1.63; P = 0.475). Studies showed important heterogeneity in treatments, definition of AMR, quality, and follow-up. Plasmapheresis and IVIG were used as standard-of-care in recent studies, and to this combination, rituximab seemed to add little or no benefit. Insufficient data are available to assess the efficacy of bortezomib and complement inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

Newer studies evaluating rituximab showed little or no difference to early graft survival, and the efficacy of bortezomib and complement inhibitors for the treatment of AMR remains unclear. Despite the evidence uncertainty, plasmapheresis and IVIG have become standard-of-care for the treatment of acute AMR.

Antibody-mediated rejection: New approaches in prevention and management

Despite the success of desensitization protocols, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) remains a significant contributor to renal allograft failure in patients with donor-specific antibodies. Plasmapheresis and high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin have proved to be effective treatments to prevent and treat AMR, but irreversible injury in the form of transplant glomerulopathy can commonly manifest months to years later. There is an unmet need to improve the outcomes for patients at risk for AMR. Updated Banff criteria now take into account the increasing understanding of the complex and heterogeneous nature of AMR phenotypes, including the timing of rejection, subclinical and chronic AMR, C4d-negative AMR, and antibody-mediated vascular rejection. Treatment for AMR is not standardized, and there is little in the way of evidence-based treatment guidelines. Refining more precisely the mechanisms of injury responsible for different AMR phenotypes and establishing relevant surrogate endpoints to facilitate more informative studies will likely allow for more accurate determination of prognosis and efficacious intervention using new therapeutic approaches. In addition to plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin, a number of other add-on therapies have been tried in small studies without consistent benefit, including anti-CD20, proteasome inhibitors, complement inhibitors, anti-interleukin-6 receptor blockers, and immunoglobulin G-degrading enzyme of Streptococcus pyogenes (called IdeS).

Bortezomib may stabilize pediatric renal transplant recipients with antibody-mediated rejection

BACKGROUND

Current therapeutic strategies to effectively treat antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) are insufficient. Thus, we aimed to determine the benefit of a therapeutic protocol using bortezomib for refractory C4d + AMR in pediatric kidney transplant patients.

METHODS

We examined seven patients with treatment-refractory C4d + AMR. Immunosuppression included antithymocyte globulin or anti-CD25 monoclonal antibody for induction therapy with maintenance corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitor, and anti-metabolite. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculated by the Schwartz equation, biopsy findings assessed by 2013 Banff criteria, and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies (DSA) performed using the Luminex single antigen bead assay were monitored pre- and post- bortezomib therapy.

RESULTS

Seven patients (86 % male, 86 % with ≥6/8 HLA mismatch, and 14 % with pre-formed DSA) age 5 to 19 (median 15) years developed refractory C4d + AMR between 1 and 145 (median 65) months post-transplantation. All patients tolerated bortezomib. One patient had allograft loss. Of the six patients with surviving grafts (86 %), mean pre-bortezomib eGFR was 42 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and the mean 1 year post-bortezomib eGFR was 53 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Five of seven (71 %) had improvement of histological findings of AMR, C4d staining, and/or acute cellular rejection. Reduction in HLA DSAs was more effective for class I than class II.

CONCLUSIONS

Bortezomib appears safe and may correlate with stabilization of eGFR in pediatric kidney transplant patients with refractory C4d + AMR.

Antibody-mediated rejection in young kidney transplant recipients: the dilemma of noncompliance and insufficient immunosuppression

BACKGROUND

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a recognized cause of late kidney allograft loss. Although ABMR may occur despite appropriate chronic immunosuppressive therapy, non-adherence both facilitates and accelerates the activation of the effector phase of the humoral immune response against the donor tissue, leading in turn to progressive kidney allograft rejection. Given the poor efficacy of rescue therapies for both acute and chronic late ABMR, establishing appropriate preventive strategies at different times before and after transplantation is a critical management goal.

CASE-DIAGNOSIS/TREATMENT

In this report, we discuss the differential diagnoses and management of ABMR based on the clinical case report of a young kidney transplant recipient with progressive ABMR due to poor immunosuppressive adherence. In the absence of sensitive and specific non-invasive monitoring tools for alloimmune activation, the clinical dilemma in the management of the adolescent patient lies in differentiating between suboptimal prescribed immunosuppression and deliberate non-adherence to adequate immunosuppression dosing. Despite the advent of therapies to reduce ABMR injury, the graft is destined for untimely functional loss.

CONCLUSIONS

New biomarkers and tools for the accurate characterization of alloimmune risk before and after transplantation, and serial testing for de novo changes in circulating donor-specific alloantibodies, are urgently needed to support the delivery of optimized immunosuppression exposure.

Review of bortezomib treatment of antibody-mediated rejection in renal transplantation

SIGNIFICANCE

Development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) after kidney transplantation is associated with reduced allograft survival. A few strategies have been tested in controlled clinical trials for the treatment of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), and no therapies are approved by regulatory authorities. Thus development of antihumoral therapies that provide prompt elimination of DSA and improve allograft survival is an important goal.

RECENT ADVANCES

Proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based regimens provide a promising new approach for treating AMR. To date, experiences have been limited to off-label bortezomib use in AMR. Key findings with PI-based therapy are that they provide effective primary and rescue therapy for AMR by prompt reduction in immunodominant DSA and improvements in histologic and renal function. Early and late AMR differ immunologically and in response to PI therapy. Bortezomib-related toxicities in renal transplant recipients are similar to those observed in the multiple myeloma population.

CRITICAL ISSUES

Although preliminary evidence with PI therapy for AMR is encouraging, the evidence is limited. Larger, prospective, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow up are needed. Advancement in endpoints of clinical trial designs and rigorous clinical trials with more standardized adjunct therapies are also required to explore the risks and benefits of AMR treatment modalities.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

In the next few years, new PIs are likely to be introduced and new approaches would be developed for achieving synergy with PIs. The ultimate goal will be to develop a regimen that delivers reliable, rapid, complete, and durable elimination of DSA with an acceptable safety profile.

Acute Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Renal Transplantation: Current Clinical Management

Acute antibody mediated rejection (AMR) is recognized as a major cause of graft loss in renal transplant recipients. Early acute AMR in the first few days after transplantation occurs primarily in sensitized renal transplant recipients with donor-specific alloantibody at the time of transplant and is a relatively "pure" form of acute AMR. Late acute AMR occurs months to years after transplantation and is commonly a mixed cellular and humoral rejection. While there is no consensus regarding optimum treatment, we contend that rational therapeutic approaches are emerging and the acute episode can be managed in most instances. However, new therapies are needed to prevent ongoing chronic injury in these patients.

Diagnosis and management of antibody-mediated rejection: current status and novel approaches

Advances in multimodal immunotherapy have significantly reduced acute rejection rates and substantially improved 1-year graft survival following renal transplantation. However, long-term (10-year) survival rates have stagnated over the past decade. Recent studies indicate that antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is among the most important barriers to improving long-term outcomes. Improved understanding of the roles of acute and chronic ABMR has evolved in recent years following major progress in the technical ability to detect and quantify recipient anti-HLA antibody production. Additionally, new knowledge of the immunobiology of B cells and plasma cells that pertains to allograft rejection and tolerance has emerged. Still, questions regarding the classification of ABMR, the precision of diagnostic approaches, and the efficacy of various strategies for managing affected patients abound. This review article provides an overview of current thinking and research surrounding the pathophysiology and diagnosis of ABMR, ABMR-related outcomes, ABMR prevention and treatment, as well as possible future directions in treatment.

Management of antibody-mediated rejection in transplantation

Despite intensive traditional immunosuppressive therapy, rates of graft loss have approximated 15% to 20% at 1 year following antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in solid organ transplant recipients. Therefore, the development of antihumoral therapies that provide prompt elimination of donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies and improve allograft survival is an important goal. Traditional treatment modalities for AMR deplete B-cell populations but not the cell at the source of antibody production, the mature plasma cell. Plasma cell-targeted therapies using proteasome inhibition is a novel approach to treating AMR. This review discusses current and emerging treatment modalities used for AMR.

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.

Immunoadsorption in severe C4d-positive acute kidney allograft rejection: a randomized controlled trial

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) frequently causes refractory graft dysfunction. This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate whether immunoadsorption (IA) is effective in the treatment of severe C4d-positive AMR. Ten out of 756 kidney allograft recipients were included. Patients were randomly assigned to IA with protein A (N = 5) or no such treatment (N = 5) with the option of IA rescue after 3 weeks. Enrolled recipients were subjected to tacrolimus conversion and, if indicated, 'anti-cellular' treatment. All IA-treated patients responded to treatment. One death unrelated to IA occurred after successful reversal of rejection. Four control subjects remained dialysis-dependent. With the exception of one patient who developed graft necrosis, non-responders were subjected to rescue IA, however, without success. Because of a high graft loss rate in the control group the study was terminated after a first interim analysis. Even though limited by small patient numbers, this trial suggests efficiency of IA in reversing severe AMR.

Treatment of early mixed cellular and humoral renal allograft rejection with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil

This prospective study investigated the efficiency of the tacrolimus (Tac) combined with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) alone without immunoadsorption (IA) or plasmapheresis (PPH) as treatment for early (within 2 weeks) acute humoral rejection (AHR) in non-sensitized renal allograft recipients. Of 160 patients enrolled in this prospective study, 11 patients had histologically and clinically confirmed early steroid-resistant acute rejection with an antibody response and received Tac-MMF therapy. No other aggressive rescue methods such as IA, PPH were used, according to the study design. Patients (n=11) were followed for 13.8+/-3.5 months; nine were females. The complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch was negative before transplantation in all patients and only positive for panel-reactive antibody in one patient. Most of the rejection episodes were mixed with cellular rejection (four patients met Banff IIA criteria, five patients met Banff IIB, one patient met Banff IB, and one patient met Banff borderline). After 16.19+/-6.16 days of treatment, all rejection episodes were successfully reversed and all graft functions were stable, with a mean serum creatinine level of 1.12+/-0.32 mg/dl during follow-up. No patient suffered from severe infectious complications (except one case of urinary infection). Our investigation suggests that Tac combined with MMF alone is adequate to reverse early mixed cellular and humoral C4d-positive rejection in non-sensitized renal allograft recipients.

Tacrolimus combined with mycophenolate mofetil can effectively reverse C4d-positive steroid-resistant acute rejection in Chinese renal allograft recipients

BACKGROUND

Tacrolimus (TAC) combined with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has been suggested to play a critical role in the reversal of C4d-positive acute humoral rejection (AHR) in renal transplantation, but the efficacy of using only TAC-MMF without immunoadsorption or plasmapheresis has not been investigated. On the other hand, Chinese recipients of renal grafts usually need lower doses of immunosuppressants, and their optimal treatment for acute humoral rejection has not been established.

METHODS

Since 1999, we have used TAC-MMF to treat steroid-resistant acute rejection (AR). C4d staining was retrospectively performed in 32 patients with steroid-resistant AR, and the treatments of 19 patients with C4d-positive steroid-resistant AR were investigated.

RESULTS

Thirteen of 19 patients received TAC-MMF treatment only; 11 episodes of rejection in them were reversed (7 completely, 4 partially) and only 2 recipients lost their graft. Another 6 patients received immunoadsorption also. One of them failed to respond and lost her graft. Four of 5 patients treated with immunoadsorption and TAC-MMF recovered (3 completely, 1 partially), but 3 of them had severe pneumonia, a complication rate statistically higher than in patients treated with only TAC-MMF (P<0.05). AR occurring during the first two weeks after transplantation had a statistically better outcome than that occurring later (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that the combination of TAC and MMF is a potentially safe and economic treatment for most Chinese renal allograft recipients with C4d-positive steroid-resistant AR, especially for rejections developing within the first two weeks after transplantation.

Beneficial effect of plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin on renal allograft survival of patients with acute humoral rejection

BACKGROUND

Acute humoral rejection (AHR) has been associated with enhanced graft loss. Our study compared the renal allograft survival of patients with AHR treated with plasmapheresis (PP) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) with allograft survival in patients with acute cellular rejection (ACR).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all kidney transplants performed at our institution between January 1999 and August 2001 (n=286). Recipients were classified into three groups according to biopsy reports: AHR, ACR, or no rejection. The ACR group was further divided into early and late rejection (<90 and >90 days posttransplant, respectively).

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 569+/-19 days, the incidence of AHR was 5.6% (n=16). Recipient presensitization, delayed graft function, early rejection, and higher creatinine at diagnosis were characteristic of AHR. Most AHR patients (14/16) were treated with PP and IVIG. One patient received only IVIG, whereas another received only PP. All AHR patients were given steroid pulses, but only four received antilymphocyte therapy because of concomitant severe ACR. The ACR group comprised 43 patients (15%). One patient with mild rejection received no therapy, 20 improved with steroids alone, and 22 required additional antilymphocyte therapy. One-year graft survival by Kaplan Meier analysis was 81% and 84% in the AHR and ACR groups, respectively (P=NS). Outcomes remained similar when AHR patients were compared with those with early ACR.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that AHR, when diagnosed early and treated aggressively with PP and IVIG, carries a short-term prognosis that is similar to ACR.

The use of apheresis in immune renal disorders

Rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis (RPGN) is often associated with the presence of autoantibodies. Included in this group are the glomerulonephritides associated with anti-GBM antibody (Goodpasture's syndrome). IgA mesangial deposition (the renal component of Henoch-Schönlein purpura), lupus erythematosus, cryoglobulinemia and the antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated pauci-immune group. In each of these cases, apheresis may provide a therapeutically useful option. Apheresis has also been found useful in certain types of antibody-mediated transplant rejection and in lowering the levels of preformed cytotoxic antibodies which may preclude transplantation. Finally, there are renal diseases in which the immune component is less clearly involved with pathogenesis but for which apheresis may offer a clear benefit, such as in the renal failure associated with 'cast nephropathy' (multiple myeloma) or the recurrence of FSGS (focal segmental glomerulosclerosis) in transplanted kidneys. It is the purpose of this paper to review the evidence supporting the use of apheresis in immune-related diseases.

An approach to evidence-based therapeutic apheresis

This review is derived from a memorial lecture honoring Dr. Francis Morrison, a former President of the American Society For Apheresis (ASFA). The author had numerous professional contacts with Dr. Morrison through ASFA in the early 1990s, having served with him on the Board of Directors and followed him as President, and also came to know him well on a personal level. Professionally, Dr. Morrison stood out as a courtly gentleman with a marvelous baritone voice whose ability to facilitate organization contributed to a growing sense of dignity and purpose in the affairs of the society. On the personal side, however, there wasn't an ounce of pretension in him. He was accessible and down-to-earth; a genuine character with an active and appealing sense of humor. Not surprisingly, he seemed to have a wealth of insight and "common sense," and since the topic of this study is a kind of common sense approach to assessing the effectiveness of therapeutic apheresis, it seems a fitting way to honor his memory.

Immunoadsorption of sensitized kidney transplant candidates immediately prior to surgery

Patients with anti-human leucocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies from previous transplantation, blood transfusion are highly sensitized and at risk to hyperacute renal graft loss. As these antibodies are identified to be of pathogenic importance, an effective removal may allow successful transplantation. Six 'high risk patients' [panel-reactive antibodies (PRA) >30% or retransplanted patients with an acutely rejected first graft within 6 months from surgery] were treated by protein A immunoadsorption (IA) immediately prior to transplantation. We treated the calculated plasma volume one to three times prior to surgery: mean 4600 mL (range 2100-10 200 mL). After transplantation we repeated the sessions according to antibody (Ab) recurrence, graft function and signs of rejection. The panel reactive Ab were reduced from mean 65% pre-IA (range 35-85) to lowest 15% (range 0-55). After the course they reappeared to 30% (range 0-90). Five of the six patients had no clinical signs of vascular rejection. At a follow-up of mean 54 months (+/-14) four grafts still function with a mean serum creatinine of 172 micromol/L (+/-57). Protein A IA is a safe and effective adjunct in the treatment of highly sensitized patients awaiting renal transplantation. The treatment immediately prior to operation can prevent hyperacute rejection and increases the graft survival in these patients.

Plasmapheresis. Technical aspects and indications

In summary, use of plasmapheresis has changed in recent years given advances in medical technology that have allowed a wider clinical application in the critical care setting. Membrane filtration technology has provided an alternative to centrifugation that can be easily applied in intensive care units. Use of plasmapheresis has also changed in recent years reflecting the availability of evidence largely obtained from controlled prospective studies. However, the clinical efficacy of plasmapheresis for many acute renal conditions is still controversial. Plasmapheresis appears to be a useful adjunct to conventional therapy in the treatment of anti-GBM nephritis, severe dialysis-dependent forms of pauciimmune RPGN, cryoglobulinemia, and HUS-TTP. Reported data also suggest a possible benefit of plasmapheresis in patients with myeloma cast nephropathy, sepsis, and poisoning/overdose, but the case for plasmapheresis in these disorders is largely unproven and the reported evidence insufficient to recommend its use outside research settings. In contrast, data from controlled trials do not support a role for plasmapheresis in immune complex-mediated RPGN, such as lupus nephritis, and acute allograft rejection. The more widespread application of prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trials should help to better define the value of plasmapheresis for treatment of acute renal diseases.

Apheresis for Renal Disease

Many primary renal diseases are associated with either antibody deposition within the glomerulus or an antibody associated autoimmunity, as may be seen with certain vasculitidies. Examples of these diseases include Goodpasture's syndrome, cryoglobulinemia, antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positive syndromes, and other forms of rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis. Immunoglobulins also may be nephrotoxic to the tubules such as is the case with myeloma related light chains. Given the rapid removal of immunoglobulins by therapeutic plasma exchange, this modality has been considered an appealing management option in the treatment of these renal diseases. Although not classically considered as autoimmune diseases, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura and hemolytic uremic syndrome are related syndromes which often involve the kidneys. Although previously unexplained, it has been long appreciated that therapeutic plasma exchange (PE) can be a useful treatment for these microangiopathic hemolytic anemias, but the most recent insights into their pathogenesis suggest that PE may be beneficial by replacing a missing enzyme or removing pathogenic autoantibodies.

Treatment of antibody-mediated accelerated rejection using plasmapheresis

Accelerated antibody-mediated rejection is believed to be due to an anamnestic response of an allograft recipient to donor antigens. Few reports have demonstrated successful reversal of this type of rejection, and no consensus exists for either diagnosis or treatment. Accelerated antibody-mediated rejection was suspected on the basis of clinical findings and confirmed by cytotoxic and flow crossmatches, and leukocyte antibody screens. Serial crossmatches and antibody screens were performed through post-transplant day 112. Plasmapheresis was performed on post-transplant days 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 14, 20, and 28. The duration of treatment was determined by the cytotoxic crossmatch results. We present a case of successfully treated accelerated antibody-mediated rejection using plasmapheresis and aggressive immunosuppression. Serial crossmatch and leukocyte antibody screen results are presented that confirm the production of anti-donor antibody and demonstrate the effectiveness of the treatment protocol in eliminating detectable levels of the anti-donor antibody. At 6 months post-transplant, the patient has a serum creatinine of 1.1 and has not had any additional rejection episodes or infectious complications. The protocol suggested in this paper allows for rapid diagnosis, institution of treatment, and monitoring the efficacy of treatment, providing the basis for follow-up clinical trials.

Therapeutic apheresis for renal disorders

Many primary renal diseases are associated with either antibody deposition within the glomerulus or an antibody associated autoimmunity, as may be seen with certain vasculitidies. Other immunoglobulins may be nephrotoxic or glomerulopathic; such may be the case with myeloma related light chains or cryoglobulins. Given the rapid removal of immunoglobulins by therapeutic plasma exchange, this modality has been considered an appealing management option in the treatment of these autoimmune related renal diseases. Although not classically considered as autoimmune diseases, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura and hemolytic uremic syndrome are related syndromes which often involve the kidneys. In many cases therapeutic plasma exchange has been found to be a useful treatment modality for these microangiopathic hemolytic anemias. This paper will provide a concise review of the renal indications for therapeutic plasma exchange.

Therapeutic apheresis for renal diseases

Plasma exchange is used frequently in renal diseases for the removal of the humoral components of immune responses. Various pathological circulating factors are recognized in primary and secondary renal diseases. Recent advances in medical technology have allowed a wider clinical application of plasmapheresis in the clinical management of a variety of conditions. However, the clinical efficacy of plasmapheresis in renal diseases is still controversial. In this article, we review the therapeutic use of apheresis in different renal diseases.

Protein A immunoadsorption (i.a.) in renal transplantation patients with vascular rejection

Vascular rejection after renal transplantation is connected with a higher frequency of allograft dysfunction or graft loss. Plasmapheresis as an adjunctive therapy in the treatment of humoral mediated acute graft rejection was compared with protein A immunoadsorption. Eleven patients with acute graft rejection and high titers of cytotoxic HLA-Ab and/or signs of vascular rejection at graft biopsy (performed in 9 patients) have been treated. Six of them have a stable graft function, the longest graft survival until now is 41 months, four are back on haemodialysis and one patient died from CMV-pneumonia with a stable graft function 9 months after transplantation. We conclude that IA is a useful adjunctive therapy in the treatment of vascular rejection after renal transplantation. Further investigations are necessary to optimize criteria for inclusion.

Plasma exchange in steroid and anti-thymocyte globulin resistant allograft rejection in children

Six children with steroid- and anti-thymocyte globulin-resistant transplant rejection were treated with plasma exchange. Three had a sustained improvement in renal function; two improved for a short period and one showed no benefit.

Therapeutic plasmapheresis and plasma exchange

Plasma exchange is a process in which large volumes of plasma, usually equivalent to one plasma volume, are exchanged with donor plasma or a plasma substitute. This permits the removal of antibody, immune complexes, inflammatory mediators, paraproteins, drugs, toxins, and other plasma constituents. Plasma exchange may also have an effect on the immune system by enhancing the function of the reticuloendothelial system, removing blocking antibody, increasing clearance of tumor cells, and making lymphocytes more vulnerable to immunosuppressive drugs. Over 100 diseases have been treated with plasma exchange with variable success. Results of controlled studies are less dramatic than those of earlier uncontrolled case reports. Reports of complications and even death have tempered initial enthusiasm. Now, over a decade since the initial promising reports began to appear in the literature, the role of plasma exchange remains undefined.