False-negative results in anti-HLA antibody detection by Sangstat ELISA: complement dependent cytotoxicity is not yet obsolete

Sensitive solid-phase detection of donor-specific antibodies as an aid highly relevant to improving allograft outcomes

Transplant recipients who have had sensitizing events such as pregnancies, blood transfusions and previous transplants often develop antibodies directed against human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-molecules of the donor tissue. These pre-formed donor-specific antibodies (DSA) represent a high risk of organ failure as a consequence of antibody-mediated hyper-acute or acute allograft rejection. As a first assay to detect DSA, the complement-dependent lymphocytotoxicity assay (CDC) was established more than 40 years ago. However, this assay is characterized by several drawbacks such as a low sensitivity and a high susceptibility to various artificial factors generally not leading to valid and reliable outcomes under several circumstances that are reviewed in this article. Furthermore, only those antibodies that exert complement-fixing activity are detected. As a consequence, novel procedures that act independently of the complement system and that do not represent functional assays were generated in the format of solid phase assays (SPAs) (bead- or ELISA-based). In this article, we review the pros and cons of these sensitive SPA in comparison with the detection of DSA through the use of the traditional methods such as CDC and flow cytometric analyses. Potential drawbacks of the alternative methodological approaches comprising high background reactivity, susceptibility to environmental factors and the possible influence of subjective operators' errors concerning the interpretation of the results are summarized and critically discussed for each method. We provide a forecast on the future role of SPAs reliably excluding highly deleterious DSA, thus leading to an improved graft survival.

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

Antibodies directed against HLA antigens of a given organ donor represent the dominating reason for hyper-acute or acute allograft rejections. In order to select recipients without donor-specific antibodies, a standard crossmatch (CM) procedure, the complement-dependent cytotoxicity assay (CDC), was developed. This functional assay strongly depends on the availability of isolated vital lymphocytes of a given donor. However, the requirements of the donor’s material may often not be fulfilled, so that the detection of the antibodies directed against HLA molecules is either impaired or becomes completely impossible. To circumvent the disadvantages of the CDC procedure, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-based and other solid phase-based ELISA-related techniques have been designed to reliably detect anti-HLA antibodies in recipients. Due to the obvious advantages of these novel technologies, when compared with the classical CDC assay, there is an urgent need to implement them as complementary methods or even as a substitution for the conventional CDC crossmatch that is currently being applied by all tissue typing laboratories.

A renewable source of donor cells for repetitive monitoring of T- and B-cell alloreactivity

A major impediment to repetitive monitoring of alloreactivity or tolerance is the limited supply of donor cells available for assays of host-versus-graft T- and B-cell reactivity. In this paper, we describe the use of CD40L stimulated CD19(+) B cells as targets or stimulators in flow cytometric crossmatching (FXM), mixed lymphocyte reactivity and IFN-gamma ELISPOT assays. Stimulated B cells (sBc) express high levels of MHC class I and II, as well as the costimulatory molecules CD80 and CD86. They can be polyclonally expanded and frozen for later use. We describe the use of sBc in ELISPOT, mixed lymphocyte cultures and FXM. CD4(+) T cells exposed to sBc express a similar cytokine profile as those stimulated with unfractionated PBMC. We further analyzed T- and B-cell responses in 14 patients on the renal transplant waiting list, finding that those with an elevated panel reactive antibody (PRA) (>60%) had higher alloreactive T-cell precursor frequencies as measured by CDFSE MLR and IFN-gamma ELISPOT. We conclude that sBc are a renewable source of donor-specific target/stimulator cells for use in repetitive and coordinate assays of B- and T-cell alloreactivity.

Comparison of different techniques for detection of anti-HLA antibodies in sera from patients awaiting kidney transplantation

The aim of the present study was to compare different techniques of HLA antibody detection in patients waiting for a transplant. Two methods of HLA antibody screening were compared: the complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) test and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent solubility assay (ELISA). Three different commercial kits for the latter assay were tested: the kits were produced by One Lambda (O.L.) and SANG STAT for prescreening and specificity determination, and GTI only for prescreening. Of the two techniques, only CDC can detect IgM. The study included 207 serum samples selected from 192 patients waiting for a first kidney transplant. The conclusions are that O.L. is more sensitive than CDC and the other ELISA kits and is much faster for analysing a serum (taking only a few hours), but costs about 16 times more than CDC and does not detect IgM antibodies, so can be used only in support of CDC.

Kidney graft failure and presensitization against HLA class I and class II antigens

BACKGROUND

It is well known that kidney transplant recipients with preformed lymphocytotoxic antibodies against HLA antigens have an increased graft rejection rate. However, the individual contribution of anti-HLA class I and class II antibodies to this phenomenon is poorly understood. We investigated the clinical relevance of preformed anti-HLA class I and class II antibodies on graft outcome in more than 4000 kidney recipients.

METHODS

Pretransplant sera of 4136 cadaver kidney recipients from 28 transplant centers were tested in ELISA for IgG-anti-HLA class I and IgG-anti-HLA class II antibodies. The influence of antibody reactivity on graft survival was analyzed.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty of the anti-HLA class I antibody-positive recipients had a graft survival rate at 2 years of 77+/-2%, compared with an 84+/-1% rate in 3656 anti-HLA class I antibody-negative recipients (P<0.0001), and 770 anti-HLA class II-positive recipients had a graft survival rate of 79+/-2%, compared with an 84+/-1% rate in 3366 anti-HLA class II-negative patients (P<0.0001). Importantly, good 2-year graft survival rates of 85+/-3% and 84+/-2%, respectively, were observed in 206 anti-HLA class I-positive/class II-negative and 496 anti-HLA, class I-negative/class II-positive recipients. In contrast, the 274 recipients positive for both types of antibodies showed a poor graft survival rate of 71+/-3% (P<0.0001). Among 853 patients who received a well-matched kidney (0 or 1 HLA-A+B+DR mismatch), sensitization against either class I or class II, or both, had no deleterious effect. However, in 113 class I and class II antibody-positive patients who received a kidney with > or =3 HLA-A+B+DR mismatches, the 2-year graft survival rate was only 60+/-5%.

CONCLUSION

Presensitization of first kidney transplant recipients against either HLA class I or class II is of no clinical consequence, whereas sensitization against both HLA class I and class II results in increased rejection of HLA mismatched grafts.

HLA-antibody testing: the immune phagocytosis inhibition test is superior to the PRA-STAT and NIH lymphocytotoxic test with respect to specificity

We compared the specificity and sensitivity of four different methods for the detection of antibodies specific for HLA antigens. The NIH version of the complement-dependent cytotoxic test (CDC) was used as the gold standard to which we compared two Fcgamma receptor (FcgammaR)-dependent immune phagocytosis inhibition tests (IPI) and one commercial enzyme-labelled immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with soluble HLA class I-antigen preparations bound to the plate (PRA-STAT). Both IPI tests are based on the fact that HLA-antibodies specifically bind to antigens on the monocyte surface via their Fab portion, and in so doing block a neighbouring FcgammaR with their Fc region. This blockade prevents phagocytosis of IgG-coated red blood cells (RBCs), which can be measured either microscopically (IPIm) or photometrically (IPIp). The four assays were used in blind tests on 20 human alloantisera or monoclonal antibodies with known HLA-antigen reactivities. Additionally, two monoclonal antibodies and one human serum were titrated to elucidate the sensitivity of each test. After all tests were completed, the identities of the samples were disclosed. Both IPI methods detected and identified all clinically relevant HLA class I and class II specific antibodies. In contrast, the CDC was not able to detect noncytotoxic HLA-antibodies and HLA class II specific antibodies; however, it detected clinically insignificant IgM lymphocytotoxins. The PRA-STAT assay enabled identification of all cytotoxic and noncytotoxic IgG antibodies with specificity for HLA-class I antigens. With respect to sensitivity, the CDC and the IPI methods were superior to the PRA-STAT. These facts demonstrate the advantage of IPI methods in the detection of clinically relevant HLA-antibodies.

Anti-HLA alloantibody is found in children but does not correlate with a lack of HIV type 1 transmission from infected mothers

Searching for mechanisms of natural resistance to HIV infection with which to guide HIV vaccine design, we have examined antibody responses to HLA class I antigens in children of HIV-1-infected mothers. Anti-HLA antibodies are known to block HIV infectivity in vitro and can be protective against SIV challenge in macaques immunized with purified class I HLA. It was hypothesized that alloantibody to maternal HLA in children might contribute to the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1. In fact, a surprisingly high proportion of the children examined, 22%, were found to have antibody against class I alloantigens. This alloantibody, however, did not correlate with the HIV status of the children and was found in a similar proportion of children of HIV-negative mothers. The HLA specificity of the antibody was not correlated with noninherited maternal HLA alleles and occurred with a higher frequency in older children. This result suggests environmental factors, rather than exposure to maternal cells, are involved in the formation of the alloantibody. The finding that anti-allo-class I HLA antibodies are not associated with a decreased risk of mother-to-child transmission indicates that this humoral immune response is unlikely to be the natural mechanism that accounts for the lack of transmission observed in many births. This result, however, does not preclude the further investigation of cellular alloimmune responses, or the use of alloimmunization as an artificial HIV immunization strategy.

Detection of HLA-specific antibodies by PRA-STAT and their association with transplant outcome

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to investigate the correlation between renal transplant outcome and the presence of HLA-specific antibodies detected using the ELISA kit PRA-STAT as compared with complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC).

METHOD

295 sera from 95 renal transplant recipients (99 transplants) were investigated for the presence of HLA-specific antibodies using both PRA-STAT and CDC. The patients were divided into group I (49 transplants failed within 1 month) and group II (50 successful transplants).

RESULTS

The concordance between PRA-STAT and CDC for the detection of HLA class I-specific antibodies was 87.8% (259 of 295). For 19 sera, antibodies were detected only by PRA-STAT; for 17 sera, antibodies were detected only by CDC. No donor-specific antibodies were detected by either technique for patients in group II. For four group I patients (six sera), donor-specific IgG antibodies were detected only by PRA-STAT (one before, three after transplant) and all four transplants failed. For five other group I patients (six sera), donor HLA-specific antibodies were detected only by CDC (one before, four after transplant) and all five transplants failed. The antibodies detected before transplant by CDC were shown to be IgM alloantibodies.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that PRA-STAT could detect HLA-specific IgG antibodies relevant to transplant outcome that were not detected by CDC. However, it could not detect IgM alloantibodies that were also shown to be important. PRA-STAT is therefore a useful addition to a histocompatibility laboratory's screening repertoire only when used in conjunction with other techniques.

Predictive value of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-detected IgG anti-HLA antibodies for pediatric renal allograft rejection

BACKGROUND

Measurement of panel-reactive antibody (PRA) with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using soluble HLA class I molecules (PRA-STAT) in adult renal transplant recipients predicted graft loss and rejection. We sought to confirm this finding in pediatric recipients, an immunologically distinct group.

METHODS

The population consisted of 158 renal transplants in 146 patients (age range, 1-21 years). PRA was determined with PRA-STAT and microlymphocytotoxicity (CDC), using final cross-match sera. An elevated test was defined as > or =5% reactivity. Statistical analysis for rejection used the chi-square test and for graft survival used the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients (22%) had %PRA-STAT > or =5%, compared with 26 (16%) with %PRA-CDC > or =5%. The percentage with elevated %PRA-STAT was found to correlate with subsequent transplantations (first, 15%; second, 67%; third, 75%). Subsequent analyses utilized only the 136 primary recipients, of whom 20 (15%) had %PRA-STAT > or =5% and 16 (12%) had %PRA-CDC > or =5%. Elevated %PRA-STAT correlated with rejection at 3 months (65% vs. 36%), 12 months (84% vs. 50%), and 24 months (84% vs. 54%) (P<0.05). No association was found between elevated %PRA-CDC and rejection. Patients with %PRA-STAT > or =5% vs. %PRA-STAT <5% had graft survival at 1 year of 89% vs. 84%, at 2 years of 88% vs. 77%, and at 3 years of 61% vs. 72% (not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of %PRA-STAT > or =5% identifies pediatric recipients who are at increased risk for rejection and may benefit from more potent immunosuppression and/or closer monitoring of graft function.