Pretransplant Soluble CD30 Is a Better Predictor of Posttransplant Development of Donor-Specific Antibodies and Acute Vascular Rejection than Panel Reactive Antibodies

Peritransplant Soluble CD30 as a Risk Factor for Slow Kidney Allograft Function, Early Acute Rejection, Worse Long-Term Allograft Function, and Patients' Survival

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine whether serum soluble CD30 (sCD30) could identify recipients at high risk for unfavorable early and late kidney transplant outcomes.

METHODS

Serum sCD30 was measured on the day of kidney transplantation and on the 4th day posttransplant. We assessed the value of these measurements in predicting delayed graft function, slow graft function (SGF), acute rejection (AR), pyelonephritis, decline of allograft function after 6 months, and graft and patient survival during 5 years of follow-up in 45 recipients.

RESULTS

We found the association between low pretransplant serum levels of sCD30 and SGF. The absence of significant decrease of sCD30 on the 4th day posttransplant was characteristic for SGF, early AR (the 8th day-6 months), late AR (>6 months), and early pyelonephritis (the 8th day-2 months). Lower pretransplant and posttransplant sCD30 predicted worse allograft function at 6 months and 2 years, respectively. Higher pretransplant sCD30 was associated with higher frequency of early AR, and worse patients' survival, but only in the recipients of deceased-donor graft. Pretransplant sCD30 also allowed to differentiate patients with early pyelonephritis and early AR.

CONCLUSIONS

Peritransplant sCD30 is useful in identifying patients at risk for unfavorable early and late transplant outcomes.

Noninvasive methods to assess the risk of kidney transplant rejection

In current clinical practice, immune reactivity of kidney transplant recipients is estimated by monitoring the levels of immunosuppressive drugs, and by functional and/or histological evaluation of the allograft. The availability of assays that could directly quantify the extent of the recipient's immune response towards the allograft would help clinicians to customize the prescription of immunosuppressive drugs to individual patients. Importantly, these assays might provide a more in-depth understanding of the complex mechanisms of acute rejection, chronic injury, and tolerance in organ transplantation, allowing the design of new and potentially more effective strategies for the minimization of immunosuppression, or even for the induction of immunological tolerance. The purpose of this review is to summarize results from recent studies in this field.

An update on the impact of pre-transplant transfusions and allosensitization on time to renal transplant and on allograft survival

Background

Blood transfusions have the potential to improve graft survival, induce sensitization, and transmit infections. Current clinical practice is to minimize transfusions in renal transplantation candidates, but it is unclear if the evidence continues to support pre-transplant transfusion avoidance. Changes in the Medicare prospective payment system may increase transfusion rates. Thus there is a need to re-evaluate the literature to improve the management options for renal transplant candidates.

Methods

A review applying a systematic approach and conducted using MEDLINE^®, Embase^®, and the Cochrane Library for English-language publications (timeframe: 01/1984–03/2011) captured 180 studies and data from publically available registries and assessed the impact of transfusions on allosensitization and graft survival, and the impact of allosensitization on graft survival and wait time.

Results

Blood transfusions continued to be a major cause of allosensitization, with allosensitization associated with increased rejection and graft loss, and longer wait times to transplantation. Although older studies showed a beneficial effect of transfusion on graft survival, this benefit has largely disappeared in the post-cyclosporine era due to improved graft outcomes with current practice. Recent data suggested that it may be the donor-specific antibody component of allosensitization that carried the risk to graft outcomes.

Conclusions

Results of this review indicated that avoiding transfusions whenever possible is a sound management option that could prevent detrimental effects in patients awaiting kidney transplantation.

Predictive biomarkers of renal allograft failure

BACKGROUND

Survival of renal allografts is limited by chronic allograft deterioration resulting from processes that are difficult to detect in their early stages, when therapeutic interventions would be most effective. Predictive biomarkers from easily accessible specimens, such as blood or urine, might improve early diagnosis of smoldering graft-damaging processes and help with the identification of patients at particularly high risk of sustained injury, thereby helping to tailor therapy and appropriate follow-up screening.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews recently investigated biomarkers for the prediction of renal allograft failure, outlines the new '-omic' technologies as a potential source for the identification of new predictive biomarkers and judges the practical value of predictive biomarkers at the present timepoint.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the medical database PubMed. No general restrictions (e.g., year of publication) were applied, but the focus was set on more recently published articles.

CONCLUSION

Despite a large number of interesting studies, none of the investigated candidate biomarkers is robustly established for widespread clinical use or able to replace biopsies for graft assessment.

Peripheral blood sampling for the detection of allograft rejection: biomarker identification and validation

Currently, acute allograft rejection can only be detected reliably by deterioration of graft function confirmed by allograft biopsy. A huge drawback of this method of diagnosis is that substantial organ damage has already taken place at the time that rejection is diagnosed. Discovering and validating noninvasive biomarkers that predict acute rejection, and chronic allograft dysfunction, is of great importance. Many studies have investigated changes in the peripheral blood in an attempt to find biomarkers that reflect changes in the graft directly or indirectly. Herein, we will review the promises and limitations of the peripheral blood biomarkers that have been described in the literature so far.

Pretransplant soluble CD30 serum concentration does not affect kidney graft outcomes 3 years after transplantation

INTRODUCTION

An elevated serum concentration of soluble the form of CD30 (sCD30), an activation marker of mainly T(H)2-type cytokines producing T lymphocytes, has been reported as a predictive factor for acute cellular rejection episodes and poor graft outcomes in kidney transplantation. This historic cohort study investigated the association of a pretransplant sCD30 serum concentrations with kidney graft function and graft survival 3 years posttransplantation in adult recipients of deceased donor kidney grafts, treated with monoclonal anti-CD25 antibodies as an induction treatment combined with a cyclosporine (CsA)-based maintenance triple therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The pretransplant sera of 296 recipients were tested for sCD30 content using a microsphere flow-cytometry assay. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was determined by the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. The incidences of graft loss were calculated with the use of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

According to the distribution of the pretransplant sCD30 levels concentration ≥2700 pg/mL was defined as high (n = 146) and concentration <2700 pg/mL as low (n = 150). Three years posttransplantation, the eGFR was not significantly different in the recipients in high and low sCD30 groups (65 ± 24 vs 67 ± 21 mL/min/1.73 m(2); P = .43); there was no association between the eGFR 3 years after transplantation and the pretransplant sCD30 levels (r(2) = 0.002; P = .49). Graft survival 3 years after transplantation was also not different in the recipients in high and low sCD30 groups (P = .52).

CONCLUSION

In our adult deceased-donor kidney graft recipients, the pretransplant sCD30 serum concentration was not a predictive factor of immunologic risk associated with the kidney graft function 3 years posttransplantation; neither did it affect graft survival 3 years after transplantation. The immunosuppression with anti-CD25 antibodies as an induction treatment combined with the CsA-based maintenance triple therapy could possibly be decisive for our findings.

Soluble CD30 and Hepatocyte growth factor as predictive markers of antibody-mediated rejection of the kidney allograft

Our retrospective study was aimed to assess the relevance of pre- and post-transplant measurements of serum concentrations of the soluble CD30 molecule (soluble CD30, sCD30) and the cytokine Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) for prediction of the risk for development of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in kidney transplant patients. Evaluation of sCD30, HGF levels and the presence of HLA-specific antibodies in a cohort of 205 patients was performed before, 2weeks and 6months after transplantation. Patients were followed up for kidney graft function and survival for two years. We found a tendency of higher incidence of AMR in retransplanted patients with elevated pre-transplant sCD30 (≥100U/ml) (p=0.051), however no such correlation was observed in first-transplant patients. Kidney recipients with simultaneously high sCD30 and HLA-specific antibodies (sCD30+/Ab+) before transplantation had significantly lower AMR-free survival compared to the other patient groups (p<0.001). HGF concentrations were not associated with the incidence of AMR at any time point of measurement, nevertheless, the combined analysis HGF and sCD30 showed increased incidence of AMR in recipients with elevated pretransplant sCD30 and low HGF levels.

CONCLUSION

the predictive value of pretransplant sCD30 for the development of antibody-mediated rejection after transplantation is significantly potentiated by the co-presence of HLA specific antibodies. The role of HGF as a rejection-protective factor in patients with high pretransplant HGF levels would need further investigation.

Biomarkers as a tool for management of immunosuppression in transplant patients

Therapeutic drug monitoring is a well-established approach in transplantation medicine to guide immunosuppressive therapy. However, it cannot always predict the effects of immunosuppressive drugs on immune cells, because it does not reflect any aspect of an individual patient's immune system. Pharmacodynamic monitoring is a more recent strategy to provide information about the biologic effect of a specific drug or drug combination on the individual transplant patient. Currently, there is a large number of different biomarkers that either directly (specific markers) or indirectly (global markers) relate to the pharmacodynamic effects of immunosuppressive drugs and are under investigation as potential candidates to be introduced in clinical practice. Such biomarkers may be useful to identify patients at risk of developing acute rejection, infection, or cancer as well as patients who are suitable for minimization of immunosuppressant therapy and may be helpful to manage the timing and rate of immunosuppressant weaning. Serial longitudinal monitoring may allow maintenance of an individualized immunosuppressive regimen. Thus, biomarker monitoring is a potential complementary tool to therapeutic drug monitoring. This review summarizes the current state of knowledge about the use of a number of global or drug-specific pharmacodynamic biomarkers. It is not a comprehensive overview of the literature available, but rather an evidence-based reflection by experts who are intensively involved in scientific work in this field.

Novel strategies for immune monitoring in kidney transplant recipients

The ongoing quandary in kidney transplantation is discovering methods to prolong graft survival. To achieve this, there is a search for optimal methods to use immunosuppressive therapy, where rejection and chronic graft damage is minimized without causing an increased risk of infections, malignancy, or toxicities. The purpose of this review was to discuss the limitations of current immunosuppressant drug monitoring as well as the clinical application of novel methods of monitoring both immunosuppressants and the immune reaction within the allograft.

Pretransplant immune risk assessment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the introduction of advanced immunosuppressive drug therapies, clinical and subclinical rejections still occur in many graft recipients with a negative impact on the long-term transplant outcome. The immunological status of the patients awaiting the transplantation is a key factor for these processes. Here we summarize the recent efforts to identify and develop biomarkers and functional assays that allow an individual pretransplant risk assessment.

RECENT FINDINGS

New sensitive techniques assessing T-cell memory and B-cell activation have been developed. Furthermore, the expression level of soluble and molecular markers reflecting the activation state of the immune system and donor graft intrinsic factors have been shown to influence graft outcome.

SUMMARY

A variety of parameters and assays that determine the pretransplant immune activation status has been developed. Some of these assays have already been used prospectively to define high-risk patients receiving advanced immunosuppressive induction therapy.However, the conflicting results obtained in different studies show that biomarker analysis and functional assays performance need to be further standardized and validated in large prospective trials before they can be routinely implemented into a pretransplant risk assessment. Subsequently, a combined effort to design pretransplant risk stratification algorithms should lead to personalized immunosuppressive treatment regimes and improved graft survival and long-term graft function.

Rationale and criteria of eligibility for calcineurin inhibitor interruption following kidney transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize predictive low-risk parameters of renal allograft recipients for purposes of improving the initiation of calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal protocols.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical trials have demonstrated the potential global benefit of calcineurin inhibitor interruption protocols on graft survival despite being associated with an increased rate of acute rejection episodes, thus underlying a number of risk factors. Recent identification or confirmation of variables updating the list of parameters and molecular markers that can be used to predict graft outcome are described.

SUMMARY

The effect of calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal on long-term graft and recipient survival patterns is assessed in relation to the large number of calcineurin inhibitor-related side-effects. However, current protocols are based on empirical observations and there is a clear requirement for reliable parameters to define patient eligibility for calcineurin inhibitor weaning procedures. Here, we review biological, clinical and genetic parameters that can be used as predictive markers of long-term graft outcome and could serve as criteria for patient selection in calcineurin inhibitor weaning protocols.

Pretransplant donor-specific and non-specific immune parameters associated with early acute rejection

BACKGROUND

New immunosuppression protocols have resulted in decreased rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection; however, it is unclear whether recipients without biopsy-proven acute rejection are still at risk for immune complication and chronic allograft dysfunction. The aim of our studies was to determine whether pretransplant immune parameters were associated with posttransplant early acute rejection, unstable creatinine courses, and poor graft outcome.

METHODS

Immune parameters, including human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatch, HLA-specific antibodies, global CD4+ cellular response as measured by intracellular adenosine triphosphate (iATP) synthesis, and IFN-gamma precursor frequencies to donor or third-party cells as measured by ELISPOT were determined for a total of 126 kidney recipients treated with a protocol, including rapid discontinuation of prednisone.

RESULTS

The donor specific pretransplant parameters of HLA class I mismatches (P=0.04) and total HLA mismatches (P=0.04) with the donor as well as the pretransplant HLA-donor specific antibodies (P=0.002) were associated with biopsy-proven acute rejection. Higher pretransplant iATP levels, a donor nonspecific parameter, were found associated with biopsy proven acute rejection (P=0.04). Pretransplant iATP levels were significantly greater for recipients with early unstable creatinine levels (P=0.01). Recipients with a pretransplant iATP value greater than 375 ng/ml were 3.67 times more likely to experience acute rejection (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretransplant assessment of donor specific and nonspecific immune parameters may identify recipients who can benefit from closer clinical and immunological surveillance to allow for tailored immunsuppression and selective intervention aimed at optimizing both short and long-term graft outcome.

Kidney graft recipients with pretransplantation HLA CLASS I antibodies and high soluble CD30 are at high risk for graft loss

In the present study, we investigated whether pretransplantation HLA class I and class II antibodies and pretransplantation levels of soluble CD30 (sCD30) and IgA anti-Fab autoantibodies are predictive of kidney allograft survival. Pretransplantation sera of 504 deceased-donor kidney recipients were tested for IgG HLA class I and class II antibodies, sCD30, and IgA anti-Fab levels using the CTS 4 ELISA kit. Kidney graft survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression. Regardless of the presence of HLA class II antibodies, recipients with high HLA class I reactivity had lower 1-year graft survival than recipients with low reactivity (p < 0.01). Recipients with high sCD30 had lower 5-year graft survival rate than those with low sCD30 (p < 0.01). The sCD30 effect was observed in presensitized and nonsensitized recipients, demonstrated a synergistic effect with HLA class I antibodies (p < 0.001), and appeared to be neutralized in recipients with no HLA class II mismatches. IgA anti-Fab did not influence kidney graft survival. Our results indicate that high pretransplantation sCD30 levels and HLA class I positivity increase the risk of kidney graft loss regardless of other factors. Consequently, such determinations should be routinely performed to estimate recipients' risks of graft rejection before transplantation.

Options for immunologic support of renal transplantation through the HLA and immunology laboratories

HLA and immunology laboratories are an integral part of clinical kidney transplant programs. They assist transplant clinicians with evaluating the immunological suitability of potential recipients for transplantation and selecting donor-recipient combinations with a low risk of immunological failure. With sophisticated new techniques becoming available for posttransplant immunological monitoring, laboratories play an increasing supporting role during posttransplant follow up. The level of precision at which immunological testing predicts clinical outcome, however, leaves room for improvement. In this article, we summarize the current state of diagnostics, discuss problems, and point out promising developments.