The calculated panel reactive antibody policy: an advancement improving organ allocation

Imlifidase therapy: exploring its clinical uses

INTRODUCTION

Imlifidase, the IgG-degrading enzyme derived from Streptococcus pyogenes, can cleave all four human IgG subclasses with precise specificity. All IgG molecules can be inactivated for ~1-to-2 weeks, until new IgG synthesis is detected.

AREAS COVERED

Imlifidase was first studied for the desensitization of highly HLA-sensitized patients to enable kidney transplantation. It is currently being evaluated for kidney transplant recipients who have antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), those with acute kidney injury in the setting of anti-glomerular basement membrane disease, and those with Guillain-Barré syndrome. In 2020, imlifidase received conditional approval from the European Medicines Agency for use to desensitize deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients with a positive crossmatch. Literature search through PubMed revealed that so far, 39 crossmatched-positive patients, i.e. in the presence of donor-specific alloantibodies (DSA) on the transplantation day, have received imlifidase prior to kidney transplantation in four single-arm, open-label, phase II studies. Results at 3-year follow-up are good, i.e. allograft survival is 84%, despite 38% of patients presenting with acute AMR. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate at 3 years was 55 mL/min/1.73 m².

EXPERT OPINION

The major hurdle now is how to prevent/avoid DSA rebound within days 5-15 post-transplantation. Thus, imlifidase represents a major breakthrough for highly HLA-sensitized kidney transplant candidates, particularly those that have calculated panel-reactive alloantibodies of ≥90%.

Presence of Panel-reactive Antibodies after Penetrating Keratoplasty

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relationship between penetrating keratoplasty (PK) and postoperative PRA level and number of unacceptable antigens.

METHODS

A cross-sectionalstudy was performed on patients with history of PK. Patients with prior solid organ transplantation, pregnancy, or blood transfusion were excluded. These findings were combined with a retrospective review. Patients were grouped by single or multiple PKs. The primary outcome was postoperative PRA level.

RESULTS

Incidence of postoperative PRA elevation and mean peak PRA was higher in the multiple PK group (p = .08 and p = .010, respectively). Mean number of unacceptable antigens was elevated in the multiple PK group (p = .024). There was a moderately positive correlation between number of PK grafts and PRA level (r = 0.629, p = .0002).

CONCLUSIONS

PRA level may be influenced by PKs, with higher PRA associated with increased prior PKs. Further studies are necessary to determine the potential prognostic value.Abbreviations: PK: penetrating keratoplasty; PRA: panel reactive antibodies; OSST: ocular surface stem cell transplantation; LSCD: limbal stem cell deficiency.

Principles of Virtual Crossmatch Testing for Kidney Transplantation

Human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) are the primary determinants of alloimmunity. A crossmatch test is a test that determines the immunologic risk of a recipient with a potential donor by ensuring that there are no transplant-relevant circulating antibodies in the recipient directed against donor antigens. Physical crossmatch (PXM) tests, such as complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch (CDCXM) and flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM), require mixing of patient serum and donor cells, are labor intensive, and are logistically challenging. Virtual crossmatch (VXM) test assesses immunologic compatibility between recipient and potential donor by analyzing the results of 2 independently done physical laboratory tests—patient anti-HLA antibody and donor HLA typing. The goal of VXM is pretransplant risk stratification—though there is no consensus on whether such risk assessment involves predicting the PXM result or the posttransplant outcome. Although the concept of VXM is not new, the advent of solid-phase assays for detecting circulating antibodies in the recipient directed against individual HLA and DNA-based methods for typing donor HLA specificities at a higher resolution makes the routine use of VXM a reality. Accordingly, VXM may be applied at different scenarios—both for sensitized and nonsensitized patients. Implementation of VXM-based approach has resulted in statistically significant reduction in cold ischemia time without an increase in hyperacute rejection episodes. Though there are considerable challenges, VXM is expected to be used more often in the future, depending on the transplant center’s tolerance of immunologic risk.

KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation

The 2020 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation is intended to assist health care professionals worldwide who evaluate and manage potential candidates for deceased or living donor kidney transplantation. This guideline addresses general candidacy issues such as access to transplantation, patient demographic and health status factors, and immunological and psychosocial assessment. The roles of various risk factors and comorbid conditions governing an individual's suitability for transplantation such as adherence, tobacco use, diabetes, obesity, perioperative issues, causes of kidney failure, infections, malignancy, pulmonary disease, cardiac and peripheral arterial disease, neurologic disease, gastrointestinal and liver disease, hematologic disease, and bone and mineral disorder are also addressed. This guideline provides recommendations for evaluation of individual aspects of a candidate's profile such that each risk factor and comorbidity are considered separately. The goal is to assist the clinical team to assimilate all data relevant to an individual, consider this within their local health context, and make an overall judgment on candidacy for transplantation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Guideline recommendations are primarily based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and our assessment of the quality of that evidence, and the strengths of recommendations are provided. Limitations of the evidence are discussed with differences from previous guidelines noted and suggestions for future research are also provided.

Eplet-based virtual PRA increases transplant probability in highly-sensitized patients

BACKGROUND

The reduced access of highly-sensitized (HS) patients to kidney transplantation (KTx) is one of the major challenges for transplant community. Therefore, the aim of our study was to estimate the impact of three different vPRA calculations, assessed traditionally and using eplet-based analysis, in donor offers.

METHODS

At 01-01-2020, 157 HS patients are waitlisted for deceased donor KTx and were included in this study. Total vPRA (vPRAt) was calculated considering all patient allosensitization history, using 1 k MFI cut-off. Current vPRA (vPRAc) refers only to the last year SAB assays, using 1 k MFI cut-off. For eplet vPRA (vPRAe) every SAB assay was analyzed by HLAMatchmaker and HLAfusion software. Matching runs have been performed taking vPRA calculation as unacceptable antigens (UAs).

RESULTS

All patients had at least one previous sensitizing event and patients with 100% vPRA were predominantly candidates for retransplantation (P < 0.001), had higher PRA-CDC (P < 0.001), and longer dialysis vintage waiting time (P < 0.001). Inter-group movement analysis between vPRA measures showed that 70 (45%), 124 (79%) and 80 (51%) patients were reclassified to a lower group when considering vPRAt to vPRAc, vPRAt to vPRAe and vPRAc to vPRAe, respectively. The median percentage of change in estimated number of match runs needed for 95% probability of finding an acceptable donor was significantly more pronounced by increasing vPRAt intervals, when considering the reclassification from vPRAt to vPRAe (P < 0.001) or vPRAc to vPRAe (P = 0.045), while from vPRAt to vPRAc it was not (P = 0.899).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that the use of total or current vPRA calculations are impairing HS patients, by decreasing transplant probability, leading to dramatically longer waiting times, when compared to eplet based vPRA.

Use of Panel-Reactive Antibody Testing in the Planning and Management of Ocular Surface Stem Cell Transplantation

PURPOSE

Panel-reactive antibody (PRA) testing has been widely adopted in solid organ transplantation for risk assessment in potential allograft recipients but has not been studied in the context of ophthalmic transplantation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients undergoing ocular surface stem cell transplantation (OSST) for limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) relative to preoperative PRA level.

METHODS

This is retrospective chart review of all eyes with documented PRA level that underwent OSST for LSCD between May 2000 and March 2019 at a single institution. Eyes with stable ocular surface but <1 year of follow-up and eyes without updated PRA before repeat OSST were excluded. Eyes were grouped by PRA <80% and ≥80%. The primary outcome was ocular surface failure, whereas the secondary outcome was clinical allograft rejection.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine surgeries met inclusion criteria, consisting of 54 living-related conjunctival limbal allografts, 5 keratolimbal allografts, and 10 combined living-related conjunctival limbal allografts/keratolimbal allografts (Cincinnati procedure). The most common etiologies for LSCD were aniridia (33%), chemical/thermal injury (28%), and contact lens associated (14%). Surface failure occurred in 5 of 12 eyes (58%) with PRA ≥80% versus 12 of 57 eyes (21%) with PRA <80% (P = 0.01). The relative risk for surface failure with PRA ≥80% was 2.8 [confidence interval (CI), 1.38-5.55]. There was no significant difference in acute rejection (P = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretransplant PRA level is an important prognostic factor for ocular surface stability in eyes undergoing OSST for LSCD, with implications for donor selection, perioperative management, and systemic immunosuppression.

Portuguese calculated panel reactive antibodies online estimator

Calculated panel reactive antibodies (CPRA) is a sensitization measure used to classify and prioritize transplant candidates in different kidney transplant allocation systems. CPRA is based on identification of HLA unacceptable on potential organ donors making a transplant candidate ineligible for transplantation. Here, we present a CPRA online estimator based on HLA allelic and haplotypic frequencies from Portuguese donors. We also compare the values we obtained from our CPRA estimator (Portuguese [PT]-CPRA) against CPRA values obtained from: Eurotransplant virtual PRA calculator (ET-CPRA); Canadian CPRA calculator (Canadian [CN]-CPRA) and Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network CPRA calculator (United States [US]-CPRA). When we analyzed correlations between CPRA values obtained from pairs of calculators, we observed that they are significantly and highly correlated. Bland-Altman plots for the comparison between PT-CPRA calculator against the other calculators, show higher differences between PT and CN than between PT and ET and PT and US. Also, the lowest value for Lin's concordance coefficient was obtained for the comparison between PT and CN calculators. CPRA values reliability depend on donors' pool from which it is calculated and it is crucial for classify correctly highly sensitized patients. A CPRA calculator must use donors' HLA frequencies similar from those who would be actual organ donors.

Acquisition of Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in Solid Organ Transplantation Recipients

BACKGROUND

Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) can lead to life-threatening outcomes with rapid spread of the carbapenemase gene in solid organ transplantation (SOT) recipients because of limitations of available antibiotics. We examined the characteristics and importance of CPE acquisition in SOT recipients with large numbers of CPE isolates.

METHODS

Between November 2015 and October 2016, 584 CPE isolates were found in 37 recipients and verified by carbapenemase gene multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). One hundred recipients with at least 2 negative results in carbapenemase PCR for stool surveillance and no CPE isolates in clinical samples were retrospectively included.

RESULTS

Most CPE isolates were Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing K. pneumoniae (546, 93.5%). The most frequent transplantation organ was lung (43.3%), and the most common sample with CPE isolates other than stool was respiratory tract (22.6%). The median time between SOT and first CPE acquisition was 7 days. All-cause mortality was significantly higher in recipients with CPE than in those without CPE (24.3% vs 10.0%; P = .03). In multivariate regression analysis, stool colonization of vancomycin-resistant Enterococci and/or Clostridium difficile during 30 days before SOT (odds ratio [OR], 3.28; 95% CI, 1.24-8.68; P = .02), lung transplantation (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.19-17.03; P = .03), and intensive care unit stay ≥2 weeks (OR, 6.21; 95% CI, 1.72-22.45; P = .005) were associated with acquisition of CPE.

CONCLUSIONS

Early posttransplantation CPE acquisition may affect the clinical outcome of SOT recipients. Careful screening for CPE during the early posttransplantation period would be meaningful in recipients with risk factors.

Comparison of Physical Crossmatch and Virtual Crossmatch to Identify Preexisting Donor-Specific Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) Antibodies and Outcome Following Kidney Transplantation

Background

Physical crossmatch (PXM) and virtual crossmatch (VXM) are applied to identify preexisting donor-specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies in patients awaiting kidney transplantation. Recently, high-resolution epitope analysis has emerged as a novel strategy for VXM. A retrospective clinical study compared PXM with VXM before kidney transplantation and recipient outcome following transplantation.

Material/Methods

Between August 2017 and March 2018, 239 patients underwent crossmatching and 94 patients received a donor kidney. A complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) PXM assay and VXM using serological and epitope analysis identified donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Crossmatch results and clinical outcome at 3 months were compared.

Results

VXM identified serological DSA (sDSA), verified epitope DSA, and total epitope DSA in 74 (31.0%), 39 (16.3%), and 49 (20.5%) cases, respectively. Eleven cases (4.6%) had a positive PXM detected by the CDC assay. Of 94 kidney transplant recipients, 21 had preexisting sDSA but were negative in PXM; there was 1 case of delayed graft function (DGF) and no cases of hyperacute rejection or acute rejection. Of the rest of the 73 recipients who were negative for sDSA, 8 had acute rejection (P=0.253) and 19 had DGF (P=0.037). No significant differences were found in graft survival at 3 months.

Conclusions

High-resolution epitope analysis identified fewer cases with DSA compared with serological analysis. Because patients with and without sDSA had a similar short-term outcome in the setting of a negative PXM, the presence of preexisting sDSA, determined by VXM, should not be an absolute contraindication for kidney transplantation.

Corrected Panel-Reactive Antibody Positivity Rates for Hypersensitized Patients in Turkish Population With Calculated Panel-Reactive Antibody Software

INTRODUCTION

High rates of panel-reactive antibody (PRA) may decrease the chance of kidney transplantation and may result in long waiting periods before transplantation. The calculated PRA (cPRA) is performed based on unacceptable HLA antigens. These antigens are identified by a program that was created based on the antibodies that developed against the HLA antigens circulating in serum and on the risk of binding of these antibodies to antigens. The antigen profile of the population and antigen frequencies can be measured, and more realistic cPRA positivity rates may be obtained using this method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed a program based on the HLA antigens of 494 blood donors in 2 European Federation for Immunogenetics-accredited Tissue Typing Laboratories in Turkey. Next-generation sequencing-based tissue typing (HLA-A, -B, -C, -DR, -DQ, 4 digits) of the samples was performed. The PRA screening test was performed on 380 patients who were waiting for organ transplant from a cadaver in Istanbul Faculty of Medicine. The single antigen bead assay testing was performed to identify the antibody profiles on 48 hypersensitized patients.

RESULTS

The PRA testing results using the current methods were 44.6% ± 18.5%, and the cPRA rate was 86.2% ± 5.1%. The mean PRA positivity of the sensitized patients using the current methods was 44.6%; however, the rate was 86.2% using the cPRA.

DISCUSSION

cPRA shows the rate of the rejected donors according to all unacceptable antigens. The need for a list of unacceptable antigens in place of the PRA positivity rate is a real change in the sensitization-dependent calculation as cPRA positivity rate.

CONCLUSION

In principal, implementation of cPRA will encourage many centers and laboratories to adopt a standard measurement of sensitization in Turkey. It will increase the chances of better donor match, particularly for hypersensitized patients, by the creation of an unacceptable mismatch program using cPRA software.

CPRA for allocation of kidneys in the US: More candidates ≥98% CPRA, lower positive crossmatch rates and improved transplant rates for sensitized patients

In 2009 calculated panel reactive antibody (CPRA) replaced PRA as the metric for HLA sensitization in the US kidney allocation system. During the next four years, registrants with at least one unacceptable antigen increased (34-40%) and registrants with ≥98% PRA/CPRA increased from 7% to 9% of the waitlist. These changes were accompanied by a reduction in kidney offers refused for positive crossmatch: 14,137 (1.7%) in 2009 and 3,310 in 2013 (0.4%). Registrants with ≥98% PRA/CPRA had highest rates of refusal but also showed substantial improvement (20% in 2009 vs 8% in 2013). For registrants with ≥98% PRA/CPRA, 45% of accepted offers in 2009 were not transplanted into the intended recipient compared to 11% in 2013. Transplant rates remained low for these patients (∼50/1000 active patient-years), but rates improved for patients with 80-97% PRA/CPRA (223/1000 active patient-years in 2009 vs 354/1000 in 2013). In 2013, 40% regraft candidates had CPRA ≥98% compared to 4% of primary graft candidates. More females than males were ≥98% CPRA (14% vs 7%) and more females had CPRA above 0 (50% vs 28%). In the CPRA era, listing of unacceptable antigens increased, positive crossmatches were diminished and transplant rates for sensitized patients improved.

Approach to the Highly Sensitized Kidney Transplant Candidate

For patients with ESRD, kidney transplant offers significant survival and quality-of-life advantages compared with dialysis. But for patients seeking transplant who are highly sensitized, wait times have traditionally been long and options limited. The approach to the highly sensitized candidate for kidney transplant has changed substantially over time owing to new advances in desensitization, options for paired donor exchange (PDE), and changes to the deceased-donor allocation system. Initial evaluation should focus on determining living-donor availability because a compatible living donor is always the best option. However, for most highly sensitized candidates this scenario is unlikely. For candidates with an incompatible donor, PDE can improve the prospects of finding a compatible living donor but for many highly sensitized patients the probability of finding a match in the relatively small pools of donors in PDE programs is limited. Desensitization of a living donor/recipient pair with low levels of incompatibility is another reasonable approach. But for pairs with high levels of pathologic HLA antibodies, outcomes after desensitization for the patient and allograft are less optimal. Determining the degree of sensitization by calculated panel-reactive antibody (cPRA) is critical in counseling the highly sensitized patient on expected wait times to deceased-donor transplant. For candidates with a high likelihood of finding a compatible deceased donor in a reasonable time frame, waiting for a kidney is a good strategy. For the candidate without a living donor and with a low probability of finding a deceased-donor match, desensitization on the waiting list can be considered. The approach to the highly sensitized kidney transplant candidate must be individualized and requires careful discussion among the transplant center, patient, and referring nephrologist.

Allocating Deceased Donor Kidneys to Candidates with High Panel-Reactive Antibodies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In December of 2014, the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network implemented a new Kidney Allocation System (KAS) for deceased donor transplant, with increased priority for highly sensitized candidates (calculated panel-reactive antibody [cPRA] >99%). We used a modified version of the new KAS to address issues of access and equity for these candidates.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In a simulation, 10,988 deceased donor kidneys transplanted into waitlisted recipients in 2010 were instead allocated to candidates with cPRA≥80% (n=18,004). Each candidate's unacceptable donor HLA antigens had been entered into the allocation system by the transplant center. In simulated match runs, kidneys were allocated sequentially to adult ABO identical or permissible candidates with cPRA 100%, 99%, 98%, etc. to 80%. Allocations were restricted to donor/recipient pairs with negative virtual crossmatches.

RESULTS

The simulation indicated that 2111 of 10,988 kidneys (19.2%) would have been allocated to patients with cPRA 100% versus 74 of 10,988 (0.7%) that were actually transplanted. Of cPRA 100% candidates, 74% were predicted to be compatible with an average of six deceased donors; the remaining 26% seemed to be incompatible with every deceased donor organ that entered the system. Of kidneys actually allocated to cPRA 100% candidates in 2010, 66% (49 of 74) were six-antigen HLA matched/zero-antigen mismatched (HLA-A, -B, and -DR) with their recipients versus only 11% (237 of 2111) in the simulation. The simulation predicted that 10,356 of 14,433 (72%) candidates with cPRA 90%-100% could be allocated an organ compared with 7.3% who actually underwent transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

Data in this simulation are consistent with early results of the new KAS; specifically, nearly 20% of deceased donor kidneys were (virtually) compatible with cPRA 100% candidates. Although most of these candidates were predicted to be compatible with multiple donors, approximately one-quarter are unlikely to receive a single offer.

cPRA Increases With DQA, DPA, and DPB Unacceptable Antigens in the Canadian cPRA Calculator

A calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) estimates the percentage of donors with unacceptable antigens (UA) for a recipient. cPRA may be underestimated in transplant candidates with UA to DQA, DPA, and DPB if these are not included in the calculation program. To serve the National Canadian Transplant Programs, a cPRA calculator was developed with complete molecular typing for all donors at HLA-A, B, C, DRB1, DRB3/4/5, DQA1, DQB1, DPA1, and DPB1, all resolved to serologic equivalents. The prevalence of UA at DQA, DPA and DPB was evaluated in a sensitized regional population. The impact of adding these additional UA to cPRA was calculated alone and in combination, and compared to the baseline cPRA for UA at A, B, C, DR, DR51/52/53, and DQ. Of 740 sensitized transplant candidates, 18% of total and 32% with cPRA≥95% had DQA UA. Twenty-seven percent of total and 54% with cPRA≥95% had DPB UA. Of 280/740 subjects with these UA, 36/280 (13%) had cPRA increase of >20% when they were included, 7% increased cPRA to ≥80% and 6% to ≥95%. Inclusion of DQA, DPA, and DPB UA in Canadian cPRA calculations improves the accuracy of cPRA where these are relevant in allocation.

Transplanting the highly sensitized patient: trials and tribulations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Humoral sensitization to antigens of the human leukocyte antigen and ABO systems remains one of the largest barriers to further expansion in renal transplantation. This barrier translates into prolonged waiting time and a greater likelihood of death. The number of highly sensitized patients on the renal transplant waiting list continues to increase. This review focuses on the options available to these patients and speculates on future directions for incompatible transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Desensitization protocols (to remove antibodies), kidney-paired donation (to circumvent antibodies) or a hybrid technique involving a combination of both have broadened the access to transplantation for patients disadvantaged by immunologic barriers. However, the risk of antibody-mediated rejection may be increased and warrants caution. Technical advances in antibody characterization using sensitive bead immunoassays and the C1q assay and therapeutic modalities such as complement inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors have been used to avoid or confront these antibody incompatibilities.

SUMMARY

A growing body of knowledge and literature indicates that these diagnostic and therapeutic modalities can facilitate a safer and more successful treatment course for these difficult-to-treat patients. Rigorous investigations into newer interventions will help in broadening the options for these patients and also expand the living donor pool.

HLA-DQ barrier: effects on cPRA calculations

BACKGROUND

Panel-reactive antibody (PRA) testing provides assessment of the breadth of sensitization a patient might have against human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antigens. The evolution of calculated PRA (cPRA) reflects the commitment of the transplant community to increase accessibility and promote equity to all patients awaiting kidney transplantation. Recent data from our center and others, however, suggested that a significant diversity of HLA-DQ antigens is not captured, which may lead to inequity in allocating cPRA points.

METHODS

HLA-DRB1-DQA1-DQB1 typing of 2182 individuals was evaluated for this study using Luminex-based sequence-specific oligonucleotide typing. A total of 3182 haplotypes were confirmed to have the level of resolution required for this study.

RESULTS

The diversity of HLA-DQαβ alleles is greater than what is apparent using the serologic equivalents. The distribution of these alleles within a serologic group varies, with some alleles being more frequent than others; therefore, their representation within the current cPRA system is inaccurate. Three informative examples are given. Haplotypes of DR antigens with DQαβ alleles did not always follow the common published linkage disequilibrium, especially in populations where there is greater genetic diversity.

CONCLUSIONS

The current cPRA system does not take into account the distribution of molecular equivalents within DQ serologic specificities. This can result is inequitable allocation of sensitization points and disadvantaging the more sensitized patients. To ameliorate this situation, the United Network for Organ Sharing system should allow inputting HLA-DQαβ alleles both for donor typing and as antibody specificities, which will lead to better representation of unacceptable DQ alleles and improve organ allocation equity.

The corneal transplant score: a simple corneal graft candidate calculator

BACKGROUND

Shortage of corneas for transplantation has created long waiting lists in most countries. Transplant calculators are available for many organs. The purpose of this study is to describe a simple automatic scoring system for keratoplasty recipient candidates, based on several parameters that we consider most relevant for tissue allocation, and to compare the system's accuracy in predicting decisions made by a cornea specialist.

METHODS

Twenty pairs of candidate data were randomly created on an electronic spreadsheet. A single priority score was computed from the data of each candidate. A cornea surgeon and the automated system then decided independently which candidate in each pair should have surgery if only a single cornea was available.

RESULTS

The scoring system can calculate values between 0 (lowest priority) and 18 (highest priority) for each candidate. Average score value in our randomly created cohort was 6.35 ± 2.38 (mean ± SD), range 1.28 to 10.76. Average score difference between the candidates in each pair was 3.12 ± 2.10, range 0.08 to 8.45. The manual scoring process, although theoretical, was mentally and emotionally demanding for the surgeon. Agreement was achieved between the human decision and the calculated value in 19 of 20 pairs. Disagreement was reached in the pair with the lowest score difference (0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

With worldwide donor cornea shortage, waiting for transplantation can be long. Manual sorting of priority for transplantation in a long waiting list is difficult, time-consuming and prone to error. The suggested system may help achieve a justified distribution of available tissue.

The DQ barrier: improving organ allocation equity using HLA-DQ information

BACKGROUND

The United Network for Organ Sharing algorithm for deceased-donor kidney allocation considers only the human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A, HLA-B, and HLA-DR loci. Although HLA-DQ serologic specificities can be entered as unacceptable antigens, they are assigned only by the identity of the DQβ chain, disregarding the role of the similarly polymorphic α chain. DQα/β combinations result in unique antigenic epitopes, which serve as targets to different antibodies. Therefore, the presence of HLA antibodies to one DQα/β combination should not preclude negative crossmatch (XM) against another combination. In this retrospective analysis, patients were allowed XM against a particular donor if they had antibodies to some, but not all, DQα/β allele combinations with the donor serologic HLA-DQ antigens.

METHODS

HLA antibody signature was obtained using solid-phase Luminex-based antibody analysis. Results were captured at the high-resolution level (as provided by the positive beads). Potential donors were typed to include information on both HLA-DQA and HLA-DQB alleles.

RESULTS

Of the 1130 flow XM assays performed, 147 patients had antibodies to donor serologic HLA-DQ antigens. Thirty-five of those patients had antibodies to an allelic DQα/β combination within the donor serologic DQ specificity that were different from the donor's DQα/β, leading to negative flow XM results (24%). Virtual XM, accounting for donor DQα/β combinations, successfully predicts more than 98% of XM outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with allelic DQα/β antibodies, denying the opportunity for XM based on serologically defined unacceptable antigens can disadvantage the patient. Larger cohort studies are required to substantiate our observation. Introducing DQα/β combination information may increase virtual XM accuracy and organ allocation equity.

Partially mismatched transplantation and human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies

The presence of donor human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-specific antibodies (DSA) increases engraftment failure risk in partially HLA-mismatched, or HLA-haploidentical, allogeneic marrow (alloBMT) transplantation. As pre-existing sensitization to HLA antigens is not well characterized among candidates for HLA-haploidentical alloBMT, we retrospectively evaluated both the incidence and relative strength of DSA in this patient population. Based on correlations of solid-phase antibody assays on the Luminex (Luminex, Austin, TX) platform with actual crossmatch tests, DSA were characterized as weak for results that were consistent with negative flow cytometric crossmatch results or as moderate-to-strong for results consistent with positive flow cytometric or cytotoxicity crossmatches. We evaluated 296 alloBMT candidates; 111 (37.5%) were female. DSA were detected in 43 (14.5%) candidates, mostly among female candidates (42.9% female versus 12.5% male). Moderate-to-strong DSA strength was more frequently encountered when directed against haploidentical donors as compared with mismatched unrelated donors. DSA were most commonly detected in female patients directed against their children. Because the presence of DSA has been considered prohibitive for HLA-mismatched alloBMT, we additionally report a desensitization methodology used to reduce DSA to negative or weak levels, ie, levels well below those detectable in a flow cytometric crossmatch. Nine patients without other available donors underwent desensitization. Eight who reduced their DSA to negative or weak levels proceeded to alloBMT and achieved full donor engraftment. These data support routine DSA evaluation in all patients considered for mismatched alloBMT; however, for patients with no other viable options, desensitization to weak or negative DSA levels may afford the opportunity for successful transplantation.

Relation between pretransplant serum levels of soluble CD30 and acute rejection during the first 6 months after a kidney transplant

OBJECTIVES

The immunologic status of kidney allograft recipients affects transplant outcome. High levels of pretransplant serum soluble CD30 correlate with an increased risk of acute rejection. Studies show conflicting results. We evaluated the relation between pretransplant serum sCD30 levels with the risk of posttransplant acute kidney rejection in renal transplant recipients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study was performed between March 2010 and March 2011 on 77 kidney transplant recipients (53 men [68.8%], 24 women [31.2%]; mean age, 41 ± 14 y). Serum samples were collected 24 hours before transplant and analyzed for soluble CD30 levels by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Patients were followed for 6 months after transplant. Acute biopsy-proven rejection episodes were recorded, serum creatinine levels were measured, and glomerular filtration rates were calculated at the first and sixth months after transplant. Preoperative serum soluble CD30 levels were compared in patients with and without rejection.

RESULTS

The mean pretransplant serum soluble CD30 level was 92.1 ± 47.3 ng/mL. At 6 months' follow-up, 10 patients experienced acute rejection. Mean pretransplant soluble CD30 levels were 128.5 ± 84 ng/mL versus 86.7 ± 37 ng/mL in patients with and without acute rejection episodes (P = .008). At 100 ng/mL, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of pretransplant serum soluble CD30 level to predict acute rejection were 70%, 73.6%, 29.1%, and 94.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed a significant relation between pretransplant serum soluble CD30 levels and acute allograft rejection. High pretransplant levels of serum soluble CD30 can be a risk factor for kidney transplant rejection, and its high negative predictive value at various cutoffs make it useful to find candidates with a low risk of acute rejection after transplant.