Does a Useful Test Exist to Properly Evaluate the Pathogenicity of Donor-specific Antibodies? Lessons From a Comprehensive Analysis in a Well-studied Single-center Kidney Transplant Cohort

Determination of the clinical relevance of donor epitope-specific HLA-antibodies in kidney transplantation

In kidney transplantation, survival rates are still partly impaired due to the deleterious effects of donor specific HLA antibodies (DSA). However, not all luminex-defined DSA appear to be clinically relevant. Further analysis of DSA recognizing polymorphic amino acid configurations, called eplets or functional epitopes, might improve the discrimination between clinically relevant vs. irrelevant HLA antibodies. To evaluate which donor epitope-specific HLA antibodies (DESAs) are clinically important in kidney graft survival, relevant and irrelevant DESAs were discerned in a Dutch cohort of 4690 patients using Kaplan-Meier analysis and tested in a cox proportional hazard (CPH) model including nonimmunological variables. Pre-transplant DESAs were detected in 439 patients (9.4%). The presence of certain clinically relevant DESAs was significantly associated with increased risk on graft loss in deceased donor transplantations (p < 0.0001). The antibodies recognized six epitopes of HLA Class I, 3 of HLA-DR, and 1 of HLA-DQ, and most antibodies were directed to HLA-B (47%). Fifty-three patients (69.7%) had DESA against one donor epitope (range 1-5). Long-term graft survival rate in patients with clinically relevant DESA was 32%, rendering DESA a superior parameter to classical DSA (60%). In the CPH model, the hazard ratio (95% CI) of clinically relevant DESAs was 2.45 (1.84-3.25) in deceased donation, and 2.22 (1.25-3.95) in living donation. In conclusion, the developed model shows the deleterious effect of clinically relevant DESAs on graft outcome which outperformed traditional DSA-based risk analysis on antigen level.

Complement-activating donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies in solid organ transplantation: systematic review, meta-analysis, and critical appraisal

Introduction

Several studies have investigated the impact of circulating complement-activating anti-human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies (anti-HLA DSAs) on organ transplant outcomes. However, a critical appraisal of these studies and a demonstration of the prognostic value of complement-activating status over anti-HLA DSA mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) level are lacking.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis and critical appraisal evaluating the role of complement-activating anti-HLA DSAs on allograft outcomes in different solid organ transplants. We included studies through Medline, Cochrane, Scopus, and Embase since inception of databases till May 05, 2023. We evaluated allograft loss as the primary outcome, and allograft rejection as the secondary outcome. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and funnel plots to assess risk of bias and used bias adjustment methods when appropriate. We performed multiple subgroup analyses to account for sources of heterogeneity and studied the added value of complement assays over anti-HLA DSA MFI level.

Results

In total, 52 studies were included in the final meta-analysis (11,035 patients). Complement-activating anti-HLA DSAs were associated with an increased risk of allograft loss (HR 2.77; 95% CI 2.33-3.29, p<0.001; I²=46.2%), and allograft rejection (HR 4.98; 95% CI 2.96-8.36, p<0.01; I²=70.9%). These results remained significant after adjustment for potential sources of bias and across multiple subgroup analyses. After adjusting on pan-IgG anti-HLA DSA defined by the MFI levels, complement-activating anti-HLA DSAs were significantly and independently associated with an increased risk of allograft loss.

Discussion

We demonstrated in this systematic review, meta-analysis and critical appraisal the significant deleterious impact and the independent prognostic value of circulating complement-activating anti-HLA DSAs on solid organ transplant risk of allograft loss and rejection.

Sensitization in transplantation: Assessment of Risk 2022 Working Group Meeting Report

The Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk workgroup is a collaborative effort of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics that aims at providing recommendations for clinical testing, highlights gaps in current knowledge, and proposes areas for further research to enhance histocompatibility testing in support of solid organ transplantation. This report provides updates on topics discussed by the previous Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk working groups and introduces 2 areas of exploration: non-human leukocyte antigen antibodies and utilization of human leukocyte antigen antibody testing measurement to evaluate the efficacy of antibody-removal therapies.

Approaches for the characterization of clinically relevant pre-transplant human leucocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies in solid organ transplant patients

The avoidance of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) attributed to human leucocyte antigen (HLA) antibody incompatibility remains an essential function of clinical Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics (H&I) laboratories who are supporting solid organ transplantation. Developments in HLA antibody identification assays over the past thirty years have greatly reduced unexpected positive cellular crossmatches and improved solid organ transplant outcomes. For sensitized patients, the decision to register unacceptable HLA antigen mismatches is often heavily influenced by results from solid phase antibody assays, particularly the Luminex^® Single Antigen Bead (SAB) assays, although the clinical relevance of antibodies identified solely by these assays remains unclear. As such, the identification of non-clinically relevant antibodies may proportionally increase the number of unacceptable transplant mismatches registered, with an associated increase in waiting time for a compatible organ. We reflect on the clinical relevance of antibodies identified solely by the Luminex SAB^® assays and consider whether the application of additional assays and/or tools could further develop our ability to define the clinical relevance of antibodies identified in patient sera. Improvements in this area would assist equity of access to a compatible transplant for highly sensitized patients awaiting a solid organ transplant.

The Problem of Subclinical Antibody-mediated Rejection in Kidney Transplantation

Defined as histologic evidence of rejection on a protocol biopsy in the absence of kidney dysfunction, subclinical rejection has garnered attention since the 1990s. The major focus of much of this research, however, has been subclinical T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR). Herein, we review the literature on subclinical antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), which may occur with either preexisting donor-specific antibodies (DSA) or upon the development of de novo DSA (dnDSA). In both situations, subsequent kidney function and graft survival are compromised. Thus, we recommend protocol biopsy routinely within the first year with preexisting DSA and at the initial detection of dnDSA. In those with positive biopsies, baseline immunosuppression should be maximized, any associated TCMR treated, and adherence stressed, but it remains uncertain if antibody-reduction treatment should be initiated. Less invasive testing of blood for donor DNA or gene profiling may have a role in follow-up of those with negative initial biopsies. If a protocol biopsy is positive in the absence of detectable HLA-DSA, it also remains to be determined whether non-HLA-DSA should be screened for either in particular or on a genome-wide basis and how these patients should be treated. Randomized controlled trials are clearly needed.

Challenges of Diagnosing Antibody-Mediated Rejection: The Role of Invasive and Non-Invasive Biomarkers

Kidney transplantation is the best treatment modality for end-stage kidney disease, leading to improvement in a patient’s quality and quantity of life. With significant improvements in short-term outcomes, prolonging long-term allograft and patient survival remain ongoing challenges. The ability to monitor allograft function, immune tolerance and predict rejection accurately would enable personalization and better prognostication during post-transplant care. Though kidney biopsy remains the backbone of transplant diagnostics, emerging biomarkers can help detecting kidney allograft injury early enough to prevent permanent damage and detect injury before it is clinically apparent. In this review, we summarize the recent biomarkers that have shown promise in the prediction of acute rejection with a focus on antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplantation.