Donor-derived Cell-free DNA: Advancing a Novel Assay to New Heights in Renal Transplantation

Analysis of the primary factors influencing donor derived cell-free DNA testing in kidney transplantation

The donor-derived cell-free DNA (ddcfDNA) is found in the plasma and urine of kidney transplant recipients and displays notable potential in diagnosing rejection, specifically antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR). Nonetheless, the quantitative methods of ddcfDNA lacking standardization and diverse detection techniques can impact the test outcomes. Besides, both the fraction and absolute values of ddcfDNA have been reported as valuable markers for rejection diagnosis, but they carry distinct meanings and are special in various pathological conditions. Additionally, ddcfDNA is highly sensitive to kidney transplant injury. The various sampling times and combination with other diseases can indeed impact ddcfDNA detection values. This review comprehensively analyses the various factors affecting ddcfDNA detection in kidney transplantation, including the number of SNPs and sequencing depths. Furthermore, different pathological conditions, distinct sampling time points, and the presence of complex heterologous signals can influence ddcfDNA testing results in kidney transplantation. The review also provides insights into ddcfDNA testing on different platforms along with key considerations.

Donor-derived cell free DNA as a biomarker in kidney transplantation

The early detection of acute rejection in the allograft is important as it provides an opportunity for timely therapeutic intervention in order to preserve graft function and achieve longer graft survival. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) has emerged as a new biomarker in the field of kidney transplantation. In this review, we used data from various studies to examine the role of dd-cfDNA in comparison to creatinine and donor-specific antibodies in the early detection of transplant rejection. We also reviewed the use of dd-cfDNA in other organ transplants as well as the challenges and potential future direction for dd-cfDNA as a diagnostic tool.

Understanding Donor-derived Cell-free DNA in Kidney Transplantation: An Overview and Case-based Guide for Clinicians

Kidney transplant recipients undergo lifelong monitoring of allograft function and evaluation for transplant complications. The current monitoring paradigm utilizes blood, urine, and tissue markers that are insensitive, nonspecific, or invasive to obtain. As a result, problems are detected late, after significant damage has accrued, and often beyond the time at which complete resolution is possible. Indeed, most kidney transplants eventually fail, usually because of chronic rejection and other undetected injury. There is a clear need for a transplant-specific biomarker that enables a proactive approach to monitoring via early detection of reversible pathology. A biomarker that supports timely and personalized treatment would assist in achieving the ultimate goal of improving allograft survival and limiting therapeutic toxicity to the recipient. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (ddcfDNA) has been proposed as one such transplant biomarker. Although the test is presently utilized most in the United States, it is conceivable that its use will become more widespread. This review covers aspects of ddcfDNA that support informed use of the test by general nephrologists, including the basic biology of ddcfDNA, methodological nuances of testing, and general recommendations for use in the kidney transplant population. Clinical contexts are used to illustrate evidence-supported interpretation of ddcfDNA results and subsequent management. Finally, knowledge gaps and areas for further study are discussed.

Levels of donor-derived cell-free DNA and chemokines in BK polyomavirus-associated nephropathy

BACKGROUND

BK polyomavirus-associated nephropathy (BKPyVAN) carries a risk of irreversible allograft injury. While detection of BK viremia and biopsy assessment are the current diagnostic gold standard, the diagnostic value of biomarkers reflecting tissue injury (donor-derived cell-free DNA [dd-cfDNA]) or immune activation (C-X-C motif chemokine ligand [CXCL]9 and CXCL10) remains poorly defined.

METHODS

For this retrospective study, 19 cases of BKPyVAN were selected from the Vienna transplant cohort (biopsies performed between 2012 and 2019). Eight patients with T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), 17 with antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) and 10 patients without polyomavirus nephropathy or rejection served as controls. Fractions of dd-cfDNA were quantified using next-generation sequencing and CXCL9 and CXCL10 were detected using multiplex immunoassays.

RESULTS

BKPyVAN was associated with a slight increase in dd-cfDNA (median; interquartile range: .38% [.27%-1.2%] vs. .21% [.12%-.34%] in non-rejecting control patients; p = .005). Levels were far lower than in ABMR (1.2% [.82%-2.5%]; p = .004]), but not different from TCMR (.54% [.26%-3.56%]; p = .52). Within the BKPyVAN cohort, we found no relationship between dd-cfDNA levels and the extent of tubulo-interstitial infiltrates, BKPyVAN class and BK viremia/viruria, respectively. In some contrast to dd-cfDNA, concentrations of urinary CXCL9 and CXCL10 exceeded those detected in ABMR, but similar increases were also found in TCMR.

CONCLUSION

BKPyVAN can induce moderate increases in dd-cfDNA and concomitant high urinary excretion of chemokines, but this pattern may be indistinguishable from that of TCMR. Our results argue against a significant value of these biomarkers to reliably distinguish BKPyVAN from rejection.

Extracellular vesicle-bound DNA in urine is indicative of kidney allograft injury

Extracellular vesicle‐bound DNA (evDNA) is an understudied extracellular vesicle (EV) cargo, particularly in cancer‐unrelated research. Although evDNA has been detected in urine, little is known about its characteristics, localization, and biomarker potential for kidney pathologies. To address this, we enriched EVs from urine of well‐characterized kidney transplant recipients undergoing allograft biopsy, characterized their evDNA and its association to allograft injury. The SEC‐based method enriched pure EVs from urine of kidney transplant recipients, regardless of the allograft injury. Urinary evDNA represented up to 29.2 ± 8% (mean ± SD) of cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) and correlated with cfDNA in several characteristics but was less fragmented (P < 0.001). Importantly, using DNase treatment and immunogold labelling TEM, we demonstrated that evDNA was bound to the surface of urinary EVs. Normalised evDNA yield (P = 0.042) and evDNA copy number (P = 0.027) significantly differed between patients with normal histology, rejection injury and non‐rejection injury, the later groups having significantly larger uEVs (mean diameter, P = 0.045) and more DNA bound per uEV. ddDNA is detectable in uEV samples of kidney allograft recipients, but its quantity is highly variable. In a proof‐of‐principle study, several evDNA characteristics correlated with clinical and histological parameters (P = 0.040), supporting that the potential of evDNA as a biomarker for kidney allograft injury should be further investigated.

Urinary CD8+HLA-DR+ T Cell Abundance Non-invasively Predicts Kidney Transplant Rejection

Early detection of kidney transplant (KT) rejection remains a challenge in patient care. Non-invasive biomarkers hold high potential to detect rejection, adjust immunosuppression, and monitor KT patients. So far, no approach has fully satisfied requirements to innovate routine monitoring of KT patients. In this two-center study we analyzed a total of 380 urine samples. T cells and tubular epithelial cells were quantified in KT patients with graft deterioration using flow cytometry. Epigenetic urine cell quantification was used to confirm flow cytometric results. Moreover, a cohort of KT patients was followed up during the first year after transplantation, tracking cell subsets over time. Abundance of urinary cell counts differed in patients with and without rejection. Most strikingly, various T cell subsets were enriched in patients with T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) compared to patients without TCMR. Among T cell subsets, CD8+HLA-DR+ T cells were most distinctive (AUC = 0.91, Spec.: 95.9%, Sens.: 76.5%). Epigenetic analysis confirmed T cell and tubular epithelial cell quantities as determined by flow cytometry. Urinary T cell abundance in new KT patients decreased during their first year after transplantation. In conclusion urinary T cells reflect intrarenal inflammation in TCMR. T cell subsets yield high potential to monitor KT patients and detect rejection. Hereby we present a promising biomarker to non-invasively diagnose TCMR.

Emerging role of cell-free DNA in kidney transplantation

Monitoring kidney transplants for rejection conventionally includes serum creatinine, immunosuppressive drug levels, proteinuria, and donor-specific antibody (DSA). Serum creatinine is a late marker of allograft injury, and the predictive ability of DSA regarding risk of rejection is variable. Histological analysis of an allograft biopsy is the standard method for diagnosing rejection but is invasive, inconvenient, and carries risk of complications. There has been a long quest to find a perfect biomarker that noninvasively predicts tissue injury caused by rejection at an early stage, so that diagnosis and treatment could be pursued without delay in order to minimize irreversible damage to the allograft. In this review, we discuss relatively novel research on identifying biomarkers of tissue injury, specifically elaborating on donor-derived cell-free DNA, and its clinical utility.

Diagnostic value of donor-derived cell-free DNA to predict antibody-mediated rejection in donor-specific antibody-positive renal allograft recipients

Circulating donor‐specific antibodies (DSA) do not necessarily indicate antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). Here, we evaluated the diagnostic value of donor‐derived cell‐free DNA (dd‐cfDNA) as an add‐on to DSA detection. The study included two independent cohorts of DSA⁺ kidney allograft recipients, 45 subclinical cases identified by cross‐sectional antibody screening (cohort 1), and 30 recipients subjected to indication biopsies (cohort 2). About 50% of the DSA⁺ recipients had ABMR and displayed higher dd‐cfDNA levels than DSA⁺ABMR⁻ recipients (cohort 1: 1.90% [median; IQR: 0.78–3.90%] vs. 0.52% [0.35–0.72%]; P < 0.001); (cohort 2: 1.20% [0.82–2.50%] vs. 0.59% [0.28–2.05%]; P = 0.086). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.89 and 0.69 for dd‐cfDNA, and 0.88 and 0.77 for DSA mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), respectively. In combined models, adding dd‐cfDNA to DSA‐MFI or vice versa significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy. Limited diagnostic performance of dd‐cfDNA in cohort 2 was related to the frequent finding of other types of graft injury among ABMR⁻ recipients, like T cell‐mediated rejection or glomerulonephritis. For dd‐cfDNA in relation to injury of any cause an AUC of 0.97 was calculated. Monitoring of dd‐cfDNA in DSA⁺ patients may be a useful tool to detect ABMR and other types of injury.