Outcomes at 3 years posttransplant in imlifidase-desensitized kidney transplant patients

Imlifidase in Highly Sensitized Kidney Transplant Recipients With a Positive Crossmatch Against a Deceased Donor

Introduction

Imlifidase is authorized for desensitization of highly sensitized adult kidney transplant candidates with a positive crossmatch (XM) against a deceased donor. Here, we report on the results for the first 9 patients transplanted in this context who had at least 3 months of follow-up.

Methods

The eligibility criteria were as follows: calculated panel reactive antibodies (cPRA) ³ 98%, ³ 3 years on the waiting list, immunodominant donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) with mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) > 6000 (and < 5000 at 1:10 dilution) and a negative post-imlifidase complement-dependent cytotoxic XM (CDCXM).

Results

All 9 patients had been on dialysis for an average of 123 ± 41 months, with cPRA at 99% (n = 2) or 100% (n = 7). At transplantation, the mean number of DSAs was 4.3 ± 1.4. The median immunodominant DSA MFI was 9153 (6430-16,980). Flow cytometry XM (FCXM) and CDCXM before imlifidase were positive in 9 and 2 patients, respectively. After 1 injection of imlifidase, all were negative. Patients received polyclonal antibodies, i.v. Igs (IVIg), rituximab, tacrolimus, and mycophenolate. Five patients had a DSA rebound within the first 14 days: 2 had concomitant clinical antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR), 2 had subclinical ABMR, and 1 had isolated positive C4d staining. No ABMR was observed in patients without rebound. Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration formula estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 56 ± 22 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at the last follow-up (7 ± 2.8 months). No graft loss or death were observed. Four patients developed at least 1 infection.

Conclusion

These real-life data demonstrate that the use of imlifidase to desensitize highly sensitized patients can have an acceptable short-term efficacy and safety profile in selected patients.

Advancing immunosuppression in liver transplantation: A narrative review

Immunosuppression is essential to ensure recipient and graft survivals after liver transplantation (LT). However, our understanding and management of the immune system remain suboptimal. Current immunosuppressive therapy cannot selectively inhibit the graft-specific immune response and entails a significant risk of serious side effects, i.e., among others, de novo cancers, infections, cardiovascular events, renal failure, metabolic syndrome, and late graft fibrosis, with progressive loss of graft function. Pharmacological research, aimed to develop alternative immunosuppressive agents in LT, is behind other solid-organ transplantation subspecialties, and, therefore, the development of new compounds and strategies should get priority in LT. The research trajectories cover mechanisms to induce T-cell exhaustion, to inhibit co-stimulation, to mitigate non-antigen-specific inflammatory response, and, lastly, to minimize the development and action of donor-specific antibodies. Moreover, while cellular modulation techniques are complex, active research is underway to foster the action of T-regulatory cells, to induce tolerogenic dendritic cells, and to promote the function of B-regulatory cells. We herein discuss current lines of research in clinical immunosuppression, particularly focusing on possible applications in the LT setting.

Anti-HLA Class II Antibodies Are the Most Resistant to Desensitization in Crossmatch-positive Living-donor Kidney Transplantations: A Patient Series

Background

In HLA-incompatible kidney transplantation, the efficacy of desensitization in terms of anti-HLA antibody kinetics is not well characterized. We present an overview of the course of anti-HLA antibodies throughout plasma exchange (PE) desensitization in a series of crossmatch-positive patients.

Methods

All consecutive candidates in the Dutch HLA-incompatible kidney transplantation program between November 2012 and January 2022 were included. The eligibility criteria were a positive crossmatch with a living kidney donor and no options for compatible transplantation. Desensitization consisted of 5-10 PE with low-dose IVIg.

Results

A total of 16 patient-donor pairs were included. Patients had median virtual panel-reactive antibody of 99.58%. Cumulative donor-specific anti-HLA antibody (cumDSA) mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) was 31 399 median, and immunodominant DSA (iDSA) MFI was 18 677 for class I and 21 893 for class II. Median anti-HLA antibody MFI response to desensitization was worse in class II as compared with class I (P < 0.001), particularly for HLA-DQ. Class I cumDSA MFI decreased 68% after 4 PE versus 53% in class II. The decrease between the fifth and the 10th PE sessions was modest with 21% in class I versus 9% in class II. Antibody-mediated rejection occurred in 85% of patients, with the iDSA directed to the same mismatched HLA as before desensitization, except for 3 patients, of whom 2 had vigorous rebound of antibodies to repeated mismatches (RMMs). Rebound was highest (86%) in RMM-DSA with prior grafts removed (transplantectomy n = 7), lower (39%) in non-RMM-DSA (n = 30), and lowest (11%) for RMM-DSA with in situ grafts (n = 5; P = 0.018 for RMM-DSA transplantectomy versus RMM-DSA graft in situ). With a median follow-up of 59 mo, 1 patient had died resulting in a death-censored graft survival of 73%.

Conclusions

Patients with class II DSA, and particularly those directed against HLA-DQ locus, were difficult to desensitize.

Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Lung Transplantation: Diagnosis and Therapeutic Armamentarium in a 21st Century Perspective

Humoral immunity is a major waypoint towards chronic allograft dysfunction in lung transplantation (LT) recipients. Though allo-immunization and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) are well-known entities, some diagnostic gaps need to be addressed. Morphological analysis could be enhanced by digital pathology and artificial intelligence-based companion tools. Graft transcriptomics can help to identify graft failure phenotypes or endotypes. Donor-derived cell free DNA is being evaluated for graft-loss risk stratification and tailored surveillance. Preventative therapies should be tailored according to risk. The donor pool can be enlarged for candidates with HLA sensitization, with strategies combining plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin and immune cell depletion, or with emerging or innovative therapies such as imlifidase or immunoadsorption. In cases of insufficient pre-transplant desensitization, the effects of antibodies on the allograft can be prevented by targeting the complement cascade, although evidence for this strategy in LT is limited. In LT recipients with a humoral response, strategies are combined, including depletion of immune cells (plasmapheresis or immunoadsorption), inhibition of immune pathways, or modulation of the inflammatory cascade, which can be achieved with photopheresis. Altogether, these innovative techniques offer promising perspectives for LT recipients and shape the 21st century's armamentarium against AMR.

Engineered IgM and IgG cleaving enzymes for mitigating antibody neutralization and complement activation in AAV gene transfer

Systemic dosing of adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors poses potential risk of adverse side effects including complement activation triggered by anti-capsid immunity. Due to the multifactorial nature of toxicities observed in this setting, a wide spectrum of immune modulatory regimens are being investigated in the clinic. Here, we discover an IgM cleaving enzyme (IceM) that degrades human IgM, a key trigger in the anti-AAV immune cascade. We then engineer a fusion enzyme (IceMG) with dual proteolytic activity against human IgM and IgG. IceMG cleaves B cell surface antigen receptors and inactivates phospholipase gamma signaling in vitro. Importantly, IceMG is more effective at inhibiting complement activation compared with an IgG cleaving enzyme alone. Upon IV dosing, IceMG rapidly and reversibly clears circulating IgM and IgG in macaques. Antisera from these animals treated with IceMG shows decreased ability to neutralize AAV and activate complement. Consistently, pre-conditioning with IceMG restores AAV transduction in mice passively immunized with human antisera. Thus, IgM cleaving enzymes show promise in simultaneously addressing multiple aspects of anti-AAV immunity mediated by B cells, circulating antibodies and complement. These studies have implications for improving safety of AAV gene therapies and possibly broader applications including organ transplantation and autoimmune diseases.

Imlifidase: Is it the Magic Wand in Renal Transplantation?

Potential kidney transplant patients with HLA-specific antibodies have reduced access to transplantation. Their harmful effects are mediated by the Fc portion of IgG, including activation of the complement system and Fc receptor-initiated cytotoxic processes by circulating leucocytes. Avoiding antibody incompatibility is the conventional approach, but for some patients this can mean extended waiting times, or even no chance of a transplant if there are no alternative, compatible donors. For these cases, pretransplant antibody removal may provide access to transplantation. Plasmapheresis is currently used to achieve this, with acceptable outcome results, but the process can take days to reduce the antibody levels to a safe level, so has limited use for deceased donors. There is now an alternative, in the form of an IgG-digesting enzyme, Imlifidase, which can be administered for in vivo IgG inactivation. Imlifidase cleaves human IgG, separating the antigen-binding part, F(ab')2 from Fc. Typically, within six hours of dosing, most, if not all, of the circulating IgG has been inactivated, allowing safe transplantation from a previously incompatible donor. For deceased donor transplantation, where minimizing cold ischaemia is critical, this six-hour delay before implantation should be manageable, with the compatibility testing processes adjusted to accommodate the treatment. This agent has been used successfully in phase 2 clinical trials, with good short to medium term outcomes. While a donation rate that matches demand may be one essential answer to providing universal access to kidney transplantation, this is currently unrealistic. IgG inactivation, using Imlifidase, is, however, a realistic and proven alternative.

Successful Desensitization with Imlifidase and Daratumumab in a Highly Immunized, Crossmatch Positive, Blood Group-Incompatible Living-Donor Re-Transplant Recipient with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Antiphospholipid Syndrome

Introduction

The transplantation of highly sensitized patients remains a major obstacle. Immunized patients wait longer for a transplant if not prioritized, and if transplanted, their transplant outcome is worse.

Case Presentation

We report a successful AB0- and HLA-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation in a 35-year-old female patient with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and antiphospholipid syndrome. The patient had a positive T- and B-cell complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) crossmatch and previous graft loss due to renal vein thrombosis. We treated the patient with intravenous immunoglobulins, rituximab, horse anti-thymocyte globulin, daratumumab, and imlifidase, besides standard immunosuppression. All IgG antibodies were sensitive to imlifidase treatment. Besides donor-specific HLA antibodies, anti-dsDNA antibodies and antiphospholipid antibodies were cleaved. The patient initially had delayed graft function. Two kidney biopsies (day 7 and day 14) revealed acute tubular necrosis without signs of HLA antibody-mediated rejection. On posttransplant day 30, hemodialysis was stopped, and creatinine levels declined over the next weeks to a baseline creatinine of about 1.7 mg/dL after 12 months.

Conclusion

In this case, a novel multimodal treatment strategy including daratumumab and imlifidase enabled successful kidney transplantation for a highly immunized patient with antiphospholipid antibodies.

A personalised delisting strategy enables successful kidney transplantation in highly sensitised patients with preformed donor-specific anti HLA antibodies

This study investigates kidney transplant outcomes in highly sensitised patients after implementing a delisting strategy aimed at enabling transplantation despite preformed donor-specific antibodies (preDSA), with the goal of reducing acute antibody-mediated rejection (aAMR) risk. Fifty-three sensitised recipients underwent kidney transplant after delisting prohibited HLA antigens, focusing initially in low MFI antibodies (<5000), except for anti-HLA-DQ. If insufficient, higher MFI antibodies were permitted, especially for those without an immunogenic eplet pattern assigned. Delisting of Complement-fixing antibodies (C1q+) was consistently avoided. Comparison cohorts included 53 sensitised recipients without DSA (SwoDSA) and 53 non-sensitised (NS). The average waiting time prior to delisting was 4.4 ± 1.8 years, with a reduction in cPRA from 99.7 ± 0.5 to 98.1 ± 0.7, followed by transplantation within 7.2 ± 8.0 months (analysed in 34 patients). Rejection rates were similar among preDSA, SwoDSA, and NS groups (16%, 8%, and 11%, respectively; p = 0.46). However, aAMR was higher in the preDSA group (12%, 4%, and 2%, respectively; p = 0.073), only presented in recipients with DSA of MFI >5000. The highest MFI DSA were against HLA-DP (Median: 10796 MFI), with 50% of preDSA aAMR cases due to anti-DP antibodies (n = 3). Graft survival rates at 1 and 5 years in preDSA group were 94%, and 67%, comparable to SwoDSA (94%, and 70%; p = 0.69), being significantly higher in the NS group (p = 0.002). The five-year recipient survival rate was 89%, comparable to SwoDSA and NS groups (p = 0.79). A delisting strategy enables safe kidney transplant in highly sensitised patients with preDSA, with a slight increase in aAMR and comparable graft and patient survivals to non-DSA cohorts.

Desensitization of Highly Immunized Kidney Transplant Recipients Awaiting Transplantation-Polish Single-Center Experience

INTRODUCTION

The increasing number of highly immunized patients waiting for kidney transplantation is a significant problem in Europe as the proportion of such patients has doubled in the last decade. Transplantation in this group is enabled by desensitization methods, i.e., intravenous pharmacotherapy with human immunoglobulin (IVIG), anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (rituximab), and plasma exchange. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this protocol.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The inclusion criteria: presence of established anti-HLA antibodies with complement-binding capacity, i.e., anti-HLAC1q+ (>MFI 15,000 for the most common antigens), no renal transplantation within 1 year after activation on the waiting list. Thirteen patients were selected for the procedure. IVIG was administered twice (2 g/kg-maximum 140 g/dose). Between IVIG doses, patients received rituximab (375 mg/m2). Anti-HLA was tested after 1 and 2 months after completion of the procedure.

RESULTS

All patients have completed the protocol. No significant changes after desensitization in the amount/profile of alloantibodies were observed. However, with negative vCM for HLA-A/B/DR (no DSA against the reported donor) and negative CM-CDC, according to the allocation system, patients were given priority on the recipient list. Seven out of 13 patients received a transplant within 12 months after treatment (mean 11.5 weeks). Renal graft function was good (mean creatinine level after 1 month: 1.5 mg/dL). No incidents of acute rejection were reported. The most common complications were infections (especially pneumonia).

CONCLUSION

The desensitization protocol (IVIG + rituximab) allows highly immunized patients to undergo organ transplantation. In short-term analysis, no acute rejection was observed, graft function was satisfactory. Desensitization was associated with an increased risk of infection.

Low-risk delisting strategy in highly sensitized patients without donor offers included in exchange donation programs. One single-center experience

Donor exchange programs were designed to allocate organs for highly sensitized (HS) patients. The allocation algorithm differs slightly among countries and includes different strategies to improve access to transplants in HS patients. However, many HS patients with a calculated panel reactive of antibodies (cPRA) of 100 % remain on the waiting list for a long time. Some allocation algorithms assume immunological risk, including Imlifidase treatment, to increase the chance of transplantation in very HS patients. Here, we describe our unicenter experience of low-risk delisting strategy in 15 HS patients included in the Spanish donor exchange program without donor offers. After delisting, 7 out of 15 HS patients reduced the cPRA below 99.95 % and impacted the reduction of time on the waiting list (p = 0.01), where 5 out of 7 achieved transplantation. Within those HS that remained above 99.95 %, 1 out of 8 was transplanted. All the HS were transplanted with delisted DSA, and only one with DSA level rebounded early after transplantation. All HS transplanted after delisting maintain graft function. The transplant immunology laboratories are challenged to search intermediate risk assessment methods for delisting high HS patients.

European Consensus on the Management of Sensitized Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Delphi Study

An increasing number of sensitized patients awaiting transplantation face limited options, leading to fatalities during dialysis and higher costs. The absence of established evidence highlights the need for collaborative consensus. Donor-specific antibodies (DSA)-triggered antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) significantly contributes to kidney graft failure, especially in sensitized patients. The European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) launched the ENGAGE initiative, categorizing sensitized candidates by AMR risk to improve patient care. A systematic review assessed induction and maintenance regimens as well as antibody removal strategies, with statements subjected to the Delphi methodology. A Likert-scale survey was distributed to 53 European experts (Nephrologists, Transplant surgeons and Immunologists) with experience in kidney transplant recipient care. A rate ≥75% with the same answer was considered consensus. Consensus was achieved in 95.3% of statements. While most recommendations aligned, two statements related to complement inhibitors for AMR prophylaxis lacked consensus. The ENGAGE consensus presents contemporary recommendations for desensitization and immunomodulation strategies, grounded in predefined risk categories. The adoption of tailored, patient-specific measures is anticipated to streamline the care of sensitized recipients undergoing renal allografts. While this approach holds the promise of enhancing transplant accessibility and fostering long-term success in transplantation outcomes, its efficacy will need to be assessed through dedicated studies.

Improving Kidney Disease Care: One Giant Leap for Nephrology

Nephrology is an ever-evolving field of medicine. The importance of such a discipline is related to the high clinical impact of kidney disease. In fact, abnormalities of kidney function and/or structure are common in the general population, reaching an overall prevalence of about 10%. More importantly, the onset of kidney damage is related to a strikingly high risk of cardiovascular events, mortality, and progression to kidney failure which, in turn, compromises quality and duration of life. Attempts to comprehend the pathogenesis and molecular mechanisms involved in kidney disease occurrence have prompted the development and implementation of novel drugs in clinical practice with the aim of treating the 'specific cause' of kidney disease (including chronic kidney disease, glomerular disease, and genetic kidney disorders) and the main immunological complications following kidney transplantation. Herein, we provide an overview of the principal emerging drug classes with proved efficacy in the context of the aforementioned clinical conditions. This can represent a simplified guide for clinical nephrologists to remind them of the vast and heterogeneous armamentarium of drugs that should be used in the present and the future to improve the management of patients suffering from kidney disease.

Advances in desensitization for human leukocyte antigen incompatible kidney transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) sensitization is a major barrier to kidney transplantation induced by exposure to alloantigens through pregnancy, blood product exposure and previous transplantations. Desensitization strategies are undertaken to improve the chances of finding compatible organ offers. Standard approaches to desensitization include the use of plasmapheresis/low dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) or high dose IVIG plus anti-CD20. However, current methods to reduce HLA antibodies are not always successful, especially in those with calculated panel reactive antibody 99-100%.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newer desensitization strategies such as imlifidase [immunoglobulin G (IgG) endopeptidase] rapidly inactivates IgG molecules and creates an "antibody-free zone", representing an important advancement in desensitization. However, pathogenic antibodies rebound, increasing allograft injury that is not addressed by imlifidase. Here, use of anti-IL-6R (tocilizumab) or anti-interleukin-6 (clazakizumab) could offer long-term control of B-memory and plasma cell DSA responses to limit graft injury. Agents aimed at long-lived plasma cells (anti-CD38 and anti-BCMAxCD3) could reduce or eliminate HLA-producing plasma cells from marrow niches. Other agents such as complement inhibitors and novel agents inhibiting the Fc neonatal receptor (FcRn) mediated IgG recycling will likely find important roles in desensitization.

SUMMARY

Use of these agents alone or in combination will likely improve the efficacy and durability of desensitization therapies, improving access to kidney transplantation for immunologically disadvantaged patients.

The role of anticomplement therapy in the management of the kidney allograft

As the number of patients living with kidney failure grows, the need also grows for kidney transplantation, the gold standard kidney replacement therapy that provides a survival advantage. This may result in an increased rate of transplantation from HLA-mismatched donors that increases the rate of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), which already is the leading cause of allograft failure. Plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin therapy, anti-CD20 therapies (i.e., rituximab), bortezomib and splenectomy have been used over the years to treat AMR as well as to prevent AMR in high-risk sensitized kidney transplant recipients. Eculizumab and ravulizumab are monoclonal antibodies targeting the C5 protein of the complement pathway and part of the expanding field of anticomplement therapies, which is not limited to kidney transplant recipients, and also includes complement-mediated microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, and ANCA-vasculitis. In this narrative review, we summarize the current knowledge concerning the pathophysiological background and use of anti-C5 strategies (eculizumab and ravulizumab) and C1-esterase inhibitor in AMR, either to prevent AMR in high-risk desensitized patients or to treat AMR as first-line or rescue therapy and also to treat de novo thrombotic microangiopathy in kidney transplant recipients.

Imlifidase in kidney transplantation

Kidney transplantation, the gold-standard therapeutic approach for patients with end-stage kidney disease, offers improvement in patient survival and quality of life. However, broad sensitization against human leukocyte antigens often resulting in a positive crossmatch against the patient's living donor or the majority of potential deceased donors in the allocation system represents a major obstacle due to a high risk for antibody-mediated rejection, delayed graft function and allograft loss. Kidney-paired donation and desensitization protocols have been established to overcome this obstacle, with limited success. Imlifidase, a novel immunoglobulin G (IgG)-degrading enzyme derived from Streptococcus pyogenes and recombinantly produced in Escherichia coli, is a promising agent for recipients with a positive crossmatch against their organ donor with high specificity towards IgG, rapid action and high efficacy in early pre-clinical and clinical studies. However, the rebound of IgG after a few days can lead to antibody-mediated rejection, making the administration of potent immunosuppressive regimens in the early post-transplant phase necessary. There is currently no comparative study evaluating the efficiency of imlifidase therapy compared with conventional desensitization protocols along with the lack of randomized control trials, indicating the clear need for future large-scale clinical studies in this field. Besides providing a practical framework for the clinical use of the agent, our aim in this article is to evaluate the underlying mechanism of action, efficiency and safety of imlifidase therapy in immunologically high-risk kidney transplant recipients.

Imlifidase Desensitization in HLA-incompatible Kidney Transplantation: Finding the Sweet Spot

Imlifidase, derived from a Streptococcus pyogenes enzyme, cleaves the entire immunoglobulin G pool within hours after administration in fully cleaved antigen-binding and crystallizable fragments. These cleaved fragments can no longer exert their antibody-dependent cytotoxic functions, thereby creating a window to permit HLA-incompatible kidney transplantation. Imlifidase is labeled, in Europe only, for deceased donor kidney transplantation in highly sensitized patients, whose chances for an HLA-compatible transplant are negligible. This review discusses outcomes of preclinical and clinical studies on imlifidase and describes the phase III desensitization trials that are currently enrolling patients. A comparison is made with other desensitization methods. The review discusses the immunological work-up of imlifidase candidates and especially the "delisting strategy" of antigens that shift from unacceptable to acceptable with imlifidase desensitization. Other considerations for clinical implementation, such as adaptation of induction protocols, are also discussed. Imlifidase cleaves most of the currently used induction agents except for horse antithymocyte globulin, and rebound of donor-specific antibodies should be managed. Another consideration is the timing and interpretation of (virtual) crossmatches when bringing this novel desensitization agent into the clinic.

Modern advances in heart transplantation

Heart transplantation (HTx) is the only definitive therapy for patients with end stage heart disease. With the increasing global prevalence of heart failure, the demand for HTx has continued to grow and outpace supply. In this paper, we will review advances in the field of HTx along the clinical journey of a HTx recipient. Starting with the sensitized patient, we discuss current methods to define sensitization, and assays to help identify clinically relevant anti-HLA antibodies. Desensitization strategies targeting all levels of the adaptive immune system are discussed with emphasis on novel techniques such as anti-CD 38 blockade and use of the Immunoglobulin G-Degrading Enzyme of Streptococcus Pyogenes. We next discuss donor procurement and the resurgence of donation after circulatory death as a viable strategy to significantly and safely increase the donor pool. Post-transplant, we evaluate non-invasive surveillance techniques including gene expression profiling and donor-derived cell-free DNA. Last, we discuss the ground-breaking developments in the field of xenotransplantation.

Impact of imlifidase treatment on immunoglobulins in an HLA-hypersensitized lupus nephritis patient with anti-SSA/SSB antibodies after kidney transplantation: A case report

Bacterial recombinant cysteine protease Ides (imlifidase, Idefirix®, Hansa Biopharma) is used to prevent humoral transplant rejection in highly HLA-sensitized recipients, and to control IgG-mediated autoimmune diseases. We report the case of a 51 years old woman suffering from lupus nephritis with end stage kidney disease, grafted for the second time and pre-treated with imlifidase. The patient was HLA-hypersensitized (calculated Panel Reactive Antibodies [Abs], cPRA>99 %) and has three preformed Donor Specific Antibodies (DSA). Circulating immunoglobulins were monitored at initiation (0, 6, 36, 72 and 96 h), and at Ab recovery one and two months following imlifidase injection. From baseline, the higher depletion was reported after 36h for total IgG (-75 %) and IgG subclasses (-87 % for IgG1, IgG2 and IgG3, -78 % for IgG4), while no significant impact on IgA and IgM was observed. Anti-SSA 60 kDa and anti-SSB auto-Abs quickly decreased after imlifidase injection (-96 % for both after 36 h) as well as post-vaccinal specific IgG (-95 % for tetanus toxoid, -97 % for pneumococcus and -91 % for Haemophilus influenzae Abs after 36 h). At the Ab recovery phase, total IgG and anti-SSA60/SSB Abs reached their initial level at two months. Regarding alloreactive Abs, anti-HLA Abs including the three DSA showed a dramatic decrease after injection with 100 % depletion from baseline after 36 h as assessed by multiplex single bead antigen assay, leading to negative crossmatches using both lymphocytotoxicity (LCT) and flow cell techniques. DSA rebound at recovery was absent and remained under the positivity threshold (MFI = 1000) after 6 months. The findings from this case report are that imlifidase exerts an early depleting effect on all circulating IgG, while IgG recovery may depend in part from imlifidase's capacity to target memory B cells.

Current limitations of gene therapy for rare pediatric diseases: Lessons learned from clinical experience with AAV vectors

Gene therapy using adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors is a promising therapeutic strategy for multiple inherited diseases. Following intravenous injection, AAV vectors carrying a copy of the missing gene or the genome-editing machinery reach their target cells and deliver the genetic material. Several clinical trials are currently ongoing and significant success has already been achieved with at least six AAV gene therapy products with market approval in Europe and the United States. Nonetheless, clinical trials and preclinical studies have uncovered several limitations of AAV gene transfer, which need to be addressed in order to improve the safety and enable the treatment of the largest patient population. Limitations include the occurrence of immune-mediated toxicities, the potential loss of correction in the long run, and the development of neutralizing antibodies against AAV vectors preventing re-administration. In this review, we summarize these limitations and discuss the potential technological developments to overcome them. © 2023 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS on behalf of French Society of Pediatrics.

Serum immunoglobulin and the threshold of Fc receptor-mediated immune activation

Antibodies can mediate immune recruitment or clearance of immune complexes through the interaction of their Fc domain with cellular Fc receptors. Clustering of antibodies is a key step in generating sufficient avidity for efficacious receptor recognition. However, Fc receptors may be saturated with prevailing, endogenous serum immunoglobulin and this raises the threshold by which cellular receptors can be productively engaged. Here, we review the factors controlling serum IgG levels in both healthy and disease states, and discuss how the presence of endogenous IgG is encoded into the functional activation thresholds for low- and high-affinity Fc receptors. We discuss the circumstances where antibody engineering can help overcome these physiological limitations of therapeutic antibodies. Finally, we discuss how the pharmacological control of Fc receptor saturation by endogenous IgG is emerging as a feasible mechanism for the enhancement of antibody therapeutics.

Immunoadsorption-Based HLA Desensitization in Patients Awaiting Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation: An Interventional, Non-Randomised, Single Cohort Study

Whether immunoadsorption (IADS) as part of desensitization protocols could facilitate deceased donor kidney transplantation (KT) in highly sensitized (HS) patients remains to be proven. We retrospectively analyzed our IADS based desensitization protocol for deceased donor KTs between 2013 and 2018. Fifteen HS patients (age 52 years [40-56]) were included. Waiting time before IADS was 6 years [5-10] and the interval between IADS initiation and KT was 5 months [1-12] for the 14 transplanted patients. Nine patients had prior KT. Calculated panel reactive antibody decreased significantly during the protocol (99.3% [92.5-99.9] vs. 79.4% [56.7-81.9]; p = 0.004). Death-censored graft survival was 85.7% at 1 and 2 years post-transplantation. One-year median plasma creatinine level was 135 µmol/L [111-202]. Six developed active antibody mediated rejection (ABMR) at 1 year, with a median delay of 13 days [11-26]. Eight patients developed severe infections, including two fatal outcomes. Finally, compared to 93% of patients who received desensitization receiving a KT, only 43% of a control with similar characteristics underwent transplantation. However, no difference was found in overall probability of being alive with a functioning graft at the end of follow-up. The results indicate that our IADS-based desensitization strategy was not effective due to a high rate of ABMR and severe infectious complications which pose a challenge to its universalization.

Emerging Therapies for Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Kidney Transplantation

Despite the advances in immunosuppressive medications, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) continues to be a major cause of kidney allograft failure and remains a barrier to improving long-term allograft survival. Recently, there have been significant advances in the understanding of the pathophysiological process of AMR, along with the development of new therapeutic options. Additionally, surveillance protocols with donor-derived cell-free DNA and gene profile testing have been established, leading to the early detection of AMR. A multitude of clinical trials are ongoing, opening numerous opportunities for improving outcome in kidney transplant recipients. In this brief review, we discuss the emerging therapies for managing both active and chronic active AMR and highlight the ongoing clinical trials.

Imlifidase for Kidney Transplantation of Highly Sensitized Patients With a Positive Crossmatch: The French Consensus Guidelines

Imlifidase recently received early access authorization for highly sensitized adult kidney transplant candidates with a positive crossmatch against an ABO-compatible deceased donor. These French consensus guidelines have been generated by an expert working group, in order to homogenize patient selection, associated treatments and follow-up. This initiative is part of an international effort to analyze properly the benefits and tolerance of this new costly treatment in real-life. Eligible patients must meet the following screening criteria: cPRA ≥ 98%, ≤ 65-year of age, ≥ 3 years on the waiting list, and a low risk of biopsy-related complications. The final decision to use Imlifidase will be based on the two following criteria. First, the results of a virtual crossmatch on recent serum, which shall show a MFI for the immunodominant donor-specific antibodies (DSA) > 6,000 but the value of which does not exceed 5,000 after 1:10 dilution. Second, the post-Imlifidase complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch must be negative. Patients treated with Imlifidase will receive an immunosuppressive regimen based on steroids, rATG, high dose IVIg, rituximab, tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid. Frequent post-transplant testing for DSA and systematic surveillance kidney biopsies are highly recommended to monitor post-transplant DSA rebound and subclinical rejection.

Can regulatory T cells improve outcomes of sensitised patients after HLA-Ab incompatible renal transplantation: study protocol for the Phase IIa GAMECHANgER-1 trial

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the gold-standard treatment for patients with kidney failure. However, one-third of patients awaiting a kidney transplant are highly sensitized to human leukocyte antigens (HLA), resulting in an increased waiting time for a suitable kidney, more acute and chronic rejection, and a shorter graft survival compared to non-highly sensitised patients. Current standard immunosuppression protocols do not adequately suppress memory responses, and so alternative strategies are needed. Autologous polyclonally expanded regulatory T cells (Tregs) have been demonstrated to be safe in transplant settings and could be a potential alternative to modulate memory immune alloresponses.

METHODS

The aim of this trial is to determine whether adoptive transfer of autologous Tregs into HLA sensitised patients can suppress memory T and B cell responses against specific HLA antigens. This is a two-part, multi-centre, prospective clinical trial, comprising an observational phase (Part 1) aiming to identify patients with unregulated cellular memory responses to HLA (Pure HLA Proteins) followed by an interventional phase (Part 2). The first 9 patients identified as being eligible in Part 1 will undergo baseline immune monitoring for 2 months to inform statistical analysis of the primary endpoint. Part 2 is an adaptive, open labelled trial based on Simon's two-stage design, with 21 patients receiving Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP)-grade polyclonally expanded Tregs to a dose of 5-10 × 106 cells/kg body weight. The primary EP is suppression of in vitro memory responses for 2 months post-infusion. 12 patients will receive treatment in stage 1 of Part 2, and 9 patients will receive treatment in stage 2 of Part 2 if ≥ 50% patients pass the primary EP in stage 1.

DISCUSSION

This is a prospective study aiming to identify patients with unregulated cellular memory responses to Pure HLA Proteins and determine baseline variation in these patterns of response. Part 2 will be an adaptive phase IIa clinical trial with 21 patients receiving a single infusion of GMP-grade polyclonally expanded Tregs in two stages. It remains to be demonstrated that modulating memory alloresponses clinically using Treg therapy is achievable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT Number: 2021-001,664-23. REC Number: 21/SC/0253. Trial registration number ISRCTN14582152.

Antibody-guided proteases enable selective and catalytic degradation of challenging therapeutic targets

The exquisite specificity, natural biological functions, and favorable development properties of antibodies make them highly effective agents as drugs. Monoclonal antibodies are particularly strong as inhibitors of systemically accessible targets where trough-level concentrations can sustain full target occupancy. Yet beyond this pharmacologic wheelhouse, antibodies perform suboptimally for targets of high abundance and those not easily accessible from circulation. Fundamentally, this restraint on broader application is due largely to the stoichiometric nature of their activity - one drug molecule is generally able to inhibit a maximum of two target molecules at a time. Enzymes in contrast are able to catalytically turnover multiple substrates, making them a natural sub-stoichiometric solution for targets of high abundance or in poorly accessible sites of action. However, enzymes have their own limitations as drugs, including, in particular the polypharmacology and broad specificity often seen with native enzymes. In this study, we introduce antibody-guided proteolytic enzymes to enable selective sub-stoichiometric turnover of therapeutic targets. We demonstrate that antibody-mediated substrate targeting can enhance enzyme activity and specificity, with proof of concept for two challenging target proteins, amyloid-β (Aβ) and immunoglobulin G (IgG). This work advances a new biotherapeutic platform that combines the favorable properties of antibodies and proteolytic enzymes to more effectively suppress high-bar therapeutic targets.

Conventional and Novel Approaches to Immunosuppression in Lung Transplantation

Most therapeutic advances in immunosuppression have occurred over the past few decades. Although modern strategies have been effective in reducing acute cellular rejection, excess immunosuppression comes at the price of toxicity, opportunistic infection, and malignancy. As our understanding of the immune system and allograft rejection becomes more nuanced, there is an opportunity to evolve immunosuppression protocols to optimize longer term outcomes while mitigating the deleterious effects of traditional protocols.

The Highly Sensitized Recipient: Pretransplant and Posttransplant Considerations

Highly sensitized patients, who are often black and Hispanic women, are less likely to be listed for lung transplant and are at higher risk for prolonged waitlist time and waitlist death. In this review, the authors discuss strategies for improving access to transplant in this population, including risk stratification of crossing pretransplant donor-specific antibodies, based on antibody characteristics. The authors also review institutional protocols, such as perioperative desensitization, for tailoring transplant immunosuppression in the highly sensitized population. The authors conclude with suggestions for future research, including development of novel donor-specific antibody-directed therapeutics.

Desensitization in Crossmatch-positive Kidney Transplant Candidates

Access to kidney transplantation is limited by HLA-specific sensitization. Desensitization strategies enable crossmatch-positive kidney transplantation. In this review, we describe clinical experience gained over the last 20 y using desensitization strategies before kidney transplantation and describe the different tools used (both drugs and apheresis options), including IVIg, rituximab, apheresis techniques, interleukin-6 interference, proteasome inhibition, enzymatic degradation of HLA antibodies, complement inhibition, and B cytokine interference. Although access to transplantation for highly sensitized kidney transplantation candidates has been vastly improved by desensitization strategies, it remains, however, limited by the recurrence of HLA antibodies after transplantation and the occurrence of antibody-mediated rejection.

Novel therapies for treatment of antibody-mediated rejection of the kidney

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to discuss current literature on novel therapies for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in kidney transplantation with a focus on chronic AMR.

RECENT FINDINGS

IL-6/IL-6 receptor blockers appear promising in the treatment of chronic AMR. Blocking this pathway was shown to reduce human leucocyte antigen-antibodies, improve histologic inflammation and increase T-regulatory cells. Based on experience in desensitization, IgG degrading endopeptidase, imlifidase, could be effective in AMR. There have been case reports describing the successful use of plasma cell/natural killer-cell-directed anti-CD38 antibody in the treatment of AMR. Off-target effects have been noted and strategies to mitigate these will be needed when using these agents. Complement inhibitors could be an effective add-on strategy to antibody-depleting therapies but their role in AMR needs to be better defined. Combining proteasome inhibitors and costimulation blockers has shown encouraging results in the prevention of AMR in animal models and is now being investigated in humans. Other novel strategies such as Fc neonatal receptor blockers which inhibit the recycling of pathogenic IgG and bispecific antibodies against B-cell maturation antigen/CD3+ T cells warrant further investigation.

SUMMARY

There are now a number of emerging therapies with varied targets and mechanism(s) of action that hold promise in the management of AMR and improving allograft survival.

First use of imlifidase desensitization in a highly sensitized lung transplant candidate: a case report

Lung transplant candidates who are highly sensitized against human leucocyte antigen present an ongoing challenge with regards to finding immunologically acceptable donors. Desensitization strategies aimed at reducing preformed donor-specific antibodies have a number of limitations. Imlifidase, an IgG-degrading enzyme derived from Streptococcus pyogenes, is a novel agent that has been used to convert positive crossmatches to negative in kidney transplant candidates, allowing transplantation to occur. We present the first case of imlifidase use for antibody depletion in a highly sensitized lung transplant candidate who went on to undergo a successful bilateral lung transplant.

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%.

Novel insights in the clinical management of hyperimmune patients before and after transplantation

Despite improvements in anti-Human Leucocyte Antigens antibody detection, identification, and characterization offer a better in peri-operative management techniques, antibodies remain a serious cause of morbidity and mortality for patients both before and after organ transplantation. Hyperimmune patients are disadvantaged by having to wait longer to receive an organ from a suitably matched donor. They could benefit from desensitization protocols in both pre- and post-transplantation period. Clinical studies are underway to highlight which best desensitization strategies could be assure the best outcome in both heart and kidney transplantation. Although most clinical evidence about desensitization strategies by using anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, proteasome inhibitors, anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, interleukin-6 blockade, cysteine protease and complement inhibitors, comes from kidney transplantation studies, many of the debated novel concepts can be easily applied to desensitization also in heart transplantation. Here, we discuss the candidates and recipients' management by using most common standard of care and novel therapeutics, desensitization endpoints, and strategies for future studies.

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.

Extensive substrate recognition by the streptococcal antibody-degrading enzymes IdeS and EndoS

Enzymatic cleavage of IgG antibodies is a common strategy used by pathogenic bacteria to ablate immune effector function. The Streptococcus pyogenes bacterium secretes the protease IdeS and the glycosidase EndoS, which specifically catalyse cleavage and deglycosylation of human IgG, respectively. IdeS has received clinical approval for kidney transplantation in hypersensitised individuals, while EndoS has found application in engineering antibody glycosylation. We present crystal structures of both enzymes in complex with their IgG1 Fc substrate, which was achieved using Fc engineering to disfavour preferential Fc crystallisation. The IdeS protease displays extensive Fc recognition and encases the antibody hinge. Conversely, the glycan hydrolase domain in EndoS traps the Fc glycan in a "flipped-out" conformation, while additional recognition of the Fc peptide is driven by the so-called carbohydrate binding module. In this work, we reveal the molecular basis of antibody recognition by bacterial enzymes, providing a template for the development of next-generation enzymes.

New approach to desensitization in solid organ transplantation-imlifidase

The IgG-degrading enzyme derived from Streptococcus pyogenes is a recombinant cysteine protease of S. pyogenes produced in Escherichia coli that cleaves all four human subclasses of IgG with strict specificity. The proteolytic activity on IgG molecules prevents the occurrence of IgG-mediated antibody-dependent, cellular cytotoxicity and complement-mediated cytotoxicity, two processes that are critical for antibody rejection. The results from phase II studies demonstrated that desensitization with imlifidase represents a therapeutic strategy that can operationalize desensitization, allowing life-saving transplants from deceased donors (DD) and living donors (LD) to proceed in highly sensitized kidney transplant candidates with low risk of hyperacute rejection. Its action onset is rapid, allowing kidney transplantation from a deceased donor. Disadvantages of imlifidase include a quick reappearance of DSAs, which poses a risk of antibody-mediated rejection, the quick development of anti-Ides antibodies, which rules out repeated use of imlifidase and its IgG-degrading potential, limiting the use of therapeutic antibodies. Imlifdase received conditional approval on 26 August 2020 in the EU for desensitization treatment of highly sensitized adult kidney transplant patients with positive crossmatch against an available deceased donor.

European Guideline for the Management of Kidney Transplant Patients With HLA Antibodies: By the European Society for Organ Transplantation Working Group

This guideline, from a European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) working group, concerns the management of kidney transplant patients with HLA antibodies. Sensitization should be defined using a virtual parameter such as calculated Reaction Frequency (cRF), which assesses HLA antibodies derived from the actual organ donor population. Highly sensitized patients should be prioritized in kidney allocation schemes and linking allocation schemes may increase opportunities. The use of the ENGAGE 5 ((Bestard et al., Transpl Int, 2021, 34: 1005–1018) system and online calculators for assessing risk is recommended. The Eurotransplant Acceptable Mismatch program should be extended. If strategies for finding a compatible kidney are very unlikely to yield a transplant, desensitization may be considered and should be performed with plasma exchange or immunoadsorption, supplemented with IViG and/or anti-CD20 antibody. Newer therapies, such as imlifidase, may offer alternatives. Few studies compare HLA incompatible transplantation with remaining on the waiting list, and comparisons of morbidity or quality of life do not exist. Kidney paired exchange programs (KEP) should be more widely used and should include unspecified and deceased donors, as well as compatible living donor pairs. The use of a KEP is preferred to desensitization, but highly sensitized patients should not be left on a KEP list indefinitely if the option of a direct incompatible transplant exists.

Emerging drugs for antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation: a focus on phase II & III trials

INTRODUCTION

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure. Its therapy continues to be challenge, and no treatment has been approved for the market thus far.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we discuss the pathophysiology and phenotypic presentation of ABMR, the current level of evidence to support the use of available therapeutic strategies, and the emergence of tailored drugs now being evaluated in systematic clinical trials. We searched PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov and Citeline's Pharmaprojects for pertinent information on emerging anti-rejection strategies, laying a focus on phase II and III trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, we rely on the use of apheresis for alloantibody depletion and intravenous immunoglobulin (referred to as standard of care), preferentially in early active ABMR. Recent systematic trials have questioned the benefits of using the CD20 antibody rituximab or the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. However, there are now several promising treatment approaches in the pipeline, which are being trialed in phase II and III studies. These include interleukin-6 antagonism, CD38-targeting antibodies, and selective inhibitors of complement. On the basis of the information that has emerged so far, it seems that innovative treatment strategies for clinical use in ABMR may be available within the next 5-10 years.

Immunoglobulin and Monoclonal Antibody Therapies in Guillain-Barré Syndrome

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute autoimmune polyradiculoneuropathy affecting 1-2 subjects per 100,000 every year worldwide. It causes, in its classic form, symmetric weakness in the proximal and distal limb muscles with common involvement of the cranial nerves, particularly facial weakness. Respiratory function is compromised in a case in four. Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated the benefit of therapeutic plasma exchange in hastening time to recovery. Intravenous immunoglobulin was subsequently shown to be as efficacious as plasma exchange in adult subjects. In children, few trials have shown the benefit of intravenous immunoglobulin versus supportive care. Pharmacokinetic studies suggested a relationship between increase in immunoglobulin G level post-infusion and outcome, implying administration of larger doses may be beneficial in subjects with poor prognosis. However, a subsequent trial of a second dose of immunoglobulin in such subjects failed to show improved outcome, while demonstrating a higher risk of thromboembolic side-effects. Monoclonal antibody therapy has more recently been investigated for GBS, after multiple studies in animal models, with different agents and variable postulated mechanisms of action. Eculizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody against the complement protein C5, was tested in in two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trials. Neither showed benefit versus immunoglobulins alone on disability level at 4 weeks, although one study importantly suggested possible, clinically highly relevant, late effects on normalising function. A phase 3 trial is in progress. Preliminary results of a placebo-controlled ongoing study of ANX005, a humanised recombinant antibody against C1q inhibiting the complement cascade, have been promising.

Innovative immunosuppression in kidney transplantation: A challenge for unmet needs

Due to the optimal results obtained in kidney transplantation and to the lack of interest of the industries, new innovative drugs in kidney transplantation are difficult to be encountered. The best strategy to find the new drugs recently developed or under development is to search in the sections of kidney transplantation still not completely covered by the drugs on the market. These unmet needs are the prevention of delayed graft function (DGF), the protection of the graft over the long time and the desensitization of preformed anti human leukocyte antigen antibodies and the treatment of the acute antibody-mediated rejection. These needs are particularly relevant due to the expansion of some kind of kidney transplantation as transplantation from non-heart beating donor and in the case of antibody-incompatible grafts. The first are particularly exposed to DGF, the latter need a safe desensitization and a safe treatments of the antibody mediated rejections that often occur. Particular caution is needed in treating these drugs. First, they are described in very recent studies and the follow-up of their effect is of course rather short. Second, some of these drugs are still in an early phase of study, even if in well-conducted randomized controlled trials. Particular caution and a careful check need to be used in trials launched 2 or 3 years ago. Indeed, is always necessary to verify whether the study is still going on or whether and why the study itself was abandoned.

Imlifidase for the treatment of anti-HLA antibody-mediated processes in kidney transplantation

The IgG-degrading enzyme derived from Streptococcus pyogenes (Imlifidase, Hansa Biopharma) is a novel agent that cleaves all four human subclasses of IgG and has therapeutic potential for HLA desensitization in kidney transplantation and antibody-mediated rejection. Data from clinical trials in kidney transplantation demonstrated rapid degradation of anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies facilitating HLA-incompatible transplantation, which led to conditional approval of imlifidase by the European Medicines Agency for desensitization in kidney transplant recipients of a deceased donor with a positive cross match. Important considerations arising from the early experiences with imilfidase on kinetics of donor-specific antibodies after administration, timing of complementary therapeutic monoclonal or polyclonal IgG antibodies, and interference with cross match assays should be recognized as imlifidase emerges as a therapeutic agent for clinical transplantation.

Antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation in children; therapy challenges and future potential treatments

Antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) remains one of the most critical problems in renal transplantation, with a significant impact on patient and graft survival. In the United States, no treatment has received FDA approval jet. Studies about treatments of AMR remain controversial, limited by the absence of a gold standard and the difficulty in creating large, multi‐center studies. These limitations emerge even more in pediatric transplantation because of the limited number of pediatric studies and the occasional use of some therapies with unknown and poorly documented side effects. The lack of recommendations and the unsharp definition of different forms of AMR contribute to the challenging management of the therapy by pediatric nephrologists. In an attempt to help clinicians involved in the care of renal transplanted children affected by an AMR, we rely on the latest recommendations of the Transplantation Society (TTS) for the classification and treatment of AMR to describe treatments available today and potential new treatments with a particular focus on the pediatric population.

Determination of unacceptable HLA antigen mismatches in kidney transplant recipients

With the introduction of the virtual allocation crossmatch in the Eurotransplant (ET) region in 2023, the determination of unacceptable antigen mismatches (UAM) in kidney transplant recipients is of utmost importance for histocompatibility laboratories and transplant centers. Therefore, a joined working group of members from the German Society for Immunogenetics (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Immungenetik, DGI) and the German Transplantation Society (Deutsche Transplantationsgesellschaft, DTG) revised and updated the previous recommendations from 2015 in light of recently published evidence. Like in the previous version, a wide range of topics is covered from technical issues to clinical risk factors. This review summarizes the evidence about the prognostic value of contemporary methods for HLA antibody detection and identification, as well as the impact of UAM on waiting time, on which these recommendations are based. As no clear criteria could be determined to differentiate potentially harmful from harmless HLA antibodies, the general recommendation is to assign all HLA against which plausible antibodies are found as UAM. There is, however, a need for individualized solutions for highly immunized patients. These revised recommendations provide a list of aspects that need to be considered when assigning UAM to enable a fair and comprehensible procedure and to harmonize risk stratification prior to kidney transplantation between transplant centers. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.