The efficacy of rituximab treatment for antibody-mediated rejection in liver transplantation: A retrospective Japanese nationwide study

B cell depletion for autoimmune liver diseases: A retrospective review of indications and outcomes

Objectives

Pediatric autoimmune hepatitis has an incidence of 0.23/100.000 children in North America, with a bleak prognosis if left untreated. Steroids are the therapy of choice but are not always effective. B cell depletion is a safe and effective therapy that allows for a steroid-sparing protocol, especially in patients who do not tolerate side effects.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed rituximab-treated patients between 2017 and 2022. Demographics, previous treatments, reasons for B cell depletion, response, and adverse effects were noted.

Results

Six patients with a mean age of 10.2 years were included. All patients had comorbidities that rendered treatment with steroids unsuccessful or undesirable. Rituximab was started at a mean follow-up of 8 months. After 6 months, the mean alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase levels decreased from 575 IU/L and 342 IU/L, respectively, to 28 IU/L (p = 0.02) and 36 IU/L (p = 0.008), respectively. Mean γ-glutamyl transpeptidase decreased from 105 to 25 IU/L (p = 0.01). Immunoglobulin G levels were normalized in all patients (p = 0.01). No severe adverse events were observed. One patient had persistent hypogammaglobulinemia, and another had lymphopenia.

Conclusion

B-cell depletion is an effective and safe treatment for autoimmune liver diseases and should be included as an option, particularly for relapsing patients in whom steroids are undesirable or have shown nonadherence.

Immunology demystified: A guide for transplant hepatologists

Liver transplantation has become standard practice for treating end-stage liver disease. The success of the procedure relies on effective immunosuppressive medications to control the host's immune response. Despite the liver's inherent capacity to foster tolerance, the early post-transplant period is marked by significant immune reactivity. To ensure favorable outcomes, it is imperative to identify and manage various rejection types, encompassing T-cell-mediated, antibody-mediated, and chronic rejection. However, the approach to prescribing immunosuppressants relies heavily on clinical judgment rather than evidence-based criteria. Given that the majority of patients will require lifelong immuno suppression as the mechanisms underlying operational tolerance are still being investigated, healthcare providers must possess an understanding of immune responses, rejection mechanisms, and the pathways targeted by immunosuppressive drugs. This knowledge enables customization of treatments and improved patient care, even though a consensus on an optimal immunosuppressive regimen remains elusive.

Repurposing of rituximab biosimilars to treat B cell mediated autoimmune diseases

Rituximab, the first monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of lymphoma, eventually became one of the most popular and versatile drugs ever in terms of clinical application and revenue. Since its patent expiration, and consequently, the loss of exclusivity of the original biologic, its repurposing as an off-label drug has increased dramatically, propelled by the development and commercialization of its many biosimilars. Currently, rituximab is prescribed worldwide to treat a vast range of autoimmune diseases mediated by B cells. Here, we present a comprehensive overview of rituximab repurposing in 115 autoimmune diseases across 17 medical specialties, sourced from over 1530 publications. Our work highlights the extent of its off-label use and clinical benefits, underlining the success of rituximab repurposing for both common and orphan immune-related diseases. We discuss the scientific mechanism associated with its clinical efficacy and provide additional indications for which rituximab could be investigated. Our study presents rituximab as a flagship example of drug repurposing owing to its central role in targeting cluster of differentiate 20 positive (CD20) B cells in 115 autoimmune diseases.

Current Use of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Since the first successful liver transplant in 1967, immunosuppression has allowed liver transplantation to become the standard treatment of end-stage liver disease. Over the decades, the rates of rejection have decreased, and patient survival outcomes have significantly improved in large part due to the introduction and advancements of immunosuppression medications. However, the adverse effects associated with long-term immunosuppression have created new challenges facing liver transplantation and added significantly to posttransplantation morbidity. This review presents the data and rationale for immunosuppression approaches, addresses the main controversies related to immunosuppression in liver transplantation, and explores some of the newer advancements in immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Antibody-mediated rejection in xenotransplantation: Can it be prevented or reversed?

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is the commonest cause of failure of a pig graft after transplantation into an immunosuppressed nonhuman primate (NHP). The incidence of AMR compared to acute cellular rejection is much higher in xenotransplantation (46% vs. 7%) than in allotransplantation (3% vs. 63%) in NHPs. Although AMR in an allograft can often be reversed, to our knowledge there is no report of its successful reversal in a pig xenograft. As there is less experience in preventing or reversing AMR in models of xenotransplantation, the results of studies in patients with allografts provide more information. These include (i) depletion or neutralization of serum anti-donor antibodies, (ii) inhibition of complement activation, (iii) therapies targeting B or plasma cells, and (iv) anti-inflammatory therapy. Depletion or neutralization of anti-pig antibody, for example, by plasmapheresis, is effective in depleting antibodies, but they recover within days. IgG-degrading enzymes do not deplete IgM. Despite the expression of human complement-regulatory proteins on the pig graft, inhibition of systemic complement activation may be necessary, particularly if AMR is to be reversed. Potential therapies include (i) inhibition of complement activation (e.g., by IVIg, C1 INH, or an anti-C5 antibody), but some complement inhibitors are not effective in NHPs, for example, eculizumab. Possible B cell-targeted therapies include (i) B cell depletion, (ii) plasma cell depletion, (iii) modulation of B cell activation, and (iv) enhancing the generation of regulatory B and/or T cells. Among anti-inflammatory agents, anti-IL6R mAb and TNF blockers are increasingly being tested in xenotransplantation models, but with no definitive evidence that they reverse AMR. Increasing attention should be directed toward testing combinations of the above therapies. We suggest that treatment with a systemic complement inhibitor is likely to be most effective, possibly combined with anti-inflammatory agents (if these are not already being administered). Ultimately, it may require further genetic engineering of the organ-source pig to resolve the problem entirely, for example, knockout or knockdown of SLA, and/or expression of PD-L1, HLA E, and/or HLA-G.

The New Challenge in Pediatric Liver Transplantation: Chronic Antibody-Mediated Rejection

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) of liver allograft transplantation was considered as anecdotal for many decades. However recently, AMR has gained clinical awareness as a potential cause of chronic liver injury, leading to liver allograft fibrosis and eventual graft failure. (1) Methods: Literature on chronic AMR (cAMR) in pediatric post-liver transplant patients was reviewed for epidemiologic data, physiopathology, diagnosis, and treatment approaches. (2) Results: Accurate incidence of cAMR in pediatric liver transplantation remains unknown. Diagnostic criteria of cAMR were suggested by the Banff Working Group in 2016 and are based on standardized histopathological findings, C4d staining pattern, associated with the presence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Physio-pathological mechanisms are not clear for the technically difficult-to-obtain animal models reproducing cAMR. Treatment protocols are not established, being limited to case reports and case series, based on experience in ABO incompatible transplantation and kidney transplantation. Immunosuppression compliance with adequate dose adjustment may prevent cAMR. Conversion of Cyclosporine to Tacrolimus may improve pathological findings if treated in early phase. The association of steroids, Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) and mTOR inhibitors have shown some synergistic effects. Second-line treatments such as intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and plasma exchange may decrease antibody titers based on ABO incompatible transplant protocols. The use of anti-CD20 (Rituximab) and proteasome inhibitors (Bortezomib) is controversial due to the lack of qualified studies. Therefore, multicenter randomized trials are needed to establish the best therapeutic strategy. In refractory cases, re-transplantation is the only treatment for allograft failure. (3) Conclusions: This literature review collects recent clinical, histopathological, and therapeutical advances of cAMR in liver allograft transplantation of pediatric patients. There are many physio-pathological aspects of cAMR to be clarified. Further efforts with multicenter prospective protocols to manage patients with cAMR are needed to improve its outcome.

Antibody-Mediated Rejection and Recurrent Primary Disease: Two Main Obstacles in Abdominal Kidney, Liver, and Pancreas Transplants

The advances in acute phase care have firmly established the practice of organ transplantation in the last several decades. Then, the next issues that loom large in the field of transplantation include antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) and recurrent primary disease. Acute ABMR is a daunting hurdle in the performance of organ transplantation. The recent progress in desensitization and preoperative monitoring of donor-specific antibodies enables us to increase positive outcomes. However, chronic active ABMR is one of the most significant problems we currently face. On the other hand, recurrent primary disease is problematic for many recipients. Notably, some recipients, unfortunately, lost their vital organs due to this recurrence. Although some progress has been achieved in these two areas, many other factors remain largely obscure. In this review, these two topics will be discussed in light of recent discoveries.

Antibody-mediated rejection of the liver allograft: An update and a clinico-pathological perspective

Antibody-mediated rejection after liver transplantation is an under-recognised cause of allograft injury. While definitions of acute and chronic antibody-mediated rejection have increased clinical awareness, timely identification and management of antibody-mediated rejection remain difficult because of complexities in diagnosis and histopathology, lack of treatment protocols, and unclear long-term outcomes. While recent cohort studies assessing the importance of donor-specific antibodies have aided in its diagnosis, literature on the treatment of antibody-mediated rejection in liver transplantation remain limited to case reports and small series. Further increasing the awareness and timely recognition of antibody-mediated rejection post-liver transplantation is crucial in order to stimulate future research and the development of protocols for its diagnosis and treatment. This review will summarise recent advances in the clinical diagnosis and treatment of antibody-mediated rejection in liver transplantation, as well as some of the histopathologic features (on liver biopsy tissue) of acute and chronic antibody-mediated rejection.