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

Neural stem cell therapies for spinal cord injury repair: an update on recent preclinical and clinical advances

Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) is a leading cause of lifelong disabilities. Permanent sensory, motor and autonomic impairments after SCI are substantially attributed to degeneration of spinal cord neurons and axons, and disintegration of neural network. To date, minimal regenerative treatments are available for SCI with an unmet need for new therapies to reconstruct the damaged spinal cord neuron-glia network and restore connectivity with the supraspinal pathways. Multipotent neural precursor cells (NPCs) have a unique capacity to generate neurons, oligodendrocytes and astrocytes. Due to this capacity, NPCs have been an attractive cell source for cellular therapies for SCI. Transplantation of NPCs has been extensively tested in preclinical models of SCI in the past two decades. These studies have identified opportunities and challenges associated with NPC therapies. While NPCs have the potential to promote neuroregeneration through various mechanisms, their low long-term survival and integration within the host injured spinal cord limit the functional benefits of NPC-based therapies for SCI. To address this challenge, combinatorial strategies have been developed to optimize the outcomes of NPC therapies by enriching SCI microenvironment through biomaterials, genetic and pharmacological therapies. In this review, we will provide an in-depth discussion on recent advances in preclinical NPC-based therapies for SCI. We will discuss modes of actions and mechanism by which engrafted NPCs contribute to the repair process and functional recovery. We will also provide an update on current clinical trials and new technologies that have facilitated preparation of medical-grade human NPCs suitable for transplantation in clinical studies.

Complement and Non-Complement Binding Anti-HLA Antibodies Are Differentially Detected with Different Antigen Bead Assays in Renal Transplant Recipients

Two semi-quantitative, Luminex-based, single-antigen bead (SAB) assays are available to detect anti-HLA antibodies and evaluate their reactivity with complement binding. Sera from 97 patients with positive panel reactive antibody tests (>5%) were analyzed with two SAB tests, Immucor (IC) and One-Lambda (OL), for anti-HLA antibody detection and the evaluation of their complement-binding capacity. IC detected 1608/8148 (mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) 4195 (1995-11,272)) and 1136/7275 (MFI 6706 (2647-13,184)) positive anti-HLA class I and II specificities, respectively. Accordingly, OL detected 1942/8148 (MFI 6185 (2855-12,099)) and 1247/7275 (MFI 9498 (3630-17,702)) positive anti-HLA class I and II specificities, respectively. For the IC assay, 428/1608 (MFI 13,900 (9540-17,999)) and 409/1136 (MFI 11,832 (7128-16,531)) positive class I and II specificities bound C3d, respectively. Similarly, OL detected 485/1942 (MFI 15,452 (9369-23,095)) and 298/1247 (MFI18,852 (14,415-24,707)) C1q-binding class I and II specificities. OL was more sensitive in detecting class I and II anti-HLA antibodies than IC was, although there was no significant difference in the number of class II specificities per case. MFI was higher for complement vs. non-complement-binding anti-HLA antibodies in both assays. Both methods were equal in detecting complement-binding anti-HLA class I antibodies, whereas the C3d assay was more sensitive in detecting complement-binding anti-HLA class II antibodies.

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.