Solid phase testing in the HLA laboratory: implications for organ allocation

Recommendations for living donor kidney transplantation

This Guide for Living Donor Kidney Transplantation (LDKT) has been prepared with the sponsorship of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SEN), the Spanish Transplant Society (SET), and the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). It updates evidence to offer the best chronic renal failure treatment when a potential living donor is available. The core aim of this Guide is to supply clinicians who evaluate living donors and transplant recipients with the best decision-making tools, to optimise their outcomes. Moreover, the role of living donors in the current KT context should recover the level of importance it had until recently. To this end the new forms of incompatible HLA and/or ABO donation, as well as the paired donation which is possible in several hospitals with experience in LDKT, offer additional ways to treat renal patients with an incompatible donor. Good results in terms of patient and graft survival have expanded the range of circumstances under which living renal donors are accepted. Older donors are now accepted, as are others with factors that affect the decision, such as a borderline clinical history or alterations, which when evaluated may lead to an additional number of transplantations. This Guide does not forget that LDKT may lead to risk for the donor. Pre-donation evaluation has to centre on the problems which may arise over the short or long-term, and these have to be described to the potential donor so that they are able take them into account. Experience over recent years has led to progress in risk analysis, to protect donors' health. This aspect always has to be taken into account by LDKT programmes when evaluating potential donors. Finally, this Guide has been designed to aid decision-making, with recommendations and suggestions when uncertainties arise in pre-donation studies. Its overarching aim is to ensure that informed consent is based on high quality studies and information supplied to donors and recipients, offering the strongest possible guarantees.

Prospective multi-centric study to analyze pre-transplant compatibility algorithm for live-related donor kidney transplant in Indian setting: the "Delhi approach"!

BACKGROUND

Since no single test is always accurate and sensitive, two or more tests are used to increase the precision of evaluation. Different algorithms have been proposed by centers in Leiden, Basel, Vienna and Minnesota, etc. With an intention to develop an optimal algorithm for India, we evaluated pre-transplant compatibility tests for live-donor kidney transplants. Three tests complement dependent cyto-toxicity cross-match (CDCXM), flow-cytometry cross-match (FCXM) and anti-HLA antibody screening (HAS) were performed and confirmed by the anti-HLA antibody identification (HAI) assay in a multi-centric trial (three transplant centers) in India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All prospective recipients (and their potential donors) underwent low-resolution HLA typing as well as CDCXM, FCXM and HAS assays. In addition, HAI {single antigen bead assay; (SAB)} was done for all recipients to identify possible anti-HLA antibodies. In a virtual cross-match (VXM), antibody specificity was mapped to donor HLA type to determine donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Only patients without DSA were cleared for the transplant. Alternatively, patients with DSA were offered an exchange in the kidney paired donation (KPD) program. The screening results (CDCXM, FCXM, and HAS) were analyzed, individually as well as in combination of screening assays (CDCXM+HAS, CDCXM+FCXM, and FCXM+HAS) and the results were compared with those from the HAI test.

RESULTS

Out of 100 patients, 69 were males and 31 were females; 85 recipients (85%) underwent a kidney transplant. The sensitivity of CDCXM was only 12.1% and the specificity of CDCXM was 100%; whereas the sensitivity of FCXM was 84.8% and the specificity of FCXM was 89.6%. The sensitivity and specificity of class I HAS was 88.2% and 84.3%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity class II HAS was 88.0% and 80.0%, respectively. However, when both class I/II HAS were tested together the sensitivity increased to 97.0% and the specificity to 82.1%. Similarly, the sensitivity of combined FCXM+HAS had the sensitivity of 100% and the specificity of 76.1%; CDCXM+FCXM had the sensitivity of 84.8% and the specificity of 89.6% and CDCXM+HAS assays reached 97% with the specificity of 82.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that the algorithm of FCXM with HAS produced the best sensitivity of 100%. The specificity of 76.1% indicate that the combined FCXM+HAS assays may detect up to 24.9% false positive results. We suggest that these false-positives may be easily resolved by performing the virtual crossmatch based on HAI (SAB) results. In our reflex testing algorithmic approach only 49% patients needed HAI (SAB). Finally, our results suggested that the CDCXM assay may be discontinued in pre-transplant workup owing to its very low sensitivity (12.1%).

Evaluation of Screening Tests for Pre-Transplant Compatibility Testing in Live-Related Kidney Transplants

Introduction:

Pre-transplant compatibility testing involves the use of different methodologies (cell-based and solid phase based) for the determination of anti-human-leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies. Implementation of these donor-recipient methods in the screening of patients awaiting transplantation increased their chance of successful graft and patient outcomes.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 1054 patients visiting tertiary care hospitals for pretransplant compatibility testing were screened with cell-based tests; complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch (CDC-XM) and flow cytometric crossmatch (FC-XM). The patients positive for either or both screening tests were suspected to have anti-HLA antibodies. Luminex single-antigen bead (SAB) tests were performed in such patients to determine and identify antibody specificity and establish donor-specific antibody (DSA).

Results:

The study showed a significantly higher sensitivity of the FCXM (94.6%) method when compared with CDC-XM (35.7%), considering the SAB assay as the gold standard technique. The specificity of CDC-XM (100%) was slightly higher than the FC-XM (76.3%). Combination of FC-XM with CDC-XM (17 cases) was 100% sensitive and specific to identify DSA (s). The graft-survival was 94.77% using the proposed algorithm.

Conclusions:

The combination of CDC-XM and FC-XM, along with SAB assay, could be used as a screening algorithm as it is a useful technique in identifying the specificities of alloantibodies, assessment of DSAs. Hence, the presented algorithm can become a new standard for the identification of potential recipients awaiting kidney transplantation in India.

A Modified Protocol with Improved Detection Rate for Mis-Matched Donor HLA from Low Quantities of DNA in Urine Samples from Kidney Graft Recipients

Background

Urine from kidney transplant recipient has proven to be a viable source for donor DNA. However, an optimized protocol would be required to determine mis-matched donor HLA specificities in view of the scarcity of DNA obtained in some cases.

Methods

In this study, fresh early morning urine specimens were obtained from 155 kidney transplant recipients with known donor HLA phenotype. DNA was extracted and typing of HLA-A, B and DRB1 loci by polymerase chain reaction-specific sequence primers was performed using tailor-made condition according to the concentration of extracted DNA.

Results

HLA typing of DNA extracted from urine revealed both recipient and donor HLA phenotypes, allowing the deduction of the unknown donor HLA and hence the degree of HLA mis-match. By adopting the modified procedures, mis-matched donor HLA phenotypes were successfully deduced in all of 35 tested urine samples at DNA quantities spanning the range of 620–24,000 ng.

Conclusions

This urine-based method offers a promising and reliable non-invasive means for the identification of mis-matched donor HLA antigens in kidney transplant recipients with unknown donor HLA phenotype or otherwise inadequate donor information.

Detection of immunoglobulin G human leukocyte antigen-specific alloantibodies in renal transplant patients using single-antigen-beads is compromised by the presence of immunoglobulin M human leukocyte antigen-specific alloantibodies

BACKGROUND

Luminex-based single-antigen human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody detection beads (SAB) are a major advance for the characterization of HLA-specific antibodies but their clinical utility is limited unless the analysis is performed and interpreted optimally. Here, we identify problems encountered in routine monitoring of antibody levels that may give rise to misleading results, and describe how these can be overcome to provide more meaningful clinical information.

METHODS AND RESULTS

HLA class I specific antibody-binding levels were determined using SAB in the sera of 42 highly sensitized patients awaiting renal transplantation. Normalization of the results against the HLA class I specific monoclonal antibody W6/32 overcame the problems caused by variation in antigen density on SAB and also suggested the presence of alloantibodies directed against multiple HLA class I epitopes of a given specificity. Routine analysis using undiluted sera gave an incomplete assessment of antibody levels. On serum dilution, three patterns of antibody binding became apparent: most sera showed a sequential reduction in immunoglobulin G (IgG) binding levels but several sera displayed antibody binding which remained unchanged (suggesting antigen saturation) or increased IgG binding on serum dilution (suggesting inhibition of IgG binding using neat serum). The presence of immunoglobulin M (IgM) HLA-specific antibodies in sera correlated with inhibition of IgG antibody binding for the corresponding specificity and treatment of sera with dithiothreitol to eliminate IgM HLA-specific blocking antibodies restored maximum IgG antibody binding levels.

CONCLUSION

When using SAB to monitor HLA-specific antibody binding levels, sera should be pretreated with dithiothreitol to eliminate blocking IgM HLA-specific antibodies that may mask clinically relevant allosensitization.

Back to the future: application of contemporary technology to long-standing questions about the clinical relevance of human leukocyte antigen-specific alloantibodies in renal transplantation

Luminex technology allows the accurate identification of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I and class II-specific antibodies at levels below the threshold detectable by either conventional complement-dependent lymphocytotoxicity or flow cytometry. The technology enables the analysis of complex antibody profiles in sensitized patients and gives improved definition of acceptable and unacceptable HLA specificities to guide donor kidney allocation. This helps to facilitate virtual cross-matching and avoid inappropriate shipping of kidneys for incompatible patients in distant centers. Luminex allows the cause of a positive cross-match test to be determined in a clinically relevant time scale and, when used in conjunction with lymphocytotoxic and flow cytometric cross-matching, it provides an assessment of the level of immunological risk in patients being considered as potential recipients for a particular donor kidney. Information is now emerging to enable the full clinical potential of Luminex to be realized.

Clinical relevance of pretransplant human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies in renal patients waiting for a transplant: a risk factor

The use of highly sensitive solid-phase antibody detection assays, including x-MAP multiple bead-based technology (Luminex), has greatly enhanced our ability to accurately detect and define very low levels of HLA antibodies. These developments have led to patients having increasing lists of antibody specificities (which may not be clinically relevant), resulting in a new "technological barrier" to transplantation in sensitized patients. Alloantibodies play a major role in all types of solid organ rejection; the presence of low-titer donor-specific antigen (DSA) identified pretransplant is associated with an increased risk of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). However, these low-titer antibodies do not represent an absolute contraindication to transplant. Improvement in the diagnosis and treatment of AMR will allow sensitized patients with DSA to be successfully transplanted in the short term, but extended follow-up is required to ensure acceptable long-term graft survival in this group. These factors must be integrated into the decision algorithms for immunosuppressive treatment in patients at immunologic risk.

HLA antibody testing: a tool to facilitate not to prevent organ transplantation

The introduction of very sensitive HLA antibody screening assays has destroyed the old dogma that pre-existence of donor specific HLA antibodies in the patient is a contra-indication for transplantation. The challenge is now to reach consensus on the parameters which predict the clinical relevance of donor specific HLA antibodies. Antibody screening assays should not only be used to prevent transplantation of patients with donor specific antibodies but also to facilitate transplantation of highly sensitized patients, both by defining acceptable HLA mismatches and non-detrimental donor specific HLA antibodies.