Stratifying the humoral risk of candidates to a solid organ transplantation: a proposal of the ENGAGE working group

IMPACT OF REPEAT HLA MISMATCHES ON KIDNEY GRAFT SURVIVAL: A CONTEMPORARY COLLABORATIVE TRANSPLANT STUDY (CTS) ANALYSIS

Repeat HLA mismatches (RMM) have been historically associated with an increased risk of graft loss after repeat kidney transplantation, in particular HLA-DR RMM in sensitized recipients. As routine use of sensitive assays can at present prevent the transplantation of RMM in hosts with donor-specific antibodies, we hypothesized that RMM would no longer be associated with graft loss. We performed a registry analysis of the Collaborative Transplant Study database including 6711 patients who received a second kidney transplant (2nd KT) between 2010 and 2021, with at least one HLA-A, -B or -DR mismatch. No increased risk for graft loss was observed for 2nd KT with a Class I RMM, regardless of sensitization status. For 2nd KT with a HLA-DR RMM, the hazard ratio for graft loss in the first year after transplantation was 1.61 (95% CI 1.16 - 2.23; P=0.004) compared to recipients without a RMM, and increased to 2.21 (95% CI 1.24 - 3.63: P=0.002) in sensitized recipients (latest CDC-PRA>0%). Our observations suggest that Class I RMM do not need to be systematically avoided. In contrast, HLA-DR RMM still had a negative impact on graft survival in this contemporary cohort, despite the widespread availability of Luminex.

Combined Molecular Mismatch Approaches to Predict Immunological Events Within the First Year After Renal Transplantation

Several molecular mismatch assessment approaches exist, but data on their combined use are limited. In this study, we aimed to define distinct risk groups for rejection based on the combination of three molecular mismatch assessment approaches (i.e., eplet mismatch count, the number of highly immunogenic eplets and PIRCHE-II score) in 439 consecutive immunological standard risk transplantations. For each molecular mismatch assessment approach, ROC analyses were used to define cut-offs for prediction of (sub) clinical rejection according to Banff 2019 classification within the first year post-transplant as a reference. If all three scores were below the cut-off, the patient was assigned to the low-risk group (19% of patients); if all three scores were above the cut-off, the patient was assigned to the high-risk group (21% of patients). The one-year incidence of (sub) clinical rejection was 12% in the low-risk group and 33% in the high-risk group (p = 0.003). Internal validation of the assigned risk groups for prediction of other outcomes revealed a high consistency: clinical rejection (6% vs. 24%; p = 0.004), ATG-treated rejection (1% vs. 16%; p < 0.001) and development of de novo HLA-DSA at 5 years post-transplant (6% vs. 25%; p = 0.003). The molecular mismatch risk group was an independent predictor for (sub) clinical rejection (high-risk vs. low-risk: hazard ratio 3.11 [95%-CI 1.50-6.45]; p = 0.002). We conclude that combining molecular mismatch approaches allows us to distinguish low- and high-risk groups among standard renal allograft recipients. Independent validation in other patient populations and different ethnicities is required.

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.

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.

Dynamics of HLA and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Alloantibodies, especially anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies (HLA antibodies), and autoantibodies, as angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies (AT1R antibodies), may complicate the access and the course of transplantation. Pregnancy is a known source of HLA antibodies, with most studies evaluating pregnancy-induced sensitization by complement-dependent cytotoxicity assays, mainly after childbirth. AT1R antibodies have been evaluated in the context of preeclampsia. We aimed to evaluate pregnancy as a natural source of HLA antibodies and AT1R antibodies, their dynamics along gestation and the potential factors involved in antibody appearance.

METHODS

Serum samples from pregnant women were collected during the three trimesters of pregnancy (1T, 2T, 3T). Presence of HLA antibodies was assessed by screening beads on Luminex and AT1R antibodies by ELISA.

RESULTS

A cohort of 138 pregnant women were included. Samples from all were tested in 1T, 127 in 2T and 102 in 3T. HLA antibodies increased from 29.7 % (1T) to 38.2 % (3T). AT1R antibodies were stable around 30 % along pregnancy. Up to 43.2 % multiparous women had HLA antibodies, with a similar proportion of class I and class II antibodies. In primiparous women HLA antibodies increased along pregnancy (from 17.6 % to 34.1 %), with predominance of class II HLA antibodies. AT1R antibodies were not different in primiparous and multiparous women.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnancy is a relevant source of HLA antibodies sensitization, but not of AT1R antibodies. HLA antibodies increased clearly in primiparous women with predominance of class II. The use of newer solid-phase techniques on Luminex evidence a higher degree of HLA sensitization during pregnancy.

Determination of the clinical relevance of donor epitope-specific HLA-antibodies in kidney transplantation

In kidney transplantation, survival rates are still partly impaired due to the deleterious effects of donor specific HLA antibodies (DSA). However, not all luminex-defined DSA appear to be clinically relevant. Further analysis of DSA recognizing polymorphic amino acid configurations, called eplets or functional epitopes, might improve the discrimination between clinically relevant vs. irrelevant HLA antibodies. To evaluate which donor epitope-specific HLA antibodies (DESAs) are clinically important in kidney graft survival, relevant and irrelevant DESAs were discerned in a Dutch cohort of 4690 patients using Kaplan-Meier analysis and tested in a cox proportional hazard (CPH) model including nonimmunological variables. Pre-transplant DESAs were detected in 439 patients (9.4%). The presence of certain clinically relevant DESAs was significantly associated with increased risk on graft loss in deceased donor transplantations (p < 0.0001). The antibodies recognized six epitopes of HLA Class I, 3 of HLA-DR, and 1 of HLA-DQ, and most antibodies were directed to HLA-B (47%). Fifty-three patients (69.7%) had DESA against one donor epitope (range 1-5). Long-term graft survival rate in patients with clinically relevant DESA was 32%, rendering DESA a superior parameter to classical DSA (60%). In the CPH model, the hazard ratio (95% CI) of clinically relevant DESAs was 2.45 (1.84-3.25) in deceased donation, and 2.22 (1.25-3.95) in living donation. In conclusion, the developed model shows the deleterious effect of clinically relevant DESAs on graft outcome which outperformed traditional DSA-based risk analysis on antigen level.

Tracking Circulating HLA-Specific IgG-Producing Memory B Cells with the B-Cell ImmunoSpot Assay

Donor-specific antibodies (DSA) against human leukocyte antigen (HLA) molecules are a major risk factor for rejection of transplanted organs (in antibody-mediated rejection [ABMR]), particularly in patients who have prior sensitization or receive insufficient immunosuppression through minimization or noncompliance. These DSA are measured routinely in the serum of patients prior to transplantation mainly using bead-based technologies or cell-based assays. However, the absence of detectable serum DSA does not always reflect the absence of sensitization or histologically defined ABMR, and so it has been proposed that the detection and measurement of memory B cells capable of secreting antibodies against donor HLA antigens could be carried out using B-cell ImmunoSpot, to better inform the degree of immune sensitization of transplant patients prior to as well as after transplantation. Such an assay is described here.

Equity matrix for kidney transplant allocation

There is a general agreement that the distribution of kidneys for transplantation should balance utility criteria with justice. Moreover, a kidney allocation system must be based on transparent policies and seen as an ongoing process. This study aims to present an allocation system grounded on an equity matrix that balances the criteria of utility and justice. Synthetic data for a waiting list with 2000 transplant candidates and a pool of 280 donors were generated. A color priority system, the Eurotransplant (ET) kidney allocation system, and the proposed Equity Matrix (EQM) allocation system were compared after 1000 iterations of kidney allocations. Distributions of variables like the age difference, Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLA) mismatches (mmHLA), recipients' time on dialysis, cPRA, and a transplant score obtained by different allocation models were compared graphically and with Cohen's d effect size. For the analyzed variables, when we compare only the selected recipients from ET with the selected recipients from the EQM neutral model, we can conclude that the former model selects more hypersensitized recipients, a higher number of 65+ years' old recipients with 65+ years' old donors and higher number of recipients with 0 mmHLA. While recipients from EQM neutral are slightly older, have a lower age difference with their donors, have a lower number of mmHLA, are less likely to have 6 mmHLA with their donors, and have more time on dialysis. The proposed EQM model attempts to provide a simple, transparent, and equitable response to a complex question with results that outperform established practices.

BSHI and BTS UK guideline on the detection of alloantibodies in solid organ (and islet) transplantation

Solid organ transplantation represents the best (and in many cases only) treatment option for patients with end-stage organ failure. The effectiveness and functioning life of these transplants has improved each decade due to surgical and clinical advances, and accurate histocompatibility assessment. Patient exposure to alloantigen from another individual is a common occurrence and takes place through pregnancies, blood transfusions or previous transplantation. Such exposure to alloantigen's can lead to the formation of circulating alloreactive antibodies which can be deleterious to solid organ transplant outcome. The purpose of these guidelines is to update to the previous BSHI/BTS guidelines 2016 on the relevance, assessment, and management of alloantibodies within solid organ transplantation.

How to measure human leukocyte antigen-specific B cells

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The implementation of highly sensitive immune assays measuring anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies has modified alloimmune risk stratification and diagnosis of rejection. Nonetheless, anti-HLA antibodies represent the downstream effector mechanism of the B-cell response. Better characterizing the cellular components of the humoral immune response (including memory B cells (mBCs) and long-lived plasma cells) could help to further stratify the alloimmune risk stratification and enable discovery of new therapeutic targets. Several tests that characterize HLA-specific mBCs, either functionally or phenotypically, have been developed in the last years, showing promising applications as well as some limitations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Functional assays involving ex vivo polyclonal activation of mBC have been refined to allow the detection of HLA-specific mBC capable of producing anti-HLA Abs, using different and complementary detection platforms such as multiplex Fluorospot and single antigen bead assay on culture supernatants. Detection of circulating HLA-specific B cells by flow cytometry remains hindered by the very low frequency of HLA-specific mBC.

SUMMARY

Technological refinements have allowed the development of tests detecting HLA-specific mBC. Further evaluation of these assays in clinical trials, both for immune risk stratification and to assess treatment efficacy (desensitization strategies, rescue therapies for ABMR) are now urgently needed.

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.

Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction

This analysis reports on the outcomes of two different steroid sparing immunosuppression protocols used in the management of 120 highly sensitised patients (HSPs) with cRF>85% receiving Alemtuzumab induction, 53 maintained on tacrolimus (FK) monotherapy and 67 tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil (FK + MMF). There was no difference in the median cRF or mode of sensitisation between the two groups, although the FK + MMF cohort received more poorly matched grafts. There was no difference in one-year patient or allograft survival, however rejection free survival was inferior with FK monotherapy compared with FK + MMF at 65.4% and 91.4% respectively, p < 0.01. DSA-free survival was comparable. Whilst there was no difference in rates of BK between the cohorts, CMV-free survival was inferior in the FK + MMF group at 86.0% compared with 98.1% in the FK group, p = 0.026. One-year post-transplant diabetes free survival was 89.6% and 100.0% in the FK and FK + MMF group respectively, p = 0.027, the difference attributed to the use of prednisolone to treat rejection in the FK cohort, p = 0.006. We report good outcomes in HSPs utilising a steroid sparing protocol with Alemtuzumab induction and FK + MMF maintenance and provide granular data on immunological and infectious complications to inform steroid avoidance in these patient groups.

Tocilizumab Evaluation in HLA-Desensitization before Kidney Transplantation as an Add-On Therapy to Apheresis: The TETRA Study

BACKGROUND

Desensitization strategies improve access to transplantation in highly sensitized kidney transplant candidates. Tocilizumab could be a valuable addition to more traditional desensitization regimens. We investigated the effect of tocilizumab as an add-on therapy to our standard of care (SoC) desensitization strategy based on rituximab and apheresis.

METHODS

In this study, we prospectively included highly sensitized patients to receive monthly tocilizumab infusions for 6 months before our SoC regimen (Toci + SoC group). We compared the reductions in the mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) rebound at post-transplantation and kidney function at 1-year post-transplantation to patients treated by SoC (based on apheresis and two doses of rituximab).

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were included in the SoC group; seven in the Toci + SoC group. Reductions in pre-transplantation MFI were similar between groups. At 1-year post-transplantation, there was no absolute difference in overall MFI rebounds, including donor-specific antibodies. Toci + SoC helped lower the rebound of antibodies with more elevated baseline MFIs. Graft function and survival rates were similar at one-year post-transplantation (median eGFR 62.8 vs. 65.6 mL/min/1.73 m² for SoC and Toci + SoC, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Tocilizumab as an add-on to SoC desensitization may help control the post-transplantation rebound of antibodies with elevated baseline MFIs. However, reductions in pre-transplantation MFIs were similar with or without tocilizumab. Further studies are needed to validate this pilot study.

Alloimmune risk assessment for antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplantation: A practical proposal

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease. Although an improvement in graft survival has been observed in the last decades with the use of different immunosuppressive drugs, this is still limited in time with antibody-mediated rejection being a main cause of graft-loss. Immune monitoring and risk assessment of antibody-mediated rejection before and after kidney transplantation with useful biomarkers is key to tailoring treatments to achieve the best outcomes. Here, we provide a review of the rationale and several accessible tools for immune monitoring, from the most classic to the modern ones. Finally, we end up discussing a practical proposal for alloimmune risk assessment in kidney transplantation, including histocompatibility leukocyte antigen (HLA) and non-HLA antibodies, HLA molecular mismatch analysis and characterization of peripheral blood immune cells.

Clinical recommendations for posttransplant assessment of anti-HLA (Human Leukocyte Antigen) donor-specific antibodies: A Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk consensus document

Although anti-HLA (Human Leukocyte Antigen) donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are commonly measured in clinical practice and their relationship with transplant outcome is well established, clinical recommendations for anti-HLA antibody assessment are sparse. Supported by a careful and critical review of the current literature performed by the Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk 2022 working group, this consensus report provides clinical practice recommendations in kidney, heart, lung, and liver transplantation based on expert assessment of quality and strength of evidence. The recommendations address 3 major clinical problems in transplantation and include guidance regarding posttransplant DSA assessment and application to diagnostics, prognostics, and therapeutics: (1) the clinical implications of positive posttransplant DSA detection according to DSA status (ie, preformed or de novo), (2) the relevance of posttransplant DSA assessment for precision diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection and for treatment management, and (3) the relevance of posttransplant DSA for allograft prognosis and risk stratification. This consensus report also highlights gaps in current knowledge and provides directions for clinical investigations and trials in the future that will further refine the clinical utility of posttransplant DSA assessment, leading to improved transplant management and patient care.

DSA in solid organ transplantation: is it a matter of specificity, amount, or functional characteristics?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The present review describes the clinical relevance of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies (HLA-DSAs) as biomarkers of alloimmunity and summarizes recent improvements in their characterization that provide insights into immune risk assessment, precision diagnosis, and prognostication in transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have addressed the clinical utility of HLA-DSAs as biomarkers for immune risk assessment in pretransplant and peritransplant, diagnosis and treatment evaluation of antibody-mediated rejection, immune monitoring posttransplant, and risk stratification.

SUMMARY

HLA-DSAs have proved to be the most advanced immune biomarkers in solid organ transplantation in terms of analytical validity, clinical validity and clinical utility. Recent studies are integrating multiple HLA-DSA characteristics including antibody specificity, HLA class, quantity, immunoglobulin G subclass, and complement-binding capacity to improve risk assessment peritransplant, diagnosis and treatment evaluation of antibody-mediated rejection, immune monitoring posttransplant, and transplant prognosis evaluation. In addition, integration of HLA-DSAs to clinical, functional and histological transplant parameters has further consolidated the utility of HLA-DSAs as robust biomarkers and allows to build new tools for monitoring, precision diagnosis, and risk stratification for individual patients. However, prospective and randomized-controlled studies addressing the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of HLA-DSA-based monitoring and patient management strategies are required to demonstrate that the use of HLA-DSAs as biomarkers can improve current clinical practice and transplant outcomes.

On the clinical relevance of using complete high-resolution HLA typing for an accurate interpretation of posttransplant immune-mediated graft outcomes

Complete and high-resolution (HR) HLA typing improves the accurate assessment of donor–recipient compatibility and pre-transplant donor-specific antibodies (DSA). However, the value of this information to identify de novo immune-mediated graft events and its impact on outcomes has not been assessed. In 241 donor/recipient kidney transplant pairs, DNA samples were re-evaluated for six-locus (A/B/C/DRB1/DQB1+A1/DPB1) HR HLA typing. De novo anti-HLA antibodies were assessed using solid-phase assays, and dnDSA were classified either (1) as per current clinical practice according to three-locus (A/B/DRB1) low-resolution (LR) typing, estimating donor HLA-C/DQ typing with frequency tables, or (2) according to complete six-locus HR typing. The impact on graft outcomes was compared between groups. According to LR HLA typing, 36 (15%) patients developed dnDSA (LR_dnDSA+). Twenty-nine out of 36 (80%) were confirmed to have dnDSA by HR typing (LR_dnDSA+/HR_dnDSA+), whereas 7 (20%) did not (LR_dnDSA+/HR_dnDSA−). Out of 49 LR_dnDSA specificities, 34 (69%) were confirmed by HR typing whereas 15 (31%) LR specificities were not confirmed. LR_dnDSA+/HR_dnDSA+ patients were at higher risk of ABMR as compared to dnDSA− and LR_dnDSA+/HR_dnDSA− (logRank < 0.001), and higher risk of death-censored graft loss (logRank = 0.001). Both LR_dnDSA+ (HR: 3.51, 95% CI = 1.25–9.85) and LR_dnDSA+/HR_dnDSA+ (HR: 4.09, 95% CI = 1.45–11.54), but not LR_dnDSA+/HR_dnDSA− independently predicted graft loss. The implementation of HR HLA typing improves the characterization of biologically relevant de novo anti-HLA DSA and discriminates patients with poorer graft outcomes.

Strategies to Overcome HLA Sensitization and Improve Access to Retransplantation after Kidney Graft Loss

An increasing number of patients waitlisted for kidney transplantation have a previously failed graft. Retransplantation provides a significant improvement in morbidity, mortality, and quality of life when compared to dialysis. However, HLA sensitization is a major barrier to kidney retransplantation and the majority of the highly sensitized patients are waiting for a subsequent kidney transplant. A multidisciplinary team that includes immunogeneticists, transplant nephrologists and surgeons, and adequate allocation policies is fundamental to increase access to a kidney retransplant. A review of Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library was performed on the challenges of kidney retransplantation after graft loss, focusing on the HLA barrier and new strategies to overcome sensitization. Conclusion: Technical advances in immunogenetics, new desensitization protocols, and complex allocation programs have emerged in recent years to provide a new hope to kidney recipients with a previously failed graft.

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.

Alloimmune Risk Stratification for Kidney Transplant Rejection

Different types of kidney transplantations are performed worldwide, including biologically diverse donor/recipient combinations, which entail distinct patient/graft outcomes. Thus, proper immunological and non-immunological risk stratification should be considered, especially for patients included in interventional randomized clinical trials. This paper was prepared by a working group within the European Society for Organ Transplantation, which submitted a Broad Scientific Advice request to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) relating to clinical trial endpoints in kidney transplantation. After collaborative interactions, the EMA sent its final response in December 2020, highlighting the following: 1) transplantations performed between human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-identical donors and recipients carry significantly lower immunological risk than those from HLA-mismatched donors; 2) for the same allogeneic molecular HLA mismatch load, kidney grafts from living donors carry significantly lower immunological risk because they are better preserved and therefore less immunogenic than grafts from deceased donors; 3) single-antigen bead testing is the gold standard to establish the repertoire of serological sensitization and is used to define the presence of a recipient's circulating donor-specific antibodies (HLA-DSA); 4) molecular HLA mismatch analysis should help to further improve organ allocation compatibility and stratify immunological risk for primary alloimmune activation, but without consensus regarding which algorithm and cut-off to use it is difficult to integrate information into clinical practice/study design; 5) further clinical validation of other immune assays, such as those measuring anti-donor cellular memory (T/B cell ELISpot assays) and non-HLA-DSA, is needed; 6) routine clinical tests that reliably measure innate immune alloreactivity are lacking.

Allorecognition and the spectrum of kidney transplant rejection

Detection of mismatched human leukocyte antigens by adaptive immune cells is considered as the main cause of transplant rejection, leading to either T-cell mediated rejection or antibody-mediated rejection. This canonical view guided the successful development of immunosuppressive therapies and shaped the diagnostic Banff classification for kidney transplant rejection that is used in clinics worldwide. However, several observations have recently emerged that question this dichotomization between T-cell mediated rejection and antibody-mediated rejection, related to heterogeneity in the serology, histology, and prognosis of the rejection phenotypes. In parallel, novel insights were obtained concerning the dynamics of donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies, the immunogenicity of donor-recipient non-human leukocyte antigen mismatches, and the autoreactivity against self-antigens. Moreover, the potential of innate allorecognition was uncovered, as exemplified by natural killer cell-mediated microvascular inflammation through missing self, and by the emerging evidence on monocyte-driven allorecognition. In this review, we highlight the gaps in the current classification of rejection, provide an overview of the expanding insights into the mechanisms of allorecognition, and critically appraise how these could improve our understanding and clinical approach to kidney transplant rejection. We argue that consideration of the complex interplay of various allorecognition mechanisms can foster a more integrated view of kidney transplant rejection and can lead to improved risk stratification, targeted therapies, and better outcome after kidney transplantation.

T- and B-cell therapy in solid organ transplantation: current evidence and future expectations

Cell therapy has emerged as an attractive therapeutic option in organ transplantation. During the last decade, the therapeutic potency of Treg immunotherapy has been shown in various preclinical animal models and safety was demonstrated in first clinical trials. However, there are still critical open questions regarding specificity, survival, and migration to the target tissue so the best Treg population for infusion into patients is still under debate. Recent advances in CAR technology hold the promise for Treg-functional superiority. Another exciting strategy is the generation of B-cell antibody receptor (BAR) Treg/cytotoxic T cells to specifically regulate or deplete alloreactive memory B cells. Finally, B cells are also capable of immune regulation, making them promising candidates for immunomodulatory therapeutic strategies. This article summarizes available literature on cell-based innovative therapeutic approaches aiming at modulating alloimmune response for transplantation. Crucial areas of investigation that need a joined effort of the transplant community for moving the field toward successful achievement of tolerance are highlighted.