Multicentre randomised controlled trial protocol of urine CXCL10 monitoring strategy in kidney transplant recipients

Urine CXCL10 as a biomarker in kidney transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Urine CXCL10 is a promising biomarker for posttransplant renal allograft monitoring but is currently not widely used for clinical management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Large retrospective studies and data from a prospective randomized trial as well as a prospective cohort study demonstrate that low urine CXCL10 levels are associated with a low risk of rejection and can exclude BK polyomavirus replication with high certainty. Urine CXCL10 can either be used as part of a multiparameter based risk assessment tool, or as an individual biomarker taking relevant confounders into account. A novel Luminex-based CXCL10 assay has been validated in a multicenter study, and proved to be robust, reproducible, and accurate.

SUMMARY

Urine CXCL10 is a well characterized inflammation biomarker, which can be used to guide performance of surveillance biopsies. Wide implementation into clinical practice depends on the availability of inexpensive, thoroughly validated assays with approval from regulatory authorities.

Randomized Trial to Assess the Clinical Utility of Renal Allograft Monitoring by Urine CXCL10 Chemokine

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

This study is the first randomized controlled trial to investigate the clinical utility of a noninvasive monitoring biomarker in renal transplantation. Although urine CXCL10 monitoring could not demonstrate a beneficial effect on 1-year outcomes, the study is a rich source for future design of trials aiming to explore the clinical utility of noninvasive biomarkers. In addition, the study supports the use of urine CXCL10 to assess the inflammatory status of the renal allograft.

BACKGROUND

Urine CXCL10 is a promising noninvasive biomarker for detection of renal allograft rejection. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical utility of renal allograft monitoring by urine CXCL10 in a randomized trial.

METHODS

We stratified 241 patients, 120 into an intervention and 121 into a control arm. In both arms, urine CXCL10 levels were monitored at three specific time points (1, 3, and 6 months post-transplant). In the intervention arm, elevated values triggered performance of an allograft biopsy with therapeutic adaptations according to the result. In the control arm, urine CXCL10 was measured, but the results concealed. The primary outcome was a combined end point at 1-year post-transplant (death-censored graft loss, clinical rejection between month 1 and 1-year, acute rejection in 1-year surveillance biopsy, chronic active T-cell-mediated rejection in 1-year surveillance biopsy, development of de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies, or eGFR <25 ml/min).

RESULTS

The incidence of the primary outcome was not different between the intervention and the control arm (51% versus 49%; relative risk (RR), 1.04 [95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.34]; P = 0.80). When including 175 of 241 (73%) patients in a per-protocol analysis, the incidence of the primary outcome was also not different (55% versus 49%; RR, 1.11 [95% confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.47]; P = 0.54). The incidence of the individual end points was not different as well.

CONCLUSIONS

This study could not demonstrate a beneficial effect of urine CXCL10 monitoring on 1-year outcomes (ClinicalTrials.gov_ NCT03140514 ).

Multicenter Validation of a Urine CXCL10 Assay for Noninvasive Monitoring of Renal Transplants

BACKGROUND

Urine CXCL10 (C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 10, interferon gamma-induced protein 10 [IP10]) outperforms standard-of-care monitoring for detecting subclinical and early clinical T-cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and may advance TCMR therapy development through biomarker-enriched trials. The goal was to perform an international multicenter validation of a CXCL10 bead-based immunoassay (Luminex) for transplant surveillance and compare with an electrochemiluminescence-based (Meso Scale Discovery [MSD]) assay used in transplant trials.

METHODS

Four laboratories participated in the Luminex assay development and evaluation. Urine CXCL10 was measured by Luminex and MSD in 2 independent adult kidney transplant trial cohorts (Basel and TMCT04). In an independent test and validation set, a linear mixed-effects model to predict (log 10 -transformed) MSD CXCL10 from Luminex CXCL10 was developed to determine the conversion between assays. Net reclassification was determined after mathematical conversion.

RESULTS

The Luminex assay was precise, with an intra- and interassay coefficient of variation 8.1% and 9.3%; showed modest agreement between 4 laboratories (R 0.96 to 0.99, P < 0.001); and correlated with known CXCL10 in a single- (n = 100 urines, R 0.94 to 0.98, P < 0.001) and multicenter cohort (n = 468 urines, R 0.92, P < 0.001) but the 2 assays were not equivalent by Passing-Bablok regression. Linear mixed-effects modeling demonstrated an intercept of -0.490 and coefficient of 1.028, showing Luminex CXCL10 are slightly higher than MSD CXCL10, but the agreement is close to 1.0. After conversion of the biopsy thresholds, the decision to biopsy would be changed for only 6% (5/85) patients showing acceptable reclassification.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate this urine CXCL10 Luminex immunoassay is robust, reproducible, and accurate, indicating it can be readily translated into clinical HLA laboratories for serial posttransplant surveillance.

Potential utility of urinary chemokine CCL2 to creatinine ratio in prognosis of 5-year graft failure and mortality post 1-year protocol biopsy in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Chemokines (chemotactic cytokines) are small proteins which are engaged in many pathophysiological processes, including inflammation and homeostasis. In recent years, application of chemokines in transplant medicine was intensively studied. The aim of this study was to determine the utility of urinary chemokines CCL2 (C-C motif ligand 2) and CXCL10 (C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 10) in prognosis of 5-year graft failure and mortality post 1-year protocol biopsy in renal transplant recipients.

METHODS

Forty patients who had a protocol biopsy 1 year after renal transplantation were included. Concentrations of CCL2 and CXCL10 in urine with reference to urine creatinine were measured. All patients were under the supervision of one transplant center. Long-term outcomes within 5 years after 1-year posttransplant biopsy were analyzed.

RESULTS

Urinary CCL2:Cr at the time of biopsy was significantly increased in patients who died or had graft failure. CCL2:Cr was proven to be a significant predictor of 5-year graft failure and mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.19, p = .02; OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.02-1.16, p = .04; respectively).

CONCLUSION

Chemokines are easily detected by current methods. In the era of personalized medicine, urinary CCL2:Cr can be considered as a factor providing complementary information regarding risk of graft failure or increased mortality.

Anti-interleukin-6 Antibody Clazakizumab in Antibody-mediated Kidney Transplant Rejection: Effect on Donor-derived Cell-free DNA and C-X-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 10

Targeting interleukin-6 (IL-6) was shown to counteract donor-specific antibody production and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) activity. It is not known whether, or to what extent, IL-6 antagonism modulates biomarkers indicative of tissue damage (donor-derived cell-free DNA [dd-cfDNA]) and parenchymal inflammation (C-X-C motif chemokine ligand [CXCL] 10).

METHODS

We report a secondary endpoint analysis of a phase 2 trial of anti-IL-6 antibody clazakizumab in late AMR (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03444103). Twenty kidney transplant recipients were randomized to treatment with clazakizumab or placebo over 12 wk (part A), followed by an extension in which all recipients received clazakizumab through week 52 (part B). Biomarkers were evaluated at day 0 and after 12 and 52 wk, respectively.

RESULTS

Fractional dd-cfDNA (dd-cfDNA[%]) did not significantly change under clazakizumab, with no differences between study arms (clazakizumab versus placebo) at week 12 (1.65% [median; interquartile range: 0.91%-2.78%] versus 0.97% [0.56%-2.30%]; P = 0.25) and no significant decrease from weeks 12 to 52 (1.15% [0.70%-2.38%] versus 1.0% [0.61%-1.70%]; P = 0.25). Similarly, urine CXCL10 was not different between groups at week 12 (55.7 [41.0-91.4] versus 60.2 [48.8-208.7.0] pg/mg creatinine; P = 0.44) and did not change over part B (CXCL10 [pg/mg creatinine]: from 58 [46.3-93.1] to 67.4 [41.5-132.0] pg/mL creatinine; P = 0.95). Similar results were obtained for serum CXCL10. There was no association between biomarker levels and resolution of molecular and morphologic AMR activity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that IL-6 blockade does not significantly affect levels of dd-cfDNA[%] and CXCL10. Subtle responses to this therapeutic principle may be overlooked by early biomarker surveillance.

Relevant biomarkers of kidney allograft rejection

This review focuses on the new relevant biomarkers proposed for the diagnosis of different types of allograft rejections. The immune response against the transplanted tissues can lead to rejection. Kidney allograft rejection occurs when the recipient component's immune system reacts against the donor's cells. MicroRNAs, dd-cf DNA, CD103 markers, CXCR3 chemokine receptor, IP-10, KIR genes, HLA antibodies, the perforin and granzyme B molecules - the constant assessment of all these parameters could prevent acute rejection episodes and kidney injuries. In this way, both immune response and tissue destruction biomarkers are essential for the long-term survival of kidney-transplanted patients. They also contribute to personalizing treatments, precisely personalized immunosuppressive regiments.

Urinary Cell mRNA Profiles Predictive of Human Kidney Allograft Status

Immune monitoring of kidney allograft recipients and personalized therapeutics may help reach the aspirational goal of "one transplant for life." The invasive kidney biopsy procedure, the diagnostic tool of choice, has become safer and the biopsy classification more refined. Nevertheless, biopsy-associated complications, interobserver variability in biopsy specimen scoring, and costs continue to be significant concerns. The dynamics of the immune repertoire make frequent assessments of allograft status necessary, but repeat biopsies of the kidney are neither practical nor safe. To address the existing challenges, we developed urinary cell mRNA profiling and investigated the diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive accuracy of absolute levels of a hypothesis-based panel of mRNAs encoding immunoregulatory proteins. Enabled by our refinements of the PCR assay and by investigating mechanistic hypotheses, our single-center studies identified urinary cell mRNAs associated with T cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy, and BK virus nephropathy. In the multicenter National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials in Organ Transplantation-04, we discovered and validated a urinary cell three-gene signature of T-cell CD3 ε chain mRNA, interferon gamma inducible protein 10 (IP-10) mRNA, and 18s ribosomal RNA that is diagnostic of subclinical acute cellular rejection and acute cellular rejection and prognostic of acute cellular rejection and graft function. The trajectory of the signature score remained flat and below the diagnostic threshold for acute cellular rejection in the patients with no rejection biopsy specimens, whereas a sharp rise was observed during the weeks before the biopsy specimen that showed acute cellular rejection. Our RNA sequencing and bioinformatics identified kidney allograft biopsy specimen gene signatures of acute rejection to be enriched in urinary cells matched to acute rejection biopsy specimens. The urinary cellular landscape was more diverse and more enriched for immune cell types compared with kidney allograft biopsy specimens. Urinary cell mRNA profile-guided clinical trials are needed to evaluate their value compared with current standard of care.

Beyond the Biopsy: Monitoring Immune Status in Kidney Recipients

Improved long-term kidney allograft survival is largely related to better outcomes at 12 months, in association with declining acute rejection rates and more efficacious immunosuppression. Finding the right balance between under- and overimmunosuppression or rejection versus immunosuppression toxicity remains one of transplant's holy grails. In the absence of precise measures of immunosuppression burden, transplant clinicians rely on nonspecific, noninvasive tests and kidney allograft biopsy generally performed for cause. This review appraises recent advances of conventional monitoring strategies and critically examines the plethora of emerging tests utilizing tissue, urine, and blood samples to improve upon the diagnostic precision of allograft surveillance.

Urinary C-X-C Motif Chemokine 10 Is Related to Acute Graft Lesions Secondary to T Cell- and Antibody-Mediated Damage

Background

Non-invasive biomarkers of graft rejection are needed to optimize the management and outcomes of kidney transplant recipients. Urinary excretion of IFN-γ-related chemokine CXCL10 is clearly associated with clinical and subclinical T cell-mediated graft inflammation, but its relationship with antibody-mediated damage has not been fully addressed. Further, the variables influencing levels of urinary CXCL10 excretion are unknown.

Material/Methods

A total of 151 kidney graft biopsies (92 surveillance and 59 indication biopsies) and 151 matched urine samples obtained before biopsy were prospectively analyzed. T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody-mediated rejection (AbMR) were defined according to the 2017 Banff classification criteria. Urinary CXCL10 levels were measured by ELISA and corrected by urinary creatinine.

Results

Banff scores ‘t’, ‘i’, ‘g’, and ‘ptc’ were significantly related to urinary CXCL10 levels. Multivariate analysis showed that ‘t’ (β=0.107, P=0.001) and ‘ptc’ (β=0.093, P=0.002) were significantly associated with urinary CXCL10. Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) were related to the high excretion of urinary CXCL10 at 1 year after transplantation (odds ratio [OR] 17.817, P=0.003). Urinary CXCL10 showed good discrimination ability for AbMR (AUC-ROC 0.760, P=0.001). The third tertile of urinary CXCL10 remained significantly associated with AbMR (OR 4.577, 95% confidence interval 1.799–11.646, P=0.001) after multivariate regression analysis.

Conclusions

DSA was the only variable clearly related to high urinary CXCL10 levels. Urinary CXCL10 is a good non-invasive candidate biomarker of AbMR and TCMR, supplying information independent of renal function and other variables normally used to monitor kidney transplants.

Technical Considerations and Confounders for Urine CXCL10 Chemokine Measurement

Background.

The urine C-X-C motif chemokine 10 (CXCL10) is a promising screening biomarker for renal allograft rejection. The aim of the study was to investigate important technical and biological aspects as well as potential confounders when measuring urine CXCL10.

Methods.

We analyzed 595 urine samples from 117 patients, who participated in a randomized controlled trial investigating the clinical utility of urine CXCL10 monitoring for posttransplant management. Urine CXCL10 was measured by an immunoassay using electrochemiluminescence.

Results.

Intraassay coefficient of variation was 2.5%, and interassay coefficient of variation was 10%. Urine CXCL10 remained stable (ie, <10% degradation) for 8 hours at 25°C or 37°C and for 3 days at 4°C. CXCL10 concentrations [pg/mL] strongly correlated with urine CXCL10/creatinine ratios [ng/mmol] (r² = 0.98; P < 0.0001). Leucocyturia and active BK-polyomavirus infection are associated with higher CXCL10 concentrations, while allograft function, serum CRP, patient age, proteinuria, urine pH, hematuria, squamous epithelia cell count, and bacteriuria did not correlate with urine CXCL10 concentrations. In 145 paired samples obtained within 1–2 weeks, 80% showed a CXCL10/creatinine ratio change of < ±2 ng/mmol or ±50%, respectively.

Conclusions.

Urine CXCL10 measurement on the used platform is accurate and robust. Leucocyturia and active BK-polyomavirus infection are major confounders, which can be easily detected but represent important diagnostic “blind spots” when using urine CXCL10 to screen for allograft rejection. The intraindividual biological variability of urine CXCL10 within 1–2 weeks is mostly below ±50%, which is still much higher than the technical variability due to sample handling/processing (<20%).