Association between Allosensitization and Waiting List Outcomes among Adult Lung Transplant Candidates in the United States

Intravenous Immunoglobulins Alone for the Desensitization of Lung Transplant Recipients with Preformed Donor Specific Antibodies and Negative Flow Cytometry Crossmatch

BACKGROUND

The lack of evidence regarding optimal desensitization strategies for lung transplant candidates with preformed donor specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies (DSAs) has led to varying approaches among centers towards this patient group. Our institution's desensitization protocol for recipients with preformed DSAs and negative flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM) consists of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) as the sole therapy. The study aimed to determine outcomes using this approach.

METHODS

This retrospective study included adults who underwent lung-only transplantation for the first time between January 2015 and March 2022 at a single center. We excluded patients with positive or missing FCXM results. Transplant recipients with any DSA ≥ 1000 MFI on latest testing within three months of transplant were considered DSA-positive, while recipients with DSAs <1000 MFI and those without DSAs were assigned to the low-level/negative group. Graft survival (time to death/retransplantation) and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD)-free times were compared between groups using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Thirty-six out of 167 eligible patients (22%) were DSA-positive. At least 50% of preformed DSAs had documented clearance (decrease to <1000 MFI) within the first 6 months of transplant. Multivariable Cox regression analyses did not detect a significantly increased risk of graft failure (aHR 1.04 95%CI 0.55-1.97) or chronic lung allograft dysfunction (aHR 0.71 95%CI 0.34-1.52) in DSA-positive patients compared to patients with low-level/negative DSAs. Incidences of antibody-mediated rejection (p = 1.00) and serious thromboembolic events (p = 0.63) did not differ between study groups.

CONCLUSION

We describe a single-center experience of administering IVIG alone to lung transplant recipients with preformed DSAs and negative FCXM. Further studies are required to confirm the efficacy of this strategy against other protocols.

Impacts of Pre-transplant Panel-Reactive Antibody on Post-transplantation Outcomes: A Study of Nationwide Heart Transplant Registry Data

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The number of sensitized heart failure patients on waiting lists for heart transplantation (HTx) is increasing. Using the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry (KOTRY), a nationwide multicenter database, we investigated the prevalence and clinical impact of calculated panel-reactive antibody (cPRA) in patients undergoing HTx.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 813 patients who underwent HTx between 2014 and 2021. Patients were grouped according to peak PRA level as group A: patients with cPRA ≤10% (n= 492); group B: patients with cPRA >10%, <50% (n=160); group C patients with cPRA ≥50% (n=161). Post-HTx outcomes were freedom from antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), acute cellular rejection, coronary allograft vasculopathy, and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration was 44 (19-72) months. Female sex, re-transplantation, and pre-HTx renal replacement therapy were independently associated with an increased risk of sensitization (cPRA ≥50%). Group C patients were more likely to have longer hospital stays and to use anti-thymocyte globulin as an induction agent compared to groups A and B. Significantly more patients in group C had positive flow cytometric crossmatch and had a higher incidence of preformed donor-specific antibody (DSA) compared to groups A and B. During follow-up, group C had a significantly higher rate of AMR, but the overall survival rate was comparable to that of groups A and B. In a subgroup analysis of group C, post-transplant survival was comparable despite higher preformed DSA in a desensitized group compared to the non-desensitized group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cPRA ≥50% had significantly higher incidence of preformed DSA and lower freedom from AMR, but post-HTx survival rates were similar to those with cPRA <50%. Our findings suggest that sensitized patients can attain comparable post-transplant survival to non-sensitized patients when treated with optimal desensitization treatment and therapeutic intervention.

Lung transplantation despite preformed donor-specific antihuman leukocyte antigen antibodies: a 9-year single-center experience

Pretransplant allosensitization to human leukocyte antigens (HLA) increases the recipient's waiting list time and mortality in lung transplantation. Rather than waiting for crossmatch-negative donors, since 2013, recipients with preformed donor-specific antiHLA antibodies (pfDSA) have been managed with repeated IgA- and IgM-enriched intravenous immunoglobulin (IgGAM) infusions, usually in combination with plasmapheresis before IgGAM and a single dose of antiCD20 antibody. This retrospective study presents our 9-year experience with patients transplanted with pfDSA. Records of patients transplanted between February 2013 and May 2022 were reviewed. Outcomes were compared between patients with pfDSA and those without any de novo donor-specific antiHLA antibodies. The median follow-up time was 50 months. Of the 1,043 patients who had undergone lung transplantation, 758 (72.7%) did not develop any early donor-specific antiHLA antibodies, and 62 (5.9%) patients exhibited pfDSA. Among the 52 (84%) patients who completed treatment, pfDSA was cleared in 38 (73%). In pfDSA vs control patients and at 8-year follow-up, respectively, graft survival (%) was 75 vs 65 (P = .493) and freedom from chronic lung allograft dysfunction (%) was 63 vs 65 (P = .525). In lung transplantation, crossing the preformed HLA-antibody barrier is safe using a treatment protocol based on IgGAM. Patients with pfDSA have a good 8-year graft survival rate and freedom from chronic lung allograft dysfunction, similar to control patients.

Preemptive immune globulin therapy in sensitized lung transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Sensitized lung transplant recipients are at increased risk of developing donor-specific antibodies, which have been associated with acute and chronic rejection. Perioperative intravenous immune globulin has been used in sensitized individuals to down-regulate antibody production.

METHODS

We compared patients with a pre-transplant calculated panel reactive antibody ≥25% who did not receive preemptive immune globulin therapy to a historical control that received preemptive immune globulin therapy. Our cohort included 59 patients, 17 patients did not receive immune globulin therapy and 42 patients received therapy.

RESULTS

Donor specific antibody development was numerically higher in the non-immune globulin group compared to the immune globulin group (58.8% vs 33.3%, respectively, odds ratio 2.80, 95% confidence interval [0.77, 10.79], p = 0.13). Median time to antibody development was 9 days (Q1, Q3: 7, 19) and 28 days (Q1, Q3: 7, 58) in the non-immune globulin and immune globulin groups, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of primary graft dysfunction at 72 h post-transplant or acute cellular rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and chronic lung allograft dysfunction at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

These findings are hypothesis generating and emphasize the need for larger, randomized studies to determine association of immune globulin therapy with clinical outcomes.

Antibody-Mediated Rejection: Diagnosis and Treatment

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is a form of lung allograft rejection that is emerging as an important risk factor for chronic lung allograft dysfunction and decreased long-term survival. In this review, we provide a brief overview of our current understanding of its pathophysiology with an emphasis on donor-specific antibodies before moving on to focus on the current diagnostic criteria and treatment strategies. Our goal is to discuss the limitations of our current knowledge and explore how novel diagnostic and therapeutic options aim to improve outcomes through earlier definitive diagnosis and preemptive targeted treatment.

The Lung Transplant Candidate, Indications, Timing, and Selection Criteria

Lung transplantation can be lifesaving for patients with advanced lung disease. Demographics are evolving with recipients now sicker but determining candidacy remains predicated on one's underlying lung disease prognosis, along with the likelihood of posttransplant success. Determining optimal timing can be challenging, and most programs favor initiating the process early and proactively to allow time for patient education, informed decision-making, and preparation. A comprehensive, multidisciplinary evaluation is used to elucidate disease progrnosis and identify risk factors for poor posttransplant outcomes. Candidacy criteria vary significantly by center, and close communication between referring and transplant providers is necessary to improve access to transplant and outcomes.

Safety of Crossing Donor-specific Antibodies in Lung Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) have been associated with antibody-mediated rejection, chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD), and increased mortality in lung transplant recipients. Our center performs transplants in the presence of DSA, and we sought to evaluate the safety of this practice with respect to graft loss, CLAD onset, and primary graft dysfunction (PGD).

METHODS

We reviewed recipients transplanted from 2010 to 2017, classifying them as DSA positive (DSA+) or negative. We used Kaplan-Meier estimation to test the association between DSA status and time to death or retransplant and time to CLAD onset. We further tested associations with severe PGD and rejection in the first year using logistic regression and Fisher exact testing.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirteen patients met inclusion criteria, 30 (10%) of whom were DSA+. DSA+ patients were more likely to be female, bridged to transplant, and receive induction therapy. There was no association between DSA status and time to death or retransplant (log rank P = 0.581) nor death-censored time to CLAD onset (log rank P = 0.278), but DSA+ patients were at increased risk of severe PGD (odds ratio 2.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-7.29; P = 0.031) and more frequent antibody-mediated rejection in the first posttransplant year.

CONCLUSIONS

Crossing DSA at time of lung transplant was not associated with an increased risk of death or CLAD in our cohort, but patients developed severe PGD and antibody-mediated rejection more frequently. However, these risks are likely manageable when balanced against the benefits of expanded access for sensitized candidates.

Eplet-Predicted Antigens: An Attempt to Introduce Eplets into Unacceptable Antigen Determination and Calculated Panel-Reactive Antibody Calculation Facilitating Kidney Allocation

(1) Calculated panel-reactive antibody (CPRA) is a measure of sensitization based on unacceptable antigens (UAs). Determination of UAs based on single-antigen bead assays at allele or antigen levels may be inappropriate. We aimed to introduce eplets for better assessment of sensitization; (2) 900 recipients and 1427 donors were enrolled for candidate or donor pools, respectively. Eplets were from the HLA Epitope Registry. UAs were determined by anti-HLA antibodies identified using LIFECODES Single Antigen (LSA) kits. CPRA values were calculated using a simplified method of donor filtering; (3) HLA antigens containing all eplets of an HLA antigen in LSA kits (LSA antigen) were defined as eplet-predicted (EP) antigens, the reactivity of which could be predicted by that LSA antigen. High reactivity concordance was found between LSA and EP antigens. More HLA antigens were covered by EP antigens in the population than LSA antigens. CPRA values at the EP level were higher than at the allele level and lower than at the antigen level. The EP antigens facilitated UA determination for non-LSA antigens and avoided acute rejection; (4) UA determination using EP antigens can lead to more accurate assessment of sensitization, enabling a high probability of compatible organs and a low risk of adverse outcomes.

Critical Care of the Lung Transplant Patient

Lung transplantation is a therapeutic option for end-stage lung disease that improves survival and quality of life. Prelung transplant admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for bridge to transplant with mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is common. Primary graft dysfunction is an important immediate complication of lung transplantation with short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Later transplant-related causes of respiratory failure necessitating ICU admission include acute cellular rejection, atypical infections, and chronic lung allograft dysfunction. Lung transplantation for COVID-19-related ARDS is increasingly common..

HLA Homozygosity and Likelihood of Sensitization in Kidney Transplant Candidates

Background.

Homozygosity for HLAs has been associated with adverse outcomes after viral infection as well as pregnancy-induced HLA sensitization. We sought to assess the relationship between HLA locus homozygosity and the level of HLA antibody sensitization.

Methods.

We measured sensitization using the calculated panel reactive antibody value for a large cohort of 147 461 patients added to the US OPTN/United Network for Organ Sharing kidney transplant waitlist between December 2014 and December 2019. We used multinomial logistic modeling to compare 62 510 sensitized patients to 84 955 unsensitized controls.

Results.

We found that the number of homozygous HLA loci was strongly associated with the level of sensitization. Within mildly, highly, or extremely sensitized candidates, women displayed a higher relative abundance of HLA homozygosity at multiple HLA loci as compared with men, with attenuation of this effect in Black candidates. In a multivariable logistic model, the number of homozygous HLA loci interacted with female sex but not with other factors associated with sensitization, including recipient ethnicity and a history of prior kidney transplant.

Conclusions.

This study shows that HLA homozygosity is an innate genetic factor that affects the likelihood of HLA sensitization. Further research is needed to identify the immunologic mechanisms that underlie this observation.

The clinical utility and thresholds of Virtual and Halifaster Flow crossmatches in lung transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Immune sensitization, defined as the presence of alloreactive donor-specific antibodies (DSA), is associated with increased wait-times and inferior transplant outcomes. Identifying pre-transplant DSA with a physical cell-based assay is critical in defining immunological risk. However, improved solid phase antibody detection has provided the potential to forgo this physical assay. Here, we evaluated the association between DSA mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) and the recently introduced Halifaster Flow cytometry crossmatch (FXM) to determine if MFI could predict the outcome of FXM and whether a virtual crossmatch (VXM) would provide an accurate risk assessment.

METHODS

Sera from 134 waitlisted lung patients was retrospectively assessed by Halifaster FXM against lymphocytes preparations from 32 donors, resulting in 265 FXMs. HLA typing was performed to 2-field allelic level and Luminex single antigen beads (SAB) used to identify DSA. The association between FXM and Luminex MFI was calculated using ROC analysis. MFI threshold accuracy was confirmed using a separate validation cohort (174 recipient sera and 34 donors), whereby both virtual crossmatch (VXM) and FXMs were compared.

RESULTS

From the 265 FXM performed, 48 (18%) T-cell (TFXM) and 56 (21%) B-cell (BFXM) were positive. In the evaluation cohort, MFI thresholds of 2000 for HLA-A, B, DRB1 and >4000 for DQB1, were predictive of a positive FXM. The validation cohort of 233 paired FXM and VXM confirmed these MFI thresholds for both TFXM and BFXM with an accuracy of 91.4% and 89.3% respectively.

CONCLUSION

A positive VXM, defined with HLA-specific MFI thresholds predicts Halifaster FXM reactivity, and can potentially expedite organ allocation, by minimising the need for the more time-consuming flow cytometry crossmatch. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Recipient selection, timing of referral, and listing for lung transplantation

Recipient selection for lung transplantation is a balance between providing access to transplantation to maximum patients, while utilizing this limited resource in the most optimal way. This review summarizes the current literature and recommendations about referral, listing, and evaluation of lung transplant candidates, with a focus on patients considered to have high risk characteristics.

B Cell Immunity in Lung Transplant Rejection - Effector Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications

Allograft rejection remains the major hurdle in lung transplantation despite modern immunosuppressive treatment. As part of the alloreactive process, B cells are increasingly recognized as modulators of alloimmunity and initiators of a donor-specific humoral response. In chronically rejected lung allografts, B cells contribute to the formation of tertiary lymphoid structures and promote local alloimmune responses. However, B cells are functionally heterogeneous and some B cell subsets may promote alloimmune tolerance. In this review, we describe the current understanding of B-cell-dependent mechanisms in pulmonary allograft rejection and highlight promising future strategies that employ B cell-targeted therapies.

Approaching the sensitized lung patient: risk assessment for donor acceptance

The presence of HLA antibodies is widely recognized as a barrier to solid organ transplantation, and for lung transplant candidates, it has a significant negative impact on both waiting time and waiting list mortality. Although HLA antibodies have been associated with a broad spectrum of allograft damage, precise characterization of these antibodies in allosensitized candidates may enhance their accessibility to transplant. The introduction of Luminex-based single antigen bead (SAB) assays has significantly improved antibody detection sensitivity and specificity, but SAB alone is not sufficient for risk-stratification. Functional characterization of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) is paramount to increase donor accessibility for allosensitized lung candidates. We describe here our approach to evaluate sensitized lung transplant candidates. By employing state-of-the-art technologies to assess histocompatibility and determine physiological properties of circulating HLA antibodies, we can provide our Clinical Team a better risk assessment for lung transplant candidates and facilitate a "road map" to transplant. The cases presented in this paper illustrate the "individualized steps" taken to determine calculated panel reactive antibodies (cPRA), titer and complement-fixing properties of each HLA antibody present in circulation. When a donor is considered, we can better predict the risk associated with potentially crossing HLA antibodies, thereby allowing the Clinical Team to approach allosensitized lung patients with an individualized medicine approach. To facilitate safe access of sensitized lung transplant candidates to potential donors, a synergy between the histocompatibility laboratory and the Clinical Team is essential. Ultimately, donor acceptance is a decision based on several parameters, leading to a risk-stratification unique for each patient.

An Intention-to-treat View of Lung Transplantation for Interstitial Lung Disease: Successful Strategies to Minimize Waiting List and Posttransplant Mortality

BACKGROUND

Access to lung transplantation (LTx) and rates of waiting list and posttransplant mortality for patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) remain problematic. We evaluated the outcomes of ILD patients listed for LTx at our institution.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2018, adult patients with ILD were listed and transplanted from a donor-pool that included extended criteria and donation after circulatory-determined death donors. Patients were categorized as experiencing 1 of 4 competing events: transplant, waitlist death, delisting, or alive on waitlist. Multivariable competing risk regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of waitlist death/delisting. Posttransplant survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

Among 187 patients listed, 82% (153 of 187) underwent LTx (median time-to-transplant, 2.0 mo), whereas 16% (30 of 187) died or were delisted (median time-to-event, 1.6 mo). At 90 d, 6 mo, and 12 mo after listing, 51%, 63%, and 78% of patients had been transplanted, whereas 10%, 14%, and 16% had died or were delisted. Multivariable predictors of waitlist death/delisting were: blood group O compared to A (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 6.43, P < 0.001), shorter height (per 1 cm, SHR: 1.11, P < 0.001), hospitalization at listing (SHR: 3.98, P = 0.002), and reduced 6-min-walk test distance (per 50 m, SHR: 1.28, P = 0.001). Among LTx recipients, 24% (36 of 153) underwent single LTx. Donor lungs were 58% (88 of 153) extended-criteria, inclusive of 24% (37 of 153) circulatory-determined death. Ninety-day and 1-, 3-, and 5-y retransplant free survival were 97% ± 1%, 92% ± 2%, 81% ± 4%, and 69% ± 6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ILD require a rapid transit to LTx after listing. Despite this, the vast majority of ILD patients in this study reached LTx with excellent early and midterm outcomes.

Lung Transplantation Outcomes after Crossing Low-Level Donor Specific Antibodies Without Planned Augmented Immunosuppression

It is unknown whether some donor specific antibodies (DSA) can be crossed at the time of lung transplant without desensitization or augmented induction immunosuppression. This study assessed whether crossing low-level pre-transplant DSA (defined as mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) 1000-6000) without augmented immunosuppression is associated with worse retransplant-free or chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD)-free survival. Of the 458 included recipients, low-level pre-transplant DSA was crossed in 39 (8.6%) patients. The median follow-up time was 2.2 years. There were 15 (38.5%) patients with Class I DSA and 24 (61.5%) with Class II DSA. There was no difference in adjusted overall retransplant-free survival between recipients where pre-transplant DSA was and was not crossed (HR: 0.98 (95% CI = 0.49-1.99), p = 0.96). There was also no difference in CLAD-free survival (HR: 0.71 (95% CI = 0.38-1.33), p = 0.28). There was no difference in Grade 3 PGD at 72 hours (OR: 1.13 (95% CI = 0.52-2.48), p = 0.75) or definite or probable AMR (HR: 2.22 (95% CI = 0.64-7.61), p = 0.21). Lung transplantation in the presence of low-level DSA without planned augmented immunosuppression is not associated with worse overall or CLAD-free survival among recipients with intermediate-term follow-up. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Lung transplantation for interstitial lung disease

Lung transplantation (LTx) can be a life-extending treatment option for patients with advanced and/or progressive fibrotic interstitial lung disease (ILD), especially idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis, sarcoidosis and connective tissue disease-associated ILD. IPF is now the most common indication for LTx worldwide. Several unique features in patients with ILD can impact optimal timing of referral or listing for LTx, pre- or post-transplant risks, candidacy and post-transplant management. As the epidemiology of LTx and community practices have evolved, recent literature describes outcomes and approaches in higher-risk candidates. In this review, we discuss the unique and important clinical findings, course, monitoring and management of patients with IPF and other progressive fibrotic ILDs during pre-LTx evaluation and up to the day of transplantation; the need for co-management with clinical experts in ILD and LTx is emphasised. Some post-LTx complications are unique in these patient cohorts, which require prompt detection and appropriate management by experts in multiple disciplines familiar with telomere biology disorders and infectious, haematological, oncological and cardiac complications to enhance the likelihood of improved outcomes and survival of LTx recipients with IPF and other ILDs.

Lung Transplantation and the Era of the Sensitized Patient

Long term outcomes in lung transplant are limited by the development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). Within the past several decades, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has been recognized as a risk factor for CLAD. The presence of HLA antibodies in lung transplant candidates, "sensitized patients" may predispose patients to AMR, CLAD, and higher mortality after transplant. This review will discuss issues surrounding the sensitized patient, including mechanisms of sensitization, implications within lung transplant, and management strategies.

Antibody-Mediated Rejection and Lung Transplantation

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is now a widely recognized form of lung allograft rejection, with mounting evidence for AMR as an important risk factor for the development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction and markedly decreased long-term survival. Despite the recent development of the consensus diagnostic criteria, it remains a challenging diagnosis of exclusion. Furthermore, even after diagnosis, treatment directed at pulmonary AMR has been nearly exclusively derived from practices with other solid-organ transplants and other areas of medicine, such that there is a significant lack of data regarding the efficacy for these in pulmonary AMR. Lastly, outcomes after AMR remain quite poor despite aggressive treatment. In this review, we revisit the history of AMR in lung transplantation, describe our current understanding of its pathophysiology, discuss the use and limitations of the consensus diagnostic criteria, review current treatment strategies, and summarize long-term outcomes. We conclude with a synopsis of our most pressing gaps in knowledge, introduce recommendations for future directions, and highlight promising areas of active research.

Donor-specific antibodies in lung transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) after lung transplantation has been recognized as an important risk factor for poor outcomes over the past 20 years. Recently, this has been a focus of intense research, and the purpose of this review is to summarize our current understanding of humoral responses and important recent findings as well as to identify areas of future research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have identified donor-derived cell-free DNA (ddcfDNA) as an important biomarker associated with antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). Importantly, ddcfDNA levels are noted to be elevated approximately 3 months before the onset of clinical allograft dysfunction, making ddcfDNA a particularly appealing biomarker to predict the onset of AMR. Additional notable recent findings include the identification of an independent association between the isolation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from respiratory specimens and the development of DSA. This finding provides potential insights into crosstalk between innate and alloimmune responses and identifies a potential therapeutic target to prevent the development of DSA.

SUMMARY

Progress in the field of humoral responses after lung transplantation has been slow, but ongoing and future research in this area are critically necessary to improve patient outcomes in the future.

A virtual crossmatch-based strategy for perioperative desensitisation in lung transplant recipients with preformed donor-specific antibodies: 3-year outcome

BACKGROUND

Preformed donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are associated with worse outcome after lung transplantation (LTx) and migvaht limit access to LTx. A virtual crossmatch (CXM)-based strategy for perioperative desensitisation protocol has been used for immunised LTx candidates since 2012 at Foch hospital. We compared the outcome of desensitised LTx candidates with high DSA mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) and those with low or no preformed DSAs, not desensitised.

METHODS

For all consecutive LTx recipients (January-2012/March-2018), freedom from CLAD and graft survival were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

We compared outcomes for desensitised patients with high preformed DSAs (n=39) and those with no (n=216) or low pre-formed DSAs (n=66). The desensitisation protocol decreased the level of immunodominant DSA (class I/II) at 1, 3, and 6 month post-LTx (p<0.001, p<0.01, p<0.001, respectively). Freedom from CLAD and graft survival at 3 years was similar in the desensitised group as a whole and other groups. Nevertheless, incidence of CLAD was higher with persistent high- than cleared high-level (p=0.044) or no DSAs (p=0.014). Conversely, graft survival was better with cleared high DSAs than persistent high-, low-level, and no pre-formed DSAs (p=0.019, p=0.025, and p=0.044, respectively). On multivariate analysis, graft survival was associated with cleared high DSAs (HR: 0.12 [95%CI: 0.02-0.85] versus no DSAs, p=0.035) and CLAD with persistent DSAs (HR: 3.04 [1.02-9.17] versus no preformed DSAs, p=0.048).

CONCLUSION

The desensitisation protocol in LTx recipients with high preformed DSAs was associated with satisfactory outcome, with cleared high pre-formed DSAs after desensitisation identified as an independent predictor of graft survival.

Clinical Outcomes of Lung Transplantation in the Presence of Donor-Specific Antibodies

Rationale: There is significant variation in approach to pre-lung transplant donor-specific antibodies (DSA), with some centers declining to cross any DSA. We implemented a protocol for transplantation for candidates with pretransplant DSA so long as a prospective complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch was negative, regardless of number, specificity, class, or mean fluorescence intensity.Objectives: To compare post-transplant outcomes including overall survival, chronic lung allograft dysfunction-free survival, antibody-mediated rejection, and acute cellular rejection in lung transplant recipients where pretransplant DSA was and was not present.Methods: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. For recipients with pretransplant DSA, if the prospective complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch was negative, the donor offer was accepted and plasmapheresis was performed within 24 hours of transplantation and continued until retrospective crossmatch results returned. Immunosuppression and post-transplant management were not otherwise modified.Results: Of the 203 included recipients, 18 (8.9%) had pretransplant DSA. The median DSA mean fluorescence intensity was 4,000 (interquartile range, 2,975-5,625; total range, 2,100-17,000). The median number of DSA present per patient was one (interquartile range, 1-2). The presence of pretransplant DSA was not associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-3.4) or decreased chronic lung allograft dysfunction-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-2.1). Recipients with pretransplant DSA were more likely to require prolonged mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 7.0; 95% CI, 2.3-21.6) and to have antibody-mediated rejection requiring treatment (adjusted odds ratio, 7.5; 95% CI, 1.0-55.8).Conclusions: A protocol of accepting donor offers for lung transplant candidates with preformed, complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch-negative DSA is associated with increased need for prolonged mechanical ventilation and antibody-mediated rejection without affecting short-term overall or chronic lung allograft dysfunction-free survival.

The impact of HLA-DR mismatch status on retransplant-free survival and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome‒free survival among sensitized lung transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Donor‒recipient HLA-DR locus matching may be protective against bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) in lung transplant recipients. It is unknown whether this benefit is more significant among sensitized (calculated panel reactive antibodies (CPRAs) of >0%) and highly sensitized (CPRAs of ≥80%) recipients who may be at a higher risk for BOS.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adults in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients who underwent lung transplantation between May 5, 2005 and May 31, 2019. Retransplant-free survival and BOS-free survival were compared among recipients with 0 vs ≥1 DR mismatches, grouped according to sensitization.

RESULTS

Among all 20,355 included recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was associated with improved retransplant-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.74-0.93, p = 0.002) and BOS-free survival (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.77-0.96, p = 0.007). Among sensitized recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was also associated with improved retransplant-free survival (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.65-0.97, p = 0.02) and BOS-free survival (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.67-1.00, p = 0.04). There was however no difference in retransplant-free or BOS-free survival between sensitized and non-sensitized recipients with 0 DR mismatches. Among highly sensitized recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was not associated with retransplant-free or BOS-free survival. Among sensitized and highly sensitized recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was not associated with reduced use of plasmapheresis or reduced biopsy-proven, treated acute cellular rejection compared with non-sensitized recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

HLA-DR matching is associated with a similar improvement in retransplant-free and BOS-free survival among non-sensitized and sensitized lung transplant recipients. DR matching does not confer a more substantial retransplant-free or BOS-free survival benefit to highly sensitized recipients than to non-sensitized recipients.

Developments in lung transplantation over the past decade

With an improved median survival of 6.2 years, lung transplantation has become an increasingly acceptable treatment option for end-stage lung disease. Besides survival benefit, improvement of quality of life is achieved in the vast majority of patients. Many developments have taken place in the field of lung transplantation over the past decade. Broadened indication criteria and bridging techniques for patients awaiting lung transplantation have led to increased waiting lists and changes in allocation schemes worldwide. Moreover, the use of previously unacceptable donor lungs for lung transplantation has increased, with donations from donors after cardiac death, donors with increasing age and donors with positive smoking status extending the donor pool substantially. Use of ex vivo lung perfusion further increased the number of lungs suitable for lung transplantation. Nonetheless, the use of these previously unacceptable lungs did not have detrimental effects on survival and long-term graft outcomes, and has decreased waiting list mortality. To further improve long-term outcomes, strategies have been proposed to modify chronic lung allograft dysfunction progression and minimise toxic immunosuppressive effects. This review summarises the developments in clinical lung transplantation over the past decade.

Many developments have taken place in lung transplantation over the last decade: indications have broadened, donor criteria expanded, allocations systems changed, and novel therapeutic interventions implemented, leading to improved long-term survivalhttp://bit.ly/2vnpwc1

Perspectives on donor lung allocation from both sides of the Atlantic: The United States

Donor lung allocation in the United States focuses on decreasing waitlist mortality and improving recipient outcomes. The implementation of allocation policy to match deceased donor lungs to waitlisted patients occurs through a unique partnership between government and private organizations, namely the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network under the Department of Health and Human Services and the United Network for Organ Sharing. In 2005, the donor lung allocation algorithm shifted toward the prioritization of medical urgency of waitlisted patients instead of time accrued on the waitlist. This led to the Lung Allocation Score, which weighs over a dozen clinical variables to predict a 1-year estimate of survival benefit, and is used to prioritize waitlisted patients. In 2017, the use of local allocation boundaries was eliminated in favor of a 250 nautical mile radius from the donor hospital as the first unit of distance used in allocation. The next upcoming iteration of donor allocation policy is expected to use a continuous distribution algorithm where all geographic boundaries are eliminated. There are additional opportunities to improve donor lung allocation, such as for patients with high antibody titers with access to a limited number of donors.

Increased Calculated Panel Reactive Antigen Is Associated With Increased Waitlist Time and Mortality in Lung Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Sensitized candidates with unacceptable antigens are a group that demands special attention in organ transplantation. Calculated panel reactive antigen (cPRA) is not used to modify allocation priorities in lung transplantation. The impact of cPRA on waiting list time and mortality is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of candidates for lung transplantation listed from May 2005 to 2018. Data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing STAR (Standard Analysis and Research) dataset was paired with additional unacceptable human leukocyte antigen (UA-HLA) data, which were used to calculate the listing cPRA. Candidates were stratified based on the lack of UA-HLAs or cPRA level for candidates with unacceptable antigens reported. Unadjusted competing risks and adjusted subdistribution hazard models were fit.

RESULTS

A total of 29,085 candidates met inclusion criteria for analysis. Of these, 23,562 (81%) with no UA-HLAs, 3472 (11.9%) with a cPRA less than 50, and 2051 with a cPRA greater than or equal to 50 (7.1%). On adjusted analysis, a cPRA greater than or equal to 50 was independently associated with increased waitlist mortality at 1 year (hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-1.88; P < .001) and decreased rate of transplantation (71.9% vs 69.5% vs 44.4%; P < .001). Furthermore, patients with a cPRA greater than or equal to 50 had a longer waitlist time compared with a cPRA less than 50 and no UA-HLA candidates (mean 293.69 days vs 162.38 days and 143.26 days, respectively; P < .001). However, once transplanted, posttransplant survival among the cohorts was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Further evaluation of organ allocation with consideration of a candidate's cPRA may be warranted in order to optimize equity in access to transplants.

Lung transplantation: a review of the optimal strategies for referral and patient selection

One of the great challenges of lung transplantation is to bridge the dichotomy between supply and demand of donor organs so that the maximum number of potential recipients achieve a meaningful benefit in improvements in survival and quality of life. To achieve this laudable goal is predicated on choosing candidates who are sufficiently unwell, in fact possessing a terminal respiratory illness, but otherwise fit and able to undergo major surgery and a prolonged recuperation and rehabilitation stage combined with ongoing adherence to complex medical therapies. The choice of potential candidate and the timing of that referral is at times perhaps more art than science, but there are a number of solid guidelines for specific illnesses to assist the interested clinician. In this regard, the relationship between the referring clinician and the lung transplant unit is a critical one. It is an ongoing and dynamic process of education and two way communication, which is a marker of the professionalism of a highly performing unit. Lung transplantation is ultimately a team effort where the recipient is the key player. That principle has been enshrined in the three consensus position statements regarding selection criteria for lung and heart-lung transplantation promulgated by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation over the last two decades. During this period, the number of indications for lung transplantation have broadened and the number of contraindications reduced. Risk management is paramount in the pre- and perioperative period to effect early successful outcomes. While it is not the province of this review to reiterate the detailed listing of those factors, an overview position will be developed that describes the rationale and evidence for selected criteria where that exists. Importantly, the authors will attempt to provide an historical and experiential basis for making these important and life-determining decisions.

The reviews of this paper are available via the supplementary material section.

Impact, Screening, and Therapy of HLA Antibodies in Patients before and after Lung Transplantation

Since almost 30 years, lung transplantation is a considerable therapeutic option in patients suffering from end-stage lung disease. Up to now, the impact of donor-specific antibodies directed against donor HLA (human leukocyte antigen) before and after transplantation is still a matter of debate. As histocompatibility testing is not required for each patient according to the current national guidelines and Eurotransplant recommendations for lung transplantation, each transplantation unit has to establish a local protocol together with the tissue typing laboratory how to implement an immunological risk assessment strategy for their patients while enabling access to transplantation. Desensitization regimens might help in case of highly alloimmunized patients waiting for urgent transplantation.

Effect of Calculated Panel Reactive Antibody Value on Waitlist Outcomes for Lung Transplant Candidates

Background

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) data to determine the effect of the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) value on waitlist outcomes for lung transplant candidates.

Material/Methods

We divided lung transplant candidates into groups based on their cPRA value at the time of waitlist activation (0–25%, 25.1–50%, 50.1–75%, and 75.1–100%) and compared each group’s waitlist outcomes to the lowest quartile (“minimally sensitized”) group. The primary outcome was lung transplantation and the secondary outcome was waitlist mortality (a composite of death on the waitlist/delisting for clinical deterioration).

Results

Compared to the minimally sensitized group, candidates with a cPRA value of 25.1–50% did not have a significantly different likelihood of undergoing lung transplant or waitlist mortality, candidates with a cPRA value of 50.1–75% were 25% less likely to undergo lung transplant and 44% more likely to die on the waitlist, and candidates with a cPRA value of 75.1–100% were 52% less likely to undergo lung transplant and 92% more likely to die on the waitlist.

Conclusions

CPRA values of greater than 50% are associated with significantly lower rates of transplantation and higher waitlist mortality.

Does the Canadian allocation system for highly sensitized patients work?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The number of sensitized heart transplant candidates is rising. Highly sensitized patients are disadvantaged because they encounter longer waiting times to heart transplant. Strategies to reduce their waiting times include waitlist prioritization and desensitization therapies. The purpose of this review is to describe the listing category for highly sensitized patients in the Canadian allocation system, examine the advantages and limitations of this strategy and provide an approach to the management of the highly sensitized patient awaiting heart transplant.

RECENT FINDINGS

Analysis of data from the United Network of Organ Sharing shows that the incidence of death or removal from the waitlist in patients listed for heart transplant increases as the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) increases and is independent of medical urgency. In the Canadian allocation system, patients with cPRA more than 80% have a similar incidence of death on the waitlist as less sensitized patients, suggesting they survive to be transplanted. Furthermore, prioritizing and transplanting highly sensitized patients has been associated with acceptable post-transplant outcomes.

SUMMARY

The Canadian allocation system prioritizes highly sensitized patients to increase equity and access to transplantation while maintaining good post-transplant outcomes. Not all highly sensitized patients can wait for an organ, even if prioritized. A pragmatic individualized approach would consider the medical stability of the patient, the likelihood of transplant with a negative crossmatch and then determine whether waitlist prioritization or desensitization is the more appropriate strategy.