ABO blood group incompatibility: a diminishing barrier to successful kidney transplantation?

Preconditioning Therapy in ABO-Incompatible Living Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation is now an established form of renal replacement therapy, but the efficacy and safety of the different types of preconditioning therapies are unclear. We aimed to synthesize the totality of the published evidence about the effects of any form of preconditioning therapies in living donor ABOi kidney transplantation on graft and patient outcomes.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Clinicaltrial.gov databases (inception through June 2015) to identify all studies that described the outcomes of adult living donor ABOi kidney transplantations using any form of preconditioning therapies. Two independent reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Data were summarized using the random effects model, and heterogeneity was explored using subgroup analyses. We assessed confidence in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Eighty-three studies (54 case reports and case series, 25 cohort, 2 case-control, and 2 registry studies) involving 4810 ABOi transplant recipients were identified. Overall, confidence in the available evidence was low. During a mean follow-up time of 28 (standard deviation [SD], 26.6) months, the overall graft survival for recipients who received immunoadsorption or apheresis was 94.1% (95% confidence interval [95%CI], 88.2%-97.1%) and 88.0% (95% CI, 82.6%-91.8%), respectively. For those who received rituximab or underwent splenectomy, the overall graft survival was 94.5% (95% CI, 91.6%-96.5%) and 79.7% (95% CI, 72.9%-85.1%), respectively. Data on other longer-term outcomes, including malignancy, were sparse.

CONCLUSIONS

Rituximab or immunoadsorption appeared to be promising preconditioning strategies before ABOi kidney transplantation. However, the overall quality of evidence and the confidence in the observed treatment effects are low. The increased use of ABOi kidney transplantation needs to be matched with randomized trials of different types, dosing, and frequency of preconditioning therapies so that this scarce resource can be used most effectively and efficiently.

Modern approaches to incompatible kidney transplantation

The presence of human-leukocyte antigen (HLA)-antibodies and blood group incompatibility remain a large barrier to kidney transplantation leading to increased morbidity and mortality on the transplant waiting list. Over the last decade a number of new approaches were developed to overcome these barriers. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) remains the backbone of HLA desensitization therapy and has been shown in a prospective, randomized, placebo controlled trial to improve transplantation rates. Excellent outcomes with the addition of rituximab (anti-B cell) to IVIG based desensitization have been achieved. There is limited experience with bortezomib (anti-plasma cell) and eculizumab (complement inhibition) for desensitization. However, these agents may be good adjuncts for patients who are broadly sensitized with strong, complement-fixing HLA antibodies. Excellent short and long-term outcomes have been achieved in ABO incompatible transplantation with the combination of antibody removal, B cell depletion, and pre-transplant immunosuppression. Kidney paired donation has emerged as a reasonable alternative for programs who cannot provide desensitization or in conjunction with desensitization. Future therapies directed toward cytokines that alter B cell proliferation are under investigation.

Intravenous immunoglobulins in liver transplant patients: Perspectives of clinical immune modulation

Shortage of appropriate donor grafts is the foremost current problem in organ transplantation. As a logical consequence, waiting times have extended and pretransplant mortality rates were significantly increasing. The implementation of a priority-based liver allocation system using the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score helped to reduce waiting list mortality in liver transplantation (LT). However, due to an escalating organ scarcity, pre-LT MELD scores have significantly increased and liver recipients became more complex in recent years. This has finally led to posttransplant decreasing survival rates, attributed mainly to elevated rates of infectious and immunologic complications. To meet this challenging development, an increasing number of extended criteria donor grafts are currently accepted, which may, however, aggravate the patients’ infectious and immunologic risk profiles. The administration of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) is an established treatment in patients with immune deficiencies and other antibody-mediated diseases. In addition, IVIg was shown to be useful in treatment of several disorders caused by deterioration of the cellular immune system. It proved to be effective in preventing hyperacute rejection in highly sensitized kidney and heart transplants. In the liver transplant setting, the administration of specific Ig against hepatitis B virus is current standard in post-LT antiviral prophylaxis. The mechanisms of action of IVIg are complex and not fully understood. However, there is increasing experimental and clinical evidence that IVIg has an immuno-balancing impact by a combination of immuno-supporting and immuno-suppressive properties. It may be suggested that, especially in the context of a worsening organ shortage with all resulting clinical implications, liver transplant patients should benefit from immuno-regulatory capabilities of IVIg. In this review, perspectives of immune modulation by IVIg and impact on outcome in liver transplant patients are described.

Case report: Eculizumab rescue of severe accelerated antibody-mediated rejection after ABO-incompatible kidney transplant

ABO-incompatible (ABOI) living donor kidney transplantation has become a well-accepted practice with standard protocols using perioperative antibody-depleting therapies to lower blood group titers to an acceptable threshold for transplantation. However, a subset of patients will experience accelerated antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) after ABOI kidney transplantation and require aggressive intervention to prevent allograft loss. Here in we report the successful use of terminal complement inhibition with eculizumab to rescue an ABOI kidney allograft with accelerated AMR refractory to salvage splenectomy and daily plasmapheresis. This case emphasizes the fact that, despite close postoperative surveillance and aggressive intervention, graft loss from accelerated AMR after ABOI kidney transplantation remains a very real risk. Eculizumab may offer a graft-saving therapeutic option for isolated cases of severe AMR after ABOI kidney transplantation refractory to standard treatment.

Infectious complications in kidney-transplant recipients desensitized with rituximab and intravenous immunoglobulin

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Rituximab and intravenous Ig (IVIG) are commonly used for desensitization of HLA and blood group-incompatible (ABOi) transplants. However, serious infections have been noted in association with rituximab administration. In this study, we retrospectively compared infectious outcomes in those who received rituximab plus IVIG for HLA or ABOi transplants (RIT group) with a group of nonsensitized, ABO-compatible transplant recipients (non-RIT group).

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Patients undergoing kidney transplantation at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center were included in the analysis. A total of 361 patients were identified. All received antimicrobial prophylaxis and viral surveillance. The primary outcome was infection.

RESULTS

Overall patient survival was 97 and 96%, and graft survival was 91 and 89% in the RIT and non-RIT groups, respectively, after an average follow-up of 18 months. There were equal rates of bacterial (34.7% versus 39.1%), viral (21.8% versus 25.1%), fungal (5.9% versus 5.2%), and serious infections (22.9% versus 25.5%) in the RIT and non-RIT groups respectively. Urinary tract infection was the most common infection, accounting for 50% of all bacterial infections. Cytomegalovirus viremia was nonsignificantly more common in the nonrituximab-treated group (15.2% versus 10%), whereas BK viremia was marginally more frequent in the rituximab-treated group (10.6% versus 5.8%). There were no graft losses caused by BK-associated nephropathy. There were two deaths in each group related to infection (1%).

CONCLUSION

Rituximab does not increase infection risk when used with intravenous Ig for desensitization.