Early clearance vs persistence of de novo donor-specific antibodies following lung transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The natural history of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) after lung transplantation is not well-described. We sought to determine the incidence and risk factors associated with dnDSA and compare outcomes between recipients with transient (or isolated) vs persistent dnDSA after transplantation. METHODS: A single-center review of all lung transplants from 1/2009-7/2013. DSAs were tested eight times in the first year and every 4 months thereafter. Outcomes examined included acute rejection and graft failure. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 18 months (range: 1-61 months), and 24.6% of 333 first-time lung-only transplant recipients developed a dnDSA. Ethnicity, HLA-DQ mismatches, post-transplantation platelet transfusion and Lung Allocation Score >60 were associated with dnDSA (P<.05). Overall graft survival was worse for dnDSA-positive vs negative recipients (P=.025). Of 323 recipients with 1-year follow-up, 72 (22.2%) developed dnDSA, and in 25 (34.7%), the dnDSA was transient and cleared. Recipients with transient dnDSA were less likely to develop acute rejection than those with persistent dnDSA (P=.007). CONCLUSIONS: Early post-lung transplantation, dnDSA occurred in 1/4 of recipients, was associated with peri-transplant risk factors and resulted in decreased survival. Spontaneous clearance of dnDSA, seen in one-third of recipients, was associated with a lower risk of acute rejection.

The detrimental impact of persistent vs an isolated occurrence of de novo donor-specific antibodies on intermediate-term renal transplant outcomes.

BACKGROUND: De novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) after renal transplant are associated with acute rejection (AR) and graft loss, yet most recipients with dnDSA have stable function and no AR. We assessed whether the persistence of dnDSA increased the risk of a detrimental outcome. METHODS: A single-center review of renal transplant recipients monitored for dnDSA at multiple time points post-transplant. An Isolated dnDSA was defined as one positive dnDSA and no additional positive tests, whereas ≥2 positive dnDSA was defined as persistent dnDSA. RESULTS: Of 708 recipients, 22% developed dnDSA, of whom 64% had persistent dnDSA. At median follow-up of 35 (range 12-74) months, there were fewer episodes of AR in the isolated dnDSA vs the persistent dnDSA group (2% vs 22%; P<.001,) and fewer graft losses with isolated dnDSA vs persistent dnDSA (0% vs 10%; P=.03). Within the persistent dnDSA group, recipients with dnDSA ≥60% of time points, had more AR (32% vs 16%, P=.10) and more graft losses (21% vs 2%; P=.003) than those with dnDSA<60%. CONCLUSIONS: Persistence of dnDSA resulted in more AR and graft failure than a single positive value. Recipients with longer duration of dnDSA persistence had an additional increased risk of AR and graft failure.

Barriers to preemptive renal transplantation: a single center questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: Preemptive transplantation results in excellent patient and graft survival yet most transplant candidates are referred for transplantation after initiation of dialysis. The goal of this study was to determine barriers to preemptive renal transplantation. METHODS: A nonvalidated questionnaire was administered to prospective kidney transplant recipients to determine factors that hindered or favored referral for transplantation before the initiation of dialysis. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-seven subjects referred for a primary renal transplant completed the questionnaire. Ninety-one subjects (46%) had been informed of preemptive transplantation before referral, and 80 (41%) were predialysis at the time of evaluation. The median time from diagnosis of renal disease to referral was 60 months (range, 2-444 months). In bivariate analysis, among other factors, knowledge of preemptive transplantation was highly associated (odds ratio=94.69) with referral before initiation of dialysis. Given the strong association between knowledge of preemptive transplantation and predialysis referral, this variable was not included in the multivariate analysis. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, white recipient race, referral by a transplant nephrologist, recipient employment, and the diagnosis of polycystic kidney disease were significantly associated with presentation to the pretransplant clinic before initiation of dialysis. CONCLUSION: The principle barrier to renal transplantation referral before dialysis was patient education regarding the option of preemptive transplantation. Factors significantly associated with referral before dialysis were the diagnosis of polycystic kidney disease, white recipient race, referral by a transplant nephrologist, and employed status. Greater effort should be applied to patient education regarding preemptive transplantation early after the diagnosis of end-stage renal disease.

Intermediate-term graft loss after renal transplantation is associated with both donor-specific antibody and acute rejection.

BACKGROUND: Renal transplant recipients with de novo DSA (dDSA) experience higher rates of rejection and worse graft survival than dDSA-free recipients. This study presents a single-center review of dDSA monitoring in a large, multi-ethnic cohort of renal transplant recipients. METHODS: The authors performed a nested case-control study of adult kidney and kidney-pancreas recipients from July 2007 through July 2011. Cases were defined as dDSA-positive whereas controls were all DSA-negative transplant recipients. DSA were determined at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months posttransplant, and every 6 months thereafter. RESULTS: Of 503 recipients in the analysis, 24% developed a dDSA, of whom 73% had dDSA against DQ antigen. Median time to dDSA was 6.1 months (range 0.2-44.6 months). After multivariate analysis, African American race, kidney-pancreas recipient, and increasing numbers of human leukocyte antigen mismatches were independent risk factors for dDSA. Recipients with dDSA were more likely to suffer an acute rejection (AR) (35% vs. 10%, P<0.001), an antibody-mediated AR (16% vs. 0.3%, P<0.001), an AR ascribed to noncompliance (8% vs. 2%, P=0.001), and a recurrent AR (6% vs. 1%, P=0.002) than dDSA-negative recipients. At a median follow-up of 31 months, the death-censored actuarial graft survival of dDSA recipients was worse than the DSA-free cohort (P=0.002). Yet, for AR-free recipients, there was no difference in graft survival between cohorts (P=0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Development of dDSA was associated with an increased incidence of graft loss, yet the detrimental effect of dDSA was limited in the intermediate term to recipients with AR.

Screening for BK viremia reduces but does not eliminate the risk of BK nephropathy: a single-center retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study reviewed the outcomes of a screening protocol for BK viremia to determine if early diagnosis, followed by immunosuppression minimization, would prevent progression to nephropathy and graft loss. METHODS: This review included 369 renal transplant recipients tested for BK virus at serial time points after transplantation. Management included immunosuppression minimization plus cidofovir treatment for BK nephropathy. RESULTS: Recipients received tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, with 8% prednisone-free and 6% who received desensitization. With a mean follow-up of 22 ± 10 months, 16% (n = 57) of recipients became BK viremia positive. The median (range) time to diagnosis was 3 (1-17) months. Because renal biopsy was performed selectively, 59% of recipients underwent biopsy, with 47% showing BK nephropathy. Seventy-four percent of recipients cleared the virus at a median (range) time of 9 (3-33) months, with four grafts lost to BK nephropathy. Cidofovir-treated recipients displayed a higher viral load at diagnosis but showed equivalent renal function at last evaluation. In multivariate analysis, recipient age, Asian ethnicity, deceased donor, and prednisone use were factors independently associated with BK viremia. Actuarial survival of BK-positive grafts was worse than that of BK-negative grafts (P<0.01, log-rank test). At 9 and 12 months, the mean estimated glomerular filtration rate of the BK-positive group was lower than that of the BK-negative cohort (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Despite using a screening protocol combined with immunosuppression minimization, BK-positive recipients had a greater risk of graft loss and impaired function than recipients free of infection. Future investigations should focus on practices to prevent BK viremia.

Donor-specific HLA-DQ antibodies may contribute to poor graft outcome after renal transplantation.

Increasing evidence suggests a detrimental effect of donor-specific antibodies directed against the human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A, -B, and -DR loci on renal allograft outcomes. Limited data exist on the impact of de novo HLA-DQ antibodies. Over a 3-year period, we prospectively monitored 347 renal transplant recipients without pre-transplant donor-specific antibodies for their development de novo. After 26 months of follow-up, 62 patients developed donor-specific antibodies, of which 48 had a HLA-DQ antibody either alone (33 patients) or in combination with an HLA-A, -B, or -DR antibody (15 patients). Only 14 patients developed a donor-specific HLA-A, -B, or -DR antibody without a HLA-DQ antibody present. Acute rejection occurred in 21% of the HLA-DQ-only patients, insignificant when compared with 11% of patients without donor-specific antibodies. At the last follow-up, the mean serum creatinine and the fraction of patients with proteinuria were significantly higher in those that developed only HLA-DQ than those without antibodies. The 3-year graft survival was significantly worse when HLA-DQ antibodies were combined with non-DQ antibodies (52%) compared with HLA-DQ alone, non-DQ antibodies alone, or no antibodies (92-94%). Thus, our prospective monitoring study found that donor-specific HLA-DQ antibodies were the most common type detected and these antibodies may contribute to inferior graft outcomes. Ongoing surveillance is necessary to determine the long-term outcome of patients developing HLA-DQ donor-specific antibodies.