Complex Linkage Disequilibrium Effects in HLA-DPB1 Expression and Molecular Mismatch Analyses of Transplantation Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: HLA molecular mismatch (MM) is a risk factor for de novo donor-specific antibody (dnDSA) development in solid organ transplantation. HLA expression differences have also been associated with adverse outcomes in hematopoietic cell transplantation. We sought to study both MM and expression in assessing dnDSA risk. METHODS: One hundred three HLA-DP-mismatched solid organ transplantation pairs were retrospectively analyzed. MM was computed using amino acids (aa), eplets, and, supplementarily, Grantham/Epstein scores. DPB1 alleles were classified as rs9277534-A (low-expression) or rs9277534-G (high-expression) linked. To determine the associations between risk factors and dnDSA, logistic regression, linkage disequilibrium (LD), and population-based analyses were performed. RESULTS: A high-risk AA:GX (recipient:donor) expression combination (X = A or G) demonstrated strong association with HLA-DP dnDSA (P = 0.001). MM was also associated with HLA-DP dnDSA when evaluated by itself (eplet P = 0.007, aa P = 0.003, Grantham P = 0.005, Epstein P = 0.004). When attempting to determine the relative individual effects of the risk factors in multivariable analysis, only AA:GX expression status retained a strong association (relative risk = 18.6, P = 0.007 with eplet; relative risk = 15.8, P = 0.02 with aa), while MM was no longer significant (eplet P = 0.56, aa P = 0.51). Importantly, these risk factors are correlated, due to LD between the expression-tagging single-nucleotide polymorphism and polymorphisms along HLA-DPB1. CONCLUSIONS: The MM and expression risk factors each appear to be strong predictors of HLA-DP dnDSA and to possess clinical utility; however, these two risk factors are closely correlated. These metrics may represent distinct ways of characterizing a common overlapping dnDSA risk profile, but they are not independent. Further, we demonstrate the importance and detailed implications of LD effects in dnDSA risk assessment and possibly transplantation overall.

Assessing the utilization of high-resolution 2-field HLA typing in solid organ transplantation.

HLA typing in solid organ transplantation (SOT) is necessary for determining HLA-matching status between donor-recipient pairs and assessing patients' anti-HLA antibody profiles. Histocompatibility has traditionally been evaluated based on serologically defined HLA antigens. The evolution of HLA typing and antibody identification technologies, however, has revealed many limitations with using serologic equivalents for assessing compatibility in SOT. The significant improvements to HLA typing introduced by next-generation sequencing (NGS) require an assessment of the impact of this technology on SOT. We have assessed the role of high-resolution 2-field HLA typing (HR-2F) in SOT by retrospectively evaluating NGS-typed pre- and post-SOT cases. HR-2F typing was highly instructive or necessary in 41% (156/385) of the cases. Several pre- and posttransplant scenarios were identified as being better served by HR-2F typing. Five different categories are presented with specific case examples. The experience of another center (Temple University Hospital) is also included, whereby 21% of the cases required HR-2F typing by Sanger sequencing, as supported by other legacy methods, to properly address posttransplant anti-HLA antibody issues.

EpHLA software: a timesaving and accurate tool for improving identification of acceptable mismatches for clinical purposes.

UNLABELLED: The HLAMatchmaker algorithm, which allows the identification of "safe" acceptable mismatches (AMMs) for recipients of solid organ and cell allografts, is rarely used in part due to the difficulty in using it in the current Excel format. The automation of this algorithm may universalize its use to benefit the allocation of allografts. Recently, we have developed a new software called EpHLA, which is the first computer program automating the use of the HLAMatchmaker algorithm. Herein, we present the experimental validation of the EpHLA program by showing the time efficiency and the quality of operation. The same results, obtained by a single antigen bead assay with sera from 10 sensitized patients waiting for kidney transplants, were analyzed either by conventional HLAMatchmaker or by automated EpHLA method. Users testing these two methods were asked to record: (i) time required for completion of the analysis (in minutes); (ii) number of eplets obtained for class I and class II HLA molecules; (iii) categorization of eplets as reactive or non-reactive based on the MFI cutoff value; and (iv) determination of AMMs based on eplets' reactivities. We showed that although both methods had similar accuracy, the automated EpHLA method was over 8 times faster in comparison to the conventional HLAMatchmaker method. In particular the EpHLA software was faster and more reliable but equally accurate as the conventional method to define AMMs for allografts. CONCLUSION: The EpHLA software is an accurate and quick method for the identification of AMMs and thus it may be a very useful tool in the decision-making process of organ allocation for highly sensitized patients as well as in many other applications.