Humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in kidney transplant recipients and dialysis patients: IgA and IgG patterns unraveled after SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Infection with SARS-CoV-2 in high-risk groups such as kidney transplant and dialysis patients is shown to be associated with a more serious course of the disease. Four years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, crucial knowledge on the immune responses in these patient groups is still lacking. Therefore, this study aimed at investigating the humoral immune response after a SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to vaccination as well as the evolution of immunoglobulins over time. METHODS: Kidney transplant recipients, patients on haemodialysis or on peritoneal dialysis and healthy controls were included in this longitudinal multicenter study. SARS-CoV-2 anti-RBD, anti-NP and anti-S1S2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and A (IgA) as well as the neutralizing antibody capacity were measured. RESULTS: Kidney transplant recipients had a significantly better humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 after infection (86.4%) than after a two-dose mRNA vaccination (55.8%) while seroconversion was comparable in patients on haemodialysis after infection (95.8%) versus vaccination (89.4%). In individuals without prior COVID-19, the IgG levels after vaccination were significantly lower in kidney transplant recipients when compared to all other groups. However, the IgA titres remained the highest in this patient group at each time point, both after infection and vaccination. A history COVID-19 was associated with higher antibody levels after double-dose vaccination in all patient categories and, while decreasing, titres remained high six months after double-dose vaccination. CONCLUSION: Kidney transplant recipients had a more robust humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 following infection compared to a two-dose mRNA vaccination, while patients on haemodialysis exhibited comparable seroconversion rates. Notably, individuals with prior COVID-19 exhibited higher IgG levels in response to vaccination. Hybrid immunity is thus the best possible defence against severe COVID-19 disease and seems also to hold up for these populations. Next, it is not clear whether the higher IgA levels in the kidney transplant recipients is beneficial for neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 or if it is a sign of disease severity.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is not associated with the induction of anti-HLA or non-HLA antibodies.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is strongly recommended in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) and dialysis patients. Whether these vaccinations may trigger alloantibodies, is still debated. METHODS: In the current study we evaluated the effect of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines on anti-Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) and 60 anti-non-HLA antibody profiles in clinically stable KTR and dialysis patients. In total, we included 28 KTR, 30 patients on haemodialysis, 25 patients on peritoneal dialysis and 31 controls with a positive seroresponse 16-21 days after the first dose of either the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine. Both anti-HLA and anti-non-HLA antibodies were determined prior to vaccination and 21 to 35 days after the second vaccine dose. RESULTS: Overall, the proportion of patients with detectable anti-HLA antibodies was similar before and after vaccination (class I 14% vs. 16%, p = 0.48; class II 25% before and after vaccination). After vaccination, there was no pattern in 1) additionally detected anti-HLA antibodies, or 2) the levels of pre-existing ones. Additional anti-non-HLA antibodies were detected in 30% of the patients, ranging from 1 to 5 new anti-non-HLA antibodies per patient. However, the clinical significance of anti-non-HLA antibodies is still a matter of debate. To date, only a significant association has been found for anti-non-HLA ARHGDIB antibodies and long-term kidney graft loss. No additionally developed anti-ARHGDIB antibodies or elevated level of existing anti-ARHGDIB antibodies was observed. CONCLUSION: The current data indicate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination does not induce anti-HLA or anti-non-HLA antibodies, corroborating the importance of vaccinating KTR and dialysis patients.

Donor-derived cell-free DNA as a biomarker for rejection after kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to investigate the value of donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) as a noninvasive biomarker in diagnosing kidney allograft rejection. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for original research papers published between January 1994 and May 2020 on dd-cfDNA fractions in blood of kidney allograft recipients. A single-group meta-analysis was performed by computing pooled estimates for dd-cfDNA fractions using the weighted median of medians or quantile estimation (QE) approach. Weighted median differences in medians (WMDMs) and median differences based on the QE method were used for pairwise comparisons. Despite heterogeneity among the selected studies, the meta-analysis revealed significantly higher median dd-cfDNA fractions in patients with antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) than patients without rejection or patients with stable graft function. When comparing patients with T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and patients with ABMR, our two statistical approaches revealed conflicting results. Patients with TCMR did not have different median dd-cfDNA fractions than patients without rejection or patients with stable graft function. dd-cfDNA may be a useful marker for ABMR, but probably not for TCMR.