Eplet mismatches associated with de novo donor-specific HLA antibody in pediatric kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing amino acid (eplet) histocompatibility at first transplant decreases the risk of de novo donor-specific antibody (dnDSA) development and may improve long-term graft survival in pediatric kidney transplant recipients (KTR). We performed a retrospective analysis of pediatric KTR and their respective donors to identify eplets most commonly associated with dnDSA formation. METHODS: Eplet mismatch analysis was performed in a cohort of 125 pediatric KTR-donor pairs (2006-2018). We determined the prevalence of each eplet mismatch and quantified the percentage of exposed patients who developed dnDSA for each mismatched eplet. RESULTS: Recipient median age was 14 (IQR 8-17) years with a racial distribution of 42% Black, 48% Caucasian, and 5.6% Middle-Eastern. Median eplet load varied significantly by recipient race, Black 82 (IQR 58-98), White 60 (IQR 44-81) and Other 66 (IQR 61-76), p = 0.002. Forty-four percent of patients developed dnDSA after median 37.1 months. Compared to dnDSA- patients, dnDSA+ patients had higher median eplet load, 64 (IQR 46-83) vs. 77 (IQR 56-98), p = 0.012. The most common target of dnDSA were eplets expressed in HLA-A*11 and A2 in Class I, and HLA-DQ6 and DQA5 in Class II. The most commonly mismatched eplets were not the most likely to result in dnDSA formation. CONCLUSIONS: In a racially diverse population, only a subset of eplets was linked to antibody formation. Eplet load alone is not a sufficient surrogate for eplet immunogenicity. These findings illustrate the need to optimize precision in donor selection and allocation to improve long-term graft outcomes. Graphical Abstract A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Correction to: Eplet mismatch analysis and allograft outcome across racially diverse groups in a pediatric transplant cohort: a single-center analysis.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. In the third paragraph of "Discussion," two references were missing.

Eplet mismatch analysis and allograft outcome across racially diverse groups in a pediatric transplant cohort: a single-center analysis.

HLA eplet mismatch load has been suggested as an improvement to HLA antigen mismatch determination for organ selection. Given that eplet mismatches are determined based on amino acid sequence difference among HLA alleles, and that the frequency of HLA alleles varies between racial groups, we investigated the correlation between eplet mismatch load and allograft outcomes in 110 pediatric kidney transplant recipients who received their first organ from a donor of the same race (SRT) versus a donor of a different race (DRT). Adjusted modified Poisson regression was used to assess the interaction between eplet mismatch load and race mismatch and its effect on outcome. Caucasians and living donor recipients had lower eplet mismatched loads against their donors compared with non-Caucasian and deceased donor recipients. Overall, for the entire population, the risk of de novo HLA-DSA development was significantly increased with higher eplet loads (p < 0.001). Compared with the SRT group, the DRT group had higher eplet loads when compared with their donor, for HLA class I but not HLA class II molecules; however, there was no significant difference in the incidence of de novo HLA-DSA between the 2 groups. The risk of rejection increased significantly for DRT compared with SRT, only when class I eplet load was ≥ 70 (p = 0.04). Together this data show that eplet mismatch load analysis is an effective tool for alloimmune risk assessment. If considered for donor selection, acceptable eplet mismatch loads determined from studies in homogenous populations may restrict transplantation across racially diverse donor and patient groups with no evidence of poor outcome. Therefore, an acceptable eplet mismatch load threshold must consider the heterogeneity of the transplant population.

Non-HLA antibodies in transplantation: when do they matter?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A growing interest in the contribution of non-human leukocyte antigens (non-HLA) antibodies to allograft rejection has led to the identification of multiple target antigens and investigation into the possible mechanisms of injury. Although several non-HLA antibody specificities have been identified, the largest cohorts studied are those detected using commercial assays. This review focuses on the phenotypes of injury associated with non-HLA antibody and defines in-vivo environmental characteristics that may be conducive to non-HLA antibody-mediated injury. RECENT FINDINGS: Mechanistic studies in animal models and clinical data suggest that an inflammatory environment, increased antigen expression, and development of neoantigens through posttranslational modifications contribute to non-HLA antibody development and their subsequent contribution to allograft injury. Furthermore, many reports show worse outcomes when HLA and non-HLA antibodies are present, suggesting possible interactions between these antibodies that lead to increased injury. Plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin are currently used to reduce HLA and non-HLA antibodies; however, therapeutic strategies targeting B cells and plasma cells simultaneously may lead to more durable antibody elimination. SUMMARY: Immune triggers that lead to non-HLA antibody formation are complex and poorly understood. The ability of non-HLA antibodies to mediate allograft injury may depend upon their specificity and affinity, density of the target antigen, and synergy with HLA antibodies.

Successful A2 to O Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Transplantation in the Setting of Pre-operative Positive HLA Crossmatch: A Case Report.

Simultaneous liver and kidney transplantation (SLKT) is possible for patients with high donor-specific HLA antibodies or with A2 donors to O recipients with high A2 titers. We report the first case of SLKT in a highly sensitized O recipient with organs from an A2 donor. The recipient is a 59-year-old woman with chronic kidney disease and liver failure due to autoimmune hepatitis and drug-induced liver injury. Immune work-up 8 days pre-transplant demonstrated a negative crossmatch and no HLA antibody (calculated panel reactive antibodies = 0%). Anti-A2 IgG levels were 512. The donor was a deceased 24-year-old man. One day before transplantation, serum from the recipient showed a significant increase in antibody reactivity (calculated panel reactive antibodies = 100%) attributable to blood product transfusion and memory response from previous pregnancies. Consequently, a crossmatch was positive for T and B cells with two newly detected HLA antibodies against the donor's antigens. On the day of surgery, the liver was transplanted first. Six hours and 37 minutes later, a repeat flow crossmatch was negative; donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) fell below the positive threshold, and anti-A2 IgG titer fell to 256. Thus, the kidney was transplanted after basiliximab induction therapy. Seven days post-transplant, non-donor-specific HLA antibodies were present but DSAs remain negative. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 57 with no signs of rejection at 4 months. This case illustrates a rapid and prolonged reduction in antibody titers (HLA and ABO) after SLKT. SLKT is feasible in patients with both DSA and high anti-A2 titer.

Utilizing proficiency testing survey data to create advanced educational content: the virtual crossmatch challenge model.

Proficiency testing (PT) surveys include data from laboratories across the world and are ideal for creating advanced educational content, beyond just consensus grading. Educational challenges provide a unique opportunity to probe common laboratory practices and risk assessment, especially in cases where there is no "analyte" tested. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) compatibility evaluation between donor and recipient pairs has been traditionally assessed using T-cell and B-cell physical crossmatches. However, advancements in our ability to identify and characterize HLA antibodies using solid phase assays, in combination with changing deceased donor allocation schemes and improved HLA typing, have shifted the paradigm from performing physical crossmatches to the use of the virtual crossmatch (VXM). VXM is a compatibility assessment relying on the interpretation of pre-transplant HLA laboratory data and as such, it is not an "analyte". However, VXM results are used in clinical decision-making. The VXM assessment depends on patient characteristics as well as laboratory and transplant center practices but must ensure safe transplantation outcomes while maintaining equity in access to transplantation. In this manuscript, we describe the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics (ASHI) PT Educational VXM Challenge, as a model for creating educational content using PT survey data. We discuss the different components of the VXM Challenge and highlight major findings and learning points acquired from ASHI VXM Challenges performed between 2018-2022, such as the lack of correlation between the VXM and the physical crossmatch in the presence of low level donor-specific antibodies (DSA), or when the DSA were aimed against donor alleles that are not present on the antibody panel, and in the presence of an antibody to a shared eplet. Finally, we show that the VXM Educational Challenge serves as a valuable tool to highlight the strengths and pitfalls of the VXM assessment and reveals differences in testing and result interpretation among participating HLA laboratories.

Current donor selection strategies for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Since the first allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) was performed by Dr. E. Donnall Thomas in 1957, the field has advanced with new stem cell sources, immune suppressive regimens, and transplant protocols. Stem cells may be collected from bone marrow, peripheral or cord blood from an identical twin, a sibling, or a related or unrelated donor, which can be human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matched, mismatched, or haploidentical. Although HLA matching is one of the most important criteria for successful allogeneic HCT (allo-HCT) to minimize graft vs host disease (GVHD), prevent relapse, and improve overall survival, the novel immunosuppressive protocols for GVHD prophylaxis offered improved outcomes in haploidentical HCT (haplo-HCT), expanding donor availability for the majority of HCT candidates. These immunosuppressive protocols are currently being tested with the HLA-matched and mismatched donors to improve HCT outcomes further. In addition, fine-tuning the DPB1 mismatching and discovering the B leader genotype and mismatching may offer further optimization of donor selection and transplant outcomes. While the decision about a donor type largely depends on the patient's characteristics, disease status, and the transplant protocols utilized by an individual transplant center, there are general approaches to donor selection dictated by donor-recipient histocompatibility and the urgency for HCT. This review highlights recent advances in understanding critical factors in donor selection strategies for allo-HCT. It uses clinical vignettes to demonstrate the importance of making timely decisions for HCT candidates.

Presentation and Outcomes of Antibody-Mediated Rejection Associated With Angiotensin II Receptor 1 Antibodies Among Kidney Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: It remains challenging to manage antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) associated with angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies (AT1R-Abs) in kidney transplant recipients and the outcomes are not well defined. We describe the presentation, clinical course, and outcomes of this condition. METHODS: This retrospective study included kidney transplant recipients with AT1R-Ab levels ≥10 units/mL and biopsy-proven ABMR in the absence of significant HLA-donor-specific antibodies at the time of rejection. RESULTS: We identified 13 recipients. Median creatinine (Cr) at rejection was significantly higher (2.05 mg/dL) compared with baseline (1.2 mg/dL), P = .006. After ABMR management, the difference in median Cr was not significant (1.5 mg/dL), P = .152. Median AT1R-Ab level was higher in the pretransplant sample (34.5 units/mL) compared with the level at rejection (19 units/mL) and after rejection treatment (13 units/mL); however, these differences were not significant, P = .129. Eight of the 13 recipients received antibody reduction therapy with plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin, and 5 of the 13 recipients had other therapies. After rejection management, 6 of the 13 recipients had improvement in Cr to baseline and 7 of the 13 recipients had > 50% reduction in proteinuria. CONCLUSIONS: AT1R-Ab-associated ABMR management and outcomes depend on the clinical presentation and may include antibody-reducing therapies among other therapies. Further prospective cohorts will improve recognizing and managing this condition.

Prevalence of Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Antibodies in Persons With Hypertension and Relation to Blood Pressure and Medication.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the prevalence of antibodies against angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1RAb) in hypertensive adults and elucidate the relation of antihypertensive medication type to blood pressure (BP) among persons with and without AT1RAb. METHODS: Sera from participants in the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Life Span (HANDLS) study with hypertension were tested for AT1RAb using a commercial Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (One Lambda; positive ≥17 units/ml). BP measurements, uncontrolled BP (systolic BP ≥140 and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg), and effect of BP medication type were compared for AT1RAb positive (+) vs. negative (-) participants using descriptive statistics and multivariable regression. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-two (13.1%) participants were AT1RAb+. Compared with AT1RAb-, AT1RAb+ persons were more likely to be white (47% vs. 36.7%; P = 0.03) but had similar comorbid disease burden. In models adjusting for age, sex, and race, AT1RAb+ persons had higher diastolic BP (ß = 2.61 mm Hg; SE = 1.03; P = 0.01) compared with AT1RAb- participants. Rates of uncontrolled BP were similar between the groups. AT1RAb+ persons on an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB; n = 21) had a mean of 10.5 mm Hg higher systolic BP (SE = 4.56; P = 0.02) compared with AT1RAb+ persons using other BP medications. The odds of uncontrolled BP among AT1RAb+ participants on an ARB was 2.05 times that of those on other medications. AT1RAb- persons prescribed an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) had 1.8 mm Hg lower diastolic BP (SE = 0.81; P = 0.03) than AT1RAb- persons not prescribed an ACEi. CONCLUSIONS: AT1RAb was prevalent among hypertensive adults and was associated with higher BP among persons on an ARB.

Successful A2 to B Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant after Desensitization for High-Strength Non-HLA Antibody Made Possible by Utilizing a Hepatitis C Positive Donor.

Desensitization using plasma exchange can remove harmful antibodies prior to transplantation and mitigate risks for hyperacute and severe early acute antibody-mediated rejection. Traditionally, the use of plasma exchange requires a living donor so that the timing of treatments relative to transplant can be planned. Non-HLA antibody is increasingly recognized as capable of causing antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection and has been associated with decreased graft longevity. Our patient had high-strength non-HLA antibody deemed prohibitive to transplantation without desensitization, but no living donors. As the patient was eligible to receive an A2 ABO blood group organ and was willing to accept a hepatitis C positive donor kidney, this afforded a high probability of receiving an offer within a short enough time frame to attempt empiric desensitization in anticipation of a deceased donor transplant. Fifteen plasma exchange treatments were performed before the patient received an organ offer, and the patient was successfully transplanted. Hepatitis C infection was treated posttransplant. No episodes of rejection were observed. At one-year posttransplant, the patient maintains good graft function. In this case, willingness to consider nontraditional donor organs enabled us to mimic living donor desensitization using a deceased donor.

Antibodies against Angiotensin II Type 1 and Endothelin A Receptors: Relevance and pathogenicity.

Antibodies against two G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) and endothelin A receptor (ETAR) are among a growing number of autoantibodies that are found to be associated with allograft dysfunction. AT1R antibodies (AT1Rabs) and ETAR antibodies (ETARabs) have been shown to activate their target receptors and affect signaling pathways. Multiple single center reports have shown an association between presence of these antibodies and acute or chronic rejection and graft loss in kidney, heart, liver, lung and composite tissue transplantations. However, the characteristics of patients that are most likely to develop adverse outcomes, the phenotypes associated with graft damage solely due to these antibodies, and the antibody titer required to cause dysfunction are areas that remain controversial. This review compiles existing knowledge on the effect of antibodies against GPCRs in other diseases in order to bridge the gap in knowledge within transplantation biology. Future areas for research are highlighted and include the need for functional assays and treatment protocols for transplant patients who present with AT1Rabs and ETARabs. Understanding how antibodies that activate GPCRs influence transplantation outcome will have direct clinical implications for preemptive evaluation of transplant candidates as well as the post-transplant care of organ recipients.

Pre-transplant Screening for Non-HLA Antibodies: Who should be Tested?

Retrospective studies of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies (AT1R-Ab) and anti-endothelial cell antibodies (AECA) have linked these antibodies to allograft injury. Because rising healthcare costs dictate judicious use of laboratory testing, we sought to define characteristics of kidney transplant recipients who may benefit from screening for non-HLA antibodies. Kidney recipients transplanted between 2011 and 2016 at Johns Hopkins, were evaluated for AT1R-Ab and AECA. Pre-transplant antibody levels were compared to clinical and biopsy indications of graft dysfunction. Biopsies were graded using the Banff' 2009-2013 criteria. AT1R-Ab and AECA were detected using ELISA and endothelial cell crossmatches, respectively. AT1R-Ab levels were higher in patients who were positive for AECAs. Re-transplanted patients (p < 0.0001), males (p = 0.008) and those with FSGS (p = 0.04) and younger (p = 0.04) at time of transplantation were more likely to be positive for AT1R-Ab prior to transplantation. Recipients who were positive for AT1R-Ab prior to transplantation had increases in serum creatinine within 3 months post-transplantation (p < 0.0001) and developed abnormal biopsies earlier than did AT1R-Ab negative patients (126 days versus 368 days respectively; p = 0.02). Defining a clinical protocol to identify and preemptively treat patients at risk for acute rejection with detectable non-HLA antibodies is an important objective for the transplant community.

Histopathologic changes in anti-angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibody-positive kidney transplant recipients with acute rejection and no donor specific HLA antibodies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of antibodies against angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R Ab) and histopathologic changes seen in patients with kidney allograft rejection and negative donor specific HLA antibodies (DSA). METHODS: Stored sera from 27 patients who had biopsy-proven rejection in the absence of DSA were tested for AT1R Ab. Biopsy slides of all patients were re-examined and classified according to Banff 2013 criteria. Histopathologic changes were compared between AT1R positive and negative patients. RESULTS: 75% of patients with positive pre-transplant AT1R Ab had antibody mediated rejection (AMR) compared to 37% of AT1R Ab-negative patients. A trend towards increased interstitial inflammation was observed in the AT1R Ab positive group (p=0.08). More patients in the AT1R Ab positive group had microcirculation inflammation (88% vs 58% with glomerulitis scores ≥1; 75% vs 58% with peritubular capillaritis scores ≥1). CONCLUSION: In kidney transplant recipients with rejection and no DSA, a higher incidence of AMR and worse inflammation scores are observed in the presence of positive pre-transplant AT1R antibodies.

Anti-Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor and Anti-Endothelial Cell Antibodies: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Pathological Findings in Allograft Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: This is a cross-sectional study designed to evaluate the histologic characteristics of graft injury in the presence of anti-angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibody (AT1R-Ab) and anti-endothelial cell antibody (AECA). METHODS: Non-HLA antibody testing was included in the posttransplant evaluation for 70 kidney recipients. Biopsies were performed for cause for 47 patients and as protocol for the remaining 23 patients. Biopsy-proven rejection was defined according to the Banff 2009-2013 criteria. AT1R-Ab was measured on an ELISA platform. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on AT1R-Ab levels (>17, 10-17, and <10 U/ml). AECA was evaluated using an endothelial cell crossmatch (ECXM) in patients whose HLA antibody level was insufficient to cause a positive flow cytometric crossmatch. RESULTS: AT1R-Ab levels were higher in patients diagnosed with antibody mediated rejection compared to those with no rejection (P = 0.004). Glomerulitis (g) and peritubular capillaritis (ptc) scores were independently correlated with increased AT1R-Ab concentrations in the presence or absence of HLA-DSA (P = 0.007 and 0.03 for g scores; p = 0.005 and 0.03 for ptc scores). Patients with a positive ECXM had higher AT1R-Ab levels compared to those with a negative ECXM (P = 0.005). Microcirculation inflammation (MCI = g + ptc score) was higher in patients with a positive ECXM and with AT1R-Ab >17 U/ml, although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: The data show an association between non-HLA antibodies detected in the ECXM and AT1R ELISA and microvascular injury observed in antibody mediated rejection.

Differential effect of bortezomib on HLA class I and class II antibody.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib has been used to reduce HLA antibody in patients either before transplantation or as treatment for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). Reports on its efficacy show mixed results. The mechanism of action of this agent is via proteasome inhibition. The primary route of synthesis of HLA class I molecules is dependent on peptide generation by the proteasome, whereas that of class II is not. We observed a differential effect of bortezomib on class I versus class II antibody and hypothesized that this was related to a reduced expression of class I HLA antigens. METHODS: The effect of bortezomib on HLA antibody levels was evaluated in 13 patients who were desensitized for incompatible renal transplantation. We calculated the percent difference in HLA antibody level before and after bortezomib treatment and the impact of bortezomib on HLA expression in lymphocytes of healthy control subjects. RESULTS: On average, the level of HLA class I donor-specific antibody (DSA) decreased by 32%, whereas that of class II DSA increased by 29%. In vitro bortezomib treatment of lymphocytes resulted in a mean decrease of 23% in MHC class I expression on B lymphocytes and no change (+1.08%) in MHC class II expression (P=0.0003). The amount of intracellular class I molecules was reduced by a mean of 29% with bortezomib. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that bortezomib reduces HLA class I antibody more effectively than class II antibody. This difference may be due to the reduced expression of class I molecules resulting from treatment with this proteasome inhibitor.

Assessing immunologic risk factors in transplantation.

The innate and adaptive immune systems, together, represent the largest impediment to good and long-lasting graft function. Although improved immunosuppressive agents and expanded and enhanced diagnostic tools have led to better prevention and treatment of acute rejection, chronic rejection remains a serious threat to long-term graft survival. Immunologic heterogeneity among patients, variability in treatment protocols and unforeseen events following transplantation translate into different levels of risk among patients. While one cannot predict with certainty the short- and long-term outcomes of a particular transplant, it is possible to identify immunologic risk factors that can affect outcome.