Fine-tuning tumor- and allo-immunity: advances in the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in kidney transplant recipients.

Cancer is a common complication after kidney transplantation. Kidney transplant recipients (KTR) have a 2- to 4-fold higher risk of developing cancer compared to the general population and post-transplant malignancy is the third most common cause of death in KTR. Moreover, it is well known that certain cancer types are overrepresented after transplantation, especially non-melanoma skin cancer. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, with remarkable survival benefit in a subgroup of patients. ICI are monoclonal antibodies that block the binding of specific co-inhibitory signaling molecules. Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and its ligand programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) are the main targets of ICI. Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) have been excluded from clinical trials owing to concerns about tumor response, allo-immunity, and risk of transplant rejection. Indeed, graft rejection has been estimated as high as 48% and represents an emerging problem. The underlying mechanisms of organ rejection in the context of treatment with ICI are poorly understood. The search for restricted antitumoral responses without graft rejection is of paramount importance. This review summarizes the current knowledge of the use of ICI in KTR, the potential mechanisms involved in kidney graft rejection during ICI treatment, potential biomarkers of rejection, and how to deal with rejection in clinical practice.

Cemiplimab for Kidney Transplant Recipients With Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Cemiplimab is approved for treating locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC). Solid organ transplant recipients have been excluded from immunotherapy trials, given concern for allograft rejection despite their increased risk of skin cancers. Chronic immunosuppression is necessary to prevent organ rejection but may attenuate antitumor response with PD-1 inhibitors. METHODS: We report a phase I study of cemiplimab for kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with advanced CSCC. After cross-taper to a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor and pulsed dose corticosteroids (prednisone 40 mg once daily, the day before and on days 1-3 of each cycle, followed by 20 mg once daily on days 4-6, then 10 mg once daily until the day before each subsequent cycle), patients received cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 2 years and were assessed for response every 8 weeks. The primary end point was the rate of kidney rejection, with key secondary end points including rate and duration of response, and survival. RESULTS: Twelve patients were treated. No kidney rejection or loss was observed. A response to cemiplimab was observed in five of 11 evaluable patients (46%; 90% CI, 22 to 73), including two with durable responses beyond a year. Median follow-up was 6.8 months (range, 0.7-29.8). Treatment-related grade 3 or greater adverse events occurred in five patients (42%), including diarrhea, infection, and metabolic disturbances. One patient died of angioedema and anaphylaxis attributed to mTOR inhibitor cross-taper. CONCLUSION: mTOR inhibitor and corticosteroids represent a favorable immunosuppressive regimen for KTRs with advanced CSCC receiving immunotherapy. This combination resulted in durable antitumor responses with no kidney rejection events (funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04339062]).

Kidney Transplant Clinicians' Perceptions of Palliative Care for Patients With Failing Allografts in the US: A Mixed Methods Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Kidney transplant patients with failing allografts have a physical and psychological symptom burden as well as high morbidity and mortality. Palliative care is underutilized in this vulnerable population. We described kidney transplant clinicians' perceptions of palliative care to delineate their perceived barriers to and facilitators of providing palliative care to this population. STUDY DESIGN: National explanatory sequential mixed methods study including an online survey and semistructured interviews. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Kidney transplant clinicians in the United States surveyed and interviewed from October 2021 to March 2022. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Descriptive summary of survey responses, thematic analysis of qualitative interviews, and mixed methods integration of data. RESULTS: A total of 149 clinicians completed the survey, and 19 completed the subsequent interviews. Over 90% of respondents agreed that palliative care can be helpful for patients with a failing kidney allograft. However, 46% of respondents disagreed that all patients with failing allografts benefit from palliative care, and two-thirds thought that patients would not want serious illness conversations. More than 90% of clinicians expressed concern that transplant patients and caregivers would feel scared or anxious if offered palliative care. The interviews identified three main themes: (1) transplant clinicians' unique sense of personal and professional responsibility was a barrier to palliative care engagement, (2) clinicians' uncertainty regarding the timing of palliative care collaboration would lead to delayed referral, and (3) clinicians felt challenged by factors related to patients' cultural backgrounds and identities, such as language differences. Many comments reflected an unfamiliarity with the broad scope of palliative care beyond end-of-life care. LIMITATIONS: Potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that multiple barriers related to patients, clinicians, health systems, and health policies may pose challenges to the delivery of palliative care for patients with failing kidney transplants. This study illustrates the urgent need for ongoing efforts to optimize palliative care delivery models dedicated to kidney transplant patients, their families, and the clinicians who serve them. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Kidney transplant patients experience physical and psychological suffering in the context of their illnesses that may be amenable to palliative care. However, palliative care is often underutilized in this population. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed 149 clinicians across the United States, and 19 of them completed semistructured interviews. Our study results demonstrate that several patient, clinician, system, and policy factors need to be addressed to improve palliative care delivery to this vulnerable population.

Clinical Outcomes of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Renal Significance Without Detectable Clones.

Introduction: Monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) is characterized by monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition in kidneys. However, monoclonal immunoglobulin and responsible clone(s) are not always detectable. Treatment response and kidney outcome of MGRS without detectable clones remain unclear. Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, we identified MGRS without detectable clones from our biopsy repository between 2010 and 2022. We investigated the correlations between treatment regimens and kidney outcomes defined by proteinuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and the impact of repeat kidney biopsy. Results: Our study cohort included 29 cases (27 native kidney and 2 transplant allograft biopsies) of MGRS without detectable clones. At diagnosis, median serum creatinine was 1.8 mg/dl (interquartile range [IQR] 1.3-2.7), with proteinuria 4.6 g/gCr (IQR 2.3-7.9). Treatment regimens were variable: 6 (21%) received conservative therapy, 13 (45%) received plasma cell clone-directed therapy, 8 (28%) received lymphocytic clone-directed therapy, and 2 (7%) received nonclone-directed immunosuppressive therapy. Of 24 patients with proteinuria >0.5 g/gCr at diagnosis, 9 (38%) and 6 (25%) achieved complete response (CR) and partial response (PR), respectively. If interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA) was >50% at the initial biopsy, less proportion of patients achieved CR. Six of 7 repeat biopsies showed progression of chronic changes (e.g., IFTA) but provided limited information on treatment response. Conclusion: Treatment regimens and outcomes of MGRS without detectable clones were extremely variable. Repeat biopsy provided limited information to assess disease activity or the need for additional treatment. More sensitive tools are needed to detect clones and to assess treatment response.

Transplant Oncology: An Emerging Discipline of Cancer Treatment.

Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The applications of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery are the core of transplant oncology to improve patients' survival and quality of life. The main concept of transplant oncology is to radically cure cancer by removing the diseased organ and replacing it with a healthy one, aiming to improve the survival outcomes and quality of life of cancer patients. Subsequently, it seeks to expand the treatment options and research for hepatobiliary malignancies, which have seen significantly improved survival outcomes after the implementation of liver transplantation (LT). In the case of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the transplant setting, where the liver is the most common site of metastasis of patients who are considered to have unresectable disease, initial studies have shown improved survival for LT treatment compared to palliative therapy interventions. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years beyond Milan criteria in a stepwise manner. However, the outcome improvements and overall patient survival are limited to the specifics of the setting and systematic intervention options. This review aims to illustrate the representative concepts and history of transplant oncology as an emerging discipline for the management of hepatobiliary malignancies, in addition to other emerging concepts, such as the uses of immunotherapy in a peri-transplant setting as well as the use of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for surveillance post-transplantation.

Clonal dynamics of alloreactive T cells in kidney allograft rejection after anti-PD-1 therapy.

Kidney transplant recipients are at particular risk for developing tumors, many of which are now routinely treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); however, ICI therapy can precipitate transplant rejection. Here, we use TCR sequencing to identify and track alloreactive T cells in a patient with melanoma who experienced kidney transplant rejection following PD-1 inhibition. The treatment was associated with a sharp increase in circulating alloreactive CD8+ T cell clones, which display a unique transcriptomic signature and were also detected in the rejected kidney but not at tumor sites. Longitudinal and cross-tissue TCR analyses indicate unintended expansion of alloreactive CD8+ T cells induced by ICI therapy for cancer, coinciding with ICI-associated organ rejection.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Solid Tumors in the Adjuvant Setting: Current Progress, Future Directions, and Role in Transplant Oncology.

The rationale for administering immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the adjuvant setting is to eradicate micro-metastases and, ultimately, prolong survival. Thus far, clinical trials have demonstrated that 1-year adjuvant courses of ICIs reduce the risk of recurrence in melanoma, urothelial cancer, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Overall survival benefit has been shown in melanoma while survival data are still not mature in other malignancies. Emerging data also show the feasibility of utilizing ICIs in the peri-transplant setting for hepatobiliary malignancies. While ICIs are generally well-tolerated, the development of chronic immune-related adverse events, typically endocrinopathies or neurotoxicities, as well as delayed immune-related adverse events, warrants further scrutiny regarding the optimal duration of adjuvant therapy and requires a thorough risk-benefit determination. The advent of blood-based, dynamic biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can help detect minimal residual disease and identify the subset of patients who would likely benefit from adjuvant treatment. In addition, the characterization of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and ctDNA-adjusted blood tumor mutation burden (bTMB) has also shown promise in predicting response to immunotherapy. Until additional, prospective studies delineate the magnitude of overall survival benefit and validate the use of predictive biomarkers, a tailored, patient-centered approach to adjuvant ICIs that includes extensive patient counseling on potentially irreversible adverse effects should be routinely incorporated into clinical practice.

Shorter versus longer corticosteroid duration and recurrent immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated AKI.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment for immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute kidney injury (ICPi-AKI), but the optimal duration of therapy has not been established. Prolonged use of corticosteroids can cause numerous adverse effects and may decrease progression-free survival among patients treated with ICPis. We sought to determine whether a shorter duration of corticosteroids was equally efficacious and safe as compared with a longer duration. METHODS: We used data from an international multicenter cohort study of patients diagnosed with ICPi-AKI from 29 centers across nine countries. We examined whether a shorter duration of corticosteroids (28 days or less) was associated with a higher rate of recurrent ICPi-AKI or death within 30 days following completion of corticosteroid treatment as compared with a longer duration (29-84 days). RESULTS: Of 165 patients treated with corticosteroids, 56 (34%) received a shorter duration of treatment and 109 (66%) received a longer duration. Patients in the shorter versus longer duration groups were similar with respect to baseline and ICPi-AKI characteristics. Five of 56 patients (8.9%) in the shorter duration group and 12 of 109 (11%) in the longer duration group developed recurrent ICPi-AKI or died (p=0.90). Nadir serum creatinine in the first 14, 28, and 90 days following completion of corticosteroid treatment was similar between groups (p=0.40, p=0.56, and p=0.89, respectively). CONCLUSION: A shorter duration of corticosteroids (28 days or less) may be safe for patients with ICPi-AKI. However, the findings may be susceptible to unmeasured confounding and further research from randomized clinical trials is needed.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors for solid organ transplant recipients: clinical updates.

Transplant care continues to advance with increasing clinical experience and improvements in immunosuppressive therapy. As the population ages and long-term survival improves, transplant patient care has become more complex due to comorbidities, frailty, and the increased prevalence of cancer posttransplantation. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become a standard treatment option for many cancers in non-transplant patients, but the use of ICIs in transplant patients is challenging due to the possibility of disrupting immune tolerance. However, over the past few years, ICIs have gradually started to be used in transplant patients as well. In this study, we review the current use of ICIs after all solid organ transplantation procedures (kidney, liver, heart, and lung). Increasing data suggest that the type and number of immunosuppressants may affect the risk of rejection after immunotherapy. Immunotherapy for cancer in transplant patients may be a feasible option for selected patients; however, prospective trials in specific organ transplant recipients are needed.

Transplant Onconephrology in Patients With Kidney Transplants.

Cancer is a leading cause of death in patients with kidney transplantation. Patients with kidney transplants are 10- to 200-times more likely to develop cancers after transplant than the general population, depending on the cancer type. Recent advances in cancer therapies have dramatically improved survival outcomes; however, patients with kidney transplants face unique challenges of immunosuppression management, cancer screening, and recurrence of cancer after transplant. Patients with a history of cancer tend to be excluded from transplant candidacy or are required to have long cancer-free wait time before wait-listing. The strategy of pretransplant wait time management may need to be revisited as cancer therapies improve, which is most applicable to patients with a history of multiple myeloma. In this review, we discuss several important topics in transplant onconephrology: the current recommendations for pretransplant wait times for transplant candidates with cancer histories, cancer screening post-transplant, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder, strategies for transplant patients with a history of multiple myeloma, and novel therapies for patients with post-transplant malignancies. With emerging novel cancer treatments, it is critical to have multidisciplinary discussions involving patients, caregivers, transplant nephrologists, and oncologists to achieve patient-oriented goals.

Outcomes of kidney transplantation in patients with myeloma and amyloidosis in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Recent improvement in treatment and patient survival has opened the eligibility of kidney transplantation to patients who developed end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) from plasma cell dyscrasias (PCDs). Data on clinical outcomes in this population are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of United Network for Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network dataset (2006-2018) to compare patient and graft outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with ESKD due to PCD versus other causes. RESULTS: Among 168 369 adult first kidney transplant recipients, 0.22-0.43% per year had PCD as the cause of ESKD. The PCD group had worse survival than the non-PCD group for both living and deceased donor types {adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.24 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.67-2.99] and aHR 1.40 [95% CI 1.08-1.83], respectively}. The PCD group had worse survival than the diabetes group, but only among living donors [aHR 1.87 (95% CI 1.37-2.53) versus aHR 1.16 (95% CI 0.89-1.2)]. Graft survival in patients with PCD were worse than non-PCD in both living and deceased donors [aHR 1.72 (95% CI 1.91-2.56) and aHR 1.30 (95% CI 1.03-1.66)]. Patient and graft survival were worse in amyloidosis but not statistically different in multiple myeloma compared with the non-PCD group. CONCLUSION: The study data are crucial when determining kidney transplant eligibility and when discussing transplant risks in patients with PCD.

Emerging Concepts in Managing Malignancy in Kidney Transplant Patients.

Cancer remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients, due to long-term immunosuppression. Salient issues to consider in decreasing the burden of malignancy among kidney transplant recipients include pretransplant recipient evaluation, post-transplant screening and monitoring, and optimal treatment strategies for the kidney transplant recipients with cancer. In this review, we address cancer incidence and outcomes, approaches to cancer screening and monitoring pretransplant and post-transplant, as well as treatment strategies, immunosuppressive management, and multidisciplinary approaches in the kidney transplant recipients with cancer.

Utilization of Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Peri-Transplant Setting: Transplant Oncology View.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths and accounts for over eighty percent of primary liver cancers worldwide. Surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation in small tumors are included in the treatment options for HCC patients with good liver function profiles. According to the Milan Criteria, only a small portion of HCC patients are eligible for liver transplantation due to advanced-stage disease and large tumor size preventing/delaying organ allocation. Recently, the use of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-1 and PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of cancers have evolved rapidly and these therapies have been approved for the treatment of HCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have resulted in good clinical outcomes in pre-and post-transplant HCC patients, although, some reports showed that certain recipients may face rejection and graft loss. In this review, we aim to illustrate and summarize the utilization of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies in pre-and post-liver transplants for HCC patients and discuss the assessment of immune checkpoint inhibitor regulators that might determine liver transplant outcomes.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Solid Organ Transplantation.

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) is a life-saving procedure for people with end-stage organ failure. However, patients experience significant symptom burden, complex decision making, morbidity, and mortality during both pre- and post-transplant periods. Palliative care (PC) is well suited and historically underdelivered for the transplant population. This article, written by a team of transplant specialists (surgeons, cardiologists, nephrologists, hepatologists, and pulmonologists), PC clinicians, and an ethics specialist, shares 10 high-yield tips for PC clinicians to consider when caring for SOT patients.

Transplant Onconephrology: An Update.

Transplant onconephrology is a growing specialty focused on the health care of kidney transplant recipients with cancer. Given the complexities associated with the care of transplant patients, along with the advent of novel cancer therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen-receptor T cells, there is a dire need for the subspecialty of transplant onconephrology. The management of cancer in the setting of kidney transplantation is best accomplished by a multidisciplinary team, including transplant nephrologists, oncologists, and patients. This review addresses the current state and future opportunities for transplant onconephrology, including the roles of the multidisciplinary team, and related scientific and clinical knowledge.

Acute kidney injury in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute kidney injury (ICPi-AKI) has emerged as an important toxicity among patients with cancer. METHODS: We collected data on 429 patients with ICPi-AKI and 429 control patients who received ICPis contemporaneously but who did not develop ICPi-AKI from 30 sites in 10 countries. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ICPi-AKI and its recovery. A multivariable Cox model was used to estimate the effect of ICPi rechallenge versus no rechallenge on survival following ICPi-AKI. RESULTS: ICPi-AKI occurred at a median of 16 weeks (IQR 8-32) following ICPi initiation. Lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, and extrarenal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were each associated with a higher risk of ICPi-AKI. Acute tubulointerstitial nephritis was the most common lesion on kidney biopsy (125/151 biopsied patients [82.7%]). Renal recovery occurred in 276 patients (64.3%) at a median of 7 weeks (IQR 3-10) following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids within 14 days following ICPi-AKI diagnosis was associated with higher odds of renal recovery (adjusted OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.58 to 4.41). Among patients treated with corticosteroids, early initiation of corticosteroids (within 3 days of ICPi-AKI) was associated with a higher odds of renal recovery compared with later initiation (more than 3 days following ICPi-AKI) (adjusted OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.16 to 3.79). Of 121 patients rechallenged, 20 (16.5%) developed recurrent ICPi-AKI. There was no difference in survival among patients rechallenged versus those not rechallenged following ICPi-AKI. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who developed ICPi-AKI were more likely to have impaired renal function at baseline, use a PPI, and have extrarenal irAEs. Two-thirds of patients had renal recovery following ICPi-AKI. Treatment with corticosteroids was associated with improved renal recovery.

Transplant Oncology: An Evolving Field in Cancer Care.

Transplant oncology is an emerging concept of cancer treatment with a promising prospective outcome. The application of oncology, transplant medicine, and surgery to improve patients' survival and quality of life is the core of transplant oncology. Hepatobiliary malignancies have been treated by liver transplantation (LT) with significant improved outcome. In addition, as the liver is the most common site of metastasis for colorectal cancer (CRC), patients with CRC who have stable unresectable liver metastases are good candidates for LT, and initial studies have shown improved survival compared to palliative systemic therapy. The indications of LT for hepatobiliary malignancies have been slowly expanded over the years in a stepwise manner; however, they have only been shown to improve patient survival in the setting of limited systemic therapy options. This review illustrates the concept and history of transplant oncology as an evolving field for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic biliary cancer, and liver-only metastasis of non-hepatobiliary carcinoma. The utility of immunotherapy in the transplant setting is discussed as well as the feasibility of using circulating tumor DNA for surveillance post-transplantation.

Gene Expression Profiling in Kidney Transplants with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Associated Adverse Events.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are increasingly used to treat various malignancies, but their application in patients with kidney transplants is complicated by high allograft rejection rates. Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated rejection is a novel, poorly understood entity demonstrating overlapping histopathologic features with immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute interstitial nephritis, which poses a challenge for diagnosis and clinical management. We sought to improve the understanding of these entities through biopsy-based gene expression analysis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: NanoString was used to measure and compare the expression of 725 immune-related genes in 75 archival kidney biopsies, including a 25-sample discovery cohort comprising pure T cell-mediated rejection and immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute interstitial nephritis and an independent 50-sample validation cohort comprising immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute interstitial nephritis, immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated T cell-mediated rejection, immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated crescentic GN, drug-induced acute interstitial nephritis, BK virus nephropathy, and normal biopsies. RESULTS: Significant molecular overlap was observed between immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute interstitial nephritis and T cell-mediated rejection. Nevertheless, IFI27, an IFN-α-induced transcript, was identified and validated as a novel biomarker for differentiating immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated T cell-mediated rejection from immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute interstitial nephritis (validation cohort: P<0.001, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve =100%, accuracy =86%). Principal component analysis revealed heterogeneity in inflammatory gene expression patterns within sample groups; however, immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated T cell-mediated rejection and immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated acute interstitial nephritis both demonstrated relatively more molecular overlap with drug-induced acute interstitial nephritis than T cell-mediated rejection, suggesting potential dominance of hypersensitivity mechanisms in these entities. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that, although there is significant molecular similarity between immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated rejection and acute interstitial nephritis, biopsy-based measurement of IFI27 gene expression represents a potential biomarker for differentiating these entities.

Immunoregulatory and lipid presentation pathways are upregulated in human face transplant rejection.

BACKGROUNDRejection is the primary barrier to broader implementation of vascularized composite allografts (VCAs), including face and limb transplants. The immunologic pathways activated in face transplant rejection have not been fully characterized.METHODSUsing skin biopsies prospectively collected over 9 years from 7 face transplant patients, we studied rejection by gene expression profiling, histology, immunostaining, and T cell receptor sequencing.RESULTSGrade 1 rejection did not differ significantly from nonrejection, suggesting that it does not represent a pathologic state. In grade 2, there was a balanced upregulation of both proinflammatory T cell activation pathways and antiinflammatory checkpoint and immunomodulatory pathways, with a net result of no tissue injury. In grade 3, IFN-γ-driven inflammation, antigen-presenting cell activation, and infiltration of the skin by proliferative T cells bearing markers of antigen-specific activation and cytotoxicity tipped the balance toward tissue injury. Rejection of VCAs and solid organ transplants had both distinct and common features. VCA rejection was uniquely associated with upregulation of immunoregulatory genes, including SOCS1; induction of lipid antigen-presenting CD1 proteins; and infiltration by T cells predicted to recognize CD1b and CD1c.CONCLUSIONOur findings suggest that the distinct features of VCA rejection reflect the unique immunobiology of skin and that enhancing cutaneous immunoregulatory networks may be a useful strategy in combatting rejection.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01281267.FUNDINGAssistant Secretary of Defense and Health Affairs, through Reconstructive Transplant Research (W81XWH-17-1-0278, W81XWH-16-1-0647, W81XWH-16-1-0689, W81XWH-18-1-0784, W81XWH-1-810798); American Society of Transplantation's Transplantation and Immunology Research Network Fellowship Research Grant; Plastic Surgery Foundation Fellowship from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons; Novo Nordisk Foundation (NNF15OC0014092); Lundbeck Foundation; Aage Bangs Foundation; A.P. Moller Foundation for the Advancement of Medical Science; NIH UL1 RR025758.