RESUMEN
Introduction: In 2014, a complement assay, which evaluates C5b-9 deposition on endothelial cells, was proposed as a biomarker for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS). Early diagnosis and/or prediction of aHUS (relapse) is pivotal in aHUS kidney transplant recipients who do not receive eculizumab prophylaxis. Methods: In this pilot study, serum samples of transplanted patients with aHUS in remission without eculizumab and patients with other primary kidney diseases (controls) were blinded and evaluated in the complement assay. Results: We included 13 patients with aHUS (4 males, 9 females) of median age of 54 years (range: 35-69) and median of 5.9 years (range: 0.25-14.1) after transplantation; and 13 controls (7 males, 6 females) of median age of 42 years (range: 27-60) and median of 5.8 years (range: 1.6-11.7) after transplantation. There were no significant differences in C5b-9 deposits between patients with aHUS and controls on resting cells (median of 136% [range: 93%-382%] and 121% [range: 75%-200%], respectively) and activated cells (median of 196% [range: 99%-388%] and 170% [range: 113%-260%], respectively). Three patients with aHUS and 4 controls showed elevated C5b-9 deposits on resting cells, which should correspond to active aHUS. None of these patients had laboratory signs of thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA). During follow-up (15.8 months, range: 6-21), estimated glomerular filtration rate remained stable in all. In 5 patients with aHUS with a genetic variant, no increase in C5b-9 deposits was found on activated endothelial cells, which contrasts with the literature suggesting that the test should identify carriers of a genetic variant. Conclusion: Our data question the routine use of the ex vivo complement assay in kidney transplant patients. Future studies should evaluate the test characteristics of assay in kidney transplant patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Guidelines advise eculizumab prophylaxis for most kidney transplant recipients with atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS). However, recurrence rates may be overestimated, and starting eculizumab at relapse ("rescue therapy") may prevent graft loss. Randomized controlled trials have not compared the efficacy, safety, and costs of different treatment strategies. We performed a comparative study, including a previously described Dutch cohort treated with rescue therapy and a UK cohort using eculizumab prophylaxis. METHODS: In the Netherlands, we selected all adult patients with aHUS who received a kidney transplant between 2010 and 2021 in the Radboud University Medical Center (nâ =â 30) and enriched this cohort with 8 patients who received rescue therapy in other centers. The UK cohort included all adult patients with aHUS at moderate or high risk of recurrence, transplanted between 2013 and 2017 with prophylactic eculizumab. RESULTS: We included 38 Dutch patients and 35 UK patients. Characteristics were comparable, although the UK cohort included more patients with a complement factor H SCR20 mutation or hybrid gene (31% versus 5%; P < 0.01), and more Dutch patients received living donor kidneys (66% versus 20%; P < 0.001). Follow-up was comparable (the Dutch patients 70.8 mo, range, 10-134; UK patients 55.4 mo, range, 2-95). Eighteen (47%) Dutch patients received rescue therapy. Death-censored graft survival was not significantly different (the Dutch patients 1 y, 3 y, and 6 y: 97.4%, 91.2%, and 87.1%, respectively; UK patients 1 y, 3 y, and 6 y: 97.1%, 88.2%, and 65.6%, respectively, log-rank P = 0.189). CONCLUSIONS: In a population characterized by low prevalence of "very high risk" genes, who were predominantly transplanted using an endothelial protective regime, death-censored graft survival with eculizumab rescue therapy was not inferior to prophylaxis.