Design, cohort profile and comparison of the KTD-Innov study: a prospective multidimensional biomarker validation study in kidney allograft rejection.

There is an unmet need for robust and clinically validated biomarkers of kidney allograft rejection. Here we present the KTD-Innov study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03582436), an unselected deeply phenotyped cohort of kidney transplant recipients with a holistic approach to validate the clinical utility of precision diagnostic biomarkers. In 2018-2019, we prospectively enrolled consecutive adult patients who received a kidney allograft at seven French centers and followed them for a year. We performed multimodal phenotyping at follow-up visits, by collecting clinical, biological, immunological, and histological parameters, and analyzing a panel of 147 blood, urinary and kidney tissue biomarkers. The primary outcome was allograft rejection, assessed at each visit according to the international Banff 2019 classification. We evaluated the representativeness of participants by comparing them with patients from French, European, and American transplant programs transplanted during the same period. A total of 733 kidney transplant recipients (64.1% male and 35.9% female) were included during the study. The median follow-up after transplantation was 12.3 months (interquartile range, 11.9-13.1 months). The cumulative incidence of rejection was 9.7% at one year post-transplant. We developed a distributed and secured data repository in compliance with the general data protection regulation. We established a multimodal biomarker biobank of 16,736 samples, including 9331 blood, 4425 urinary and 2980 kidney tissue samples, managed and secured in a collaborative network involving 7 clinical centers, 4 analytical platforms and 2 industrial partners. Patients' characteristics, immune profiles and treatments closely resembled those of 41,238 French, European and American kidney transplant recipients. The KTD-Innov study is a unique holistic and multidimensional biomarker validation cohort of kidney transplant recipients representative of the real-world transplant population. Future findings from this cohort are likely to be robust and generalizable.

Long-term Kidney Transplant Survival Across the Globe.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes after kidney transplantation (KT), including access, wait time, and other issues around the globe, have been studied. However, issues do vary from one country to another. METHODS: We obtained data from several countries from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia, including the number of patients awaiting KT from 2015, transplant rate per million population (pmp), proportion of living donor and deceased donor (LD/DD) KT, and posttransplant survival. We also sought opinions on key difficulties faced by each of these countries with respect to KT and long-term survival. RESULTS: Variation in access to KT across the globe was noted. Countries with the highest rates of KT pmp included the United States (79%) and Spain (71%). A higher proportion of LD transplants was noted in Japan (93%), India (85%), Singapore (63%), and South Korea (63%). A higher proportion of DD KTs was noted in Spain (90%), Brazil (90%), France (85%), Italy (85%), Finland (85%), Australia-New Zealand (80%), and the United States (77%). The 5-y graft survival for LD was highest in South Korea (95%), Singapore (94%), Italy (93%), Finland (93%), and Japan (93%), whereas for DD, it was South Korea (93%), Italy (88%), Japan (86%), and Singapore (86%). The common issues surrounding KTs are access and a limited number of LDs and DDs. Key issues identified for long-term survival were increasing age of donors and recipients, higher recipient comorbidity, and posttransplant events, such as alloimmune injury to the kidney, infection, cancer, and suboptimal adherence to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A unified approach is necessary to improve issues surrounding KT as the demand continues to increase.

Long-Term Outcomes after Conversion to a Belatacept-Based Immunosuppression in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Conversion to a belatacept-based immunosuppression is currently used as a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) avoidance strategy when the CNI-based standard-of-care immunosuppression is not tolerated after kidney transplantation. However, there is a lack of evidence on the long-term benefit and safety after conversion to belatacept. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 311 kidney transplant recipients from 2007 to 2020 from two referral centers, converted from CNI to belatacept after transplant according to a prespecified protocol. Patients were matched at the time of conversion to patients maintained with CNIs, using optimal matching. The primary end point was death-censored allograft survival at 7 years. The secondary end points were patient survival, eGFR, and safety outcomes, including serious viral infections, immune-related complications, antibody-mediated rejection, T-cell-mediated rejection, de novo anti-HLA donor-specific antibody, de novo diabetes, cardiovascular events, and oncologic complications. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients converted to belatacept (belatacept group) were matched to 243 patients maintained on CNIs (CNI control group). All recipient, transplant, functional, histologic, and immunologic parameters were well balanced between the two groups with a standardized mean difference below 0.05. At 7 years post-conversion to belatacept, allograft survival was 78% compared with 63% in the CNI control group ( P < 0.001 for log-rank test). The safety outcomes showed a similar rate of patient death (28% in the belatacept group versus 36% in the CNI control group), active antibody-mediated rejection (6% versus 7%), T-cell-mediated rejection (4% versus 4%), major adverse cardiovascular events, and cancer occurrence (9% versus 11%). A significantly higher rate of de novo proteinuria was observed in the belatacept group as compared with the CNI control group (37% versus 21%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world evidence study shows that conversion to belatacept post-transplant was associated with lower risk of graft failure and acceptable safety outcomes compared with patients maintained on CNIs. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: Long-term Outcomes after Conversion to Belatacept, NCT04733131 .

Prognostic Biomarkers in Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Why are there so few biomarkers accepted by health authorities and implemented in clinical practice, despite the high and growing number of biomaker studies in medical research ? In this meta-epidemiological study, including 804 studies that were critically appraised by expert reviewers, the authors have identified all prognostic kidney transplant biomarkers and showed overall suboptimal study designs, methods, results, interpretation, reproducible research standards, and transparency. The authors also demonstrated for the first time that the limited number of studies challenged the added value of their candidate biomarkers against standard-of-care routine patient monitoring parameters. Most biomarker studies tended to be single-center, retrospective studies with a small number of patients and clinical events. Less than 5% of the studies performed an external validation. The authors also showed the poor transparency reporting and identified a data beautification phenomenon. These findings suggest that there is much wasted research effort in transplant biomarker medical research and highlight the need to produce more rigorous studies so that more biomarkers may be validated and successfully implemented in clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing number of biomarker studies published in the transplant literature over the past 20 years, demonstrations of their clinical benefit and their implementation in routine clinical practice are lacking. We hypothesized that suboptimal design, data, methodology, and reporting might contribute to this phenomenon. METHODS: We formed a consortium of experts in systematic reviews, nephrologists, methodologists, and epidemiologists. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2005, and November 12, 2022 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020154747). All English language, original studies investigating the association between a biomarker and kidney allograft outcome were included. The final set of publications was assessed by expert reviewers. After data collection, two independent reviewers randomly evaluated the inconsistencies for 30% of the references for each reviewer. If more than 5% of inconsistencies were observed for one given reviewer, a re-evaluation was conducted for all the references of the reviewer. The biomarkers were categorized according to their type and the biological milieu from which they were measured. The study characteristics related to the design, methods, results, and their interpretation were assessed, as well as reproducible research practices and transparency indicators. RESULTS: A total of 7372 publications were screened and 804 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 1143 biomarkers were assessed among the included studies from blood ( n =821, 71.8%), intragraft ( n =169, 14.8%), or urine ( n =81, 7.1%) compartments. The number of studies significantly increased, with a median, yearly number of 31.5 studies (interquartile range [IQR], 23.8-35.5) between 2005 and 2012 and 57.5 (IQR, 53.3-59.8) between 2013 and 2022 ( P < 0.001). A total of 655 studies (81.5%) were retrospective, while 595 (74.0%) used data from a single center. The median number of patients included was 232 (IQR, 96-629) with a median follow-up post-transplant of 4.8 years (IQR, 3.0-6.2). Only 4.7% of studies were externally validated. A total of 346 studies (43.0%) did not adjust their biomarker for key prognostic factors, while only 3.1% of studies adjusted the biomarker for standard-of-care patient monitoring factors. Data sharing, code sharing, and registration occurred in 8.8%, 1.1%, and 4.6% of studies, respectively. A total of 158 studies (20.0%) emphasized the clinical relevance of the biomarker, despite the reported nonsignificant association of the biomarker with the outcome measure. A total of 288 studies assessed rejection as an outcome. We showed that these rejection studies shared the same characteristics as other studies. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker studies in kidney transplantation lack validation, rigorous design and methodology, accurate interpretation, and transparency. Higher standards are needed in biomarker research to prove the clinical utility and support clinical use.

Immune response after pig-to-human kidney xenotransplantation: a multimodal phenotyping study.

BACKGROUND: Cross-species immunological incompatibilities have hampered pig-to-human xenotransplantation, but porcine genome engineering recently enabled the first successful experiments. However, little is known about the immune response after the transplantation of pig kidneys to human recipients. We aimed to precisely characterise the early immune responses to the xenotransplantation using a multimodal deep phenotyping approach. METHODS: We did a complete phenotyping of two pig kidney xenografts transplanted to decedent humans. We used a multimodal strategy combining morphological evaluation, immunophenotyping (IgM, IgG, C4d, CD68, CD15, NKp46, CD3, CD20, and von Willebrand factor), gene expression profiling, and whole-transcriptome digital spatial profiling and cell deconvolution. Xenografts before implantation, wild-type pig kidney autografts, as well as wild-type, non-transplanted pig kidneys with and without ischaemia-reperfusion were used as controls. FINDINGS: The data collected from xenografts suggested early signs of antibody-mediated rejection, characterised by microvascular inflammation with immune deposits, endothelial cell activation, and positive xenoreactive crossmatches. Capillary inflammation was mainly composed of intravascular CD68+ and CD15+ innate immune cells, as well as NKp46+ cells. Both xenografts showed increased expression of genes biologically related to a humoral response, including monocyte and macrophage activation, natural killer cell burden, endothelial activation, complement activation, and T-cell development. Whole-transcriptome digital spatial profiling showed that antibody-mediated injury was mainly located in the glomeruli of the xenografts, with significant enrichment of transcripts associated with monocytes, macrophages, neutrophils, and natural killer cells. This phenotype was not observed in control pig kidney autografts or in ischaemia-reperfusion models. INTERPRETATION: Despite favourable short-term outcomes and absence of hyperacute injuries, our findings suggest that antibody-mediated rejection in pig-to-human kidney xenografts might be occurring. Our results suggest specific therapeutic targets towards the humoral arm of rejection to improve xenotransplantation results. FUNDING: OrganX and MSD Avenir.

An automated histological classification system for precision diagnostics of kidney allografts.

For three decades, the international Banff classification has been the gold standard for kidney allograft rejection diagnosis, but this system has become complex over time with the integration of multimodal data and rules, leading to misclassifications that can have deleterious therapeutic consequences for patients. To improve diagnosis, we developed a decision-support system, based on an algorithm covering all classification rules and diagnostic scenarios, that automatically assigns kidney allograft diagnoses. We then tested its ability to reclassify rejection diagnoses for adult and pediatric kidney transplant recipients in three international multicentric cohorts and two large prospective clinical trials, including 4,409 biopsies from 3,054 patients (62.05% male and 37.95% female) followed in 20 transplant referral centers in Europe and North America. In the adult kidney transplant population, the Banff Automation System reclassified 83 out of 279 (29.75%) antibody-mediated rejection cases and 57 out of 105 (54.29%) T cell-mediated rejection cases, whereas 237 out of 3,239 (7.32%) biopsies diagnosed as non-rejection by pathologists were reclassified as rejection. In the pediatric population, the reclassification rates were 8 out of 26 (30.77%) for antibody-mediated rejection and 12 out of 39 (30.77%) for T cell-mediated rejection. Finally, we found that reclassification of the initial diagnoses by the Banff Automation System was associated with an improved risk stratification of long-term allograft outcomes. This study demonstrates the potential of an automated histological classification to improve transplant patient care by correcting diagnostic errors and standardizing allograft rejection diagnoses.ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05306795 .

Subclinical rejection-free diagnostic after kidney transplantation using blood gene expression.

We previously established a six-gene-based blood score associated with operational tolerance in kidney transplantation which was decreased in patients developing anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Herein, we aimed to confirm that this score is associated with immunological events and risk of rejection. We measured this using quantitative PCR (qPCR) and NanoString methods from an independent multicenter cohort of 588 kidney transplant recipients with paired blood samples and biopsies at one year after transplantation validating its association with pre-existing and de novo DSA. From 441 patients with protocol biopsy, there was a significant decrease of the score of tolerance in 45 patients with biopsy-proven subclinical rejection (SCR), a major threat associated with pejorative allograft outcomes that prompted an SCR score refinement. This refinement used only two genes, AKR1C3 and TCL1A, and four clinical parameters (previous experience of rejection, previous transplantation, sex of recipient and tacrolimus uptake). This refined SCR score was able to identify patients unlikely to develop SCR with a C-statistic of 0.864 and a negative predictive value of 98.3%. The SCR score was validated in an external laboratory, with two methods (qPCR and NanoString), and on 447 patients from an independent and multicenter cohort. Moreover, this score allowed reclassifying patients with discrepancies between the DSA presence and the histological diagnosis of antibody mediated rejection unlike kidney function. Thus, our refined SCR score could improve detection of SCR for closer and noninvasive monitoring, allowing early treatment of SCR lesions notably for patients DSA-positive and during lowering of immunosuppressive treatment.

Absence of Mortality Differences Between the First and Second COVID-19 Waves in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic evolved in 2 consecutive waves during 2020. Improvements in the management of COVID-19 led to a reduction in mortality rates among hospitalized patients during the second wave. Whether this progress benefited kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), a population particularly vulnerable to severe COVID-19, remained unclear. Methods: In France, 957 KTRs were hospitalized for COVID-19 in 2020 and their data were prospectively collected into the French Solid Organ Transplant (SOT) COVID registry. The presentation, management, and outcomes of the 359 KTRs diagnosed during the first wave were compared to those of the 598 of the second wave. Results: Baseline comorbidities were similar between KTRs of the 2 waves. Maintenance immunosuppression was reduced in most patients but withdrawal of antimetabolite (73.7% vs. 58.4%, P < 0.001) or calcineurin inhibitor (32.1% vs. 16.6%, P < 0.001) was less frequent during the second wave. Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin that were commonly used during the first wave (21.7% and 30.9%, respectively) but were almost abandoned during the second wave. In contrast, the use of high dose corticosteroids doubled (19.5% vs. 41.6%, P < 0.001). Despite these changing trends in COVID-19 management, 60-day mortality was not statistically different between the 2 waves (25.3% vs. 23.9%; Log Rank, P = 0.48) and COVID-19 hospitalization period was not associated with death due to COVID-19 in multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.67-1.17, P = 0.4). Conclusion: We conclude that changing of therapeutic trends during 2020 did not reduce COVID-19 related mortality among KTRs. Our data indirectly support the importance of vaccination and neutralizing monoclonal anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies to protect KTRS from severe COVID-19.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on publication dynamics and non-COVID-19 research production.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected health systems and medical research worldwide but its impact on the global publication dynamics and non-COVID-19 research has not been measured. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted the scientific production of non-COVID-19 research. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive meta-research on studies (original articles, research letters and case reports) published between 01/01/2019 and 01/01/2021 in 10 high-impact medical and infectious disease journals (New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association, Nature Medicine, British Medical Journal, Annals of Internal Medicine, Lancet Global Health, Lancet Public Health, Lancet Infectious Disease and Clinical Infectious Disease). For each publication, we recorded publication date, publication type, number of authors, whether the publication was related to COVID-19, whether the publication was based on a case series, and the number of patients included in the study if the publication was based on a case report or a case series. We estimated the publication dynamics with a locally estimated scatterplot smoothing method. A Natural Language Processing algorithm was designed to calculate the number of authors for each publication. We simulated the number of non-COVID-19 studies that could have been published during the pandemic by extrapolating the publication dynamics of 2019 to 2020, and comparing the expected number to the observed number of studies. RESULTS: Among the 22,525 studies assessed, 6319 met the inclusion criteria, of which 1022 (16.2%) were related to COVID-19 research. A dramatic increase in the number of publications in general journals was observed from February to April 2020 from a weekly median number of publications of 4.0 (IQR: 2.8-5.5) to 19.5 (IQR: 15.8-24.8) (p < 0.001), followed afterwards by a pattern of stability with a weekly median number of publications of 10.0 (IQR: 6.0-14.0) until December 2020 (p = 0.045 in comparison with April). Two prototypical editorial strategies were found: 1) journals that maintained the volume of non-COVID-19 publications while integrating COVID-19 research and thus increased their overall scientific production, and 2) journals that decreased the volume of non-COVID-19 publications while integrating COVID-19 publications. We estimated using simulation models that the COVID pandemic was associated with a 18% decrease in the production of non-COVID-19 research. We also found a significant change of the publication type in COVID-19 research as compared with non-COVID-19 research illustrated by a decrease in the number of original articles, (47.9% in COVID-19 publications vs 71.3% in non-COVID-19 publications, p < 0.001). Last, COVID-19 publications showed a higher number of authors, especially for case reports with a median of 9.0 authors (IQR: 6.0-13.0) in COVID-19 publications, compared to a median of 4.0 authors (IQR: 3.0-6.0) in non-COVID-19 publications (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this meta-research gathering publications from high-impact medical journals, we have shown that the dramatic rise in COVID-19 publications was accompanied by a substantial decrease of non-COVID-19 research. META-RESEARCH REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/9vtzp/ .

COVID-19-related medical research: a meta-research and critical appraisal.

BACKGROUND: Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, a large number of COVID-19-related papers have been published. However, concerns about the risk of expedited science have been raised. We aimed at reviewing and categorizing COVID-19-related medical research and to critically appraise peer-reviewed original articles. METHODS: The data sources were Pubmed, Cochrane COVID-19 register study, arXiv, medRxiv and bioRxiv, from 01/11/2019 to 01/05/2020. Peer-reviewed and preprints publications related to COVID-19 were included, written in English or Chinese. No limitations were placed on study design. Reviewers screened and categorized studies according to i) publication type, ii) country of publication, and iii) topics covered. Original articles were critically appraised using validated quality assessment tools. RESULTS: Among the 11,452 publications identified, 10,516 met the inclusion criteria, among which 7468 (71.0%) were peer-reviewed articles. Among these, 4190 publications (56.1%) did not include any data or analytics (comprising expert opinion pieces). Overall, the most represented topics were infectious disease (n = 2326, 22.1%), epidemiology (n = 1802, 17.1%), and global health (n = 1602, 15.2%). The top five publishing countries were China (25.8%), United States (22.3%), United Kingdom (8.8%), Italy (8.1%) and India (3.4%). The dynamic of publication showed that the exponential growth of COVID-19 peer-reviewed articles was mainly driven by publications without original data (mean 261.5 articles ± 51.1 per week) as compared with original articles (mean of 69.3 ± 22.3 articles per week). Original articles including patient data accounted for 713 (9.5%) of peer-reviewed studies. A total of 576 original articles (80.8%) showed intermediate to high risk of bias. Last, except for simulation studies that mainly used large-scale open data, the median number of patients enrolled was of 102 (IQR = 37-337). CONCLUSIONS: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of research is composed by publications without original data. Peer-reviewed original articles with data showed a high risk of bias and included a limited number of patients. Together, these findings underscore the urgent need to strike a balance between the velocity and quality of research, and to cautiously consider medical information and clinical applicability in a pressing, pandemic context. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/5zjyx/.

Is COVID-19 infection more severe in kidney transplant recipients?

There are no studies which have compared the risk of severe COVID-19 and related mortality between transplant recipients and nontransplant patients. We enrolled two groups of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, that is, kidney transplant recipients (KTR) from the French Registry of Solid Organ Transplant (n = 306) and a single-center cohort of nontransplant patients (n = 795). An analysis was performed among subgroups matched for age and risk factors for severe COVID-19 or mortality. Severe COVID-19 was defined as admission (or transfer) to an intensive care unit, need for mechanical ventilation, or death. Transplant recipients were younger and had more comorbidities compared to nontransplant patients. They presented with higher creatinine levels and developed more episodes of acute kidney injury. After matching, the 30-day cumulative incidence of severe COVID-19 did not differ between KTR and nontransplant patients; however, 30-day COVID-19-related mortality was significantly higher in KTR (17.9% vs 11.4%, respectively, p = .038). Age >60 years, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, fever, lymphopenia, and C-reactive protein (CRP) were associated with severe COVID-19 in univariate analysis, whereas transplant status and serum creatinine levels were not. Age >60 years, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, CRP >60 mg/L, lymphopenia, kidney transplant status (HR = 1.55), and creatinine level >115 µmol/L (HR = 2.32) were associated with COVID-19-related mortality in univariate analysis. In multivariable analysis, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, and fever were associated with severe disease, whereas age >60 years, cardiovascular disease, dyspnea, fever, and creatinine level>115 µmol/L retained their independent associations with mortality. KTR had a higher COVID-19-related mortality compared to nontransplant hospitalized patients.

C5b9 Deposition in Glomerular Capillaries Is Associated With Poor Kidney Allograft Survival in Antibody-Mediated Rejection.

C4d deposition in peritubular capillaries (PTC) reflects complement activation in antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) of kidney allograft. However, its association with allograft survival is controversial. We hypothesized that capillary deposition of C5b9-indicative of complement-mediated injury-is a severity marker of ABMR. This pilot study aimed to determine the frequency, location and prognostic impact of these deposits in ABMR. We retrospectively selected patients diagnosed with ABMR in two French transplantation centers from January 2005 to December 2014 and performed C4d and C5b9 staining by immunohistochemistry. Fifty-four patients were included. Median follow-up was 52.5 (34.25-73.5) months. Thirteen patients (24%) had C5b9 deposits along glomerular capillaries (GC). Among these, seven (54%) had a global and diffuse staining pattern. Twelve of the C5b9+ patients also had deposition of C4d in GC and PTC. C4d deposits along GC and PTC were not associated with death-censored allograft survival (p = 0.42 and 0.69, respectively). However, death-censored allograft survival was significantly lower in patients with global and diffuse deposition of C5b9 in GC than those with a segmental pattern or no deposition (median survival after ABMR diagnosis, 6 months, 40.5 months and 44 months, respectively; p = 0.015). Double contour of glomerular basement membrane was diagnosed earlier after transplantation in C5b9+ ABMR than in C5b9- ABMR (median time after transplantation, 28 vs. 85 months; p = 0.058). In conclusion, we identified a new pattern of C5b9+ ABMR, associated with early onset of glomerular basement membrane duplication and poor allograft survival. Complement inhibitors might be a therapeutic option for this subgroup of patients.

Primary sclerosing cholangitis: a new cause of distal renal tubular acidosis.

We describe the first case of distal renal tubular acidosis (dRTA) associated with primary sclerosing cholangitis. A 26-year-old Lao-Thai male patient presented with severe jaundice, metabolic acidosis and hypokalaemia. He was diagnosed of dRTA. Liver transplantation resulted in correction of electrolyte disturbances and hyperbilirubinaemia. A fludrocortisone-furosemide test revealed normal urinary acidification, demonstrating no residual dRTA. This observation suggests that dRTA may be an early manifestation of bilirubin-associated nephropathy or the consequence of an immune mechanism.