Predicting flow cytometry crossmatch results from single-antigen bead testing.

The aim of this study was to devise an algorithm that would predict flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM) results using single-antigen bead (SAB) mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) levels using samples received through the National External Quality Assurance Scheme (NEQAS) 2B external proficiency testing scheme between 2019 and 2023. A total of 159 serum samples were retrospectively screened using LABScreen Single Antigen Class I and II (SAB), and 40 peripheral blood samples were human leucocyte antigen (HLA) typed with LABType SSO. Donor-specific antibodies were identified for each cell-serum combination tested, and cumulative MFI values were calculated for each test before correlating the screening result with the consensus crossmatch results for this scheme. HLA Class I MFIs were combined to predict the T cell crossmatch. For the B cell crossmatch prediction, two options were considered: (i) HLA Class II MFI values alone and (ii) HLA Class I + Class II MFIs. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was carried out to identify the combined MFI threshold that predicted NEQAS consensus results with the greatest sensitivity and specificity. HLA Class I combined MFI >5000 predicted T cell crossmatch results with 96% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value (PPV) and 92% negative predictive value (NPV). For B cell results, HLA Class I + Class II combined MFIs >11,000 gave the best model, showing 97% sensitivity, 82% specificity, 96% PPV and 85% NPV. However, for samples with only HLA Class II sensitization, combined MFIs >13,000 improved the B cell crossmatch predictions: 92% sensitivity, 95% specificity, 96% PPV and 91% NPV. Using this model, combined MFI can be used to predict the immunological risk posed by donor-specific antibodies when it is not possible to carry out an FCXM.

Association between C4d staining in renal transplant biopsies, production of donor-specific HLA antibodies, and graft outcome.

BACKGROUND: We carried out a retrospective study of C4d staining in paraffin sections from renal transplant biopsies to determine the association between C4d staining, donor-specific antibodies (DSA), histological features, and graft outcome. METHODS: We studied 92 patients who had been biopsied for graft dysfunction. Biopsies were classified using Banff 97 criteria and features suggestive of antibody-mediated rejection were noted. Paraffin sections were stained with a polyclonal antibody using an immunoperoxidase technique. The presence of DSA in concurrent sera was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and clinical data were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 92 cases, 15% showed diffuse and 24% showed focal C4d positivity. The grafts failed in 36% of the diffuse (P<0.025), 23% of the focal, and 7% of the negative group at between one month and 15 years posttransplantation. Only patients in the group with diffuse C4d positivity had concurrent DSA (five cases, P<0.001). Of the five DSA-positive patients, three had type II acute rejection and two of these transplants subsequently failed. The remaining two had chronic allograft nephropathy with features of alloimmune injury. Only two of the nine DSA-negative/C4d-positive transplants had failed at the time of writing, in one case due to recurrent disease. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a significant association between diffuse C4d staining, production of DSA, and graft failure. Although the concurrent detection of DSA and C4d positivity is uncommon in our patients, these results indicate that outcome in this group is poor and they may benefit from therapies directed at the humoral response.

The role of HLA-specific antibodies in kidney transplant rejection: published studies and local data.

The post-transplantation production of antibodies directed against donor HLA class I and class II mismatches has been shown to be associated with transplant rejection. Recipient sensitization against donor HLA plays a key role in transplant rejection; this risk is best minimized by efficient pre-transplant antibody detection and definition, effective pre-allocation cross-matching, and minimization of HLA mismatches between donor and recipient. The term "PRA" is of little value. Identification of the HLA specificity to which an antibody is directed is essential and now possible using contemporary methodology. It is now recognized that antibody-mediated rejection should be diagnosed on the basis of allograft dysfunction, characteristic features of histology, C4d immunohistology, and the presence of donor-specific antibodies. HLA-DP is becoming recognized as a "transplantation antigen." For the future, the repertoire of a histocompatibility laboratory must expand to include typing organ transplant recipients and donors for HLA-DP and also the definition of antibodies to DP. Antibodies to non-HLA targets should be an important consideration when assessing factors that influence transplant outcome.

The detection and definition of IgM alloantibodies in the presence of IgM autoantibodies using flowPRA beads.

We have developed a flow cytometry-based screening method using FlowPRA (One Lambda) human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I panel beads and FlowPRA (One Lambda) HLA class I specificity beads for the detection and definition of immunoglobulin (Ig)M HLA-specific antibodies in the presence of IgM autoantibodies. Forty-six autoantibody-positive patients who were on the waiting list for a renal transplant (56 sera) were tested in parallel with FlowPRA (One Lambda) HLA class I beads and FlowPRA (One Lambda) control beads. Sera that were positive for IgM HLA class I antibodies were subsequently tested with FlowPRA HLA class I specificity beads to determine the HLA specificities. Thirteen of the 46 patients were positive for IgM HLA class I-specific antibodies. Eleven of the 13 had previous failed transplants and 2 were awaiting a primary transplant. For 9 of the 13 positive patients, IgM HLA class I specificities were defined. We have demonstrated the presence of IgM HLA-specific antibodies in patients with IgM autoantibodies. This study demonstrates the value of FlowPRA HLA class I panel and specificity beads for the detection and definition of IgM HLA class I-specific antibodies.

Posttransplantation production of donor HLA-specific antibodies as a predictor of renal transplant outcome.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine whether the production, in renal transplant recipients, of antibodies directed against donor HLA mismatches is predictive of transplant failure. METHODS: The failure study group comprised 112 adult recipients of primary renal transplants who had re-entered the transplant waiting list after failure of the first graft. A control group of 123 recipients with functioning transplants was selected from transplantations performed during the same time period, in which patients had equivalent HLA matching and immunosuppression and a minimum of 5 years of follow-up. Sera taken before transplantation and at 1, 3, and 6 months and annually after transplantation were tested by enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay (ELISA) for the presence of HLA class I- and class II-specific antibodies. Antibody specificity was defined by a combination of cytotoxicity, ELISA, and flow cytometry techniques to determine whether the antibodies were directed against donor mismatches. RESULTS: All recipients were negative for donor HLA-specific antibodies before transplantation. After transplantation, 57 (50.9%) of the 112 patients in the failure group produced donor HLA-specific antibodies compared with 2 (1.6%) of the 123 controls (P<0.0001; odds ratio [OR]=64.98; confidence interval [CI], 14.78-399.51). For 60% of the donor-specific antibody-positive patients, antibodies were detected before transplant failure. In 17 cases, these were class I specific; in 14 cases, class II specific; and in 3 cases, specific for both class I and II. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that the production of posttransplantation antibodies directed against donor HLA-A, -B, -Cw, -DR, and -DQ mismatches are all strongly predictive of transplant failure.