Impact of pretransplant anti-HLA antibodies on outcomes in lung transplant candidates.

RATIONALE: The prevalence of anti-HLA antibodies in lung transplant candidates and their impact on waitlist and transplant outcomes is not known. OBJECTIVES: We examined the prevalence of pretransplant anti-HLA antibodies at varying thresholds and evaluated their impact on outcomes before and after lung transplantation. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study including all patients listed for lung transplantation between January 2008 and August 2012. Per protocol, transplant candidates were assessed by solid phase LABscreen mixed Class I and II and LABscreen Single Antigen assays. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 224 patients, 34% had anti-HLA antibodies at mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) greater than or equal to 3,000 (group III), and 24% had antibodies at MFI 1,000 to 3,000 (group II). Ninety percent of the patients with pretransplant anti-HLA antibodies had class I antibodies, whereas only seven patients developed class II alone. Patients in group III were less likely to receive transplants than patients without any anti-HLA antibodies (group I) (45.5 vs. 67.7%, P = 0.005). Wait time to transplant was longer in group III than group I, although this difference did not meet statistical significance, and waitlist mortality was similar. Among transplant recipients, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) was more frequent in group III than in group II (20% vs. 0%, P = 0.01) or group I (6.3%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of anti-HLA antibodies at the high MFI threshold (>3,000) was associated with lower transplant rate and higher rates of AMR. Screening for anti-HLA antibodies using the 3,000 MFI threshold may be important in managing transplant candidates and recipients.

Potential Effects of Remdesivir on Tacrolimus Exposure in Transplant Recipients With COVID-19 Infection.

Introduction: Remdesivir has proven to have benefits against COVID-19 infection. However, data supporting drug-drug interactions are insufficient. Clinicians have noticed that calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) levels tend to change after starting remdesivir. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the effect of remdesivir on CNI levels. Methods: This study included adult solid organ transplant recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 who received remdesivir while on CNI. Patients were excluded if they started on other medications known to interact with CNI. The primary end point was the percentage of change in CNI levels after starting remdesivir. Secondary end points included the time until CNI levels reached a maximum increase in trough levels, the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and the time until CNI levels normalized. Results: Of the 86 patients screened, 61 were included (56 on tacrolimus and 5 on cyclosporine). Most patients received kidney transplants (44.3%), and baseline demographics were similar among the transplanted organs. The median increase in tacrolimus level after starting remdesivir was 84.8%, and only 3 patients had no significant change in CNI levels. The median increase in tacrolimus level was more pronounced in lung and kidney recipients than in heart recipients (96.5% vs. 93.9% vs. 64.6 %, respectively). The median time to maximum increase in tacrolimus trough levels was 3 days, and it took 10 days after the remdesivir course for levels to return to baseline. Conclusion: This retrospective analysis demonstrates that CNI levels were significantly elevated after starting remdesivir. However, future studies are warranted to evaluate this interaction further.

Limited Effect of Prevention Strategies on Incidence of Clinically Detectable Venous Thromboembolism After Lung Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic complications are common post-lung transplant, leading to significant morbidity. We instituted multiple interventions because of an observed 36.8% incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) (Incidence rate (IR) 5.74/1000 pt days) in our recipients. METHODS: Our initiative commenced January 2015 with enoxaparin initiation within 6-8 hours of intensive care unit arrival and continuation for 4-6 weeks. We evaluated the IR of VTE in lung transplant recipients within 90 days of transplant. In 2017, the protocol was modified to extend the time to initiation of prophylaxis to within 72 hours of ICU arrival. In 2019, we further amended our intraoperative vascular access strategy. RESULTS: Eighteen of 26 lung transplant recipients (LTR) met inclusion criteria in the 2015 cohort. Six of 18 (33.3%) developed VTE, 50% of which were upper extremity (UE), line associated. Fifty two of 75 LTR were eligible for enoxaparin prophylaxis in the 2017 cohort. Fifteen of 52 subjects (28.8%) developed VTE, 77.8% of which were UE and line associated. Despite improved adherence in 2017, there was little change in VTE IR (3.90/1000 pt days compared with 3.85/1000 pt days). Twenty six of 43 LTR met protocol inclusion criteria in the 2019 cohort. Ten subjects (38.5%) developed VTE, 67% of which were UE and line associated (IR 5.18/1000 pt days). CONCLUSION: Our prospective study found that LTR remain at high risk for VTE despite aggressive prophylaxis with 4-6 weeks of enoxaparin and adjustment of vascular access approach. Alternative interventions should be investigated to minimize VTE development in this vulnerable population.

Alemtuzumab as a Therapy for Chronic Lung Allograft Dysfunction in Lung Transplant Recipients With Short Telomeres.

Alemtuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD52 that causes lymphocyte apoptosis, is a form of advanced immunosuppression that is currently used as a therapy for refractory acute cellular rejection and chronic lung allograft dysfunction in lung transplant recipients (1-3). Side effects of alemtuzumab include bone marrow suppression, infection, and malignancy. Whether alemtuzumab can be safely used in allograft recipients that have an increased propensity for bone marrow suppression due to telomeropathies is unknown. In a retrospective case series, we report outcomes associated with alemtuzumab in three lung allograft recipients with short telomere lengths, comparing endpoints such as leukopenia, transfusion needs, infection, hospitalization and survival to those of 17 patients without known telomeropathies that received alemtuzumab. We show that the use of alemtuzumab in lung transplant recipients with short telomeres is safe, though is associated with an increased incidence of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia requiring packed red blood cell transfusions. Alemtuzumab appears to be an acceptable advanced immunosuppressive therapy in patients with telomeropathies, though given the design and scope of this study, the actual clinical effect needs further evaluation in larger trials.

Comparison of extracorporeal photopheresis and alemtuzumab for the treatment of chronic lung allograft dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Survival after lung transplantation is limited by chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). Immunomodulatory therapies such as extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) and alemtuzumab (AL) have been described for refractory CLAD, but comparative outcomes are not well defined. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed spirometric values and clinical outcomes after therapy with ECP, AL, or no treatment (NT) in patients with CLAD who underwent transplant between January 2005 and December 2014. We used inverse probability-weighted regression adjustment (IPWRA) to adjust for potential confounders affecting treatment choice. RESULTS: Of 267 patients, 31 received immunomodulatory therapies for CLAD, and 78 received NT. The slope of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) decline significantly improved after treatment with AL and with ECP compared with pre-treatment FEV1 slope; however, there was no significant change in slope of forced vital capacity (FVC). Comparison with NT was limited because of clinical differences in treatment groups. After IPWRA, we found no significant difference in mean difference of FEV1 slope (ml/month) when comparing treatment with NT, suggesting stabilization of lung function in the treatment group. We found no difference between the 2 immunomodulatory therapies 1, 3, and 6 months post-treatment (-49.9 [95% CI -581.8, +482.0], p = 0.85; +27.7 [95% CI -167.6, +223.0], p = 0.78; -9.6 [95% CI -167.5, +148.2], p = 0.91). We found no difference in mean FVC slope or differences between ECP and AL in infection rates or survival after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Immunomodulatory therapy for CLAD with ECP or AL was associated with a significant change in FEV1 slope post-treatment compared with pre-treatment slope, with minimal effect on FVC. There was no difference between the 2 therapies in their effect on pulmonary function.

The Presence of Pretransplant HLA Antibodies Does Not Impact the Development of Chronic Lung Allograft Dysfunction or CLAD-Related Death.

BACKGROUND: Development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) after lung transplantation is associated with antibody mediated rejection, acute cellular rejection, and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; however, the significance of circulating antibodies before transplant remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study including recipients of primary lung transplants between 2008 and 2012. We assessed the impact of circulating HLA and noncytotoxic DSA detected before transplant on development of Chronic Lung Allograft Dysfunction (CLAD) or CLAD-related death. RESULTS: 30% of subjects had circulating class I antibodies alone, 4% Class II, and 14.4% class I and class II at mean fluorescent intensity greater than 1000. Nine percent of the subjects had DSA class I, 9% class II, and 2.4% both DSA classes 1 and 2. Neither the presence of circulating antibodies (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-1.54) nor the presence of DSA (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-3.18) before transplant at mean fluorescent intensity greater than 1000 was associated with the development of CLAD or CLAD-related death. CONCLUSIONS: Although in previous studies we have shown an increased incidence of antibody-mediated rejection in patients with pretransplant DSA, neither the presence of HLA antibodies nor DSA translated to an increased risk of allograft dysfunction or death if prospective crossmatch testing was negative. Prospective studies are needed to define the impact of pretransplant sensitization on lung transplant recipients.

Antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplantation: a review of pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment options.

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), also known as B-cell-mediated or humoral rejection, is a significant complication after kidney transplantation that carries a poor prognosis. Although fewer than 10% of kidney transplant patients experience AMR, as many as 30% of these patients experience graft loss as a consequence. Although AMR is mediated by antibodies against an allograft and results in histologic changes in allograft vasculature that differ from cellular rejection, it has not been recognized as a separate disease process until recently. With an improved understanding about the importance of the development of antibodies against allografts as well as complement activation, significant advances have occurred in the treatment of AMR. The standard of care for AMR includes plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulin that remove and neutralize antibodies, respectively. Agents targeting B cells (rituximab and alemtuzumab), plasma cells (bortezomib), and the complement system (eculizumab) have also been used successfully to treat AMR in kidney transplant recipients. However, the high cost of these medications, their use for unlabeled indications, and a lack of prospective studies evaluating their efficacy and safety limit the routine use of these agents in the treatment of AMR in kidney transplant recipients.