Faculty Bibliography

Transplantation benefits from appropriate regulation by ensuring adherence to quality and safety standards. However, Dr. Andreoni highlights in his Personal Viewpoint the unintended consequences of heightened regulatory control¹ . While the article has a US perspective, its message is global. For example, in the UK any center with statistical deviation in actual-versus-expected 30-day survival outcomes can be investigated. US data show that discard rates have risen and the number of patients waiting for transplants has flattened in the era of enhanced regulation; suggesting we are providing fewer transplant opportunities for patients who could potentially benefit.

Desensitization using plasma exchange can remove harmful antibodies prior to transplantation and mitigate risks for hyperacute and severe early acute antibody-mediated rejection. Traditionally, the use of plasma exchange requires a living donor so that the timing of treatments relative to transplant can be planned. Non-HLA antibody is increasingly recognized as capable of causing antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection and has been associated with decreased graft longevity. Our patient had high-strength non-HLA antibody deemed prohibitive to transplantation without desensitization, but no living donors. As the patient was eligible to receive an A2 ABO blood group organ and was willing to accept a hepatitis C positive donor kidney, this afforded a high probability of receiving an offer within a short enough time frame to attempt empiric desensitization in anticipation of a deceased donor transplant. Fifteen plasma exchange treatments were performed before the patient received an organ offer, and the patient was successfully transplanted. Hepatitis C infection was treated posttransplant. No episodes of rejection were observed. At one-year posttransplant, the patient maintains good graft function. In this case, willingness to consider nontraditional donor organs enabled us to mimic living donor desensitization using a deceased donor.

With the development of modern solid-phase assays to detect anti-HLA antibodies and a more precise histological classification, the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has become more common and is a major cause of kidney graft loss. Currently, there are no approved therapies and treatment guidelines are based on low level evidence. The number of prospective randomized trials for the treatment of AMR is small and the lack of an accepted common standard for care has been an impediment to the development of new therapies. To help alleviate this, The Transplantation Society convened a meeting of international experts to develop a consensus as to what is appropriate treatment for active and chronic active AMR. The aim was to reach a consensus for standard of care treatment against which new therapies could be evaluated.At the meeting, the underlying biology of AMR, the criteria for diagnosis, the clinical phenotypes and outcomes were discussed. The evidence for different treatments was reviewed and a consensus for what is acceptable standard of care for the treatment of active and chronic active AMR was presented.Whilst it was agreed that the aims of treatment are to preserve renal function, reduce histological injury and reduce the titer of donor specific antibody (DSA), there was no conclusive evidence to support any specific therapy. As a result, the treatment recommendations are largely based on expert opinion. It is acknowledged that properly conducted and powered clinical trials of biologically plausible agents are urgently needed to improve patient outcomes.

Kidney paired donation (KPD) and the new kidney allocation system (KAS) in the United States have led to improved transplantation rates for highly sensitized candidates. We aimed to assess the potential need for other approaches to improve the transplantation rate of highly sensitized candidates such as desensitization. Using the UNOS STAR file, we analyzed transplant rates in a prevalent active waiting-list cohort as of June 1, 2016, followed for 1 year. The overall transplantation rate was 18.9% (11 129/58769). However, only 9.7% (213/2204) of candidates with a calculated panel reactive antibody ≥99.9% received a transplant, and highly sensitized candidates were less likely to receive a living donor transplant. Among candidates with a CPRA ≥ 99.5% (ie. 100%), only 2.5% of transplants were from living donors (13 total, 7 from KPD). Nearly 4 years after KAS (6/30/2018), 1791 actively wait-listed candidates had a CPRA of ≥99.9% and 34.6% (620/1791) of these had ≥5 years of waiting time. Thus, despite KPD and KAS, many sensitized candidates have not been transplanted even with prolonged waiting time. We conclude that candidates with a CPRA ≥ 99.9% and sensitized candidates with an incompatible living donor and prolonged waiting time may benefit from desensitization to improve their ability to receive a transplant.

The complement system is integral to innate immunity, and it is an essential deterrent against infections. The complement apparatus comprises of >30 fluid-phase and surface-bound elements that also engage with the adaptive immune system, clear harmful immune complexes, and orchestrates several salutary physiological processes. An imbalance in the complement system's tightly regulated machinery and the consequent unrestrained complement activation underpins the pathogenesis of a wide array of inflammatory, autoimmune, neoplastic and degenerative disorders. Antibody-mediated rejection is a leading cause of graft failure in kidney transplantation. Complement-induced inflammation and endothelial injury have emerged as the primary mechanisms in the pathogenesis of this form of rejection. Researchers in the field of transplantation are now trying to define the role and efficacy of complement targeting agents in the prevention and treatment of rejection and other complement related conditions that lead to graft injury. Here, we detail the current clinical indications for complement therapeutics and the scope of existing and emerging therapies that target the complement system, focusing on kidney transplantation.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

OBJECTIVE:To develop and validate an integrative system to predict long term kidney allograft failure. DESIGN:International cohort study. SETTING:Three cohorts including kidney transplant recipients from 10 academic medical centres from Europe and the United States. PARTICIPANTS:Derivation cohort: 4000 consecutive kidney recipients prospectively recruited in four French centres between 2005 and 2014. Validation cohorts: 2129 kidney recipients from three centres in Europe and 1428 from three centres in North America, recruited between 2002 and 2014. Additional validation in three randomised controlled trials (NCT01079143, EudraCT 2007-003213-13, and NCT01873157). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Allograft failure (return to dialysis or pre-emptive retransplantation). 32 candidate prognostic factors for kidney allograft survival were assessed. RESULTS:Among the 7557 kidney transplant recipients included, 1067 (14.1%) allografts failed after a median post-transplant follow-up time of 7.12 (interquartile range 3.51-8.77) years. In the derivation cohort, eight functional, histological, and immunological prognostic factors were independently associated with allograft failure and were then combined into a risk prediction score (iBox). This score showed accurate calibration and discrimination (C index 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.83). The performance of the iBox was also confirmed in the validation cohorts from Europe (C index 0.81, 0.78 to 0.84) and the US (0.80, 0.76 to 0.84). The iBox system showed accuracy when assessed at different times of evaluation post-transplant, was validated in different clinical scenarios including type of immunosuppressive regimen used and response to rejection therapy, and outperformed previous risk prediction scores as well as a risk score based solely on functional parameters including estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria. Finally, the accuracy of the iBox risk score in predicting long term allograft loss was confirmed in the three randomised controlled trials. CONCLUSION:An integrative, accurate, and readily implementable risk prediction score for kidney allograft failure has been developed, which shows generalisability across centres worldwide and common clinical scenarios. The iBox risk prediction score may help to guide monitoring of patients and further improve the design and development of a valid and early surrogate endpoint for clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03474003.