Clinical management strategies for recipients with renal graft loss / 器官移植

With the maturity of kidney transplantation, introduction of new immunosuppressive drugs and improvement of immunosuppressive regimen, the short-term survival rate of kidney transplant recipients has been significantly improved, whereas the long-term survival rate has not been significantly elevated. Kidney transplant recipients may have the risk of renal graft loss. Clinical management after renal graft loss is complicated, including the adjustment of immunosuppressive drugs, management of renal graft and selection of subsequent renal replacement therapy. These management procedures directly affect clinical prognosis of patients with renal graft loss. Nevertheless, relevant guidelines or consensuses are still lacking. Clinical management of patients after renal graft loss highly depend upon clinicians’ experience. In this article, the adjustment of immunosuppressive drugs, management of renal graft and selection of subsequent renal replacement therapy were reviewed, aiming to provide reference for prolonging the survival and improving the quality of life of these patients.

Expert consensus on perioperative nursing standards for pediatric kidney transplantation / 器官移植

Pediatric kidney transplant recipients differ from adult counterparts in primary disease, physiology, psychology, organ function and immune status and their perioperative treatment and nursing management are different from those of adult kidney transplantation. To standardize holistic perioperative nursing regimens for pediatric kidney transplantation, Surgery Nursing Committee of Shanghai Nursing Association organized national medical and nursing experts in the fields of transplantation to jointly draft "expert consensus on perioperative nursing standards for pediatric kidney transplantation " (abbreviated as "consensus"). After three rounds of online expert inquiry, all revised opinions were jointly discussed combined with literature evidence, and the expert consensus was finally reached. The highlights of perioperative treatment and nursing care for pediatric kidney transplantation were summarized and stated, including preoperative evaluation, preoperative and postoperative nursing care, which were of scientific and practical value.

Protein A immunoadsorption in the treatment of de novo DSA-mediated acute rejection after lung transplantation / 器官移植

Objective To investigate the treatment on de novo donor specific antibody (dnDSA) mediated acute rejection after lung transplantation. Methods Clinical data of 1 recipient with antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) early after lung transplantation was retrospectively analyzed. The process of diagnosis and treatment were assessed. Results The recipient underwent right lung transplantation due to systemic sclerosis-associated end-stage interstitial lung disease. Preoperatively, classⅠ panel reactive antibody (PRA) was positive (11%). No pretreatment was given before transplantation. Antithymocyte globulin induction therapy was delivered on the day of transplantation and postoperatively. The recipient was properly recovered early after transplantation. Chest tightness and shortness of breath occurred at postoperative 13 d, which were progressively worsened and rapidly progressed into type Ⅰ respiratory failure. Class Ⅰ PRA was increased to 58%, and dnDSA was observed at the loci of A24: 02. The mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) was 2 110. According to the guidelines of International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation, the recipient was diagnosed as possible AMR. After comprehensive treatment including plasmapheresis, protein A immunoadsorption, glucocorticoid pulse, rituximab and immunoglobulin intravenous drip, the PRA and DSA levels were gradually decreased, and the MFI of DSA was 0 at postoperative 20 d. Clinical condition of the recipient was gradually improved. The dyspnea was healed, shortness of breath was eased, respiratory failure was treated, and pulmonary effusion was gradually absorbed. At postoperative 45 d, the recipient was discharged after full recovery. During 1-year follow-up, the recipient was physically stable and obtained normal quality of life. Class Ⅰ PRA was 5%, and class Ⅱ PRA was negative. No DSA was noted. Conclusions Based on traditional drug therapy, supplement of protein A immunoadsorption therapy may effectively eliminate DSA from the circulating blood of the recipient and mitigate the damage of target organs. Ideal short- and long-term prognosis may be achieved. Traditional drug therapy combined with immunoadsorption may yield ideal efficacy in treating AMR after lung transplantation.

Evaluation of renal transplantation recipients those who do not use steroid with panel reactive antibody and donor specific antibody / Evaluación de receptores de trasplante renal que no usan esteroides con panel de anticuerpos reactivos y anticuerpos específicos del donante

ABSTRACT Background: Steroids are the mainstream drugs of immu- nosuppressive regimen in renal transplantation. They are successfully used on induction, maintenance and rejection treatment. Due to complications caused by steroids, treatments are switched to immunosuppressive agents. Graft dysfunction risk caused by reduced total immunosuppression disturbs clinicians very often. We documented the differences among patients by means of clinical presentation and PRA/DSA levels between patients who are using steroids and patients that were prescribed for steroid-free regimen. Methods: 82 individuals who did not use steroid and 52 patients on steroid treatment were included with similar rates of age, sex, primary renal disease, dialysis type, posttransplant follow-up duration and donor type. Pre and posttransplant PRA, DSA levels, posttransplant and current graft function and comorbidities were evaluated. Results: Individuals who do not use steroids were found to have a lower posttransplant creatinine level and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) compared to steroid users. Posttransplant and current spot urinary protein/creatinine rates were also lower in the steroid-free group. However DM, BKVN and induction therapy rates were higher in the steroid-free group. PRA and DSA levels were similar in both groups. On the other hand, posttransplant PRA-I levels were significantly higher in those with less steroid use time. Conclusions: Although steroid free regimens usually worry the clinicians, they can be preferred in patients with low immunological risk for rejection to avoid its side effects such as uncontrolled diabetes, obesity, musculoskeletal problems and cataracts.

RESUMEN Antecedentes: Los esteroides son los principales fármacos del régimen inmunosupresor en el trasplante renal. Se utilizan con éxito en tratamientos de inducción, mantenimiento y rechazo. Debido a las complicaciones causadas por los esteroides, los tratamientos se cambian a agentes inmunosupresores. El riesgo de disfunción del injerto causado por la reducción de la inmunosupresión total perturba a los médicos con mucha frecuencia. Documentamos la diferencia entre los pacientes por medio de la presentación clínica y los niveles de PRA/DSA en aquellos que utilizan esteroides y a los que se les prescribió un regimen sin esteroides. Material y métodos: Se incluyeron 82 individuos que no usaban esteroides y 52 pacientes en tratamiento con esteroides con tasas similares de edad, sexo, enfermedad renal primaria, tipo de diálisis, duración del seguimiento postrasplante y tipo de donante. Se evaluaron la ARP pre y postrasplante, los niveles de DSA, la función y comorbilidades postrasplante y actual del injerto. Resultados: Se encontró que las personas que no usan esteroides tienen un nivel de creatinina postrasplante y una tasa de filtración glomerular (TFG) más bajas en comparación con los usuarios de esteroides. Las tasas de proteína/creatinina urinarias postrasplante y puntuales actuales también fueron más bajas en el grupo sin esteroides. Sin embargo, las tasas de DM, BKVN y terapia de inducción fueron más altas en el grupo sin esteroides. Los niveles de PRA y DSA fueron similares en ambos grupos. Por otro lado, los niveles de PRA-I postrasplante fueron significativamente más altos en aquellos con menos tiempo de uso de esteroides. Conclusiones: Aunque los regimenes libres de esteroides suelen preocupar a los clínicos, pueden ser preferidos en pacientes con bajo riesgo inmunológico de rechazo para evitar sus efectos secundarios, como diabetes no controlada, obesidad, problemas musculoesqueléticos y cataratas.

Assessment and monitoring of immune risk of kidney transplantation rejection / 器官移植

Kidney transplantation is the most efficacious treatment for end-stage renal failure. Although the shortterm survival and functional recovery of the kidney graft have been significantly improved, the long-term survival of the kidney graft remains to be enhanced. Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) caused by immune factors are still the most critical causes of kidney graft failure. In this article, the immune risk assessment and monitoring of kidney transplant recipients during the awaiting period, before and after kidney transplantation were reviewed. Through the evaluation of preexisting human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies and non-HLA antibodies, HLA matching, lymphocytotoxicity cross-matching and immune memory cells in the recipients before kidney transplantation, programmed biopsy of the kidney graft of the recipients after kidney transplantation and monitoring of HLA antibodies, non-HLA antibodies and donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), individualized immunosuppressive treatment and monitoring regimes could be established, and the incidence of rejection could be prevented, timely detected and diagnosed. According to the immune monitoring results, ineffective treatment or over-treatment could be avoided, thereby improving the long-term survival of kidney graft.

Analysis of the management and clinical effect of accessory renal artery in the living-related donor renal, transplantation / 器官移植

Objective To investigate the management and clinical effect of accessory renal artery in living-related donor renal transplantation. Methods Clinical data of 277 donors and recipients undergoing living-related donor renal transplantation were retrospectively analyzed. According to the results of preoperative CT angiography (CTA), the donor kidney was selected and the accessory renal artery of the renal graft was treated intraoperatively. Intraoperative status of the donors, and intraoperative management, postoperative complications, clinical prognosis of the recipients were summarized. Results Among 277 cases of renal transplantation, accessory renal arteries were detected in 83 donors by preoperative CTA examination with an accuracy rate of 95%. Fifty-eight donor kidneys with accessory renal arteries were obtained. Twenty-five donor kidneys with accessory renal arteries were reconstructed and anastomized by vascular repairing. Among them, 1 patient presented with anastomotic thrombosis during abdominal closure, whereas the other 24 cases were successfully anastomized with excellent blood flow. No complications, such as hemorrhage, renal graft embolism, ureteral necrosis and urinary fistula, occurred after renal transplantation. The 1-year survival rates of the recipients and renal grafts were 94% and 91%. The clinical efficacy did not significantly differ between the recipients with single renal artery and their counterparts with accessory renal artery (P > 0.05). Conclusions It can be obtained good clinical efficacy of renal transplantation by selecting a suitable donor kidney and reconstructing and anastomizing the accessory renal artery of the renal graft through vascular repair.

Monitoreo de anticuerpos anti-HLA en pacientes con insuficiencia renal crónica en lista de espera para trasplante / Anti-hla antibodies monitoring in patients with chronic re- nal failure on waiting list for renal transplant in Paraguay

INTRODUCCIÓN: El estudio de anticuerpos anti-HLA en el suero del paciente en lista de espera para trasplante renal es fundamental para optimizar la elección de un donante así como el esquema de inmunosupresión de inducción y mantenimiento acorde al riesgo inmunológico. Estos anticuerpos pueden Encontrarse de manera preexistente al trasplante como resultado de exposición del individuo a transfusiones sanguíneas, embarazos y trasplantes previos. El objetivo del estudio fue determinar la incidencia de inmunización frente a antígenos de HLA, los factores asociados y su impacto en pacientes en espera de un trasplante renal. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: En este estudio, observacional retrospectivo de corte trasversal, fueron incluidos 254 pacientes en lista de espera para trasplante renal que acudieron al Laboratorio Central de Salud Pública en el período comprendido entre julio de 2013 y julio de 2015. RESULTADOS: De los 254 pacientes estudiados, 30% presentaron anticuerpos anti-HLA. El evento sensibilizante más significativo fue la exposición a un trasplante previo, presentando anticuerpos anti-HLA el 84% de los candidatos a retrasplante (p<0,05). En segundo lugar se encontraron las mujeres multíparas, presentando un PRA (Panel Reactivo de Anticuerpos) positivo el 69% de ellas (p<0,05). Por último, el 24% de los pacientes poli-transfundidos presentaron anticuerpos anti HLA (p<0,05). CONCLUSIONES: En el trascurso de los dos años de estudio, 51 pacientes fueron trasplantados, de los cuales un solo paciente presentaba anticuerpos anti-HLA antes del trasplante. Esto indica claramente que la inmunización frente a antígenos de HLA representa una barrera para el acceso al trasplante

INTRODUCTION: Anti-HLA antibodies determination in the serum of patients on a waiting list for renal transplant is essential to optimize donor selection as well as for the induction and maintenance immunosuppression scheme, according to immunological risk. These antibodies could be present before transplantation as a result of being exposed to blood transfusions, pregnancies and previous transplants. The objective of the study was to determine immunization against HLA antigens, associated factors and their impact on the waiting list for a renal transplant. METHODS: In this observational retrospective cross sectional study, 254 patients on the waiting list for renal transplant were included. These patients attended the Public Health central laboratory between July 2013 and July 2015. RESULTS: 30% of the 254 studied patients presented anti-HLA antibodies. The most significant sensitizing event was the exposure to a previous transplant (p=<0.05). Multiparous women were in second place, 69% of them presenting positive PRA (panel reactive antibodies) (p=<0.05). Finally 24% of poly transfused patients presented anti-HLA antibodies (p=<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: During the 2 year of the study, 51 patients were transplanted, presenting only one of them anti-HLA antibodies before transplantation. This results clearly indicate that the immunization against HLA represents a barrier for transplantation access

Effects of preoperative panel reactive antibody levels on long-term survival after kidney transplantation / 中国免疫学杂志

Objective:To evaluate the effect of preoperative panel reactive antibody(PRA)levels on long-term survival after kidney transplantation. Methods:Data on 1 162 patients underwent first kidney transplantation performed between January 2001 and June 2014 were included in our center. According to the preoperative PRA levels,the patients were divided into negative group( PRA≤10%) and positive group( PRA>10%) ,which were retrospectively analyzed. Results: The 1-,5-,10-year patient survival rates of the negative group calculated by Kaplan-Meier were 96. 8%,89. 4%,78. 6%,respectively,while the positive group were 93. 5%,81. 6%, 65. 4%. The 1-,5-,10 -year death-censored graft survival rates of the negative group were 95. 9%,84. 8%,63. 1%,respectively,while the positive group were 92. 3%,74. 1%,51. 9%. The log-rank test revealed that there was significant difference between the patient and graft survival curves (χ2 =9. 623/11. 019, P=0. 002/0. 001 ) . Cox multivariate analysis found that preoperative PRA levels were independent risk factors for reducing the patient or graft survival rates(P<0. 001). Logistic multivariate regression analysis confirmed the significant association between preoperative PRA levels and the risk of acute rejection ( OR=8. 25,95% CI=2. 86-5. 72, P<0. 001). The 5-,10-year creatinine values were significantly lower in the negative group compared to the positive group(all P<0. 05), while there was no difference in the 1-year. In addition, Logistic multivariate regression analysis confirmed the significant association between preoperative PRA levels and the production of donor specific antibody(DSA)(OR=6. 89,95% CI=4. 52-9. 17,P<0. 05). Conclusion: The detection of preoperative PRA is an important indictor predicting the sensitivity status of the recipients. The preoperative PRA positive recipients need careful monitoring and diagnosis of acute rejection and DSA after kidney transplantation.

Study on the relationship between panel reactive antibody and long-term prognosis of transplant renal function / 器官移植

Objective To study the impact of panel reactive antibody (PRA)on the long-term prognosis of transplant renal function after renal transplantation.Methods The objects of this study were 224 patients,who underwent renal transplantation,received PRA test about 2 weeks after operation and followed up in Affiliated Beijing Friendship Hospital of Capital Medical University from January 1 994 to December 2004.According to the PRA test results,the patients were divided into two groups:negative group (n =1 95)and positive group (n =29).PRA of patients in negative group were tested again in 2007.Serum creatinine (Scr) of patients in both groups were tested recently (from October 201 3 to April 201 4)to know about the renal function.The rates of long-term normal transplant renal function between PRA positive patients (including PRA re-test positive patients)and PRA negative patients were compared.Results In 29 cases of positive group, the re-test result in April 201 4 showed that 1 8 cases were observed with loss (n =1 7)or decline (n =1 )of renal function,and 1 1 cases were observed with normal renal function.In 1 95 cases of negative group,a total of 1 53 cases were re-tested with PRA negative in 2007,1 48 cases were re-tested with normal renal function in April 201 4,and 5 cases were observed with decline or loss of renal function.A total of 42 cases were re-tested with PRA positive in 2007 and the transplant renal function was observed decline or loss by varying degrees.There were a total of 71 cases with PRA positive before 2004 and when re-tested in 2007,and 1 1 cases were re-tested with normal renal function in April 201 4.The rate of long-term normal transplant renal function was 1 5.5%.There were 1 53 cases with PRA negative and 1 48 cases were re-tested with normal renal function in April 201 4.The rate of long-term normal transplant renal function was 96.7%.Significant difference was observed in the rates of long-term normal transplant renal function between PRA positive patients and PRA negative patients (P <0.005).Conclusions PRA after renal transplantation has obvious impacts on the long-term prognosis of transplant renal function.

Preoperative treatment and prognosis observation in sensitized recipients of kidney transplantation / 中华器官移植杂志

Objective To study the preoperative treatment and prognosis observation? in sensitized recipients of kidney transplantation.Method Forty-one recipients positive for preoperative PRA accepted renal allograft transplantation from January 2007 to July 2012.All recipients were given immunosuppressant or immune induction by anti-CD25rnAb in advance,and plasma exchange,immunoadsorption and intravenous high-dose immune globulin were administered.Meanwhile,donor HLA antigens had to avoid all stored HLA antibodies of the recipient,and lymphocyte cytotoxicity cross test (CDC) had to be negative.Anti-human lymphocyte globulin (ATG) was used to strengthen the immune induction,and tacrolimus + mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) + corticosteroids triple immunosuppressive regimen was adopted after transplantation.Then intravenous micafungin would be given after transplanted kidney function was normal,and ganciclovir and sulfamethoxazole were taken orally to prevent infection.Result In 41 recipients positive for preoperative PRA,13 cases were positive for only HLA class Ⅰ antibodies,15 cases for only HLA class Ⅱ antibodies,and there existed 13 cases of both HLA class Ⅰ and class Ⅱ antibodies also with PRA≥50％.Fifteen patients achieved normal serum creatinine in one week,and no hyperacute rejection and accelerated rejection occurred.Fourteen recipients experienced an episode of acute rejection (34.15％,14/41): 12 recovered by steroids bolus therapy,and the other two reversed in 3-5 days by cyclophosphamide or ATG treatment.One case died of mycotic pneumonia in 4 months later.One-year recipient/kidney survival rate was 97.6％ (40/41).Conclusion The recipients positive for preoperative PRA only can accept renal allograft transplant while the donor's HLA antigens had to avoid all stored HLA antibodies of recipients themselves and CDC test was negative.After that the combination of desensitization therapy,immune induction therapy and postoperative potent immunosuppressant can prevent acute rejection effectively and increase postoperative recipient/kidney survival rate.

Evaluation of Flow Cytometric Crossmatch Results in Comparison with Donor-specific Antibodies Detected by Luminex-PRA Tests in Organ Transplantation Patients / 대한이식학회지

BACKGROUND: Two of the most sensitive methods for detecting donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSAs) are solid phase panel reactive antibody (PRA) assay using Luminex platform (Luminex-PRA), and a cell-based flow cytometric crossmatch (FCXM) test. We evaluated FCXM results in relation to DSAs detected by the Luminex-PRA method in solid organ transplantation candidates or post-transplant follow-up patients. METHODS: A total of 171 donor-recipient pairs were evaluated by Luminex-PRA (LIFECODES Class I and Class II ID kits; Gen-Probe, USA) and FCXM (T- and B-cells) tests. DSA levels were analyzed using a sum of median fluorescence intensity (MFI) values, and FCXM results were analyzed using MFI ratios. RESULTS: Class I and II DSAs were detected in 11.7% (20/171) and 11.1% (19/171) of tested sera, respectively. T-FCXM was negative in 97.4% (147/151) of Class I DSA negative sera, and B-FCXM was negative in 99.3% (137/138) of Class I and II DSA negative sera. T-FCXM was positive in 91.7% (11/12) of sera with moderate to strong Class I DSAs and B-FCXM was positive in 88.9% (16/18) of sera with moderate to strong Class II and/or Class I DSAs in the evaluation of sensitivities of FCXM in relation to DSA. There were significant correlations between FCXM ratios and DSA levels for both T-FCXM (P=0.008) and B-FCXM (P97%) and the sensitivities of T- and B-FCXM were satisfactory (>88%) in detecting moderate to strong DSAs.

Application of Calculated Panel Reactive Antibody Using HLA Frequencies in Koreans

BACKGROUND: Introduction of the Luminex panel reactive antibody (PRA)-single antigen (SA) assay has increased the detection rates of unacceptable antigens in sensitized patients; the calculated PRA (CPRA) level represents the percentage of actual organ donors that express 1 or more of these unacceptable antigens. We developed a CPRA calculator based on the HLA frequencies in Koreans to measure sensitization levels in Korean patients. METHODS: To develop the calculator, we obtained the HLA-A, HLA-B, and HLA-DR phenotypes of 1,622 Koreans, and compared these with previously reported frequencies in Koreans. Sera from patients awaiting kidney transplantation were tested for HLA antibodies by Luminex PRA-screen, PRA-identification (ID), and PRA-SA assays. The measured %PRA from the PRA-screen (N=55) and PRA-ID (N=71) were compared to the %CPRA for the unacceptable antigens obtained from PRA-SA. RESULTS: Phenotype frequencies used for the CPRA calculator agreed with previously reported data. The concordance rates among the 3 PRA methods for the detection of class I and class II antibodies were 76.1-81.8% (kappa, 0.519-0.636) and 72.7-83.6% (0.463-0.650), respectively. For the detection of broadly sensitized sera (>50% or >80%), the concordance rates were over 80%. In sera with 80-100% CPRA, 91.7% and 94.4% of the samples had concordant results (80-100% PRA) in the PRA-screen and PRA-ID assay, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although further clinical studies are required to confirm the benefits of CPRA values, adoption of CPRA analysis based on HLA frequencies in Koreans may be useful for sensitization measurements and organ-allocation algorithms.

Analysis of sensitized factors in 2429 urinemia patients / 中华器官移植杂志

Objective To analyze the sensitized factors in urinemia patients who waiting for renal transplantation.Methods 2429 patients with urinemia from April 2002 to December 2008 were subjected to the detection of panel reactive antibody, and classified into 5 groups according to their clinical data:(A) no history disease group (n = 1097) who never experienced transfusion, pregnancy and transplantation; (B) Transfusion group (n = 361) who received transfusion more than 200 ml; (C) Pregnancy group (n = 481) who experienced pregnancy; (D) Transfusion+ pregnancy group (n= 294) who experienced both pregnancy and transfusion; (E) Re-transplantation group (n = 196) who experienced failed transplantation before, and waited for the second renal transplantation.Results All the males in group A were negative for PRA, and females were weakly positive for HLA Ⅱ antibody.The incidence of PRA production in group B was 15.24 % (55/361).Thirty-nine patients were positive for PRA in group C with the incidence being 8.11 % (39/481).The PRA positive rate in groups D and E was 30.61 % (90/294) and 70.92 % (139/196) respectively.PRA intensity was more than 60 % in 72 patients in group E.Conclusion Transfusion and pregnancy caused lower incidence of PRA positive rate.The incidence was much higher in transfusion + pregnancy patients than that in patients with transfusion or pregnancy alone.Graft caused the higher incidence of PRA than by transfusion and pregnancy.

Comparison of HLA antibody production in living donor and cadaveric transplant / 国际外科学杂志

Objective To compare the Panel reactive antibody (PRA) producing incidence in living and cadaveric transplant for forecasting long term survival. Methods Retrospectively analyze post-transplant PRA of 48 living transplant patients ( December 2003-Sepdtember 2007 ), and 258 cadaveric transplant patients( Feburary 2003-June 2007 ), which in both groups were all PRA negative in pre-transplant. PRA was detected using LAT-1240 (OneLambda) and QUICKSCREE&BSCREEN (GTI). Serum creatine/urea nitrogen level was provided by clinical laboratory. Results Four recipients in 48 living transplant patients showed PRA positive(8.33% ), while 62 receipients in 258 cadaveric transplant patients showed PRA positive(24.03% ) ( P ＜0.05 ). Three recipients in 35 male living donor transplant patients showed PRA positive(8.57% ) ,while 23.03% PRA positive in male cadaveric transplant patients (P ＜0.05). In females, 1out of 13 living donor transplant patients showed HLA-Ⅱ positive, whereas 20 out of 106 in cadaveric transplant patients( 18.87% ) ( P ＜ 0. 05). Conclusion The incidence of HLA antibody production was much higher in cadaveric transplant patients than that in those of living donor transplant.

Analysis of Panel Reactive Antibody in Patients Awaiting Renal Transplantation / 대한이식학회지

BACKGROUND: We performed panel reactive antibody (PRA) tests in renal transplantation candidates registered to the Korean Network for Organ Sharing (KONOS) and analyzed the results of PRA tests in relation to the results of HLA crossmatch (XM) tests and transplantation history. METHODS: From 833 patients awaiting cadaveric renal transplantation in the KONOS registry, 122 (98 patients) XM (NIH or AHG)-positive and 147 (147 patients) XM-negative serum samples were selected for PRA test. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-PRA screening test was performed and HLA antibody specificities were identified by NIH and AHG PRA methods. RESULTS: PRA positive rate was significantly higher in XM-positive group compared with XM-negative group (ELISA-PRA, 70.5% vs. 21.8%; AHG-PRA [PRA > or =10%], 73.9% vs. 9.6%). Donor specific antibodies were defined in 52.5% (64/122), whereas false positive XM results were suspected in 20.5% (25/122) of the XM-positive samples. Patients with transplantation histories showed significantly higher positive rates for ELISA-PRA (78.7% vs. 30.8%) and AHG-XM tests (78.2% vs. 29.3%). Highly sensitized patients (AHG-PRA > or =80%) showed significantly higher cumulative waiting rate (88.9% vs. 60.2% at 4 years) and longer waiting time (3.8 vs. 3.6 years) (Kaplan Meier method, P=0.037). PRA positive rate in the total renal transplantation candidates in the KONOS registry was estimated to be 33.9% for ELISA-PRA and 21.7% for AHG-PRA (PRA > or =10%), and the proportion of highly sensitized (PRA > or =80%) patients was estimated to be 5.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-transplantation PRA as a routine test is needed in cadaveric renal transplantation for effective and fair allocation of organs in Korea.

Experience on Identification of Cross-Reactive Group Specificity Performed by Anti-human Globulin Panel Reactive Antibody Tests / 대한진단검사의학회지

BACKGROUND: Panel reactive antibody (PRA) is to screen and identify HLA antibody. Majority of antibody specificities in high-PRA are directed against cross reactive group (CREG). Thus, this study was to know the advantage of identifying CREG specificity and whether antibody specificities are changed according to CREG classification. METHODS: HLA class I antibodies were identified from 159 sera from 108 patients in Asan Medical Center, who had shown more than 5% PRA by anti-human globulin (AHG)-complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC). Tail analysis-based computer program was developed to identify specificities, applying both Rodey (R-ABC) and Takemoto (T-ABC) classification. The results were also compared with those obtained when without CREG application (ABC). RESULTS: Among 151 cases in which HLA specificities was identified, the frequency of CREG specificity was 22.5% in R-ABC and 27.2% in T-ABC. Eleven cases showed CREG specificities only in one classification. However, the individual antigen specificities in one hand were all included in the CREG identified in the other hand. CREG specificities in samples with PRA >50% (60%) were more frequently identified than those in samples with PRA < or =50% (9%) (in R-ABC, P<0.0001). Without applying CREG to interpretation, specificity was not identified in 9 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Application of CREG enhanced the rate of antibody identification. Antibody specificities of those cases where CREG specificities were different between Rodey and Takemoto classifications were almost the same when compared at the individual antigen level. Therefore, it was thought that it makes no difference to use any one of these two classifications in interpreting PRA.

Comparison of Anti-HLA Detecting Methods; Cytotoxicity, Flow Cytometric Crossmatch, Multiple Antigen-ELISA, Single Antigen-ELISA / 대한이식학회지

PURPOSE: Identification of antibody specificity is difficult using a multiple antigen PRA (MA-PRA) assay. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical impact of single antigen PRA (SA-PRA) ELISA assay on the transplant outcome and to analyze the clinical significance of SA-PRA compared with CDC-AHG, flow cytometric crossmatch (FCXM) and MA-PRA. METHODS: A total of 151 kidney transplanted patients were tested for the presence of HLA antibodies in the pre- and posttransplant period. The HLA specificities were classified as donor-specific antibodies (DSA) including donor private antigen specific (DS-HLA) or donor public antigen specific (DS-cross reactive group (CREG)), and nondonor specific HLA antibodies. RESULTS: Of the 151 recipients, 28 patients experienced acute rejection episodes (ARE). The pretransplant CDC-AHG, FCXM and MA-PRA tests were positive in 2, 8 and 18 patients, respectively and the concordance between FCXM and MA-PRA was 89.4% (135/151). Of the 47 sera which were tested with both MA-PRA and SA-PRA, 4 sera were SA-PRA positive and MA-PRA negative. The HLA specificities which were not determined with MA-PRA were detected with SA-PRA test. The patients with DSA showed higher incidence of ARE (7/12, 58% vs. 21/139, 15%; P<0.001) and lower glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at 6 posttransplant months (54.9+/-10.2 vs. 66.2+/-19.3; P=0.023) than the patients without DSA. The patients with ARE had higher incidence of posttransplant DS-HLA (6 (21%) vs. 0 (0%); P<0.001), DS- CREG (7 (25%) vs. 0 (0%); P<0.001), de novo HLA antibody (6 (21%) vs. 0 (0%); P<0.001) than the patients without ARE. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that analysis of HLA specificities using the SA-PRA may be useful as a supportive crossmatch test or as a monitoring test after transplantation for early detection of patients at risk of poor clinical outcome.

Allograft Immune Reaction of Kidney Transplantation Part 2. Immunosuppression and Methods to Assess Alloimmunity

For solid organ transplant, ABO blood type of donor and recipient should be compatible in principle. Recent improvement of immunosuppressant made HLA typing not so important while no-mismatch transplant still shows the longest graft survival. PRA(panel reactive antibody) test is to screen and identify recipients with HLA sensitization. When solid organ transplant is scheduled, cross-match test of donor cell and recipient serum should be performed and positive result of cross-match prohibits transplantation. Donor specific antibody (DSA) test can predict the severity of recipient immune reaction against donor organ. Today's mainstay of allograft immunosuppressant regimen is triple therapy of steroid, calcineurin inhibitor(cyclosporine, tacrolimus), azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil(MMF). Antibody induction using Thymoglobulin or anti-IL-2 receptor antibody(basiliximab or daclizumab) is frequently practiced as well.

Development of a Web-based Program for the Identification of Human Leukocyte Antigen Antibody Specificities / 대한진단검사의학회지

BACKGROUND: Panel reactive antibody (PRA) test is used to determine whether a patient awaiting transplantation is previously sensitized. Tail analysis algorithm is widely used to identify antibody specificities, but it is very difficult to perform manually. METHODS: To develop a web-based program, PHP (5.1.2), Apache (2.0.55), and MySQL (5.0.22) were used. Tail analysis algorithm was applied to identify specificities, which analyzed statistically 2 x 2 tables representing reactivities to broad antigens, splits and cross reactive groups (CREG). Exploiting two CREG classifications of Rodey (R) and Takemoto (T), antibody specificities were identified by 3 methods (ABC, R-ABC, T-ABC) simultaneously. Performance of the system was evaluated using 159 samples that showed > or =6 PRA% by a lymphocytotoxicity assay. RESULTS: A web-based system that can identify HLA antibody specificities was implemented on www.koreanhla.com. Among 159 samples tested, antibody specificities were identified in 151 (95.0 %), but not in 8 samples with PRA >97%. Among the 151 samples, 110 showed broad or split specificities and 41 CREG specificities. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a web-based computer program for the identification of HLA antibody specificities. Accessible to everyone on the internet, this program should be of help in sharing PRA results among laboratories.

Detection of Donor Specific Anti-HLA Antibodies Using Antibody Monitoring System / 대한이식학회지

PURPOSE: The antibody monitoring system (AMS, GTI Inc.) is a solid phase ELISA crossmatch test for the detection of IgG antibody to the donor-specific solubilized HLA class I and class II antigens. The objective of this study was to compare the results of AMS assay with donor specific anti-HLA IgG antibodies (DS-HLA Abs), as determined by ELISA-PRA and flowcytometric crossmatch test (FCXM). METHODS: A total of 132 sera were tested for the presence of DS-HLA Abs by ELISA-EIA, FCXM and AMS assay. RESULTS: DS-HLA Abs were determined in 41 serum samples by an ELISA-PRA panel and FCXM. There was a significant degree of concordance (84.8%) between the results from the FCXM and AMS (P<0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, the positive predictive value and the negative predictive value of AMS assay to detect DS-HLA Abs was 90.2%, 93.4%, 86.0%, 95.5%, respectively. The AMS is a simple, objective test and it has several advantages over the cell-based crossmatch test such as elimination of non-HLA antibody reactivity, elimination of the non-donor specific antibody reactivity, no need for viable cells, and the donor's HLA antigens can be prepared in advance. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that AMS may be useful as a supportive crossmatch test or as a monitoring test after transplantation for detecting class I and/or class II DS-HLA Abs.