The relevance of proficiency testing for laboratories involved in cadaveric organ transplantation and its consequences for graft survival.

Organ exchange organizations such as Eurotransplant allocate organs on the basis of histocompatibility testing results. For this reason it is essential that all data reported by the affiliated laboratories are accurate and reliable. The Eurotransplant Reference Laboratory (ETRL) organizes proficiency testing schemes for the tissue-typing centers of the respective renal transplantation units participating in Eurotransplant. Each year, the ETRL sends out 8 peripheral blood samples of healthy blood donors for serological typing and crossmatching, 16 sera to screen for the presence and definition of HLA alloantibodies and 20 DNA samples for molecular typing to the 49 participating centers. The results are collected centrally and reported back to the participants in an open way. These exercises show that the quality of HLA typing, screening and crossmatching improved significantly over the years. In particular, the introduction of molecular typing for HLA-DR resulted in an increase of reliability. The clinical relevance of a reliable HLA typing was demonstrated in a selected group of transplants, the zero HLA-A,-B,-DR- mismatched group. After retyping the donors, 146 of the 3,458 matched transplants appeared to have a mismatch and those transplants had a significantly lower graft survival rate. A continuing problem, however, is the result of screening for panel reactive antibodies (PRA), where the percentage PRA reported for each serum varies significantly from center to center. The results indicate that the use of a PRA value for classification of patients and allocation of organs should be revisited.

Anti-HLA antibodies interfere in the detection of soluble HLA class I molecules.

Heart transplant rejection is routinely defined by histological evaluation of endomyocardial biopsies (EMB). As elevated levels of donor derived sHLA (dsHLA) can be detected in the serum of transplanted patients just before or during rejection, quantification of donor specific soluble counterparts of HLA Class I (sHLA-I) in the serum of the recipient may be a new way for non-invasive monitoring of graft rejection. However, not all patients show an increase of dsHLA at time of rejection. A reason for this might be that anti-donor-HLA antibodies, which are formed by the patient, form complexes with donor sHLA-I molecules. This masking or blocking of sHLA-I binding sites might cause false-negative results of tests detecting donor specific sHLA. Using HLA-antigen specific ELISA tests we could demonstrate that most anti-HLA antibodies block the detection of sHLA antigens in plasma, even in high dilutions of the antibody when the antibodies were not detectable in a CDC test. In general, HLA-antigen specific antibodies block the detection of sHLA molecules, while broadly-reactive antibodies, recognizing another epitope on the molecule, do not. The implication of these findings is that more than one dsHLA allotype within one patient should be tested to monitor graft rejection. In addition, sHLA monitoring must be combined with an HLA-antibody screening.