Role of anti-vimentin antibodies in renal transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The role of non-HLA antibodies in rejection is not clear. We investigate whether antibodies to vimentin are made after renal transplantation and if production is associated with interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA). METHODS: In this retrospective study, sera from 70 recipients of renal allografts (40 controls, 30 IFTA) were studied. The biopsy diagnosis of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA) was based on random, cause-indicating biopsies. Sera were collected pretransplant and at 3 monthly intervals up to 5 years posttransplant or diagnosis of IFTA and assayed by ELISA for IgM and IgG anti-vimentin antibodies (AVA) and HLA antibodies. RESULTS: Mean titers of IgM AVA were higher at every year after transplantation compared with pretransplant for both IFTA and controls groups (P<0.001). There was no difference in the mean level of IgM AVA achieved by IFTA and control groups. The mean pretransplant levels of IgG AVA in the IFTA and control group were 18.2±11.7 and 11.0±8.1, respectively (P=0.001). There was a significant increase between the pretransplant mean levels of IgG AVA and the levels at years 1 to 4 in the IFTA group (years 1-3, P<0.0001, year 4 P=0.003) but not in the controls. There was no significant difference between the numbers of IFTA or control patients achieving a positive value (mean+2SD of pretransplant antibody titers) of IgM AVA (50% versus 37.5%, respectively) or IgG AVA (26.6% versus 12.5%, respectively). There was no association between production of HLA and AVA antibodies. CONCLUSION: Posttransplant production of IgM AVA is not associated with IFTA. The production of IgG AVA by a minority of IFTA patients suggests that in some individuals, IgG AVA may be involved in the pathology of IFTA.

Vessel rejection secondary to human leucocyte antigen antibodies directed against the arterial conduit following pancreas transplantation from a separate donor.

Whole-organ pancreas transplantation is typically carried out using a Y-graft derived from the donor iliac vessels. We describe a case in which a 31-year-old male underwent a simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant, but in which vessels from a different donor were used for the arterial anastomosis of the pancreas graft. Although initially there was good function, 18 months post-transplant the patient was admitted with diabetic ketoacidosis secondary to pancreas graft failure. Radiological investigations revealed complete occlusion of the vascular Y-graft, and laboratory investigations demonstrated donor-specific human leucocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies directed against HLA mismatches of the vessel donor. This case highlights the risks of using allogeneic vascular material for surgical anastomoses.

C4d deposition in early renal allograft protocol biopsies.

BACKGROUND: Deposition of the complement protein C4d in renal allograft biopsies obtained during graft dysfunction and rejection has been proposed to be a sensitive marker of antibody-mediated acute rejection. To determine the diagnostic specificity of C4d deposition, it is important to study biopsies from allografts with no evidence of dysfunction. In this study, we examined C4d deposition in protocol biopsies obtained irrespective of clinical status. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry for C4d was performed on routine protocol biopsies preimplantation and on day 7 posttransplantation from 48 unselected renal allografts. Serum samples obtained up to 1 month after transplantation were assayed for donor-reactive antibodies (DRA). Results were correlated with histopathology and clinical outcome measures. RESULTS: Diffuse C4d deposition was detected in the peritubular capillaries of 6 of 48 (13%) biopsies. C4d deposition was present in 5 of 15 (33%) biopsies that showed acute rejection (Banff 97, category 4) but only in 1 of 33 (3%) biopsies with no rejection (P=0.003, 97% specificity). Posttransplant DRAs were detected in 21 of 48 (44%) patients. All five recipients with C4d deposition and rejection had posttransplant DRA; the recipient whose biopsy showed C4d positivity, but not rejection, did not have detectable DRA. C4d deposition was not treated with plasmapheresis or intravenous immunoglobulin and was not associated with poor posttransplant graft outcome at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that in early posttransplant protocol biopsies, C4d is a specific marker for the presence of humoral rejection, as indicated by its association with DRA and acute histologic rejection.