Wai H Lim1, Jeremy R Chapman2, Patrick T Coates3, Joshua R Lewis4, Graeme R Russ5, Narelle Watson6, Rhonda Holdsworth7, Germaine Wong8. 1. Department of Renal Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; wai.lim@health.wa.gov.au. 2. Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; 3. Central and Northern Adelaide Renal and Transplantation Services, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; 4. Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; 5. Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Central and Northern Adelaide Renal and Transplantation Services, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; 6. New South Wales Transplantation and Immunogenetic Services, Australian Red Cross Service, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; and. 7. Transplantation Services, Australian Red Cross Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 8. Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia;
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The current allocation algorithm for deceased donor kidney transplantation takes into consideration HLA mismatches at the ABDR loci but not HLA mismatches at other loci, including HLA-DQ. However, the independent effects of incompatibilities for the closely linked HLA-DQ antigens in the context of HLA-DR antigen matched and mismatched allografts are uncertain. We aimed to determine the effect of HLA-DQ mismatches on renal allograft outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, we examined the association between HLA-DQ mismatches and acute rejections in primary live and deceased donor kidney transplant recipients between 2004 and 2012 using adjusted Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of the 788 recipients followed for a median of 2.8 years (resulting in 2891 person-years), 321 (40.7%) and 467 (59.3%) received zero and one or two HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys, respectively. Compared with recipients who have received zero HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys, those who have received one or two HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys experienced greater numbers of any rejection (50 of 321 versus 117 of 467; P<0.01), late rejections (occurring >6 months post-transplant; 8 of 321 versus 27 of 467; P=0.03), and antibody-mediated rejections (AMRs; 12 of 321 versus 38 of 467; P=0.01). Compared with recipients of zero HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys, the adjusted hazard ratios for any and late rejections in recipients who had received one or two HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys were 1.54 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.08 to 2.19) and 2.85 (95% CI, 1.05 to 7.75), respectively. HLA-DR was an effect modifier between HLA-DQ mismatches and AMR (P value for interaction =0.02), such that the association between HLA-DQ mismatches and AMR was statistically significant in those who have received one or two HLA-DR mismatched kidneys, with adjusted hazard ratio of 2.50 (95% CI, 1.05 to 5.94). CONCLUSIONS: HLA-DQ mismatches are associated with acute rejection, independent of HLA-ABDR mismatches and initial immunosuppression. Clinicians should be aware of the potential importance of HLA-DQ matching in the assessment of immunologic risk in kidney transplant recipients.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The current allocation algorithm for deceased donor kidney transplantation takes into consideration HLA mismatches at the ABDR loci but not HLA mismatches at other loci, including HLA-DQ. However, the independent effects of incompatibilities for the closely linked HLA-DQ antigens in the context of HLA-DR antigen matched and mismatched allografts are uncertain. We aimed to determine the effect of HLA-DQ mismatches on renal allograft outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, we examined the association between HLA-DQ mismatches and acute rejections in primary live and deceased donor kidney transplant recipients between 2004 and 2012 using adjusted Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of the 788 recipients followed for a median of 2.8 years (resulting in 2891 person-years), 321 (40.7%) and 467 (59.3%) received zero and one or two HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys, respectively. Compared with recipients who have received zero HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys, those who have received one or two HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys experienced greater numbers of any rejection (50 of 321 versus 117 of 467; P<0.01), late rejections (occurring >6 months post-transplant; 8 of 321 versus 27 of 467; P=0.03), and antibody-mediated rejections (AMRs; 12 of 321 versus 38 of 467; P=0.01). Compared with recipients of zero HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys, the adjusted hazard ratios for any and late rejections in recipients who had received one or two HLA-DQ mismatched kidneys were 1.54 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.08 to 2.19) and 2.85 (95% CI, 1.05 to 7.75), respectively. HLA-DR was an effect modifier between HLA-DQ mismatches and AMR (P value for interaction =0.02), such that the association between HLA-DQ mismatches and AMR was statistically significant in those who have received one or two HLA-DR mismatched kidneys, with adjusted hazard ratio of 2.50 (95% CI, 1.05 to 5.94). CONCLUSIONS: HLA-DQ mismatches are associated with acute rejection, independent of HLA-ABDR mismatches and initial immunosuppression. Clinicians should be aware of the potential importance of HLA-DQ matching in the assessment of immunologic risk in kidney transplant recipients.
Authors: R Sapir-Pichhadze; K Tinckam; K Quach; A G Logan; A Laupacis; R John; J Beyene; S J Kim Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Marlies K A Dankers; Marian D Witvliet; Dave L Roelen; Peter de Lange; Nelleke Korfage; Guido G Persijn; René Duquesnoy; Ilias I N Doxiadis; Frans H J Claas Journal: Transplantation Date: 2004-04-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Marcelo A Fernández-Viña; John P Klein; Michael Haagenson; Stephen R Spellman; Claudio Anasetti; Harriet Noreen; Lee Ann Baxter-Lowe; Pedro Cano; Neal Flomenberg; Dennis L Confer; Mary M Horowitz; Machteld Oudshoorn; Effie W Petersdorf; Michelle Setterholm; Richard Champlin; Stephanie J Lee; Marcos de Lima Journal: Blood Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: C Wiebe; D Pochinco; T D Blydt-Hansen; J Ho; P E Birk; M Karpinski; A Goldberg; L J Storsley; I W Gibson; D N Rush; P W Nickerson Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2013-10-25 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: E C Jolly; T Key; H Rasheed; H Morgan; A Butler; N Pritchard; C J Taylor; M R Clatworthy Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Vasilios Kosmoliaptsis; Olivera Gjorgjimajkoska; Linda D Sharples; Afzal N Chaudhry; Nikolaos Chatzizacharias; Sarah Peacock; Nicholas Torpey; Eleanor M Bolton; Craig J Taylor; J Andrew Bradley Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Ji Zhang; Dong Liu; Caixin Zhang; Min Zhou; Jian Lv; Hongmei Wang; Hang Yang; Li Fan; Bo Wu; Jingyu Chen Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2020-02