Benjamin S Mantell1, Hector Cordero2, Sarah B See2, Kevin J Clerkin2, Rodica Vasilescu3, Charles C Marboe3, Yoshifumi Naka4, Susan Restaino5, Paolo C Colombo5, Linda J Addonizio6, Maryjane A Farr5, Emmanuel Zorn7. 1. Columbia Center for Translational Immunology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York; Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 2. Columbia Center for Translational Immunology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 3. Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 4. Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 5. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. 7. Columbia Center for Translational Immunology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. Electronic address: ez2184@cumc.columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antibody mediated rejection (AMR) is an increasingly studied cause of graft failure after heart transplantation. AMR diagnosis previously required the detection of circulating donor specific antibodies (DSA); however, the most recent criteria only require pathological findings. This classification defined a subset of patients with AMR, yet without known antibodies. Here, we sought to evaluate differences in the transcriptome profile associated with different types of AMR. METHODS: RNA sequencing was used on endomyocardial biopsies to analyze and compare transcriptomic profiles associated with different subtypes of AMR defined by immunopathological and histopathological findings, as well as the presence or absence of DSA. Gene expression profiles were characterized for each diagnostic group. RESULTS: The most divergent gene expression profiles were observed between patients with or without DSA. AMR subtypes associated with DSA showed expression of signature genes involved in monocyte activation and response to interferon. There was also substantial difference between the transcriptomic profiles of AMR defined by histopathological and immunopathological findings, the latter being associated with expression of mucin genes. In contrast, there was no differential RNA expression between patients with pAMR1i without DSA and those without AMR. Likewise, no differential expression was observed between patients with pAMR1h with DSA and pAMR2. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our studies reveal different expression profiles in endomyocardial biopsies in relation to some key criteria used to diagnose AMR. These findings support the view that the diagnosis of AMR encompasses several phenotypes that may rely on distinct mechanisms of injury.
BACKGROUND: Antibody mediated rejection (AMR) is an increasingly studied cause of graft failure after heart transplantation. AMR diagnosis previously required the detection of circulating donor specific antibodies (DSA); however, the most recent criteria only require pathological findings. This classification defined a subset of patients with AMR, yet without known antibodies. Here, we sought to evaluate differences in the transcriptome profile associated with different types of AMR. METHODS: RNA sequencing was used on endomyocardial biopsies to analyze and compare transcriptomic profiles associated with different subtypes of AMR defined by immunopathological and histopathological findings, as well as the presence or absence of DSA. Gene expression profiles were characterized for each diagnostic group. RESULTS: The most divergent gene expression profiles were observed between patients with or without DSA. AMR subtypes associated with DSA showed expression of signature genes involved in monocyte activation and response to interferon. There was also substantial difference between the transcriptomic profiles of AMR defined by histopathological and immunopathological findings, the latter being associated with expression of mucin genes. In contrast, there was no differential RNA expression between patients with pAMR1i without DSA and those without AMR. Likewise, no differential expression was observed between patients with pAMR1h with DSA and pAMR2. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our studies reveal different expression profiles in endomyocardial biopsies in relation to some key criteria used to diagnose AMR. These findings support the view that the diagnosis of AMR encompasses several phenotypes that may rely on distinct mechanisms of injury.
Authors: M E Billingham; N R Cary; M E Hammond; J Kemnitz; C Marboe; H A McCallister; D C Snovar; G L Winters; A Zerbe Journal: J Heart Transplant Date: 1990 Nov-Dec
Authors: Alexandre Loupy; Jean Paul Duong Van Huyen; Luis Hidalgo; Jeff Reeve; Maud Racapé; Olivier Aubert; Jeffery M Venner; Konrad Falmuski; Marie Cécile Bories; Thibaut Beuscart; Romain Guillemain; Arnaud François; Sabine Pattier; Claire Toquet; Arnaud Gay; Philippe Rouvier; Shaida Varnous; Pascal Leprince; Jean Philippe Empana; Carmen Lefaucheur; Patrick Bruneval; Xavier Jouven; Philip F Halloran Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jennifer R Wehner; Karen Fox-Talbot; Marc K Halushka; Carla Ellis; Andrea A Zachary; William M Baldwin Journal: Transplantation Date: 2010-05-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Manon M H Huibers; Alison J Gareau; Aryan Vink; Rianne Kruit; Hannah Feringa; Johanna M T Beerthuijzen; Erica Siera-de Koning; Ton Peeters; Nicolaas de Jonge; Roel A de Weger; Timothy D G Lee Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: A Loupy; C Toquet; P Rouvier; T Beuscart; M C Bories; S Varnous; R Guillemain; S Pattier; C Suberbielle; P Leprince; C Lefaucheur; X Jouven; P Bruneval; J P Duong Van Huyen Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2015-11-20 Impact factor: 8.086