Theresa K Wolf-Doty1, Roslyn B Mannon2, Emilio D Poggio3, Randall J Hinojosa4, David Hiller1, Jonathan S Bromberg5, Daniel C Brennan6. 1. CareDx, South San Francisco, California. 2. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 3. Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 4. Department of Pharmacy, University Health System - San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas. 5. Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 6. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
Background: The quantification of rejection treatment efficacy has been insufficient using traditional markers due, in part, to the lagging response of serum creatinine and histologic alterations on biopsy specimens. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is a molecular marker of injury that may assess allograft injury after rejection. Methods: Retrospective review of the DART study identified 70 patients who had a clinically indicated biopsy, simultaneous dd-cfDNA measurement, and at least one follow-up dd-cfDNA within 3 months post-treatment. Thirty-five patients had no biopsy-proven rejection and no rejection treatment (NR), 16 patients had no biopsy-proven rejection but did receive rejection treatment (CR), 9 patients had diagnosis of ABMR/mixed rejection on biopsy and received rejection treatment (ABMR), and 10 patients had diagnosis of TCMR and received rejection treatment (TCMR). The CR, ABMR, and TCMR groups combined to form a rejection (R) group. Results: In the R group, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 0.62% and 0.35% (n=21 pairs, p=0.34), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.77% and 0.21% (n=23 pairs, p=0.002). In TCMR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 1.13% and 0.37% (n=5 pairs, p=0.63), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.25% and 0.12% (n=9 pairs, p=0.004). In ABMR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 1.61% and 1.2 % (n=6 pairs, p>0.99), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 3.85% and 1.32% (n=6 pairs, p=0.09). In CR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 0.31% and 0.29% (n=10 pairs, p=0.38), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.38% and 0.17% (n=8 pairs, p=0.31). Lastly, in NR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 0.23% and 0.18% (n=21 pairs, p=0.10), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.33% and 0.17% (n=26 pairs, p=0.003). Changes in serum creatinine across 1 month and 2-3 months following rejection were similar. Conclusions: dd-cfDNA may be a useful dynamic biomarker to assess the health of the kidney allograft following rejection treatment.
Background: The quantification of rejection treatment efficacy has been insufficient using traditional markers due, in part, to the lagging response of serum creatinine and histologic alterations on biopsy specimens. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is a molecular marker of injury that may assess allograft injury after rejection. Methods: Retrospective review of the DART study identified 70 patients who had a clinically indicated biopsy, simultaneous dd-cfDNA measurement, and at least one follow-up dd-cfDNA within 3 months post-treatment. Thirty-five patients had no biopsy-proven rejection and no rejection treatment (NR), 16 patients had no biopsy-proven rejection but did receive rejection treatment (CR), 9 patients had diagnosis of ABMR/mixed rejection on biopsy and received rejection treatment (ABMR), and 10 patients had diagnosis of TCMR and received rejection treatment (TCMR). The CR, ABMR, and TCMR groups combined to form a rejection (R) group. Results: In the R group, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 0.62% and 0.35% (n=21 pairs, p=0.34), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.77% and 0.21% (n=23 pairs, p=0.002). In TCMR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 1.13% and 0.37% (n=5 pairs, p=0.63), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.25% and 0.12% (n=9 pairs, p=0.004). In ABMR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 1.61% and 1.2 % (n=6 pairs, p>0.99), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 3.85% and 1.32% (n=6 pairs, p=0.09). In CR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 0.31% and 0.29% (n=10 pairs, p=0.38), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.38% and 0.17% (n=8 pairs, p=0.31). Lastly, in NR, median dd-cfDNA values at baseline and 1 month were 0.23% and 0.18% (n=21 pairs, p=0.10), and at baseline and 2-3 months were 0.33% and 0.17% (n=26 pairs, p=0.003). Changes in serum creatinine across 1 month and 2-3 months following rejection were similar. Conclusions: dd-cfDNA may be a useful dynamic biomarker to assess the health of the kidney allograft following rejection treatment.
Authors: J Sellarés; D G de Freitas; M Mengel; J Reeve; G Einecke; B Sis; L G Hidalgo; K Famulski; A Matas; P F Halloran Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Roy D Bloom; Jonathan S Bromberg; Emilio D Poggio; Suphamai Bunnapradist; Anthony J Langone; Puneet Sood; Arthur J Matas; Shikha Mehta; Roslyn B Mannon; Asif Sharfuddin; Bernard Fischbach; Mohanram Narayanan; Stanley C Jordan; David Cohen; Matthew R Weir; David Hiller; Preethi Prasad; Robert N Woodward; Marica Grskovic; John J Sninsky; James P Yee; Daniel C Brennan Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Jonathan S Bromberg; Daniel C Brennan; Emilio Poggio; Suphamai Bunnapradist; Anthony Langone; Puneet Sood; Arthur J Matas; Roslyn B Mannon; Shikha Mehta; Asif Sharfuddin; Bernard Fischbach; Mohanram Narayanan; Stanley C Jordan; David J Cohen; Ziad S Zaky; David Hiller; Robert N Woodward; Marica Grskovic; John J Sninsky; James P Yee; Roy D Bloom Journal: J Appl Lab Med Date: 2017-11-01
Authors: Iwijn De Vlaminck; Hannah A Valantine; Thomas M Snyder; Calvin Strehl; Garrett Cohen; Helen Luikart; Norma F Neff; Jennifer Okamoto; Daniel Bernstein; Dana Weisshaar; Stephen R Quake; Kiran K Khush Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Stanley C Jordan; Suphamai Bunnapradist; Jonathan S Bromberg; Anthony J Langone; David Hiller; James P Yee; John J Sninsky; Robert N Woodward; Arthur J Matas Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2018-08-20
Authors: Michael Eikmans; Els M Gielis; Kristien J Ledeganck; Jianxin Yang; Daniel Abramowicz; Frans F J Claas Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2019-01-08
Authors: Erik Stites; Dhiren Kumar; Oyedolamu Olaitan; Sidney John Swanson; Nicolae Leca; Matthew Weir; Jonathan Bromberg; Joseph Melancon; Irfan Agha; Hasan Fattah; Tarek Alhamad; Yasir Qazi; Alexander Wiseman; Gaurav Gupta Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Enver Akalin; Matthew R Weir; Suphamai Bunnapradist; Daniel C Brennan; Rowena Delos Santos; Anthony Langone; Arjang Djamali; Hua Xu; Xia Jin; Sham Dholakia; Robert N Woodward; Jonathan S Bromberg Journal: Kidney360 Date: 2021-09-28
Authors: Pedro Ventura-Aguiar; Maria Jose Ramirez-Bajo; Jordi Rovira; Elisenda Bañón-Maneus; Natalia Hierro; Marta Lazo; Miriam Cuatrecasas; M A Garcia-Criado; Nathan Liang; Ryan K Swenerton; Federic Cofan; David Cucchiari; Nuria Esforzado; Enrique Montagud-Marrahi; Federic Oppenheimer; Gaston Piñeiro; Ignacio Revuelta; Vicens Torregrosa; Ebad Ahmed; Karina Soboleva; Navchetan Kaur; Bernhard G Zimmermann; Nour Al Haj Baddar; Zachary P Demko; Cesar Escrig; Hossein Tabriziani; Philippe Gauthier; Paul R Billings; Antonio J Amor; Joana Ferrer; Josep M Campistol; Fritz Diekmann Journal: Transplantation Date: 2022-03-14 Impact factor: 5.385