Sonia Rodriguez-Ramirez1,2, Ayman Al Jurdi3,4, Ana Konvalinka1,2,5,6,7, Leonardo V Riella3,4. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology. 2. Ajmera Transplant Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Division of Nephrology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School. 4. Center for Transplantation Sciences, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network. 6. Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto. 7. Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has emerged as the leading cause of late graft loss in kidney transplant recipients. Donor-specific antibodies are an independent risk factor for AMR and graft loss. However, not all donor-specific antibodies are pathogenic. AMR treatment is heterogeneous due to the lack of robust trials to support clinical decisions. This review provides an overview and comments on practical but relevant dilemmas physicians experience in managing kidney transplant recipients with AMR. RECENT FINDINGS: Active AMR with donor-specific antibodies may be treated with plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin and corticosteroids with additional therapies considered on a case-by-case basis. On the contrary, no treatment has been shown to be effective against chronic active AMR. Various biomarkers and prediction models to assess the individual risk of graft failure and response to rejection treatment show promise. SUMMARY: The ability to personalize management for a given kidney transplant recipient and identify treatments that will improve their long-term outcome remains a critical unmet need. Earlier identification of AMR with noninvasive biomarkers and prediction models to assess the individual risk of graft failure should be considered. Enrolling patients with AMR in clinical trials to assess novel therapeutic agents is highly encouraged.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has emerged as the leading cause of late graft loss in kidney transplant recipients. Donor-specific antibodies are an independent risk factor for AMR and graft loss. However, not all donor-specific antibodies are pathogenic. AMR treatment is heterogeneous due to the lack of robust trials to support clinical decisions. This review provides an overview and comments on practical but relevant dilemmas physicians experience in managing kidney transplant recipients with AMR. RECENT FINDINGS: Active AMR with donor-specific antibodies may be treated with plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin and corticosteroids with additional therapies considered on a case-by-case basis. On the contrary, no treatment has been shown to be effective against chronic active AMR. Various biomarkers and prediction models to assess the individual risk of graft failure and response to rejection treatment show promise. SUMMARY: The ability to personalize management for a given kidney transplant recipient and identify treatments that will improve their long-term outcome remains a critical unmet need. Earlier identification of AMR with noninvasive biomarkers and prediction models to assess the individual risk of graft failure should be considered. Enrolling patients with AMR in clinical trials to assess novel therapeutic agents is highly encouraged.
Authors: L Liefeldt; S Brakemeier; P Glander; J Waiser; N Lachmann; C Schönemann; B Zukunft; P Illigens; D Schmidt; K Wu; B Rudolph; H-H Neumayer; K Budde Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2012-02-02 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: C Wiebe; I W Gibson; T D Blydt-Hansen; M Karpinski; J Ho; L J Storsley; A Goldberg; P E Birk; D N Rush; P W Nickerson Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2012-03-19 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Donald E Hricik; Richard N Formica; Peter Nickerson; David Rush; Robert L Fairchild; Emilio D Poggio; Ian W Gibson; Chris Wiebe; Kathryn Tinckam; Suphamai Bunnapradist; Milagros Samaniego-Picota; Daniel C Brennan; Bernd Schröppel; Osama Gaber; Brian Armstrong; David Ikle; Helena Diop; Nancy D Bridges; Peter S Heeger Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: S Kulkarni; N C Kirkiles-Smith; Y H Deng; R N Formica; G Moeckel; V Broecker; L Bow; R Tomlin; J S Pober Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2016-09-16 Impact factor: 8.086