| Literature DB >> 35990687 |
Delphine Kervella1,2, Stéphanie Le Bas-Bernardet2, Sarah Bruneau2, Gilles Blancho1,2.
Abstract
Long-term allograft survival in allotransplantation, especially in kidney and heart transplantation, is mainly limited by the occurrence of antibody-mediated rejection due to anti-Human Leukocyte Antigen antibodies. These types of rejection are difficult to handle and chronic endothelial damages are often irreversible. In the settings of ABO-incompatible transplantation and xenotransplantation, the presence of antibodies targeting graft antigens is not always associated with rejection. This resistance to antibodies toxicity seems to associate changes in endothelial cells phenotype and modification of the immune response. We describe here these mechanisms with a special focus on endothelial cells resistance to antibodies. Endothelial protection against anti-HLA antibodies has been described in vitro and in animal models, but do not seem to be a common feature in immunized allograft recipients. Complement regulation and anti-apoptotic molecules expression appear to be common features in all these settings. Lastly, pharmacological interventions that may promote endothelial cell protection against donor specific antibodies will be described.Entities:
Keywords: accommodation; anti-ABO antibodies; anti-HLA antibodies; antibody mediated rejection (ABMR); endothelium; vascularized organ transplantation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35990687 PMCID: PMC9389360 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.932242
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Figure 1Mechanisms of accommodation (A) and antibody-mediated toxicity (B) in the anti-HLA Ab setting.
In vitro induction of accommodation in anti-HLA Ab setting.
| Authors, Journal, Year | Salama et al, AJT 2001 | Jin et al, Human Immunology 2004 | Narayaman et al, Eur J Immunol2004 | Narayaman et al, Transplant Immunology 2006 | Bharat et al, Transplantation 2007 | Iwasaki et al, Transplantation 2012 | Iwasaki et al, Transpl Int 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Human | Human | Human | Human | Mouse | Human | Human | Human |
| Anti-MHC Ab | Total IgG from immunized patients(containing anti-Class I and II HLA Ab) | Anti-HLA class I monoclonal Ab(clone W6/32), full or Fab fragment | Polyclonal anti HLA-A2 Ab from 4 immunized patients | Anti-HLA class I monoclonal Ab (clone W6/32) | Anti-H2b monoclonal Ab | Anti-HLA class Imonoclonal Ab (clone W6/32) | Anti-HLA class I monoclonal Ab (clone W6/32) | Anti-HLA class I monoclonal Ab (clone W6/32) |
| Endothelial cell type | HUVEC | HAEC | HAEC (HLA A2) | HAEC (HLA A2) | Islets | Islets | EA.hy926 (HUVEC cell line) | EA.hy926 (HUVEC cell line) |
| Saturating/High dose | 1/5- 1/7 dilution | 10 µg/mL | 6000 ng/mL | 10 000 ng/mL | 1-10 µg/mL | 1-10 µg/mL | 10 µg/mL | 10 µg/mL |
| Subsaturating/low dose | 1/100- 1/200 dilution | 0.1 µg/mL | 60 ng/mL | 100 ng/mL | 1-100 ng/mL | 1-100 ng/mL | 1 µg/mL | 1 µg/mL |
| other molecules | Complement 1%Thrombin 0.5 U/mLResveratrol 50 µM | |||||||
| Incubation time | 5 days (functionnal test and phenotype) | 3 days (phenotype), 10 min (signalling) | 3 days (functionnal test, apoptose assays, phenotype), 15 min(signalling) | 3 days (functionnal test, phenotype), 15 min (WB) | 48 h | 48 h | 24 h (functional test, and phenotype), 1 h (signalling) | 24 h Resveratrol +/- followed by 24 h W6/32 +/- complement and thrombin (functional test, phenotype),2 h (signalling) |
| Accommodating dose | Anti HLA Ab subsaturating dose | W6/32 subsaturating dose | Anti HLA Ab subsaturating dose | W6/32 subsaturating dose | Anti-H2b Ab subsaturating dose | W6/32subsaturating dose | W6/32 subsaturating dose | W6/32 subsaturating dose and Resveratrol 50 µM |
| Functionnal test | CDC (LDH release) after exposition to saturating dose of IgG | * CDC (51Cr release) after 1h expostion to saturating dose of anti-HLA A2 Ab *PBL adhesion after 1h exposition to saturating dose of anti-HLA A2 Ab * High doseanti-HLA A2 Ab + complement mediated apoptosis (TUNEL assay and Caspase 3 assay (fluorometry)) | * CDC (51Cr release) after 1h expostion to saturating dose of anti-HLA A2 Ab *High dose W6/32 + complement mediated apoptosis (TUNEL assay and Caspase 3 assay (fluorometry)) | see table | CDC after 1h exposition to saturating dose of W6/32 (MTT) | CDC after 1h exposition to saturating dose of W6/32 (MTT) | ||
| Result of functional test | Resistance to CDC | * Resistance to CDCInhibition of PBL adhesion to ECfewer apoptotic cells * lower caspase 3 activity | * Resistance to CDC* fewer apoptotic cells * lower caspase 3 activity | Resistance to CDC | Complement and thrombin each inhibit the protecting effect of W6/32 at subsaturating dosis against saturating dose W6/32 CDCResveratrol induces EC resistance to W6/32 CDC and restores the protection against W6/32 saturating dose CDC in the presence ofW6/32 subsaturating dose, complement 1% and thrombin 0,5 U/mL | |||
| Signaling pathways | ↗ Akt phosphorylation via Scr, PTK, FAK and PI3K (Fab and full Ab idem) | ↗ Bad and Akt phophorylation | * ↗ Bad, Akt, PI3K, PDK1 and PKA phophorylation* ↗ production of cAMP | ↗ Akt phosphorylation | * ↗ AMPKα phosphorylation, ↘ Akt and S6K phosphorylation, no effect on ERK* The protective effect of Resveratrol is AMPKα- dependant (abolished by siAMPKα) | |||
| Transcriptionnal changes | ↗ Bcl-2 | ↗ Bcl-2 | ↗ Ferritin H and HO-1 | * ↗ Ferritin H, HO-1 and KLF2 (Resveratrol)* ↗ Ferritin H and HO-1 (Resveratrol + W6/32 subsaturating dose + Complement + thrombin) | ||||
| Phenotypical changes | * ↗ Bcl-xL* Resistance to the upregulation of ICAM-1 induced by saturating doses of IgG (FC) | * ↗ Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL* ↗ Bad phosphorylation (Fab and full Ab idem) | * ICAM and VCAM downregulation* HLA-A2: no change* ↗Bcl-xL, Bcl-2 and HO-1 | Resistance to TNF-α (no induction of ICAM-1/VCAM-1)* HLA-A2: no change↗ Bcl-xL, Bcl-2 and HO-1 | ↗ HO-1, Bcl-xL and Bcl-2 in islets endothelial cells | ↗ CD55 and CD59 (Resveratrol) | ||
* was usedto mark items when there was more than one idea/results in a box.
MHC, major histocompatibility antigen; HLA, human leukocyte antigen; Ab, antibody; HUVEC, human umbilical vein endothelial cells; HAEC, human aortic endothelial cells; WB, Western-Blot; CDC, complement-dependant cytotoxicity; PBL, peripheral blood leukocytes.
Upward arrow, increase; downward arrow, decrease.
In vivo induction of accommodation in allogeinic transplantation.
| Authors, Journal, Year | Bharat et al, Transplantation 2007 | Fukami et al, Transplantation 2012 | Wang et al, JI 2007 | Rother et al, AJT 2008 | Chen et al, AJT 2011 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Mouse | C57BL/6 transgenic mice (HLA-A2) | Mouse | Mouse | Non Human Primate |
| Organ | Islets | Heart | Heart | Kidney | Kidney |
| Agent to obtainaccommodation | Anti-HLA Ab subsaturating dose pre-incubation | Anti-HLA Ab subsaturating dose pre-incubation | Complement inhibition during early postTx period | Complement inhibition during early postTx period | Complement inhibition during early postTx period |
| Protocol | Transplantation of ex vivo accommodated islets (Anti H2b Ab subsaturating dose 48 h) to a full MHC- mismatch sensitized recipient | Heterotopic heart transplantation from HLA-A2 Tg mice treated with W6/32 subsaturating dose (50 µg ip) 48 h before Tx to non transgenic sensitized mice | Allogeneic heart transplantation from C3H (H-2k) donor to recipient BALB/c (H- 2d) mouse presensitized with C3H skin graft | Allogeneic kidney transplantation from C3H (H-2k) donor to recipient BALB/c (H- 2d) mouse presensitized with C3H skin graft | Allogeneic kidney transplantation to recipients pre-sensitized with donor skin |
| Immunosuppression | No IS | No or rabbit anti-mouse lymphocyte serum (ALS) | CsA + anti-C5 mAb or CsA + CyP (2 days)/anti-C5 mAb (60 days). Controls no IS or monotherapy | CsA + LF10-0195 (14 days) + anti-C5 mAb (60 days). Controls no IS or monotherapy | Long-term triple therapy CsA + MPA + Cs+ CVF 14 days. Controls CsA+ MPA + Cs |
| Graft survival | Prolonged survival (6 vs 1 day) for accommodated grafts | Prolonged transplant survival of hearts from donors pre-treated with W6/32 50 µg (pre-treatment + ALS 25 vs Pre-treatment 15 vs no treatement 5 days) | Mean graft survival controls 3.1 days, CsA+ Anti-C5 mAb 11.9 days, CsA + CyP indefinite survival | Mean graft survival controls 8.5 days, CsA+ LF + Anti-C5 mAb indefinite survival | Controls graft failure between day 2 and 4, CVF group indefinite graft survival (> 715 days) with normal renal function |
| Graft histological analysis | Controls (isotype) AMR Day 5, Treatment with W6/32 cellular rejection Day 15 | Controls features of AMR, CsA + anti-C5 mAb AMR, CsA + CyP + anti-C5 mAb normal histology, C3, C5, IgG and IgMdeposits. | controls AMR + CMR, triple therapy no AMR no CMR, mild C5 deposition, C3 deposition | controls AMR +/- ACR, CVF normal histology, IgG deposits, low C3c, low/mild C4d and low C5b-9 deposits | |
| Graft proteic changes | * ↘ expression of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, PECAM (Day 5) * ↘IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-12 | ↗ Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL | ↗ Bcl-xL and A-20 (D11 and D100) | ↗ Bcl-2, CD59, CD46 | |
| Graft RNA changes | * ↗ Bcl-2 and HO-1 * ↗ Bcl-xL, Bcl-2, HO-1, Survivin (day 5) | ||||
| Recipient changes | Switch from IgG2a to IgG2b in recipients of accommodated hearts serum | Lower anti-donor IgG and IgM MFI at day 100 in triple therapy groupIgG2b predominance in recipients of triple therapy group | Long survivors: persistent but low levels of anti-donor IgG | ||
| Additionnal results | Major role of Bcl-2 in graft protection (rejection day 9 after Bcl-2 silencing by shRNA) | accommodated heart grafts retransplanted into presensitized recipients with accommodated primary heart grafts (CsA) exhibit indefinite survival but not when the second heart or the recipient is not accommodated |
* was usedto mark items when there was more than one idea/results in a box.
MHC, major histocompatibility antigen; HLA, human leukocyte antigen; Ab, antibody; HUVEC, human umbilical vein endothelial cells; HAEC, human aortic endothelial cells; WB, Western-Blot; CDC, complement-dependant cytotoxicity; PBL, peripheral blood leukocytes.
Upward arrow, increase; downward arrow, decrease.
Figure 2Strategies of endothelium protection in kidney transplantation.
| Ab | antibodies |
| ABMR | Antibody-mediated Rejection |
| ABOi | ABO-incompatible |
| ACR | acute cellular rejection |
| ADCC | Antibody-dependent-cell-mediated cytotoxicity |
| AHR | acute humoral rejection |
| AlloAb | allo-antibodies |
| AMPK | AMP-activated protein kinase |
| APCs | antigen presenting cells |
| CDC | Complement-dependant cytotoxicity |
| CM | cross-match |
| CsA | cyclosporin A |
| CVF | cobra venom factor |
| DSA | donor-specific antibodies |
| ECs | endothelial cellsGT-KO knock-down of galactosyl-transferase (enzyme synthetizing the Gal epitope) |
| Gal: | galactose-α-1, 3-galactose |
| HAECs | human aortic endothelial cells |
| HAR | Hyperacute rejection |
| HO-1 | heme oxygenase-1 |
| HLA | human leukocyte antigens |
| HUVECs | human umbilical vein endothelial cells |
| IdeS | IgG-degrading enzyme derived from Streptococcus pyogenes |
| IFNγ | gamma interferon |
| iNOS | inducible nitric oxide synthase |
| IRI | ischemia reperfusion injury |
| IS | immunosuppression |
| MFI | mean fluorescence intensity |
| MHC | major histocompatibility complex |
| MPA | Mycophenolic acid |
| NHP | Non-human primates |
| PAECs | porcine aortic endothelial cells |
| PBMCs | peripheral blood mononuclear cells |
| PI3K | phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase |
| PRA | Panel-reactive antibody |
| SLA | Swine Leucocyte Antigens (Swine MHC) |
| SMC | Smooth muscle cells |
| XAb | xenogeneic antibodies |
| XNA | xenogeneic natural antibodies |