OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate the correlation between renal transplant outcome and the presence of HLA-specific antibodies detected using the ELISA kit PRA-STAT as compared with complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC). METHOD: 295 sera from 95 renal transplant recipients (99 transplants) were investigated for the presence of HLA-specific antibodies using both PRA-STAT and CDC. The patients were divided into group I (49 transplants failed within 1 month) and group II (50 successful transplants). RESULTS: The concordance between PRA-STAT and CDC for the detection of HLA class I-specific antibodies was 87.8% (259 of 295). For 19 sera, antibodies were detected only by PRA-STAT; for 17 sera, antibodies were detected only by CDC. No donor-specific antibodies were detected by either technique for patients in group II. For four group I patients (six sera), donor-specific IgG antibodies were detected only by PRA-STAT (one before, three after transplant) and all four transplants failed. For five other group I patients (six sera), donor HLA-specific antibodies were detected only by CDC (one before, four after transplant) and all five transplants failed. The antibodies detected before transplant by CDC were shown to be IgM alloantibodies. CONCLUSION: This study showed that PRA-STAT could detect HLA-specific IgG antibodies relevant to transplant outcome that were not detected by CDC. However, it could not detect IgM alloantibodies that were also shown to be important. PRA-STAT is therefore a useful addition to a histocompatibility laboratory's screening repertoire only when used in conjunction with other techniques.
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate the correlation between renal transplant outcome and the presence of HLA-specific antibodies detected using the ELISA kit PRA-STAT as compared with complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC). METHOD: 295 sera from 95 renal transplant recipients (99 transplants) were investigated for the presence of HLA-specific antibodies using both PRA-STAT and CDC. The patients were divided into group I (49 transplants failed within 1 month) and group II (50 successful transplants). RESULTS: The concordance between PRA-STAT and CDC for the detection of HLA class I-specific antibodies was 87.8% (259 of 295). For 19 sera, antibodies were detected only by PRA-STAT; for 17 sera, antibodies were detected only by CDC. No donor-specific antibodies were detected by either technique for patients in group II. For four group I patients (six sera), donor-specific IgG antibodies were detected only by PRA-STAT (one before, three after transplant) and all four transplants failed. For five other group I patients (six sera), donor HLA-specific antibodies were detected only by CDC (one before, four after transplant) and all five transplants failed. The antibodies detected before transplant by CDC were shown to be IgM alloantibodies. CONCLUSION: This study showed that PRA-STAT could detect HLA-specific IgG antibodies relevant to transplant outcome that were not detected by CDC. However, it could not detect IgM alloantibodies that were also shown to be important. PRA-STAT is therefore a useful addition to a histocompatibility laboratory's screening repertoire only when used in conjunction with other techniques.