Evaluation of Pretransplant Immunologic Status in Kidney-Transplant Recipients by Panel Reactive Antibody and Soluble CD30 Determinations

Università di Pisa, Pisa, Tuscany, Italy
Transplantation (Impact Factor: 3.83). 06/2005; 79(9):1154-6. DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000152660.56055.53
Source: PubMed


To retrospectively compare the accuracy of pretransplant panel of reactivity antibodies (PRA) and serum level of soluble CD30 (sCD30) in predicting early (<6 months) acute rejection (AR) in living-donor and deceased-donor kidney-transplant (KT) patients.
Pretransplant sera of 24 KT recipients were retrospectively tested for sCD30 and compared with PRA. Inclusion criteria were de novo graft patients on calcineurin-inhibitor-based immunosuppression, minimum follow-up of 1 year, alive with a functioning graft, and stable renal function over the last 12 months. Objective measures were incidence of biopsy-proven AR (BPAR) within 6 months of KT and sCD30 and PRA diagnostic indexes. The relative risk (RR) of BPAR for each test was also obtained.
Fourteen (58.3%) patients presented at least one episode of BPAR within 6 months of KT. All rejection episodes were responsive to steroid treatment. PRA was positive in six (25%) patients, and four (66.7%) of them presented at least one episode of BPAR. sCD30 tested positive in nine (37.5%) patients, and all these later presented at least one episode of BPAR. sCD30 and PRA diagnostic indexes in predicting early (< 6months) BPAR were sensitivity 64.2% versus 28.5%; specificity 100% versus 80%; accuracy 79.1% versus 50%; positive predictive value 100% versus 66.6%; and negative predictive value 66.6% versus 44.4%. The RR of early AR was 1.4 in PRA-positive patients and extremely higher in the sCD30-positive group.
Pretransplant sCD30 is a more accurate predictor of AR when compared with PRA. These results support its use in the pretransplant work-up of kidney-graft recipients.

6 Reads
  • Source
    • "Most studies reported a detrimental effect of allosensitization on graft rejection: 9 studies reported a significant detrimental effect [13,14,39-45], and 7 studies reported a non-significant detrimental effect [12,15,16,46-49] (Figure 4). In contrast, 6 studies reported a non-detrimental effect of allosensitization on graft rejection [50-55]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Blood transfusions have the potential to improve graft survival, induce sensitization, and transmit infections. Current clinical practice is to minimize transfusions in renal transplantation candidates, but it is unclear if the evidence continues to support pre-transplant transfusion avoidance. Changes in the Medicare prospective payment system may increase transfusion rates. Thus there is a need to re-evaluate the literature to improve the management options for renal transplant candidates. A review applying a systematic approach and conducted using MEDLINE(R), Embase(R), and the Cochrane Library for English-language publications (timeframe: 01/1984--03/2011) captured 180 studies and data from publically available registries and assessed the impact of transfusions on allosensitization and graft survival, and the impact of allosensitization on graft survival and wait time. Blood transfusions continued to be a major cause of allosensitization, with allosensitization associated with increased rejection and graft loss, and longer wait times to transplantation. Although older studies showed a beneficial effect of transfusion on graft survival, this benefit has largely disappeared in the post-cyclosporine era due to improved graft outcomes with current practice. Recent data suggested that it may be the donor-specific antibody component of allosensitization that carried the risk to graft outcomes. Results of this review indicated that avoiding transfusions whenever possible is a sound management option that could prevent detrimental effects in patients awaiting kidney transplantation.
    BMC Nephrology 10/2013; 14(1):217. DOI:10.1186/1471-2369-14-217 · 1.69 Impact Factor
  • Transplantation 01/2006; 80(11):1638. DOI:10.1097/ · 3.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this work is to review the current knowledge in the field of immunological monitoring of allogenic responsiveness in clinical liver transplantation. When compared to other solid-organ transplants, liver allografts are considered as immunologically privileged, and, accordingly, constitute a favorable setting to develop experimental as well as clinical strategies for minimization of immunosuppression and even induction of operational tolerance. The validation of simple, reliable, noninvasive assays exploring antidonor alloreactivity will constitute a crucial step toward implementing such approaches in the clinic. In contrast to research in rodents claiming the development of donor-specific tolerance in case of graft survivals of over 100 days without immunosuppression, it is impractical to confirm tolerance induction in this way in humans. Promising candidate assays include the detection of post-transplant immune deviation, of circulating precursors of dendritic cells subtypes, and of regulatory T cells. A conceptual framework for the development of tolerance assays in clinical liver transplantation is also proposed.
    Liver Transplantation 03/2006; 12(3):373-83. DOI:10.1002/lt.20704 · 4.24 Impact Factor
Show more