The XIII Banff meeting, held in conjunction the Canadian Society of Transplantation in Vancouver, Canada, reviewed the clinical impact of updates of C4d‐negative antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR) from the 2013 meeting, reports from active Banff Working Groups, the relationships of donor‐specific antibody tests (anti‐HLA and non‐HLA) with transplant histopathology, and questions of molecular transplant diagnostics. The use of transcriptome gene sets, their resultant diagnostic classifiers, or common key genes to supplement the diagnosis and classification of rejection requires further consensus agreement and validation in biopsies. Newly introduced concepts include the i‐IFTA score, comprising inflammation within areas of fibrosis and atrophy and acceptance of transplant arteriolopathy within the descriptions of chronic active T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR) or chronic ABMR. The pattern of mixed TCMR and ABMR was increasingly recognized. This report also includes improved definitions of TCMR and ABMR in pancreas transplants with specification of vascular lesions and prospects for defining a vascularized composite allograft rejection classification. The goal of the Banff process is ongoing integration of advances in histologic, serologic, and molecular diagnostic techniques to produce a consensus‐based reporting system that offers precise composite scores, accurate routine diagnostics, and applicability to next‐generation clinical trials.

The presence of donor-specific HLA antibodies before or after transplantation may have different implications based on the antibody strength. Yet, current approaches do not provide information regarding the true antibody strength as defined by antigen-antibody dissociation rate. To assess currently available methods, we compared between neat mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values, C1q MFI values, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA)-treated samples, as well as titration studies and peak MFI values of over 7000 Luminex-based single-antigen HLA antibody data points. Our results indicate that neat MFI values do not always accurately depict antibody strength. We further showed that EDTA treatment (6%) does not always remove all inhibitory factors compared with C1q or titration studies. In this study of patients presenting with multiple antibody specificities, a prozone effect was observed in 71% of the cohort (usually not affecting all antibody specificities within a single serum sample, though). Similar to titration studies, the C1q assay was able to address the issue of potential inhibition; however, its limitation is its low sensitivity and inability to detect the presence of weak antibodies. Titration studies are the only method among the approaches used in this study to provide information suggesting antigen-antibody dissociation rates and are, therefore, likely to provide better indication of true antibody strength.Abbreviations: AMR, antibody-mediated rejection; DSA, donor-specific antibody; EDTA, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; MFI, mean fluorescence intensity; SAB, single antigen beads; SPA, solid phase assays

With the development of modern solid-phase assays to detect anti-HLA antibodies and a more precise histological classification, the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has become more common and is a major cause of kidney graft loss. Currently, there are no approved therapies and treatment guidelines are based on low-level evidence. The number of prospective randomized trials for the treatment of AMR is small, and the lack of an accepted common standard for care has been an impediment to the development of new therapies. To help alleviate this, The Transplantation Society convened a meeting of international experts to develop a consensus as to what is appropriate treatment for active and chronic active AMR. The aim was to reach a consensus for standard of care treatment against which new therapies could be evaluated. At the meeting, the underlying biology of AMR, the criteria for diagnosis, the clinical phenotypes, and outcomes were discussed. The evidence for different treatments was reviewed, and a consensus for what is acceptable standard of care for the treatment of active and chronic active AMR was presented. While it was agreed that the aims of treatment are to preserve renal function, reduce histological injury, and reduce the titer of donor-specific antibody, there was no conclusive evidence to support any specific therapy. As a result, the treatment recommendations are largely based on expert opinion. It is acknowledged that properly conducted and powered clinical trials of biologically plausible agents are urgently needed to improve patient outcomes.

The presence of preexisting (memory) or de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies (DSAs) is a known barrier to successful long-term organ transplantation. Yet, despite the fact that laboratory tools and our understanding of histocompatibility have advanced significantly in recent years, the criteria to define presence of a DSA and assign a level of risk for a given DSA vary markedly between centers. A collaborative effort between the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics and the American Society of Transplantation provided the logistical support for generating a dedicated multidisciplinary working group, which included experts in histocompatibility as well as kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplantation. The goals were to perform a critical review of biologically driven, state-of-the-art, clinical diagnostics literature and to provide clinical practice recommendations based on expert assessment of quality and strength of evidence. The results of the Sensitization in Transplantation: Assessment of Risk (STAR) meeting are summarized here, providing recommendations on the definition and utilization of HLA diagnostic testing, and a framework for clinical assessment of risk for a memory or a primary alloimmune response. The definitions, recommendations, risk framework, and highlighted gaps in knowledge are intended to spur research that will inform the next STAR Working Group meeting in 2019.

Solid phase multiplex-bead arrays for the detection and characterization of HLA antibodies provide increased sensitivity and specificity compared to conventional lymphocyte-based assays. Assay variability due to inconsistencies in commercial kits and differences in standard operating procedures hamper comparison of results between laboratories. The Clinical Trials in Organ Transplantation Antibody Core Laboratories investigated sources of assay variation and determined if reproducibility improved through utilization of standard operating procedures, common reagents and normalization algorithms. Ten commercial kits from two manufacturers were assessed in each of seven laboratories using 20 HLA reference sera. Implementation of a standardized (versus a non-standardized) operating procedure greatly reduced MFI variation from 62% to 25%. Although laboratory agreements exceeded 90% (R2), small systematic differences were observed suggesting center specific factors still contribute to variation. MFI varied according to manufacturer, kit, bead type and lot. ROC analyses showed excellent consistency in antibody assignments between manufacturers (AUC>0.9) and suggested optimal cutoffs from 1000–1500 MFI. Global normalization further reduced MFI variation to levels near 20%. Standardization and normalization of solid phase HLA antibody tests will enable comparison of data across laboratories for clinical trials and diagnostic testing.

These findings suggest an association between the genetic ability to produce low levels of IFN-gamma and the susceptibility to develop chronic HBV infection.

No abstract

Identifying the formation of de novo HLA-directed antibodies following heart transplantation may predict allograft outcome. This, in turn, may serve as a tool for individualization of immunosuppression protocols in heart transplant recipients.