The XV. Banff conference for allograft pathology was held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics in Pittsburgh, PA (USA) and focused on refining recent updates to the classification, advances from the Banff working groups, and standardization of molecular diagnostics. This report on kidney transplant pathology details clarifications and refinements to the criteria for chronic active (CA) T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR), borderline, and antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). The main focus of kidney sessions was on how to address biopsies meeting criteria for CA TCMR plus borderline or acute TCMR. Recent studies on the clinical impact of borderline infiltrates were also presented to clarify whether the threshold for interstitial inflammation in diagnosis of borderline should be i0 or i1. Sessions on ABMR focused on biopsies showing microvascular inflammation in the absence of C4d staining or detectable donor‐specific antibodies; the potential value of molecular diagnostics in such cases and recommendations for use of the latter in the setting of solid organ transplantation are presented in the accompanying meeting report. Finally, several speakers discussed the capabilities of artificial intelligence and the potential for use of machine learning algorithms in diagnosis and personalized therapeutics in solid organ transplantation.

ObjectiveTo develop and validate an integrative system to predict long term kidney allograft failure.DesignInternational cohort study.SettingThree cohorts including kidney transplant recipients from 10 academic medical centres from Europe and the United States.ParticipantsDerivation cohort: 4000 consecutive kidney recipients prospectively recruited in four French centres between 2005 and 2014. Validation cohorts: 2129 kidney recipients from three centres in Europe and 1428 from three centres in North America, recruited between 2002 and 2014. Additional validation in three randomised controlled trials (NCT01079143, EudraCT 2007-003213-13, and NCT01873157).Main outcome measureAllograft failure (return to dialysis or pre-emptive retransplantation). 32 candidate prognostic factors for kidney allograft survival were assessed.ResultsAmong the 7557 kidney transplant recipients included, 1067 (14.1%) allografts failed after a median post-transplant follow-up time of 7.12 (interquartile range 3.51-8.77) years. In the derivation cohort, eight functional, histological, and immunological prognostic factors were independently associated with allograft failure and were then combined into a risk prediction score (iBox). This score showed accurate calibration and discrimination (C index 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.83). The performance of the iBox was also confirmed in the validation cohorts from Europe (C index 0.81, 0.78 to 0.84) and the US (0.80, 0.76 to 0.84). The iBox system showed accuracy when assessed at different times of evaluation post-transplant, was validated in different clinical scenarios including type of immunosuppressive regimen used and response to rejection therapy, and outperformed previous risk prediction scores as well as a risk score based solely on functional parameters including estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria. Finally, the accuracy of the iBox risk score in predicting long term allograft loss was confirmed in the three randomised controlled trials.ConclusionAn integrative, accurate, and readily implementable risk prediction score for kidney allograft failure has been developed, which shows generalisability across centres worldwide and common clinical scenarios. The iBox risk prediction score may help to guide monitoring of patients and further improve the design and development of a valid and early surrogate endpoint for clinical trials.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03474003.

BackgroundCOVID-19 has been associated with high morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. However, risk factors for COVID-19 disease in patients with kidney transplants remain poorly defined.MethodsWe enrolled patients who underwent kidney transplantation and were actively followed up in two hospitals in Paris on March 1st, 2020. Patients were screened for baseline and transplant characteristics, functional parameters, comorbidities, and immunosuppressive therapies. COVID-19 disease was assessed. Patients were followed up during the pandemic until April 30th, 2020 by the COVID-19 SLS KT survey program, including teleconsulting, at-home monitoring for patients with COVID-19, and a dedicated phone hotline platform.ResultsAmong 1216 patients with kidney transplants enrolled, 66 (5%) patients were identified with COVID-19 disease, which is higher than the incidence observed in the general population in France (0.3%). Their mean age was 56.4±12.5 years, and 37 (56%) patients were men. The following factors were independently associated with COVID-19 disease: non-White ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.17; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.23 to 3.78; P=0.007), obesity (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.19 to 4.05; P=0.01), asthma and chronic pulmonary disease (OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.49 to 6.41; P=0.002), and diabetes (OR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.92 to 5.77; P<0.001). The mortality rate related to COVID-19 disease was 1% in the overall study population and 24% in COVID-19–positive patients.ConclusionsPatients with kidney transplants display a high risk of mortality. Non-White ethnicity and comorbidities such as obesity, diabetes, asthma, and chronic pulmonary disease were associated with higher risk of developing COVID-19 disease. It is imperative that policy makers urgently ensure the integration of such risk factors on response operations against COVID-19.

IMPORTANCE Approximately 3500 donated kidneys are discarded in the United States each year, drawing concern from Medicare and advocacy groups. OBJECTIVE To estimate the effects of more aggressive allograft acceptance practices on the donor pool and allograft survival for the population of US wait-listed kidney transplant candidates.

No abstract

We report results of a phase 2, randomized, multicenter, open‐label, two‐arm study evaluating the safety and efficacy of eculizumab in preventing acute antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) in sensitized recipients of living‐donor kidney transplants requiring pretransplant desensitization (NCT01399593). In total, 102 patients underwent desensitization. Posttransplant, 51 patients received standard of care (SOC) and 51 received eculizumab. The primary end point was week 9 posttransplant treatment failure rate, a composite of: biopsy‐proven acute AMR (Banff 2007 grade II or III; assessed by blinded central pathology); graft loss; death; or loss to follow‐up. Eculizumab was well tolerated with no new safety concerns. No significant difference in treatment failure rate was observed between eculizumab (9.8%) and SOC (13.7%; P = .760). To determine whether data assessment assumptions affected study outcome, biopsies were reanalyzed by central pathologists using clinical information. The resulting treatment failure rates were 11.8% and 21.6% for the eculizumab and SOC groups, respectively (nominal P = .288). When reassessment included grade I AMR, the treatment failure rates were 11.8% (eculizumab) and 29.4% (SOC; nominal P = .048). This finding suggests a potential benefit for eculizumab compared with SOC in preventing acute AMR in recipients sensitized to their living‐donor kidney transplants (EudraCT 2010‐019630‐28).

No abstract

BackgroundMany kidneys donated for transplant in the United States are discarded because of abnormal histology. Whether histology adds incremental value beyond usual donor attributes in assessing allograft quality is unknown.MethodsThis population-based study included patients who received a deceased donor kidney that had been biopsied before implantation according to a prespecified protocol in France and Belgium, where preimplantation biopsy findings are generally not used for decision making in the allocation process. We also studied kidneys that had been acquired from deceased United States donors for transplantation that were biopsied during allocation and discarded because of low organ quality. Using donor and recipient characteristics, we fit multivariable Cox models for death-censored graft failure and examined whether predictive accuracy (C index) improved after adding donor histology. We matched the discarded United States kidneys to similar kidneys transplanted in Europe and calculated predicted allograft survival.ResultsIn the development cohort of 1629 kidney recipients at two French centers, adding donor histology to the model did not significantly improve prediction of long-term allograft failure. Analyses using an external validation cohort from two Belgian centers confirmed the lack of improved accuracy from adding histology. About 45% of 1103 United States kidneys discarded because of histologic findings could be accurately matched to very similar kidneys that had been transplanted in France; these discarded kidneys would be expected to have allograft survival of 93.1% at 1 year, 80.7% at 5 years, and 68.9% at 10 years.ConclusionsIn this multicenter study, donor kidney histology assessment during allocation did not provide substantial incremental value in ascertaining organ quality. Many kidneys discarded on the basis of biopsy findings would likely benefit United States patients who are wait listed.