y Both authors contributed equally.Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is still a major complication after kidney transplantation. Although cytotoxic CMV-specific T cells play a crucial role controlling CMV survival and replication, current pretransplant risk assessment for CMV infection is only based on donor/recipient (IgG)-serostatus. Here, we evaluated the usefulness of monitoring pre-and 6-month CMV-specific T cell responses against two dominant CMV antigens (IE-1 and pp65) and a CMV lysate, using an IFN-g Elispot, for predicting the advent of CMV infection in two cohorts of 137 kidney transplant recipients either receiving routine prophylaxis (n ¼ 39) or preemptive treatment (n ¼ 98). Incidence of CMV antigenemia/disease within the prophylaxis and preemptive group was 28%/20% and 22%/12%, respectively. Patients developing CMV infection showed significantly lower anti-IE-1-specific T cell responses than those that did not in both groups (p < 0.05). In a ROC curve analysis, low pretransplant anti-IE-1-specific T cell responses predicted the risk of both primary and late-onset CMV infection with high sensitivity and specificity (AUC > 0.70). Furthermore, when using most sensitive and specific Elispot cut-off values, a higher than 80% and 90% sensitivity and negative predictive value was obtained, respectively. Monitoring IE-1-specific T cell responses before transplantation may be useful for predicting posttransplant risk of CMV infection, thus potentially guiding decision-making regarding CMV preventive treatment.

The accurate evaluation of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) has allowed a precise identification of sensitized patients at risk of antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR). However, the scale of the humoral response is not always fully addressed, as it excludes the complete memory B-cell (mBC) pool such as that caused by antigen-specific mBC. Using a novel B-cell ELISpot assay approach, we assessed circulating mBC frequencies against class I and II HLA antigens in highly sensitized and nonsensitized patients in the waiting list for kidney transplantation. Also, kidney transplant patients undergoing ABMR were evaluated for the presence of donor-specific mBCs both at the time of rejection and before transplantation. For this purpose, 278 target HLA-sp antigens from 70 patients were studied and compared to circulating HLA-sp antibodies. Both class I and II HLA-sp mBC frequencies were identified in highly sensitized individuals but not in nonsensitized and healthy individuals, many years after first sensitization. Also, high donor-specific mBC responses were clearly found both during ABMR and before transplantation, regardless of circulating DSA. The higher the donor-specific mBC response, the more aggressive the allograft rejection. Thus, assessing donor-specific mBC frequencies may be relevant to better refine patient alloimmune-risk stratification, and provides new insight into the mechanisms of the adaptive humoral alloimmune response taking place in kidney transplantation.

Assessment of donor-specific alloreactive memory/effector T cell responses using an IFN-γ Elispot assay has been suggested to be a novel immune-monitoring tool for evaluating the cellular immune risk in renal transplantation. Here, we report the cross-validation data of the IFN-γ Elispot assay performed within different European laboratories taking part of the EU RISET consortium. For this purpose, development of a standard operating procedure (SOP), comparisons of lectures of IFN-γ plates assessing intra- and interlaboratory assay variability of allogeneic or peptide stimuli in both healthy and kidney transplant individuals have been the main objectives. We show that the use of a same SOP and count-settings of the Elispot bioreader allow low coefficient variation between laboratories. Frozen and shipped samples display slightly lower detectable IFN-γ frequencies than fresh samples. Importantly, a close correlation between different laboratories is obtained when measuring high frequencies of antigen-specific primed/memory T cell alloresponses. Interestingly, significant high donor-specific alloreactive T cell responses can be similarly detected among different laboratories in kidney transplant patients displaying histological patterns of acute T cell mediated rejection. In conclusion, assessment of circulating alloreactive memory/effector T cells using an INF-γ Elispot assay can be accurately achieved using the same SOP, Elispot bioreader and experienced technicians in kidney transplantation.

Background Improving cytomegalovirus (CMV) immune-risk stratification in kidney transplantation is highly needed to establish guided preventive strategies. Methods This prospective, interventional, multicenter clinical trial assessed the value of monitoring pretransplant CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI) using an interferon-γ release assay to predict CMV infection in kidney transplantation. One hundred sixty donor/recipient CMV-seropositive (D+/R+) patients, stratified by their baseline CMV (immediate-early protein 1)–specific CMI risk, were randomized to receive either preemptive or 3-month antiviral prophylaxis. Also, 15-day posttransplant CMI risk stratification and CMI specific to the 65 kDa phosphoprotein (pp65) CMV antigen were investigated. Immunosuppression consisted of basiliximab, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids in 80% of patients, whereas 20% received thymoglobulin induction therapy. Results Patients at high risk for CMV based on pretransplant CMI developed significantly higher CMV infection rates than those deemed to be at low risk with both preemptive (73.3% vs 44.4%; odds ratio [OR], 3.44 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.30–9.08]) and prophylaxis (33.3% vs 4.1%; OR, 11.75 [95% CI, 2.31–59.71]) approaches. The predictive capacity for CMV-specific CMI was only found in basiliximab-treated patients for both preemptive and prophylaxis therapy. Fifteen-day CMI risk stratification better predicted CMV infection (81.3% vs 9.1%; OR, 43.33 [95% CI, 7.89–237.96]). Conclusions Pretransplant CMV-specific CMI identifies D+/R+ kidney recipients at high risk of developing CMV infection if not receiving T-cell–depleting antibodies. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI soon after transplantation further defines the CMV infection prediction risk. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI may guide decision making regarding the type of CMV preventive strategy in kidney transplantation. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02550639.

Current characterization of the immune risk in renal transplant patients is only focused on the assessment of preformed circulating alloantibodies; however, alloreactive memory T cells are key players in mediating allograft rejection. Immune monitoring of antidonor alloreactive memory/effector T cells using an IFN-γ Elispot has been shown to distinguish patients at risk for immune-mediated graft dysfunction, suggesting a potential tool for immunosuppression individualization. In this nonrandomized study, we prospectively assessed donor and nondonor T-cell alloreactivity in 60 highly alloreactive patients receiving calcineurin inhibitor-based immunosuppression and in non-T-cell alloreactive transplant recipients treated with a calcineurin inhibitor-free regimen. The impact was evaluated using 1-year allograft outcome. We found a strong association between ongoing antidonor T-cell alloreactivity and histological lesions of acute T cell-mediated rejection in 6-month protocol biopsies, distinguishing those patients with better 1-year graft function, regardless of immunosuppression regimen. Interestingly, evidence for enhanced immune regulation, driven by circulating Foxp3-demethylated regulatory T cells, was only observed among patients achieving antidonor T-cell hyporesponsiveness. Thus, prospective evaluation of donor-specific T-cell sensitization may add crucial information on the alloimmune state of transplanted patients to be used in daily clinical practice.

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is defined by specific histopathological lesions and evidence of circulating donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Although DSA are not always detectable, monitoring donor-reactive memory B cells (mBC) could identify patients at risk of developing ABMR. Peripheral donor-reactive mBC using a novel HLA B cell ELISpot assay, serum DSA, and numbers of different B cell subsets were assessed in 175 consecutive kidney transplants undergoing either for-cause or 6- and 24-month surveillance biopsies for their association with main histological lesions of ABMR and impact on allograft outcome. In 85 incident for-cause biopsies, high frequencies of donor-reactive mBC were detected in all 16 (100%) acute ABMR/DSA+ and most chronic ABMR, with or without DSA (24/30[80%] and 21/29[72.4%], respectively). In a longitudinal cohort of 90 nonsensitized patients, a progressively higher expansion of donor-reactive mBC than de novo DSA was observed at 6 and 24 months (8.8% vs 7.7% and 15.5% vs 11.1%, respectively) and accurately identified patients with ongoing subclinical ABMR (area under the curve = 0.917 and area under the curve = 0.809, respectively). An unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis revealed a strong association between donor-reactive mBC with main fundamental allograft lesions associated with ABMR and conferred a significant deleterious impact on graft outcome. Monitoring donor-reactive mBC may be useful to further characterize humoral rejection after kidney transplantation.

Preformed T-cell immune-sensitization should most likely impact allograft outcome during the initial period after kidney transplantation, since donor-specific memory T-cells may rapidly recognize alloantigens and activate the effector immune response, which leads to allograft rejection. However, the precise time-frame in which acute rejection is fundamentally triggered by preformed donor-specific memory T cells rather than by de novo activated naïve T cells is still to be established. Here, preformed donor-specific alloreactive T-cell responses were evaluated using the IFN-γ ELISPOT assay in a large consecutive cohort of kidney transplant patients (n = 90), to assess the main clinical variables associated with cellular sensitization and its predominant time-frame impact on allograft outcome, and was further validated in an independent new set of kidney transplant recipients (n = 67). We found that most highly T-cell sensitized patients were elderly patients with particularly poor HLA class-I matching, without any clinically recognizable sensitizing events. While one-year incidence of all types of biopsy-proven acute rejection did not differ between T-cell alloreactive and non-alloreactive patients, Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis indicated the first two months after transplantation as the highest risk time period for acute cellular rejection associated with baseline T-cell sensitization. This effect was particularly evident in young and highly alloreactive individuals that did not receive T-cell depletion immunosuppression. Multivariate analysis confirmed preformed T-cell sensitization as an independent predictor of early acute cellular rejection. In summary, monitoring anti-donor T-cell sensitization before transplantation may help to identify patients at increased risk of acute cellular rejection, particularly in the early phases after kidney transplantation, and thus guide decision-making regarding the use of induction therapy.

The description of protective humoral and T cell immune responses specific against SARS‐CoV‐2 has been reported among immunocompetent (IC) individuals developing COVID‐19 infection. However, its characterization and determinants of poorer outcomes among the at‐risk solid organ transplant (SOT) patient population have not been thoroughly investigated. Cytokine‐producing T cell responses, such as IFN‐γ, IL‐2, IFN‐γ/IL‐2, IL‐6, IL‐21, and IL‐5, against main immunogenic SARS‐CoV‐2 antigens and IgM/IgG serological immunity were tracked in SOT (n = 28) during acute infection and at two consecutive time points over the following 40 days of convalescence and were compared to matched IC (n = 16) patients admitted with similar moderate/severe COVID‐19. We describe the development of a robust serological and functional T cell immune responses against SARS‐CoV‐2 among SOT patients, similar to IC patients during early convalescence. However, at the infection onset, SOT displayed lower IgG seroconversion rates (77% vs. 100%; p = .044), despite no differences on IgG titers, and a trend toward decreased SARS‐CoV‐2‐reactive T cell frequencies, especially against the membrane protein (7 [0–34] vs. 113 [15–245], p = .011, 2 [0–9] vs. 45 [5–74], p = .009, and 0 [0–2] vs. 13 [1–24], p = .020, IFN‐γ, IL‐2, and IFN‐γ/IL‐2 spots, respectively). In summary, our data suggest that despite a certain initial delay, SOT population achieve comparable functional immune responses than the general population after moderate/severe COVID‐19.