Background and objectivesDelayed graft function is related to ischemia-reperfusion injury and may be complement dependent. We previously reported from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial that treatment with C1 esterase inhibitor was associated with a shorter duration of delayed graft function and higher eGFR at 1 year. Here, we report longer-term outcomes from this trial.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThis is a post hoc analysis of a phase 1/2, randomized, controlled trial enrolling 70 recipients of deceased donor kidney transplants at risk for delayed graft function (NCT02134314). Subjects were randomized to receive C1 esterase inhibitor 50 U/kg (n=35) or placebo (n=35) intraoperatively and at 24 hours. The cumulative incidence functions method was used to compare graft failure and death over 3.5 years. eGFR slopes were compared using a linear mixed effects model.ResultsThree deaths occurred among C1 esterase inhibitor–treated patients compared with none receiving placebo. Seven graft failures developed in the placebo group compared with one among C1 esterase inhibitor–treated recipients; the cumulative incidence of graft failure was lower over 3.5 years among C1 esterase inhibitor–treated recipients compared with placebo (P=0.03). Although no difference in eGFR slopes was observed between groups (P for group-time interaction =0.12), eGFR declined in placebo-treated recipients (−4 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year; 95% confidence interval, −8 to −0.1) but was stable in C1 esterase inhibitor–treated patients (eGFR slope: 0.5 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year; 95% confidence interval, −4 to 5). At 3.5 years, eGFR was 56 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval, 42 to 70) in the C1 esterase inhibitor group versus 35 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval, 21 to 48) in the placebo group, with an estimated mean eGFR difference of 21 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval, 2 to 41 ml/min per 1.73 m2).ConclusionsTreatment of patients at risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury and delayed graft function with C1 esterase inhibitor was associated with a lower incidence of graft failure.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Modification of pathogenic antibodies and their effector functions in autoimmune diseases or use of B cell/plasma cell-directed anticancer therapies have illuminated the biologic relevance of B cells, plasma cells (PCs), and pathogenic antibodies and complement in alloimmunity. They have also rejuvenated interest in how B cells mediate multiple effector functions that include antibody production, antigen presentation to T cells, costimulation, and the production of immune stimulating and immune modulatory cytokines that drive dysfunctional immune responses. Current methods to reduce alloantibodies are only modestly successful. Rituximab is used for desensitization and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) treatment by targeting CD20 found on B-lymphocytes. However, PCs do not express CD20, likely explaining the limited success of this approach. Intravenous immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis (PLEX) have limited success due to antibody rebound. Despite attempts to develop tolerable therapeutics for management of AMR, none, to date, have been universally accepted or obtained Food and Drug Administration approval. Lack of approved therapeutics often results in patients having a much shorter graft survival due to AMR. Repurposing drugs from autoimmunity and cancer immunotherapy has rapidly yielded important advancements in the care of AMR patients. Here we discuss emerging therapeutics aimed at prevention and treatment of AMR. K E Y W O R D S clinical research/practice, immunosuppression/immune modulation, kidney transplantation/ nephrology, rejection: antibody-mediated (ABMR), sensitization | 43 JORDAN et Al.

No abstract

Modification of pathogenic antibodies and their effector functions in autoimmune diseases or use of B cell/plasma cell‐directed anticancer therapies have illuminated the biologic relevance of B cells, plasma cells (PCs), and pathogenic antibodies and complement in alloimmunity. They have also rejuvenated interest in how B cells mediate multiple effector functions that include antibody production, antigen presentation to T cells, costimulation, and the production of immune stimulating and immune modulatory cytokines that drive dysfunctional immune responses. Current methods to reduce alloantibodies are only modestly successful. Rituximab is used for desensitization and antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) treatment by targeting CD20 found on B‐lymphocytes. However, PCs do not express CD20, likely explaining the limited success of this approach. Intravenous immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis (PLEX) have limited success due to antibody rebound. Despite attempts to develop tolerable therapeutics for management of AMR, none, to date, have been universally accepted or obtained Food and Drug Administration approval. Lack of approved therapeutics often results in patients having a much shorter graft survival due to AMR. Repurposing drugs from autoimmunity and cancer immunotherapy has rapidly yielded important advancements in the care of AMR patients. Here we discuss emerging therapeutics aimed at prevention and treatment of AMR.

Alloantibodies are a significant barrier to successful transplantation. While desensitization has emerged, efficacy is limited. Interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) is an important mediator of inflammation and immune cell activation. Persistent IL‐6 production increases the risk for alloantibody production. Here we report our experience with clazakizumab (anti‐IL‐6) for desensitization of highly HLA‐sensitized patients (HS). From March 2018 to September 2020, 20 HS patients were enrolled in an open label pilot study to assess safety and limited efficacy of clazakizumab desensitization. Patients received PLEX, IVIg, and clazakizumab 25 mg monthly X6. If transplanted, graft function, pathology, HLA antibodies and regulatory immune cells were monitored. Transplanted patients received standard immunosuppression and clazakizumab 25 mg monthly posttransplant. Clazakizumab was well tolerated and associated with significant reductions in class I and class II antibodies allowing 18 of 20 patients to receive transplants with no DSA rebound in most. Significant increases in Treg and Breg cells were seen posttransplant. Antibody‐mediated rejection occurred in three patients. The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate at 12 months was 58 ± 29 ml/min/1.73 m2. Clazakizumab was generally safe and associated with significant reductions in HLA alloantibodies and high transplant rates for highly‐sensitized patients. However, confirmation of efficacy for desensitization requires assessment in randomized controlled trials.

Background. Highly HLA-sensitized (HS) patients have an increased risk for the development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) posttransplant. Here, we examined the risk for AMR in HS patients transplanted after desensitization (DES) who were DSA+ versus DSA− at transplant. We also examined the incidence and clinical impact of de novo DSAs (dnDSAs) and compared with dnDSA− patients. Methods. From January 2013 to October 2016, 90 HS patients (PRA > 80%, DSA+ = 50 versus DSA− = 40) received kidney transplantation after DES with IVIG + rituximab ± PLEX (plasma exchange) ± tocilizumab. DSAs were monitored at transplant and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months posttransplant. Results. Patients were divided into 4 groups: DSA+/+ (n = 31), DSA+/− (n=19), DSA−/+ (n=10), and DSA−/− (n = 30). Median follow-up time was 2.9 years. DSA-negative patients who developed dnDSA had the highest incidence of AMR (70%) compared with the DSA+/+ (45%), DSA+/− (11%), and DSA−/− (10%) patients (P < 0.0001). Among patients who developed AMR, Banff 2013 AMR scores did not differ among the 4 groups. Graft survival and estimated glomerular filtration rate determinations at 4 years were similar. Conclusions. Persistence of preexisting DSAs or development of dnDSA after transplant is associated with an increased risk for AMR. Despite this, we did not observe a difference in Banff biopsy scores, graft survival, or patient survival compared with those without DSAs after transplant. Thus, for HS patients undergoing HLA-incompatible kidney transplant, DES therapy and frequent monitoring for dnDSAs appears critical for good long-term survival in at-risk groups.

Background. The efficacy and safety of belatacept when converted from calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) in HLA-sensitized (HS) kidney transplant recipients has not been established. Methods. The study included 108 kidney transplant recipients converted from CNI to belatacept between July 1, 2012, and September 30, 2017. Rejection-free, patient, and graft survival over 5 years follow-up were compared between HS and non-HLA-sensitized (non-HS) recipients using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. The estimated glomerular filtration rate slope postconversion was compared using linear mixed effects models. Results. There were 29 HS and 79 non-HS recipients included. Rejections after conversion were mostly cell-mediated. There was no difference in rejection-free survival (log-rank P = 0.30; at 5 y, HS: 82%; non-HS: 84.6%); however, rejection-free survival was lower among HS recipients converted within the first-year posttransplant compared to non-HS recipients (log-rank P = 0.03; at 5 y, HS: 55.6%; non-HS: 75.0%). There was no difference in patient survival (log-rank P = 0.75; at 5 y, HS: 85.7%, non-HS: 83.7%) or graft survival (log-rank P = 0.17; at 5 y, HS: 78.5%, non-HS: 89.8%) in the 2 groups. On average, estimated glomerular filtration rate slope improved postconversion in non-HS (0.28 mL/min/1.73 m2/y [0.03 to 0.53]) but declined in HS recipients (-0.44 mL/min/1.73 m2/y [-0.85 to -0.03]). Conclusions. There was no difference in rejection-free, patient, or graft survival after conversion to belatacept over 5 years among HS and non-HS recipients. However, rejection-free survival was lower in HS recipients converted to belatacept within the first-year posttransplant. Conversion from CNI to belatacept should be done cautiously in high immunologic risk patients.