The kidney sessions of the 2017 Banff Conference focused on 2 areas: clinical implications of inflammation in areas of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (i‐IFTA) and its relationship to T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR), and the continued evolution of molecular diagnostics, particularly in the diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). In confirmation of previous studies, it was independently demonstrated by 2 groups that i‐IFTA is associated with reduced graft survival. Furthermore, these groups presented that i‐IFTA, particularly when involving >25% of sclerotic cortex in association with tubulitis, is often a sequela of acute TCMR in association with underimmunosuppression. The classification was thus revised to include moderate i‐IFTA plus moderate or severe tubulitis as diagnostic of chronic active TCMR. Other studies demonstrated that certain molecular classifiers improve diagnosis of ABMR beyond what is possible with histology, C4d, and detection of donor‐specific antibodies (DSAs) and that both C4d and validated molecular assays can serve as potential alternatives and/or complements to DSAs in the diagnosis of ABMR. The Banff ABMR criteria are thus updated to include these alternatives. Finally, the present report paves the way for the Banff scheme to be part of an integrative approach for defining surrogate endpoints in next‐generation clinical trials.

The Symphony study showed that at 1 year posttransplant, a regimen based on daclizumab induction, 2 g mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), low-dose tacrolimus and steroids resulted in better renal function and lower acute rejection and graft loss rates compared with three other regimens: two with low-doses of cyclosporine or sirolimus instead of tacrolimus and one with no induction and standard cyclosporine dosage. This is an observational follow-up for 2 additional years with the same endpoints as the core study. Overall, 958 patients participated in the follow-up. During the study, many patients changed their immunosuppressive regimen (e.g. switched from sirolimus to tacrolimus), but the vast majority (95%) remained on MMF. During the follow-up, renal function remained stable (mean change: -0.6 ml/min), and rates of death, graft loss and acute rejection were low (all about 1% per year). The MMF and low-dose tacrolimus arm continued to have the highest GFR (68.6 +/- 23.8 ml/min vs. 65.9 +/- 26.2 ml/min in the standard-dose cyclosporine, 64.0 +/- 23.1 ml/min in the low-dose cyclosporine and 65.3 +/- 26.2 ml/min in the low-dose sirolimus arm), but the difference with the other arms was not significant (p = 0.17 in an overall test and 0.077, 0.039 and 0.11, respectively, in pair-wise tests). The MMF and low-dose tacrolimus arm also had the highest graft survival rate, but with reduced differences between groups over time, and the least acute rejection rate. In the Symphony study, the largest ever prospective study in de novo kidney transplantation, over 3 years, daclizumab induction, MMF, steroids and low-dose tacrolimus proved highly efficacious, without the negative effects on renal function commonly reported for standard CNI regimens.

Late antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure. Uncontrolled studies have suggested efficacy of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, but no systematic trial has been undertaken to support its use in ABMR. In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial (the Bortezomib in Late Antibody-Mediated Kidney Transplant Rejection [BORTEJECT] Trial), we investigated whether two cycles of bortezomib (each cycle: 1.3 mg/m intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11) prevent GFR decline by halting the progression of late donor-specific antibody (DSA)-positive ABMR. Forty-four DSA-positive kidney transplant recipients with characteristic ABMR morphology (median time after transplant, 5.0 years; pretransplant DSA documented in 19 recipients), who were identified on cross-sectional screening of 741 patients, were randomly assigned to receive bortezomib (=21) or placebo (=23). The 0.5-ml/min per 1.73 m per year (95% confidence interval, -4.8 to 5.8) difference detected between bortezomib and placebo in eGFR slope (primary end point) was not significant (=0.86). We detected no significant differences between bortezomib- and placebo-treated groups in median measured GFR at 24 months (33 versus 42 ml/min per 1.73 m; =0.31), 2-year graft survival (81% versus 96%;=0.12), urinary protein concentration, DSA levels, or morphologic or molecular rejection phenotypes in 24-month follow-up biopsy specimens. Bortezomib, however, associated with gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity. In conclusion, our trial failed to show that bortezomib prevents GFR loss, improves histologic or molecular disease features, or reduces DSA, despite significant toxicity. Our results reinforce the need for systematic trials to dissect the efficiency and safety of new treatments for late ABMR.

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) can occur in patients with preexisting anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) or in patients who develop DSA. However, how these processes compare in terms of allograft injury and outcome has not been addressed. From a cohort of 771 kidney biopsy specimens from two North American and five European centers, we performed a systematic assessment of clinical and biologic parameters, histopathology, circulating DSA, and allograft gene expression for all patients with ABMR (=205). Overall, 103 (50%) patients had preexisting DSA and 102 (50%) had DSA. Compared with patients with preexisting DSA ABMR, patients with DSA ABMR displayed increased proteinuria, more transplant glomerulopathy lesions, and lower glomerulitis, but similar levels of peritubular capillaritis and C4d deposition. DSA ABMR was characterized by increased expression of IFN-inducible, natural killer cell, and T cell transcripts, but less expression of AKI transcripts compared with preexisting DSA ABMR. The preexisting DSA ABMR had superior graft survival compared with the DSA ABMR (63% versus 34% at 8 years after rejection, respectively;<0.001). After adjusting for clinical, histologic, and immunologic characteristics and treatment, we identified DSA ABMR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.82 compared with preexisting DSA ABMR; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.07 to 3.08;=0.03); low eGFR (<30 ml/min per 1.73 m) at diagnosis (HR, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.48 to 7.23; <0.001); ≥0.30 g/g urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.47 to 4.09; <0.001); and presence of cg lesions (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.79; =0.002) as the main independent determinants of allograft loss. Our findings support the transplant of kidneys into highly sensitized patients and should encourage efforts to monitor patients for DSA.

No abstract

No abstract

The impact of donor‐specific HLA alloantibodies (DSA) on short‐ and long‐term liver transplant outcome is not clearly defined. While it is clear that not all levels of allosensitization produce overt clinical injury, and that liver allografts possess some degree of alloantibody resistance, alloantibody‐mediated adverse consequences are increasingly being recognized. To better define the current state of this topic, we assembled experts to provide insights, explore controversies and develop recommendations for future research on the consequences of DSA in liver transplantation. This article summarizes the proceedings of this inaugural meeting. Several insights emerged. Acute antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR), although rarely diagnosed, is increasingly understood to overlap with T cell–mediated rejection. Isolated liver allograft recipients are at increased risk of early allograft immunologic injury when preformed DSA are high titer and persist posttransplantation. Persons who undergo simultaneous liver–kidney transplantation are at risk of renal AMR when Class II DSA persist posttransplantation. Other under‐appreciated DSA associations include ductopenia and fibrosis, plasma cell hepatitis, biliary strictures and accelerated fibrosis associated with recurrent liver disease. Standardized DSA testing and diagnostic criteria for both acute and chronic AMR are needed to distil existing associations into etiological processes in order to develop responsive therapeutic strategies.

The authors conducted a prospective trial to assess the feasibility of real time central molecular assessment of kidney transplant biopsy samples from 10 North American or European centers. Biopsy samples taken 1 day to 34 years posttransplantation were stabilized in RNAlater, sent via courier overnight at ambient temperature to the central laboratory, and processed (29 h workflow) using microarrays to assess T cell- and antibody-mediated rejection (TCMR and ABMR, respectively). Of 538 biopsy samples submitted, 519 (96%) were sufficient for microarray analysis (average length, 3 mm). Automated reports were generated without knowledge of histology and HLA antibody, with diagnoses assigned based on Molecular Microscope Diagnostic System (MMDx) classifier algorithms and signed out by one observer. Agreement between MMDx and histology (balanced accuracy) was 77% for TCMR, 77% for ABMR, and 76% for no rejection. A classification tree derived to provide automated sign-outs predicted the observer sign-outs with >90% accuracy. In 451 biopsy samples where feedback was obtained, clinicians indicated that MMDx more frequently agreed with clinical judgment (87%) than did histology (80%) (p = 0.0042). In 81% of feedback forms, clinicians reported that MMDx increased confidence in management compared with conventional assessment alone. The authors conclude that real time central molecular assessment is feasible and offers a useful new dimension in biopsy interpretation. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT#01299168.