Monitoring of Anti-HLA and Anti–Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I Related Chain A Antibodies in Living Related Renal Donor Transplantation

Panigrahi, Ashutosh; Gupta, Natasha; Siddiqui, Jamshaid A.; Margoob, A; Bhowmik, D; Guleria, Sandeep; Nk, Mehra

doi:10.1016/j.transproceed.2007.02.009

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Panigrahi et al ( 82 , 119 ) analyzed the presence of Abs against MICA*001, MICA*002, MICA*004, MICA*008, and MICA*009 in serum samples of 185 patients transplanted with live related donor kidneys. Sixteen percent of all recipients developed anti-MICA Abs during the posttransplant period, 83% of the patients whose grafts eventually failed had both anti-HLA and anti-MICA Abs as compared to 29% patients who had only anti-MICA Abs, and 11% of those without any of the Abs (HLA or MICA) ( 82 , 119 ).…”

Section: Mica–nkg2d and Kidney Transplantmentioning

confidence: 99%

MICA and NKG2D: Is There an Impact on Kidney Transplant Outcome?

Risti

Bicalho

2017

Front. Immunol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to present an overview of MICA and natural killer group 2 member D (NKG2D) genetic and functional interactions and their impact on kidney transplant outcome. Organ transplantation has gone from what can accurately be called a “clinical experiment” to a routine and reliable practice, which has proven to be clinically relevant, life-saving and cost-effective when compared with non-transplantation management strategies of both chronic and acute end-stage organ failures. The kidney is the most frequently transplanted organ in the world (transplant-observatory1). The two treatment options for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are dialysis and/or transplantation. Compared with dialysis, transplantation is associated with significant improvements in quality of life and overall longevity. A strong relationship exists between allograft loss and human leukocyte antigens (HLA) antibodies (Abs). HLA Abs are not the only factor involved in graft loss, as multiple studies have shown that non-HLA antigens are also involved, even when a patient has a good HLA matche and receives standard immunosuppressive therapy. A deeper understanding of other biomarkers is therefore important, as it is likely to lead to better monitoring (and consequent success) of organ transplants. The objective is to fill the void left by extensive reviews that do not often dive this deep into the importance of MICA and NKG2D in allograft acceptance and their partnership in the immune response. There are few papers that explore the relationship between these two protagonists when it comes to kidney transplantation. This is especially true for the role of NKG2D in kidney transplantation. These reasons give a special importance to this review, which aims to be a helpful tool in the hands of researchers in this field.

show abstract

Section: Mica–nkg2d and Kidney Transplantmentioning

confidence: 99%

MICA and NKG2D: Is There an Impact on Kidney Transplant Outcome?

Risti

Bicalho

2017

Front. Immunol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The monitoring of antibodies against HLA and anti-major histocompatibility complex class I related chain A (MICA) has been shown to have clinical relevance [74,75]. HLA and MICA antigens are polymorphic and can elicit antibody production.…”

Section: Hla and Non-hla Antibodiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study showed that presensitization of kidney transplant recipients against MICA antigens is associated with an increased rate of graft loss, even in recipients who are well matched for HLA. In another study, MICA and HLA antibodies were studied in posttransplant sera of living related renal donor transplantations[75]. Patients carrying antibodies against both HLA and MICA (MICA + /HLA + ) showed significantly poorer graft survival compared with the MICA − /HLA − group.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Relevance of Immune Monitoring in Solid Organ Transplantation

Daniel

Opelz

2009

International Reviews of Immunology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transplant recipients receive immunosuppressive drugs to prevent graft rejection and graft loss. Immunosuppressive drugs are dosed according to empiric treatment protocols, which consider the risk of under- or oversuppression, rejection, infection, cancer, and drug side effects. An individualized immunosuppressive protocol based on immune monitoring would be useful for avoiding undesired effects. In retrospective studies, numerous immune parameters were shown to be associated with clinical events. Their suitability for clinical application has to be proven in prospective studies. A multiparametric immune monitoring program, performed frequently and lifelong, might be the appropriate approach to predict dysfunction of the graft before clinical symptoms occur.

show abstract

“…The much‐needed impetus towards understanding the relevance of non‐HLA antibodies has come from multicentric analysis involving a large cohort of renal allograft recipients and published under the aegis of the Collaborative Transplant Study (CTS) 1 . Subsequently, several investigators have highlighted an important role of non‐HLA antibodies not only in kidney transplants, but also in those involving other organs such as heart and lung 2‐7 . Major histocompatibility complex class I chain–related molecule A (MICA), the most notable of all the non‐HLA antigenic targets, has been implicated in hyperacute, acute and/or chronic allograft rejection 8‐12 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The risk factors for development of MICA antibodies are primarily the same as already known for HLA sensitization, namely, pregnancy, blood transfusion, and previous transplantation. Studies carried out worldwide have suggested the prevalence of MICA antibodies to be in the range between 7% and 27% 3,[18][19][20][21] in renal allograft recipients and around 30% in those undergoing heart transplantation. 22 Further, their presence has been acknowledged in the pretransplant sera, 2,16 as well as following transplantation but before graft rejection 23 and in patients undergoing rejection of their kidney allografts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical relevance of major histocompatibility complex class I chain–related molecule A (MICA) antibodies in live donor renal transplantation – Indian Experience

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Besides the overriding influence of anti-HLA antibodies on the overall graft survival, immune response to non-HLA antigens has become a subject of substantial interest in recent years. The much-needed impetus towards understanding the relevance of non-HLA antibodies has come from multicentric analysis involving a large cohort of renal allograft recipients and published under the aegis of the Collaborative Transplant Study (CTS). 1 Subsequently, several investigators have highlighted an important role of non-HLA antibodies not only in kidney transplants, but also in those involving other organs such as heart and lung. 2-7 Major histocompatibility complex class I chain-related molecule A (MICA), the most notable

show abstract

Monitoring of Anti-HLA and Anti–Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I Related Chain A Antibodies in Living Related Renal Donor Transplantation

Cited by 16 publications

References 4 publications

MICA and NKG2D: Is There an Impact on Kidney Transplant Outcome?

MICA and NKG2D: Is There an Impact on Kidney Transplant Outcome?

Clinical Relevance of Immune Monitoring in Solid Organ Transplantation

Clinical relevance of major histocompatibility complex class I chain–related molecule A (MICA) antibodies in live donor renal transplantation – Indian Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About