Cargando…
Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis
BACKGROUND: Besides ‘definitive rejection’, the Banff classification includes categories for ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and phenotypes of rejection episodes in 316 consecutive renal transplants from 2009 to 2014 grouped into patients w...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5367753/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28361120 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000650 |
_version_ | 1782517825509785600 |
---|---|
author | Wehmeier, Caroline Amico, Patrizia Hirt-Minkowski, Patricia Georgalis, Argyrios Höenger, Gideon Menter, Thomas Mihatsch, Michael Burkhalter, Felix Steiger, Juerg Dickenmann, Michael Hopfer, Helmut Schaub, Stefan |
author_facet | Wehmeier, Caroline Amico, Patrizia Hirt-Minkowski, Patricia Georgalis, Argyrios Höenger, Gideon Menter, Thomas Mihatsch, Michael Burkhalter, Felix Steiger, Juerg Dickenmann, Michael Hopfer, Helmut Schaub, Stefan |
author_sort | Wehmeier, Caroline |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Besides ‘definitive rejection’, the Banff classification includes categories for ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and phenotypes of rejection episodes in 316 consecutive renal transplants from 2009 to 2014 grouped into patients without/with pretransplant HLA-DSA (ptDSA(neg), n = 251; ptDSA(pos), n = 65). METHODS: All adequate indication (n = 125) and surveillance biopsies (n = 538) performed within the first year posttransplant were classified according to the current Banff criteria. RESULTS: ‘Suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes were 3 times more common than ‘definitive rejection’ phenotypes in biopsies from ptDSA(neg) patients (35% vs 11%) and equally common in biopsies from ptDSA(pos) patients (25% vs 27%). In both groups, ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes were more frequent in surveillance than in indication biopsies (28% vs 16% in ptDSA(neg) patients, and 37% vs 29% in ptDSA(pos) patients). ‘Borderline changes: ‘Suspicious' for acute T-cell mediated rejection’ (91%) were the dominant ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotype in ptDSA(neg) patients, whereas ‘borderline changes’ (58%) and ‘suspicious for acute/active antibody-mediated rejection’ (42%) were equally frequent in biopsies from ptDSA(pos) patients. Inclusion of ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes increased the 1-year incidence of clinical (ptDSA(neg) patients: 18% vs 8%, P = 0.0005; ptDSA(pos) patients: 24% vs 18%, P = 0.31) and (sub)clinical rejection (ptDSA(neg) patients: 59% vs 22%, P < 0.0001; ptDSA(pos) patients: 68% vs 40%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: ‘Suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes are very common in the current era and outnumber the frequency of ‘definitive rejection’ within the first year posttransplant. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5367753 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53677532017-03-30 Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis Wehmeier, Caroline Amico, Patrizia Hirt-Minkowski, Patricia Georgalis, Argyrios Höenger, Gideon Menter, Thomas Mihatsch, Michael Burkhalter, Felix Steiger, Juerg Dickenmann, Michael Hopfer, Helmut Schaub, Stefan Transplant Direct Kidney Transplantation BACKGROUND: Besides ‘definitive rejection’, the Banff classification includes categories for ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and phenotypes of rejection episodes in 316 consecutive renal transplants from 2009 to 2014 grouped into patients without/with pretransplant HLA-DSA (ptDSA(neg), n = 251; ptDSA(pos), n = 65). METHODS: All adequate indication (n = 125) and surveillance biopsies (n = 538) performed within the first year posttransplant were classified according to the current Banff criteria. RESULTS: ‘Suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes were 3 times more common than ‘definitive rejection’ phenotypes in biopsies from ptDSA(neg) patients (35% vs 11%) and equally common in biopsies from ptDSA(pos) patients (25% vs 27%). In both groups, ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes were more frequent in surveillance than in indication biopsies (28% vs 16% in ptDSA(neg) patients, and 37% vs 29% in ptDSA(pos) patients). ‘Borderline changes: ‘Suspicious' for acute T-cell mediated rejection’ (91%) were the dominant ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotype in ptDSA(neg) patients, whereas ‘borderline changes’ (58%) and ‘suspicious for acute/active antibody-mediated rejection’ (42%) were equally frequent in biopsies from ptDSA(pos) patients. Inclusion of ‘suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes increased the 1-year incidence of clinical (ptDSA(neg) patients: 18% vs 8%, P = 0.0005; ptDSA(pos) patients: 24% vs 18%, P = 0.31) and (sub)clinical rejection (ptDSA(neg) patients: 59% vs 22%, P < 0.0001; ptDSA(pos) patients: 68% vs 40%, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: ‘Suspicious for rejection’ phenotypes are very common in the current era and outnumber the frequency of ‘definitive rejection’ within the first year posttransplant. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5367753/ /pubmed/28361120 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000650 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Kidney Transplantation Wehmeier, Caroline Amico, Patrizia Hirt-Minkowski, Patricia Georgalis, Argyrios Höenger, Gideon Menter, Thomas Mihatsch, Michael Burkhalter, Felix Steiger, Juerg Dickenmann, Michael Hopfer, Helmut Schaub, Stefan Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis |
title | Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis |
title_full | Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis |
title_fullStr | Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis |
title_short | Acute Rejection Phenotypes in the Current Era of Immunosuppression: A Single-Center Analysis |
title_sort | acute rejection phenotypes in the current era of immunosuppression: a single-center analysis |
topic | Kidney Transplantation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5367753/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28361120 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000650 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wehmeiercaroline acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT amicopatrizia acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT hirtminkowskipatricia acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT georgalisargyrios acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT hoengergideon acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT menterthomas acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT mihatschmichael acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT burkhalterfelix acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT steigerjuerg acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT dickenmannmichael acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT hopferhelmut acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis AT schaubstefan acuterejectionphenotypesinthecurrenteraofimmunosuppressionasinglecenteranalysis |