Download Overcoming Antibody Barriers in Renal Transplantation

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Overcoming Antibody Barriers in
Renal Transplantation
Reference: Montgomery MA. Renal
transplantation across HLA and ABO antibody
barriers: Integrating paired donation into
desensitization protocols.
Am J Transplant. 2010;10:449–457.
• All patients in need of renal transplantation face the
crisis of organ availability, particularly, those who are
disadvantaged by human leukocyte antigen (HLA)
sensitization or hard-to-match blood types and will
have to wait for prolonged periods.
• At present, there are three options available to patients
who have an incompatible live donor—desensitization,
kidney paired donation (KPD) and a combination of the
two modalities.
• Figure 1 outlines a transplant modality algorithm that
takes into account the clinical phenotypes that are
likely to benefit from the different options.
Desensitization
• Two desensitization protocols have demonstrated clinical
efficacy—Plasmapheresis (or immunoadsorption) and highdose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) with low-dose IVIg
(PP/IVIg).
• Within days of discontinuing plasmapheresis, the anti-HLA
antibody rebounds whereas the transplantation benefit of
high-dose IVIg can continue for several months after the drug
is administered.
• However, both the protocols are designed to lower donorspecific alloantibody (DSA) strength to a level that is safe for
transplantation; besides the immunoregulartory mechanisms
can promote maintenance of reduced antibody reactivity
following preconditioning and transplantation.
High-Dose IVIg
• Similar protocols exist for both live and deceased
donor transplants.
• The protocol consists of monthly infusions of 2
g/kg IVIg until either the crossmatch is deemed
safe or a total of four doses are administered.
• The Mayo group, after performing a head-tohead comparison between a single high-dose of
IVIg and PP/IVIg in live donor recipients, reported
that PP/IVIg was more effective in abrogating a
positive crossmatch particularly when the
strength of the crossmatch was higher.
PP/IVIg
• Effective reduction of HLA antibody and isohemagglutinin via
plasmapheresis helps in the preparation for an incompatible live
donor transplant (see Fig. 2).
• After transplantation, at least two PP/IVIg sessions are performed,
beyond which the duration of treatment is predicated by DSA
levels.
• Low-dose IVIg (100 mg/kg) serves to reduce the synthesis and
release of endogenous antibody that occurs after plasma exchange
otherwise it can have immunomodulatory effects similar to highdose protocols.
• Anti-CD20 has been used selectively in patients with high-risk
donor/recipient phenotypes (combined ABOi and +XM, high XM
starting titer, multiple DSAs and multiple repeat mismatches).
Kidney Paired Donation
• Currently, computer modeling and mathematical
algorithms have helped to simulate incompatible
donor pools.
• When compared to the general donor/recipient
population, incompatible pools contain a
dramatic blood type skewing towards a greater
percentage of hard-to-match O recipients and
fewer valuable O donors.
• However, several of the hard-to-match patients
who are less likely to find matches can be
considered for desensitization.
KPD versus Desensitization
• Two important questions can help to determine
the best option for an individual pair; they are
(1) how difficult will they be to match in a KPD?
and (2) how difficult will they be to desensitize?
• The first question can be addressed using
mathematical simulations to impute the
probability of matching in a KPD based on the
donor blood type, recipient blood type, degree of
sensitization and the size of the KPD pool (see
Table 1).
KPD versus Desensitization
• Once the immunologic profile of the donor/recipient has been
determined, it becomes possible to predict who will be either difficult-todesensitize or at risk for antibody-mediated acute rejection (AMR).
• The strength of the recipient’s antibody reactivity to the donor in positive
crossmatch patients is a good predictor of the length of the
desensitization therapy as well as the risk of AMR after the transplant.
• Broadly sensitized patients will have variable strengths of antibody
reactivity against different HLA molecules.
• Very broadly sensitized patients with high HLA reactivity that are both
difficult-to-match and difficult-to-desensitize can be transplanted by
combining KPD and desensitization (see Fig. 1C).
• Figure 3 reveals that this can be accomplished by raising the threshold for
the antibody strength that defines unacceptable antigens and then search
the KPD database for genotypes that would permit a positive crossmatch
with a low strength.
Conclusion
• Several different interventions with proven
efficacy exist that can be used to avoid or
confront antibody incompatibilities.
• Considering the strengths and limitations of
these interventions can help to apply a more
rational application of therapeutic modalities
that have the potential to add several
thousand additional transplants each year.