* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Document
Lymphopoiesis wikipedia , lookup
Immune system wikipedia , lookup
Psychoneuroimmunology wikipedia , lookup
Immunocontraception wikipedia , lookup
Complement system wikipedia , lookup
Innate immune system wikipedia , lookup
Adaptive immune system wikipedia , lookup
Molecular mimicry wikipedia , lookup
Adoptive cell transfer wikipedia , lookup
Cancer immunotherapy wikipedia , lookup
Polyclonal B cell response wikipedia , lookup
Canadian Blood Services Transfusion Medicine Resident Topic Teaching Session: Trojan Antibodies and Transplant Malware: Improbable Sensitizations & Hemolytic Passenger Lymphocyte Syndromes Tuesday, October 5th 2010, 12:00 – 1:00 pm Conference Dial-In: 1-866-752-7690, Passcode 1775282 www.transfusionmedicine.ca Christine Cserti-Gazdewich, MD FRCPC Assistant Professor, University of Toronto Departments of Laboratory Hematology (Pathology) & Clinical Hematology (Medicine) Blood Transfusion Laboratory, University Health Network Toronto, Ontario, Canada office 416-340-5390, pager 416-790-9597, email [email protected] NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. FUNDING FOR RESEARCH FROM PUBLIC FOUNDATIONS ONLY. 1 Princess Margaret Hospital Toronto General Hospital Toronto Western Hospital University Health Network Holland Ortho & Arthritic Centre Ontario Regional Blood Coordinators provincial blood management Sunnybrook Hospital Women’s College Hospital Canadian Blood Services Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre St Michael’s Hospital Hospital for Sick Children national blood provider Ontario Transfusion Coordinators provincial blood conservation Mount Sinai Hospital TRANSFUSION MEDICINE COLLABORATIVE University of Toronto teaching hospitals: Hospital Transfusion Services Trillium Gift of Life Network provincial organ network 2 Goals • Re-orient to sensitization biology in transfusion medicine • Appreciate what is known about hemolytic passenger lymphocyte syndromes (PLS) in transplantation • Note some twists in ABO-incompatible stem cell transplantation • Consider new insights into “accommodation” 3 It All Starts With This One Tube… plasma 4 ABO Types in the General Population A donor plasma: • anti-B IgM 40% 45% O donor plasma: • anti-A,B IgG • anti-A & anti-B IgG & IgM A B AB O 4% AB donor plasma: • no anti-A or anti-B 11% B donor plasma: • anti-A IgM 5 30 blood group antigen systems (ABO, Rh, …) containing structures that are naturally “polymorphic” (278 antigens + 38 in “collections/series”) 6 Who Are The Antibody-Makers Anyway? • anyone whose immune system has seen a foreign red cell at any other time in their lives – the parous (85% of child-bearing age females) • feto-maternal hemorrhage (FMH), especially at parturition – any transfusion history • up to 1-3% of the healthy donor population • up to 1/3rd of those with a hospital admission history – any tissue grafts or transplants (solid organs, hematopoietic progenitor [stem] cells), inevitably contaminated with passenger erythrocytes 7 “Antibody Makers” • 13% of people are “antibody makers” • difference between -makers and -others appears, at least in part, to be absence vs integrity of T-reg-suppressive activity 8 Guy (Gal) Walks In The Door… What Are The Chances? EXPOSURE X INTRINSIC SEROCONVERSION RISK X HOW RECENT & HOW DURABLE THE ANTIBODY IS 1 – 5 % of the population has a positive red cell antibody screen 9 Targets for Graft versus Host Attack HLA Antigens (Platelets, Tissues)… ie- GVHD Red Cell Antigens… ie- Passenger Lymphocyte Syndrome (PLS) 10 Diversity (Polymorphisms) Set Up The Tissue Incompatibility Fight extensive variations therein… ALLOIMMUNIZATION 11 Diversity (Polymorphisms) Set Up The RBC Incompatibility Fight Kell: K vs k, others ABO Duffy: Fya vs Fyb Rh(D) Kidd: Jka vs Jkb complete absence or presence ISOIMMUNIZATION etc: MNS, P, Lutheran, Lewis, Diego, Scianna, Dombrock, other Rh(CE) Colton, LW, Chido/Rodgers, Gerbich, Cromer, Knops, Indian antigens: C vs c E vs e subtle (eg SNP) variations therein… ALLOIMMUNIZATION 12 The Vocabulary of Immune Violence MAJOR vs MINOR incompatibility ACTIVE vs PASSIVE immunity 13 Directions of Incompatibility • MAJOR • “MINOR” – incoming donor’s cellular antigens are the incompatible target – host-source immunity mounts the attack – donor-source immunity mounts the attack – PRODUCT REJECTION by a fighting recipient – HOST REJECTION by a fighting donor • eg. ABO incompatible RBC mistransfusion – A into O: donor A cells destroyed by host O plasma – host’s cellular antigens are the incompatible target • eg. GVHD from a solid organ transplant, a transfusion, or a BMT • eg. TRALI • eg. acute rejection of organs 14 Active vs Passive Immunity • ACTIVE n∞ • PASSIVE – renewable humoral (via cellular) fighting power all forms of MAJOR incompatibility recipient plasma cell – finite (humorally contained) fighting power some forms of MINOR incompatibility passenger donor plasma cell n=x graft* most forms of MINOR incompatibility product 15 GVHD: What does it take? • living passenger lymphocytes • proliferative stimulus: something recognizably different in the host to attack • invulnerability: some way for the passengers to “get away with it” – host too immune suppressed – host “immune oblivious” (eg. homozygous haploidentical donor indistinguishable from self) 16 passenger donor plasma cell graft host RBC Passenger Lymphocyte Syndromes minor incompatibility scenario of donororigin (graft-associated) alloimmune hemolytic anemia of host RBCS aka. HUMORAL GRAFT VERSUS HOST DISEASE FOR THE BLOOD BANK 17 PLS – The Implicated RBC Antigen Spectrum (Usual Victims) 555-fold • ABO > Rh > minor RBC antigens: – probability of minor discrepancy • 25% for ABO vs <15% for Rh – presence of preformed Ab or primary historical sensitizations • ~100% for ABO vs 0.3% for Rh(D) • Rh: usually from donors who have been alloimmunized previously – prior donor alloimmunization “almost necessary” 18 First Reports of Anti-RBC PLS • 1964 – 1st hemolytic ABO PLS Marchioro, NYAS • 1985 – 1st hemolytic anti-D PLS Swanson, Transfusion • 1990 – 1st multiorgan (L, K) PLS Ramsey, aaBB 19 PLS – “Lymphoid” Load Spectrum (Usual Aggressors) kidney (heart-) lung small bowel, pancreas HPC: PB > BM liver • dead or alive… • graft (usually) unaffected • at least 10 6 – 10 7 20 Timing For “Serologically Expressive” Chimerism • median onset: 9 days (5 – 17) • median duration: 4.5 weeks (2 – 23) • undetectable by 3 months • the records: – fastest onset: 12 h – most delayed onset: 45 d – longest persistence: 2 years for Ab (2 mo for HA) 21 The Role of Incidental HLA Matching (“graft stealth” by tolerance of inadvertently HLA-similar passengers) • borne out in TA- & SOT- GVHD literature • anti-RBC PLS may also be more likely with inadvertent HLA matching 22 Things That May Make it Worse • density of vulnerable antigen – group A recipients • use of non-B-cell suppressive IST – cyclosporine • pro-hemolytic ± complement-fixing capabilities of antibody • inflammation / cytokines – TNF-α & IL-1 (conditioning or ischemic injuries) – co-stimulatory interactions: CD40 - CD154, CD28 - B7 – IL-2 RαCD25-dependent clonal expansion with Th1 – CTL response – overly receptive RES/MPS 23 Things That May Make it Better (or Preventatively Subdue it?) • post- (or pre-?) transplant graft irradiation • reducing immunosuppression = de-repression revenge • evolution towards non-hemolytic antibody properties • promotion of activity of inhibitory FcR • “non-hemolytic red cell antigen loss” • senescence of passenger lymphocytes • Ag-Ab excesses negative feedback to memory B cells 24 Transfusion Care in PLS • issuing antigen-negative blood, compatible with respect to graft-origin antibodies, and not just the same blood type as the host • failure to do so = “Incorrect Blood Component Transfused” (IBCT) medical error event… +/- ABO mis-transfusion • top-up transfusions… or therapeutic red cell exchange (TREX) 25 Is There a Role for Apheresis? Red cell replacement of removed plasma (hybrid TPRE) Whole blood removal eg. manual red cell exchange, replacing with pRBC ± plasma/NS/albumin (reconstituted whole blood) Therapeutic red cell exchange (TREx) Top-up transfusion 26 When Sh/(C)ould Therapeutic Plasma Exchange Be Offered? • removal of pathologic antibody – IgM > IgG – high titer > low titer • “detox” of RBC breakdown products – for extreme cases with intravascular hemolysis • plasma free hemoglobin: ? danger thresholds ? – massive acute hemolysis (MAH): free plasma hemoglobinemia > 60 µmol/L = > 387 mg/dL (N: 0.5 – 5 mg/dL) • stromal factors & DIC 27 Other Management Options • rituximab • graft irradiation • splenectomy • cytotoxic agents, prednisone adjustments • combination therapy: RBC/TREX, IST, apheresis, splenectomy 28 A Passenger Lymphocyte Traceback Story… Why does my D+ patient now have anti-D after transplant? -passive sensitization? -partial D with alloimmunization? -active (passenger lymphocyte-mediated) sensitization? 29 case 2 case I case 3 30 Case 1: The good news: ABO compatibility… Donor: “A Negative” Recipient: “A Positive” The bad news: the seeming Rh(D)-compatibility isn’t 31 Case 1 • 66F presented for a R SLT for COPD • group & screen pre-op: – A, Rh(D)+ – screen negative amid a history of A+ transfusions • group & screen POD17 in the pre-transfusion investigations of her new hemolytic anemia: – A, Rh(D)+ – screen: anti-D & anti-C – DAT: anti-D & anti-C 32 Case 1 Traceback of Donor • elderly multiparous female • group A, Rh(D)-negative (rr) • screen: Anti-C Anti-D Anti-E 33 RECIPIENT: Serologically: C+ D+ e+ c- E- Weiner designation: R1 R1 (17% of population) Anti-C Anti-D Anti-E DONOR: Serologically: c+ e+ C- D- E- Weiner designation: r r (15% of population) passenger lymphocyte 34 anti-D on IAT 216 anti-C on IAT 123 217 anti-D on DAT (eluate) anti-C on DAT (eluate) clinically significant hemolytic anemia (depleted haptoglobin, increased LDH & bilirubin) 10 therapeutic plasma exchange 67 39 60 36 - 40 110 160 210 days post transplant 35 Case 1: Indirect Attributable Mortality Due to PLS • POD 21, Hb 6.0 g/dL: – massive AMI (“demand-ischemic” with rAF) – grade IV EF left with refractory CHF cardiac dysrhythmiae & fluid imbalances • died day 330 post transplant = 10 months later = 113 days after last detectable anti-D 36 Case 2: Recipient of the Contralateral Donor’s Lung: • 43 y old female presented for L SLT 9/28/07 • A, R1 r , negative pre-transplant screen • lifelong transfusion-free history • screened monthly due to Case 1 patient 37 reaction strength Case 2: Novel Serological Course 4 serologically positive 3 120 DAT IAT 159 2 acute rejection 1 173 0 0 100 TPE 259 266 200 days post-transplant 300 38 Case 3: It happened again! RECIPIENT 3: ♂ DONOR 2: ♂ O, R1 R1 ( CC DD ee ) anti-C anti-C O, r r anti-D anti-D ( cc dd ee ) anti-V 0 • 30 year old male presented for DLT for CF • RBC antibody screen negative pre-operatively • RBC antibody screen + POD 23 – anti-D on IAT – anti-D & anti-C on eluate of DAT • no hemolysis • ongoing persistence at follow-ups (> 6 mo) 39 Why Did anti-D PLS Happen So Often In Our Series? • expected: – (13% risk of D- to D+) x (2% risk of anti-D) x (100% transfer) = 0.3% • observed: – 3/92 or 3% [95% CI: 1 – 9 %] • 100% transfer did indeed occur based on lookback • 3 donors were found to be D-sensitized – of a denominator of 12 D- donors, rate was 25% [ 6 – 57%, 95% CI] (>12x higher than expected… ) 40 Update: 10 Sequential Cases at the UHN Over 3.87 Years of Surveillance (q 25 wk) Implicated organ Donor antibodies Cognate recipient attack Significant hemolysis? Lung Lung Lung Anti- C, D, E Anti- C, D, E Anti- C, D, V C, D D C, D Liver Lung Liver Liver Anti- B Anti- B, Jka, N Anti- D Anti- B B B, Jka, N D B Liver Liver Anti- A Anti- A (IgM) A A yes yes Lung Anti-A A yes yes no no yes yes yes * (day 798) yes 41 The Only Prospective Post-Solid Organ Tranplant Sensitization Surveillance Study in the Literature: aaBB Abstracts 2007 – 27% of the ABOi KTs developed +DAT • checked q 10d x 3 checks post-operatively 42 Types Of HPCT ABO Incompatibility R D Type O O O A B A B AB AB AB Major A B AB AB AB O O O A B Minor A B B A Both O A B AB O A B AB None 75% random combinations (assuming equal prevalence of types) are incompatible (12/16) 43 Major Incompatibility 5-ways: non-O into O, or AB into A or B recipient donor 44 Minor Incompatibility 5-ways: O into non-O, or A or B into AB recipient donor 45 All Possible Players… (or the Worst Case Scenario): Bidirectional Incompatibility 2-ways: A to B or B to A recipient donor 46 Donor Distributions By Recipient PROBABILITIES given: O: A: B: AB: 0.45 0.40 0.11 0.04 R D Type Ptype specific O O O O A B AB O Major Major Major None 55% major A A A A A O B AB None Minor Both Major 40% compatible 45% minor 11% bidirectional 4% major B B B B B O A AB None Minor Both Major 11% compatible 45% minor 40% bidirectional 4% major AB AB AB AB AB O A B None Minor Minor Minor 4% compatible 45% identical 96% minor 47 Probability of HPCT ABO Incompatibility Among MUDs Major Minor Bidirectional Compatible O 24.75% n/a n/a 18.00% A 1.60% 18.00% 4.4% 16.00% B 0.44% 4.95% 4.4% 1.21% AB n/a 3.84% n/a 0.16% P total 26.8% 26.8% 8.8% 37.6% Recipient 62.5 % 48 Quick Summary of Vagaries of ABOi in HPCT • MAJOR INCOMPATIBLE HPCT – multi-lineage marrow aplasia/hypoplasia – delayed (red cell) engraftment / pure red cell aplasia (PRCA) – INCOMING DONOR CELLS FOUGHT OFF (acute hemolysis of passive contaminant, delayed establishment of active production) • MINOR INCOMPATIBLE HPCT – delayed, potentially severe hemolytic anemia – HISTORICAL RECIPIENT CELLS FOUGHT OFF (acute hemolysis of recipient cells by passive antibody, delayed hemolysis of recipient cells by active antibody) 49 ABOi HPCT and Increased RBC Alloimmunization? • Described once by de la Rubia et al in 2001, in a transplant cohort of 217 transplant patients, of whom 8 had developed non-ABO RBC antibodies – ABO blood group incompatibility (p = 0.005) and patient's age (p = 0.02) were the only two variables significantly associated with the development of RBC alloantibodies • Took a peak (in 2006 while at BIDMC) at 90 consecutive transplant patients, of whom 8 had non-ABO RBC antibodies 50 ABOidentical MUD transplants, n=6 ABOincompatible MUD transplants, n = 12 ABO-incompatible MRD transplants, n = 28 (odds 3X higher for ABOincompatible HPCTs among MUD vs MRD) ABO-incompatible transplants, n = 40 (28 MRD, 12 MUD [30%]) 51 MUD transplants, n = 18 MRD transplants, n = 72 (4X as many MRDs as MUDs) ABO-identical MRD transplants, n = 44 patients post- ABO identical HPCT, n = 50 (0 [0%] new alloimmunizations) p=0.006 (2-tailed Fisher’s exact test) 2/2 of historically alloimmunized patients experienced antibody persistence 32, 80% 8, 20% non-alloimmunized patients persistent, pre-transplant anti-E persistent, pre-transplant anti-Jk(a) new, post-transplant anti-K new, post-transplant anti-K new, post-transplant anti-E new, post-transplant anti-E new, post-transplant anti-E new, post-transplant anti-K, E, C(W) 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 10 antibodies 1 8 alloimmunized patients 0/1 of historically alloimmunized patients experienced antibody persistence patients post- ABO incompatible HPCT, n = 40 (6 [15%] new alloimmunizations) 52 Minor Not So Innocent, Yet Again ABO minor incompatible HPC transplants ABO major incompatible HPC transplants 21 15 (1) (7) red cell sensitization (n=8): • 1/3rd of ABO minor incompatible HPC transplants • 1/15th of ABO major incompatible HPC transplants Suggests that antibody formation is not only more frequently observed in ABO-mismatched cases, but specifically in the minor incompatibility scenario. 53 The Discovery of Non-Hemolytic Red Cell Antigen Loss • after transfusion of Ag+ cells to Ab+ host… D R 1. hemolytic clearance of DAT+ allogeneic cells D 2. non-hemolytic persistence of DAT+ cells D 3. non-hemolytic transformation of Ag-, DAT- cells D R R R 54 How Does Loss of Ag Happen Without Losing the RBC? • no single mechanism found yet… – ? synthetic feedback suppression of antigen – ? post-expression tear-away – ? partial alteration of antigen – ? benign antibody binding D • you don’t need a spleen, but it won’t happen ex-vivo… – need a liver with FcγRIII – need to simultaneously cross-link antibodies that have separate specificities for parts of the same target antigen 55 A Natural Mechanism, Neglected Because of Its Silence… • CR1 (CD35) on RBCs* have been known to transfer immune complexes to Kupffer cells of the liver without undergoing hemolysis! * CR1 also present in B cells, myeloid cells… • Unnatural clinical precedents, good and bad: – “organ accommodation” – CD20+ CLL cells becoming CD20- and thus escaping the effects of rituximab (anti-CD20) 56 CR1 (CD35) Biology: Expression Implications genotype +/+ +/- -/- phenotype high moderate low/absent Normal range: 50 – 1200/cell 20-fold natural variation in healthy people Low expression: <200 / cell • C3b/C4b complement receptor = CR1 = CD35, chr 1q32 within RCA (regulators of complement activation) family • On red blood cells: – Primary function: limits activation of complement pathway • Binds complement cleavage products C3b and C4b, thus acting as a cofactor to inactivate them to iC3b and iC4b – Secondary function: provide a removal/clearance function • Immune complexes (IC) bind to C3b, which is then trafficked on CR1 of RBCs (and other cells) to the liver and spleen for removal by macrophages… • On B-cells and macrophages: – Pro-inflammatory cytokine release in response to immune complexes? 57 Final Aphorisms • just because something isn’t major incompatible, it doesn’t mean it’s compatible enough… sometimes “minor” is anything but • unexpected antibodies – for a specific self-alloantigen, at a time when de novo antibody production is assumed to be stymied, tell us interesting stories • knowing more about what controls the difference between harmful versus harmless sensitizations has vast implications for us in troubleshooting our way through transfusion medicine, transplant immunobiology, & biologic therapy 58