Introduction: Kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment in end-stage kidney disease, but de-novo donor specific antibody development continues to negatively impact patients undergoing kidney transplantation. One of the recent advances in solid organ transplantation has been the definition of molecular mismatching between donors and recipients’ Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLA). While not fully integrated in standard clinical care, cumulative molecular mismatch at the level of eplets (EMM) as well as the PIRCHE-II score have shown promise in predicting transplant outcomes. In this manuscript, we sought to study whether certain T-cell molecular mismatches (TcEMM) were highly predictive of death-censored graft failure (DCGF). Methods: We studied a retrospective cohort of kidney donor:recipient pairs from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (2000-2015). Allele level HLA-A, B, C, DRB1 and DQB1 types were imputed from serologic types using the NMDP algorithm. TcEMMs were then estimated using the PIRCHE-II algorithm. Multivariable Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) models assessed the association between each TcEMM and DCGF. To discriminate between TcEMMs most predictive of DCGF, we fit multivariable Lasso penalized regression models. We identified co-expressed TcEMMs using weighted correlation network analysis (WGCNA). Finally, we conducted sensitivity analyses to address PIRCHE and IMGT/HLA version updates. Results: A total of 118,309 donor:recipient pairs meeting the eligibility criteria were studied. When applying the PIRCHE-II algorithm, we identified 1,935 distinct TcEMMs at the population level. A total of 218 of the observed TcEMM were independently associated with DCGF by AFT models. The Lasso penalized regression model with post selection inference identified a smaller subset of 86 TcEMMs (56 and 30 TcEMM derived from HLA Class I and II, respectively) to be highly predictive of DCGF. Of the observed TcEMM, 38.14% appeared as profiles of highly co-expressed TcEMMs. In addition, sensitivity analyses identified that the selected TcEMM were congruent across IMGT/HLA versions. Conclusion: In this study, we identified subsets of TcEMMs highly predictive of DCGF and profiles of co-expressed mismatches. Experimental verification of these TcEMMs determining immune responses and how they may interact with EMM as predictors of transplant outcomes would justify their consideration in organ allocation schemes and for modifying immunosuppression regimens.

Background. Characterization of anti-HLA versus anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (anti-SARS-CoV-2) immune globulin isotypes in organ transplant recipients after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection has not been reported. We aimed to determine changes in anti-HLA antibodies in renal transplant patients with COVID-19 and compare the immunoglobulin and epitope-binding pattern versus anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Methods. This is a cross-sectional study of 46 kidney transplant recipients including 21 with longitudinal sampling. Using a semi-quantitative multiplex assay, we determined immunoglobulin (Ig) M, IgA, IgG, and IgG1-2-3-4 antibodies against Class I and Class II HLA, and 5 SARS-CoV-2 epitopes including the nucleocapsid protein and multiple regions of the spike protein. Results. Fourteen of 46 (30%) patients had donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (donor-specific antibody [DSA]), 12 (26%) had non-DSA anti-HLA antibodies and 45 (98%) had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Most DSAs targeted HLA-DQ (71%), with a dominant IgG isotype and IgG1 subtype prevalence (93%), and/or IgG3 (64%), followed by IgG2 (36%). Comparatively, there was a higher prevalence of IgA (85% versus 14%, P = 0.0001) and IgM (87%, versus 36%, P = 0.001) in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody profile, when compared to DSAs, respectively. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody profile was characterized by increased prevalence of IgM and IgA, when compared to DSAs. The median calculated panel reactive antibody before COVID-19 diagnosis (24%) tended to decrease after COVID-19 diagnosis (10%) but it was not statistically significant (P = 0.1). Conclusions. Anti-HLA antibody strength and calculated panel reactive antibody in kidney transplant recipients after COVID-19 do not significantly increase after infection. Although the IgG isotype was the dominant form in both HLA and SARS-CoV-2 antigens, the alloimmune response had a low IgA pattern, whereas anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were high IgA/IgM.

Background. Liver allografts protect renal allografts from the same donor from some, but not all, preformed donor specific alloantibodies (DSA). However, the precise mechanisms of protection and the potential for more subtle alterations/injuries within the grafts resulting from DSA interactions require further study. Methods. We reevaluated allograft biopsies from simultaneous liver-kidney transplant recipients who had both allografts biopsied within 60 d of one another and within 30 d of DSA being positive in serum (positive: mean florescence intensity ≥5000). Routine histology, C4d staining, and specialized immunohistochemistry for Kupffer cells (KCs; CD163) and a C4d receptor immunoglobulin-like transcript-4 were carried out in 4 patients with 6 paired biopsies. Results. Overt antibody-mediated rejection was found in 3 of 4 renal and liver allografts. One patient had biopsy-confirmed renal and liver allograft antibody-mediated rejection despite serum clearance of DSA. All biopsies showed KC hypertrophy (minimal: 1; mild: 2; moderate: 1; severe: 2) and cytoplasmic C4d KC staining was easily detected in 2 biopsies from 2 patients; minimal and negative in 2 biopsies each. Implications of which are discussed. Control 1-y protocol liver allograft biopsies from DSA- recipients showed neither KC hypertrophy nor KC C4d staining (n = 6). Conclusions. Partial renal allograft protection by a liver allograft from the same donor may be partially mediated by phagocytosis/elimination of antibody and complement split products by KCs, as shown decades ago in controlled sensitized experimental animal experiments.

Solid phase multiplex-bead arrays for the detection and characterization of HLA antibodies provide increased sensitivity and specificity compared to conventional lymphocyte-based assays. Assay variability due to inconsistencies in commercial kits and differences in standard operating procedures (SOP) hamper comparison of results between laboratories. The Clinical Trials in Organ Transplantation Antibody Core Laboratories investigated sources of assay variation and determined if reproducibility improved through utilization of SOP, common reagents and normalization algorithms. Ten commercial kits from two manufacturers were assessed in each of seven laboratories using 20 HLA reference sera. Implementation of a standardized (vs. a nonstandardized) operating procedure greatly reduced MFI variation from 62% to 25%. Although laboratory agreements exceeded 90% (R2), small systematic differences were observed suggesting center specific factors still contribute to variation. MFI varied according to manufacturer, kit, bead type and lot. ROC analyses showed excellent consistency in antibody assignments between manufacturers (AUC > 0.9) and suggested optimal cutoffs from 1000 to 1500 MFI. Global normalization further reduced MFI variation to levels near 20%. Standardization and normalization of solid phase HLA antibody tests will enable comparison of data across laboratories for clinical trials and diagnostic testing.

Letter to the Editor.

Implementation of the kidney allocation system in 2014 greatly reduced access disparity due to human leukocyte antigen (HLA) sensitization. To address persistent disparity related to candidate ABO blood groups, herein we propose a novel metric termed “ABO-adjusted cPRA,” which simultaneously considers the impact of candidate HLA and ABO sensitization on the same scale. An ethnic-weighted ABO-adjusted cPRA value was computed for 190 467 candidates on the kidney waitlist by combining candidate's conventional HLA cPRA with the remaining fraction of HLA-compatible donors that are ABO-incompatible. Consideration of ABO sensitization resulted in higher ABO-adjusted cPRA relative to conventional cPRA by HLA alone, except for AB candidates since they are not ABO-sensitized. Within cPRA Point Group = 99%, 43% of the candidates moved up to ABO-adjusted cPRA Point Group = 100%, though this proportion varied substantially by candidate blood group. Nearly all O and most B candidates would have elevated ABO-adjusted cPRA values above this policy threshold for allocation priority, but relatively few A candidates displayed this shift. Overall, ABO-adjusted cPRA more accurately measures the proportion of immune-compatible donors compared with conventional HLA cPRA, especially for highly sensitized candidates. Implementation of this novel metric could enable the development of allocation policies permitting more ABO-compatible transplants without compromising equity.

Although rare, infection and vaccination can result in antibodies to human leukocyte antigens (HLA). We analyzed the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination on HLA antibodies in waitlisted renal transplant candidates. Specificities were collected and adjudicated if the calculated panel reactive antibodies (cPRA) changed after exposure. Of 409 patients, 285 (69.7 %) had an initial cPRA of 0 %, and 56 (13.7 %) had an initial cPRA > 80 %. The cPRA changed in 26 patients (6.4 %), 16 (3.9 %) increased, and 10 (2.4 %) decreased. Based on cPRA adjudication, cPRA differences generally resulted from a small number of specificities with subtle fluctuations around the borderline of the participating centers’ cutoff for unacceptable antigen listing. All five COVID recovered patients with an increased cPRA were female (p = 0.02). In summary, exposure to this virus or vaccine does not increase HLA antibody specificities and their MFI in approximately 99 % of cases and 97 % of sensitized patients. These results have implications for virtual crossmatching at the time of organ offer after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, and these events of unclear clinical significance should not influence vaccination programs.

Introduction: To mitigate risks related to human leukocyte antigen (HLA) incompatibility, we assessed whether certain structurally defined HLA targets present in donors but absent from recipients, known as eplet mismatches (EMM), are associated with death-censored graft failure (DCGF). Methods: We studied a cohort of 118,313 American 0% panel reactive antibodies (PRA) first kidney transplant recipients (2000 to 2015) from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Imputed allele-level donor and recipient HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, and -DQB1 genotypes were converted to the repertoire of EMM. We fit survival models for each EMM with significance thresholds corrected for false discovery rate and validated those in an independent PRA > 0% cohort. We conducted network-based analyses to model relationships among EMM and developed models to select the subset of EMM most predictive of DCGF. Results: Of 412 EMM observed, 119 class I and 118 class II EMM were associated with DCGF. Network analysis showed that although 210 eplets formed profiles of 2 to 12 simultaneously occurring EMMs, 202 were singleton EMMs that were not involved in any profile. A variable selection procedure identified 55 single HLA class I and II EMMs in 70% of the dataset; of those, 15 EMMs (9 singleton and 6 involved in profiles) were predictive of DCGF in the remaining dataset. Conclusion: Our analysis distinguished increasingly smaller subsets of EMMs associated with increased risk of DCGF. Validation of these EMMs as important predictors of transplant outcomes (in contrast to acceptable EMMs) in datasets with measured allele-level genotypes will support their role as immunodominant EMMs worthy of consideration in organ allocation schemes.

The requirement for immunosuppression in organ transplant recipients, particularly suppression of the T cell response, has made this population especially vulnerable to prolonged and severe infections during the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.1 Acknowledgment of this increased risk led to the reduction of deceased-donor organ transplantation, and for many programs, complete cessation of living-donor operations during the early periods of the COVID-19 pandemic.2,3 Nevertheless, for transplant recipients, the risk of contracting viral disease does not exist in a vacuum. Solid organ transplant candidates have a number of characteristics that increase their morbidity and mortality risk above that of the general population. Delineating the presentation and effects of SARS-CoV-2 in this cohort is critical to understanding the new landscape of organ transplantation in the context of an ongoing pandemic.4, 5, 6

The concept that blood has curative qualities dates back to ancient times. The poet Ovid (43 BC–17/18 AD) wrote of the rejuvenation of Aeson by “letting out the old blood” and replacing it with a restorative tincture.1 Accounts of Roman spectators hoping to gain the strength of slain gladiators by drinking their blood are well detailed by the philosopher Pliny the Elder. But it was not until 1829 that James Blundell, the father of modern blood transfusion, published the first successful case of human-to-human blood transfusion, saving the life of a young woman experiencing postpartum hemorrhage by transfusion of 8 ounces of blood (∼240 ml).2 However, many of Blundell’s other patients did not survive transfusion, presumably due to ABO incompatibility and the resulting hemolysis. Recognizing both the benefits and detriments of transfusion, Blundell cautioned that transfusions be limited only to the severely ill.