Submitted:
22 January 2024
Posted:
23 January 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Results
2.1. Patients and biopsies
2.2. Transcriptome analysis by microfluidics
2.3. Transcriptome analysis and clinical variables
2.4. Renal outcome and protocol biopsies
3. Discussion
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. Patients.
4.2. HLA typing and HLA antibodies
4.3. Immunosuppression
4.4. Biopsies
4.5. Analysis Using Fluidigm Microfluidics Dynamic Arrays
4.6. Statistics
4.7. Bioinformatic analysis
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations:
| ABMR: antibody-mediated rejection. |
| DSA: donor specific HLA antibodies. |
| FC: fold change. |
| FDR: false discovery rate. |
| eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate by CKD-EPI formula. |
| IF/TA: Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy. |
| IF/TA+i: Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy with interstitial infiltrates. |
| SCR: subclinical rejection. |
| TAC-C0: tacrolimus trough levels. |
| TCMR: T-cell mediated rejection. |
References
- Serón D, Moreso F. Protocol biopsies in renal transplantation: prognostic value of structural monitoring. Kidney Int. 2007 Sep;72(6):690–7. [CrossRef]
- Rush D, Nickerson P, Gough J, McKenna R, Grimm P, Cheang M, et al. Beneficial effects of treatment of early subclinical rejection: a randomized study. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1998 Nov;9(11):2129–34. [CrossRef]
- Rush D, Arlen D, Boucher A, Busque S, Cockfield SM, Girardin C, et al. Lack of benefit of early protocol biopsies in renal transplant patients receiving TAC and MMF: a randomized study. Am J Transplant. 2007 Nov;7(11):2538–45. [CrossRef]
- Ortiz F, Gelpi R, Helanterä I, Melilli E, Honkanen E, Bestard O, et al. Decreased Kidney Graft Survival in Low Immunological Risk Patients Showing Inflammation in Normal Protocol Biopsies. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0159717. [CrossRef]
- Loupy A, Haas M, Roufosse C, Naesens M, Adam B, Afrouzian M, et al. The Banff 2019 Kidney Meeting Report (I): Updates on and clarification of criteria for T cell- and antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant. 2020 Sep;20(9):2318–31. [CrossRef]
- Halloran PF, Venner JM, Madill-Thomsen KS, Einecke G, Parkes MD, Hidalgo LG, et al. Review: The transcripts associated with organ allograft rejection. American Journal of Transplantation. 2018;18(4):785–95. [CrossRef]
- Moreso F, Sellarès J, Soler MJ, Serón D. Transcriptome Analysis in Renal Transplant Biopsies Not Fulfilling Rejection Criteria. Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Mar 24;21(6):2245. [CrossRef]
- de Freitas DG, Sellarés J, Mengel M, Chang J, Hidalgo LG, Famulski KS, et al. The nature of biopsies with ‘borderline rejection’ and prospects for eliminating this category. Am J Transplant. 2012 Jan;12(1):191–201. [CrossRef]
- Chamoun B, Caraben A, Torres IB, Sellares J, Jiménez R, Toapanta N, et al. A Rejection Gene Expression Score in Indication and Surveillance Biopsies Is Associated with Graft Outcome. Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Nov 3;21(21):E8237. [CrossRef]
- Haas M, Loupy A, Lefaucheur C, Roufosse C, Glotz D, Seron D, et al. The Banff 2017 Kidney Meeting Report: Revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell–mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next-generation clinical trials. American Journal of Transplantation. 2018;18(2):293–307. [CrossRef]
- Gatault P, Kamar N, Büchler M, Colosio C, Bertrand D, Durrbach A, et al. Reduction of Extended-Release Tacrolimus Dose in Low-Immunological-Risk Kidney Transplant Recipients Increases Risk of Rejection and Appearance of Donor-Specific Antibodies: A Randomized Study. Am J Transplant. 2017 May;17(5):1370–9. [CrossRef]
- Torres IB, Reisaeter AV, Moreso F, Âsberg A, Vidal M, Garcia-Carro C, et al. Tacrolimus and mycophenolate regimen and subclinical tubulo-interstitial inflammation in low immunological risk renal transplants. Transpl Int. 2017 Nov;30(11):1119–31. [CrossRef]
- Hernández D, Vázquez T, Alonso-Titos J, León M, Caballero A, Cobo MA, et al. Impact of HLA Mismatching on Early Subclinical Inflammation in Low-Immunological-Risk Kidney Transplant Recipients. J Clin Med. 2021 Apr 29;10(9):1934. [CrossRef]
- Wiebe C, Rush DN, Nevins TE, Birk PE, Blydt-Hansen T, Gibson IW, et al. Class II Eplet Mismatch Modulates Tacrolimus Trough Levels Required to Prevent Donor-Specific Antibody Development. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Nov;28(11):3353–62. [CrossRef]
- Vionnet J, Miquel R, Abraldes JG, Wall J, Kodela E, Lozano JJ, et al. Non-invasive alloimmune risk stratification of long-term liver transplant recipients. J Hepatol. 2021 Dec;75(6):1409–19. [CrossRef]
- Ekberg H, Tedesco-Silva H, Demirbas A, Vítko Š, Nashan B, Gürkan A, et al. Reduced Exposure to Calcineurin Inhibitors in Renal Transplantation. New England Journal of Medicine. 2007 Dec 20;357(25):2562–75. [CrossRef]
- Torres IB, Reisaeter AV, Moreso F, Âsberg A, Vidal M, Garcia-Carro C, et al. Tacrolimus and mycophenolate regimen and subclinical tubulo-interstitial inflammation in low immunological risk renal transplants. Transpl Int. 2017 Nov;30(11):1119–31. [CrossRef]
- Mehta RB, Melgarejo I, Viswanathan V, Zhang X, Pittappilly M, Randhawa P, et al. Long-term immunological outcomes of early subclinical inflammation on surveillance kidney allograft biopsies. Kidney International. 2022 Dec;102(6):1371–81. [CrossRef]
- Mehta RB, Tandukar S, Jorgensen D, Randhawa P, Sood P, Puttarajappa C, et al. Early subclinical tubulitis and interstitial inflammation in kidney transplantation have adverse clinical implications. Kidney International. 2020 Aug;98(2):436–47. [CrossRef]
- Mengel M, Chang J, Kayser D, Gwinner W, Schwarz A, Einecke G, et al. The molecular phenotype of 6-week protocol biopsies from human renal allografts: reflections of prior injury but not future course. Am J Transplant. 2011 Apr;11(4):708–18. [CrossRef]
- Olsen S, Hansen ES, Jepsen FL. The prevalence of focal tubulo-interstitial lesions in various renal diseases. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand A. 1981 Mar;89(2):137–45. [CrossRef]
- Furness PN, Taub N, Convergence of European Renal Transplant Pathology Assessment Procedures (CERTPAP) Project. International variation in the interpretation of renal transplant biopsies: report of the CERTPAP Project. Kidney Int. 2001 Nov;60(5):1998–2012. [CrossRef]
- Halloran PF, Reeve JP, Pereira AB, Hidalgo LG, Famulski KS. Antibody-mediated rejection, T cell–mediated rejection, and the injury-repair response: new insights from the Genome Canada studies of kidney transplant biopsies. Kidney International. 2014;85(2):258–64. [CrossRef]
- Mengel M, Loupy A, Haas M, Roufosse C, Naesens M, Akalin E, et al. Banff 2019 Meeting Report: Molecular diagnostics in solid organ transplantation-Consensus for the Banff Human Organ Transplant (B-HOT) gene panel and open source multicenter validation. Am J Transplant. 2020 Sep;20(9):2305–17. [CrossRef]
- Dooley BJ, Verma A, Ding R, Yang H, Muthukumar T, Lubetzky M, et al. Urinary Cell Transcriptome Profiling and Identification of ITM2A, SLAMF6, and IKZF3 as Biomarkers of Acute Rejection in Human Kidney Allografts. Transplant Direct. 2020 Jul 22;6(8):e588. [CrossRef]
- Ford ML. T Cell Cosignaling Molecules in Transplantation. Immunity. 2016 May 17;44(5):1020–33. [CrossRef]
- Geneugelijk K, Wissing J, Koppenaal D, Niemann M, Spierings E. Computational Approaches to Facilitate Epitope-Based HLA Matching in Solid Organ Transplantation. J Immunol Res. 2017;2017:9130879. [CrossRef]
- Chamoun B, Torres IB, Gabaldón A, Sellarés J, Perelló M, Castellá E, et al. Progression of Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy in Low Immunological Risk Renal Transplants Monitored by Sequential Surveillance Biopsies: The Influence of TAC Exposure and Metabolism. J Clin Med. 2021 Jan 4;10(1):141. [CrossRef]
- Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Pattyn F, Poppe B, Van Roy N, De Paepe A, et al. Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biol. 2002 Jun 18;3(7):RESEARCH0034. [CrossRef]






| Variable | Group I (n = 17) | Group II (n = 12) | Group III (n = 137) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Donor type (BDD / DCD / LD) | 10 / 4 / 3 | 7 / 2 / 3 | 85 / 34 / 18 |
| Donor age (years) | 45 ± 18 | 59 ± 15 | 57 ± 14 |
| Donor gender (m / f) | 10 / 7 | 4 / 8 | 77 / 60 |
| Recipient age (years) | 46 ± 13 | 50 ± 16 | 55 ± 14 |
| Recipient gender (m / f) | 10 / 7 | 6 / 6 | 91 / 46 |
| First transplant / re-transplant | 15 / 2 | 7/5 | 117 / 20 |
| Primary renal disease (GN / ADPKD / diabetes / others / unknown) | 3 / 5 / 0 / 4 / 5 | 4 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 4 | 28 / 18 / 11 / 25 / 55 |
| Class I HLA mismatch (A+B) | 2.5 ± 0.9 | 2.1 ± 0.9 | 2.8 ± 1.0 |
| Class II HLA mismatch (DR) | 1.1 ± 0.5 | 1.3 ± 0.6 | 1.1 ± 0.6 |
| Induction (basiliximab / thymoglobulin) | 8 / 9 | 4 / 8 | 77 / 60 |
| Cold ischemia time | 14.3 ± 6.7 | 13.0 ± 7.0 | 13.4 ± 6.8 |
| Delayed graft function (no / yes) | 16 / 1 | 10 / 2 | 123 / 19 |
| Previous episodes of rejection (no / yes) | 17 / 0 | 9 / 3 | 134 / 7 |
| DSA at the time of transplant (no / yes) | 15 / 2 | 11 / 1 | 130 / 7 |
| CMV infection (no / viremia / disease) | 14 / 2 / 1 | 9 / 3 / 0 | 115 / 18 / 4 |
| Variable | Group I (n = 17) | Group II (n = 12) | Group III (n = 137) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time of biopsy (months) | 4.7 ± 1.7 | 43 ± 55 | 4.4 ± 1.4 |
| Serum creatinine (mg/dL) | 1.22 ± 0.31 | 2.72 ± 1.95 | 1.44 ± 0.32 |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 sqm) | 66.6 ± 23.0 | 35.1 ± 21.1 | 52.2 ± 14.6 |
| Urine P/C ratio (mg/g) | 260 ± 190 | 1890 ± 1340 | 265 ± 192 |
| DSA at the time of biopsy (no / yes) | 17 / 0 | 8 / 4 | 133 / 4 |
| Tacrolimus dose (mg/day) | 6.8 ± 4.2 | 7.6 ± 5.9 | 6.5 ± 4.2 |
| TAC-C0 (ng/mL) | 8.8 ± 2.0 | 7.9 ± 3.6 | 9.3 ± 2.7 |
| MMF dose (g/day) | 1.0 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.2 |
| Variable | i-score=0 (n= 99) | i-score ≥1 (n = 38) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Donor type (BDD / DCD/ LD) | 58 / 27 / 14 | 27 / 7 / 4 | 0.490 |
| Donor age (years) | 57 ± 14 | 56 ± 15 | 0.837 |
| Donor gender (m / f) | 56 / 43 | 21 / 17 | 0.793 |
| Recipient age (years) | 55 ± 14 | 57 ± 14 | 0.453 |
| Recipient gender (m / f) | 65 / 34 | 26 / 12 | 0.759 |
| First transplant / re-transplant | 85 / 14 | 32 / 6 | 0.807 |
| Class I HLA mismatch (A+B) | 2.8 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 0.521 |
| Class II HLA mismatch (DR) | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 1.2 ± 0.6 | 0.233 |
| Class I Eplet mismatch | 14 ± 6 | 14 ± 8 | 0.845 |
| Class II Eplet mismatch | 15 ± 10 | 17 ± 15 | 0.305 |
| PIRCHE-II class I | 49 ± 27 | 49 ± 29 | 0.914 |
| PIRCHE-II class II | 34 ± 25 | 34 ± 22 | 0.996 |
| DSA at the time transplant (no/yes) | 96 / 3 | 34 / 4 | 0.074 |
| Induction (Basiliximab / ATG) | 53 / 46 | 24 / 14 | 0.367 |
| Cold ischemia time | 12.6 ± 6.9 | 15.3 ± 6.2 | 0.040 |
| DGF (no /yes) | 87 / 12 | 31 / 7 | 0.339 |
| TCMR before protocol biopsy (no / yes) | 94 / 5 | 36 / 2 | 0.960 |
| Variable | i-score=0 (n= 99) | i-score ≥1 (n = 38) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time of biopsy (months) | 4.3 ± 1.4 | 4.6 ± 1.7 | 0.169 |
| Serum creatinine (mg/dL) | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 0.747 |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) | 52 ± 14 | 53 ± 16 | 0.790 |
| Urine P/C ratio (mg/g) | 275 ± 206 | 239 ± 148 | 0.331 |
| DSA at the time of biopsy (no/yes). | 96 / 3 | 37 / 1 | 0.901 |
| Tacrolimus dose (mg/day) | 6.7 ± 4.5 | 6.0 ± 3.3 | 0.425 |
| TAC-C0 (ng/mL) | 9.7 ± 2.7 | 8.2 ± 2.2 | 0.002 |
| C/D tacrolimus (ng/mL/mg) | 1.72 (1.06–2.80) | 1.54 (1.05–1.98) | 0.220 |
| CV TAC from day 7 to biopsy (%) | 36.5 ± 23.3 | 36.6 ± 14.3 | 0.990 |
| MMF dose (g/day) | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.735 |
| eGFR decline (mL/min/1.73 m2/year) | -0.8 ± 4.3 | -1.1 ± 2.9 | 0.163 |
| Variable | Cluster 1 (n=77) | Cluster 2 (n=60) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Donor type (BDD / DACD/ LD) | 47 / 17 / 13 | 38 / 17 / 5 | Ns |
| Donor age (y) | 54 ± 13 | 60 ± 15 | 0.0316 |
| Patient age (y) | 54 ± 13 | 57 ± 15 | ns |
| Patient sex (m/f) | 53 / 24 | 38 / 22 | ns |
| First transplant / retransplant | 68 / 9 | 49 / 11 | ns |
| Class I HLA mismatch (A+B) | 2.7 ± 1.0 | 3.0 ± 1.0 | 0.039 |
| Class II HLA mismatch (DR) | 1.1 ± 0.7 | 1.2 ± 0.6 | 0.571 |
| HLA eplet class I mismatch | 13 ± 6 | 15 ± 7 | 0.061 |
| HLA eplet class II mismatch | 14 ± 11 | 16 ± 9 | 0.335 |
| HLA AbV eplet DRB mismatch | 2.8 ± 2.4 | 3.6 ±2.4 | 0.059 |
| HLA AbV eplet DQB mismatch | 2.6 ± 2.6 | 2.5 ± 2.3 | 0.757 |
| PIRCHE-II class I | 48 ± 28 | 52 ± 28 | 0.446 |
| PIRCHE-II class II | 34 ±28 | 34 ± 19 | 0.999 |
| Induction (basiliximab/thymoglobulin) | 44 / 33 | 33 / 27 | ns |
| DGF (n/y) | 67 / 10 | 51 / 9 | ns |
| TCMR before protocol biopsy (n/y) | 72 / 5 | 68 / 2 | ns |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 sqm) biopsy | 53 ± 13 | 51 ± 16 | ns |
| Urinary protein /creatinine (g/g) biopsy | 0.24 ± 0.17 | 0.30 ± 0.24 | ns |
| TAC-C0 (ng/mL) biopsy | 9.8 ± 2.6 | 8.6 ± 2.6 | 0.0133 |
| Time in TR (%) | 68 ± 32 | 70 ± 30 | 0.430 |
| Time above TR (%) | 25 ± 30 | 15 ± 25 | 0.304 |
| Time below TR (%) | 5 ± 15 | 12 ± 18 | 0.070 |
| MMF dose (g/day) | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.2 | ns |
| eGFR decline (mL/min/1.72m2/year) | -0.2 ± 3.7 | -1.9 ± 4.1 | 0.0145 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).