Acute Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Liver Transplantation: Impact and Applicability of the Banff Working Group on Liver Allograft Pathology 2016 Criteria

Identification of liver transplant biopsy phenotypes associated with distinct liver biological markers and allograft survival

The intricate association between histologic lesions and circulating antihuman leucocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies (DSA) in liver transplantation (LT) requires further clarification. We conducted a probabilistic, unsupervised approach in a comprehensively well-annotated LT cohort to identify clinically relevant archetypes. We evaluated 490 pairs of LT biopsies with DSA testing from 325 recipients transplanted between 2010 and 2020 across 3 French centers and an external cohort of 202 biopsies from 128 recipients. Unsupervised archetypal analysis integrated all clinico-immuno-histologic parameters of each biopsy to identify biopsy archetypes. The median time after LT was 1.17 (interquartile range, 0.38-2.38) years. We identified 7 archetypes distinguished by clinico-immuno-histologic parameters: archetype #1: severe T cell-mediated rejection (15.9%); #2: chronic rejection with ductopenia (1.8%); #3: architectural and microvascular damages (3.5%); #4: (sub)normal (55.9%); #5: mild T cell-mediated rejection (4.9%); #6: acute antibody-mediated rejection (6.5%); and #7: chronic rejection with DSA (11.4%). Cell infiltrates vary in the archetype. These archetypes were associated with distinct liver biological markers and allograft outcomes. These findings remained consistent when stratified using the patient's age or indications for LT, with good performance in the external cohort (mean highest probability assignment = 0.58, standard deviation ± 0.17). In conclusion, we have identified clinically meaningful archetypes, providing valuable insights into the intricate DSA-histology association, which may help standardize liver allograft pathology classification.

Salidroside ameliorates acute liver transplantation rejection in rats by inhibiting neutrophil extracellular trap formation

Acute rejection is an important factor affecting the survival of recipients after liver transplantation. Salidroside has various properties, including anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and hepatoprotective properties. This study aims to investigate whether salidroside can prevent acute rejection after liver transplantation and to examine the underlying mechanisms involved. An in vivo acute rejection model is established in rats that are pretreated with tacrolimus (1 mg/kg/d) or salidroside (10 or 20 mg/kg/d) for seven days after liver transplantation. In addition, an in vitro experiment is performed using neutrophils incubated with salidroside (1, 10, 50 or 100 μM). Hematoxylin-eosin staining, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick-end labeling staining, immunosorbent assays, immunofluorescence analysis, Evans blue staining, and western blot analysis are performed to examine the impact of salidroside on NET formation and acute rejection in vitro and in vivo. We find that Salidroside treatment reduces pathological liver damage, serum aminotransferase level, and serum levels of IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α in vivo. The expressions of proteins associated with the HMGB1/TLR-4/MAPK signaling pathway (HMGB1, TLR-4, p-ERK1/2, p-JNK, p-P38, cleaved caspase-3, cleaved caspase-9, Bcl-2, Bax, IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6) are also decreased after salidroside treatment. In vitro experiments show that the release of HMGB1/TLR-4/MAPK signaling pathway-associated proteins from neutrophils treated with lipopolysaccharide is decreased by salidroside. Moreover, salidroside inhibits NETosis and protects against acute rejection by regulating the HMGB1/TLR-4/MAPK signaling pathway. Furthermore, salidroside combined with tacrolimus has a better effect than either of the other treatments alone. In summary, salidroside can prevent acute liver rejection after liver transplantation by reducing neutrophil extracellular trap development through the HMGB1/TLR-4/MAPK signaling pathway.

Advancing immunosuppression in liver transplantation: A narrative review

Immunosuppression is essential to ensure recipient and graft survivals after liver transplantation (LT). However, our understanding and management of the immune system remain suboptimal. Current immunosuppressive therapy cannot selectively inhibit the graft-specific immune response and entails a significant risk of serious side effects, i.e., among others, de novo cancers, infections, cardiovascular events, renal failure, metabolic syndrome, and late graft fibrosis, with progressive loss of graft function. Pharmacological research, aimed to develop alternative immunosuppressive agents in LT, is behind other solid-organ transplantation subspecialties, and, therefore, the development of new compounds and strategies should get priority in LT. The research trajectories cover mechanisms to induce T-cell exhaustion, to inhibit co-stimulation, to mitigate non-antigen-specific inflammatory response, and, lastly, to minimize the development and action of donor-specific antibodies. Moreover, while cellular modulation techniques are complex, active research is underway to foster the action of T-regulatory cells, to induce tolerogenic dendritic cells, and to promote the function of B-regulatory cells. We herein discuss current lines of research in clinical immunosuppression, particularly focusing on possible applications in the LT setting.

Morphologic and immunophenotypic evaluation of liver allograft biopsies with contemporaneous serum DSA measurements

BACKGROUND

Acute antibody mediated rejection is increasingly identified in liver allografts as a unique form of alloimmune injury associated with donor specific antibodies (DSA). This manifests pathologically as microvascular injury and C4d uptake. Despite the liver allograft's relative resistance to alloimmune injury, liver allografts are not impervious to cellular and antibody-mediated rejection.

METHODS

In this blinded control study, we evaluated CD163 immunohistochemistry and applied the Banff 2016 criteria for diagnosis of acute AMR on a group of indication allograft liver biopsies from DSA positive patients and compared them to indication biopsies from DSA negative controls.

RESULTS

Most DSA positive patients were females (75%, p = .027), and underwent transplantation for HCV infection. Significant histopathological predictors of serum DSA positivity were Banff H-score (p = .01), moderate to severe cholestasis (p = .03), and CD163 score > 2 (p = .029). Other morphologic features that showed a trend with DSA positivity include Banff portal C4d-score (p = .06), bile ductular reaction (p = .07), and central perivenulitis (p = .07). The odds of DSA sMFI ≥5000 was 12.5 times higher in those with a C4d score >1 than those with a C4d score ≤ 1 (p = .04). Incidence of definite for aAMR in the DSA positive cohort was 25% (n = 5), and 0% in the DSA negative cohort. A group of 5 DSA positive cases were not classifiable by the current scheme.

CONCLUSION

Sinusoidal CD163, Banff H-score, and diffuse C4d are predictors of serum DSA, and facilitate recognition of histopathological features associated with serum DSA and tissue-antibody interaction.

Liver transplantation immunology: Immunosuppression, rejection, and immunomodulation

Outcomes after liver transplantation have continuously improved over the past decades, but long-term survival rates are still lower than in the general population. The liver has distinct immunological functions linked to its unique anatomical configuration and to its harbouring of a large number of cells with fundamental immunological roles. The transplanted liver can modulate the immunological system of the recipient to promote tolerance, thus offering the potential for less aggressive immunosuppression. The selection and adjustment of immunosuppressive drugs should be individualised to optimally control alloreactivity while mitigating toxicities. Routine laboratory tests are not accurate enough to make a confident diagnosis of allograft rejection. Although several promising biomarkers are being investigated, none of them is sufficiently validated for routine use; hence, liver biopsy remains necessary to guide clinical decisions. Recently, there has been an exponential increase in the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors due to the unquestionable oncological benefits they provide for many patients with advanced-stage tumours. It is expected that their use will also increase in liver transplant recipients and that this might affect the incidence of allograft rejection. Currently, the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in liver transplant recipients is limited and cases of severe allograft rejection have been reported. In this review, we discuss the clinical relevance of alloimmune disease, the role of minimisation/withdrawal of immunosuppression, and provide practical guidance for using checkpoint inhibitors in liver transplant recipients.