The Effect of Anti-Human Leukocyte Antigen, Anti-Major Histocompatibility Complex Class 1 Chain-Related Antigen A, and Anti-Glutathione Transferase-T1 Antibodies on the Long-Term Survival of Renal Allograft

A Comparison of Line Blots, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent, and RNA-immunoprecipitation Assays of Antisynthetase Antibodies in Serum Samples from 44 Patients

Objective To determine the differences between anti-aminoacyl tRNA synthetase (ARS) antibodies among line blots, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) anti-ARS tests, and RNA-immunoprecipitation (IP) assays. Methods Sera from patients with confirmed or suspected antisynthetase syndrome (ASS) that were positive for either the anti-ARS test or the line-blot assay were used to perform an RNA-IP assay and ELISA to detect individual anti-ARS antibodies. Results Among the 44 patients, 10 were positive only in line-blot assays, 6 were positive only in the anti-ARS test, and 28 were positive in both assays. We compared the accuracy of these assays against the gold standard RNA-IP assay. The κ coefficient was 0.23 in the line-blot assay, but this increased to 0.75 when the cut-off was increased from 1+ to 2+. The κ coefficient was 0.73 in the anti-ARS test. The κ coefficient was 0.85 for positivity in both assays. Patients with ASS that was positive in an RNA-IP assay more frequently had mechanic's hand (62.1% vs. 20%: p=0.031), myositis (51.7 vs. 10%: p=0.028) and more ASS symptoms than those who were positive only in line-blot assays (3.48 vs. 2.2: p=0.019). Conclusions Clinicians need to understand the features of each assay and determine diagnoses by also considering clinical presentations. Diagnoses should not be judged based only on the results of line-blot assays due to the risk of a misdiagnosis from false positives.

Non-HLA Abs in Solid Organ Transplantation

The role of anti-HLA antibodies in solid organ rejection is well established and these antibodies are routinely monitored both in patients in the waiting list and in the post-transplant setting. More recently, the presence of other antibodies directed towards non-HLA antigens, or the so-called minor histocompatibility antigens, has drawn the attention of the transplant community; however, their possible involvement in the graft outcome remains uncertain. These antibodies have been described to possibly have a role in rejection and allograft failure. This review focuses on the most studied non-HLA antibodies and their association with different clinical outcomes considered in solid organ transplantation with the aim of clarifying their clinical implication and potential relevance for routine testing.

MICA and NKG2D: Is There an Impact on Kidney Transplant Outcome?

This paper aims to present an overview of MICA and natural killer group 2 member D (NKG2D) genetic and functional interactions and their impact on kidney transplant outcome. Organ transplantation has gone from what can accurately be called a “clinical experiment” to a routine and reliable practice, which has proven to be clinically relevant, life-saving and cost-effective when compared with non-transplantation management strategies of both chronic and acute end-stage organ failures. The kidney is the most frequently transplanted organ in the world (transplant-observatory¹). The two treatment options for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are dialysis and/or transplantation. Compared with dialysis, transplantation is associated with significant improvements in quality of life and overall longevity. A strong relationship exists between allograft loss and human leukocyte antigens (HLA) antibodies (Abs). HLA Abs are not the only factor involved in graft loss, as multiple studies have shown that non-HLA antigens are also involved, even when a patient has a good HLA matche and receives standard immunosuppressive therapy. A deeper understanding of other biomarkers is therefore important, as it is likely to lead to better monitoring (and consequent success) of organ transplants. The objective is to fill the void left by extensive reviews that do not often dive this deep into the importance of MICA and NKG2D in allograft acceptance and their partnership in the immune response. There are few papers that explore the relationship between these two protagonists when it comes to kidney transplantation. This is especially true for the role of NKG2D in kidney transplantation. These reasons give a special importance to this review, which aims to be a helpful tool in the hands of researchers in this field.

The association of glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms in patients with osteosarcoma: evidence from a meta-analysis

Osteosarcoma is a life-threatening malignancy that often occurs in teenagers. Numerous studies have reported glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms are associated with osteosarcoma, but the results are inconclusive, partially because the sample size in each of published studies is relatively small. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of the published studies to estimate the association more accurately. To preciously examine the association between the glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms and osteosarcoma, we undertook a meta-analysis of six case-control studies. The association between the glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms and osteosarcoma risk was assessed by odds ratios together with their 95% confidence intervals using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. In addition, hazard ratio was used to measure the relationship between glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms and prognosis in patients with osteosarcoma. We found that there was significant association between the polymorphisms in GSTT1 or GSTM3 (AA versus BB) and osteosarcoma risk. In addition, there is no evidence of association on GSTM1, GSTT1, GSTP1 (IIe/IIe versus IIe/Val) or GSTP1 (IIe/IIe versus Val/Val) polymorphisms with prognosis in osteosarcoma. In conclusion, the GSTT1 and GSTM3 polymorphisms might influence osteosarcoma risk.