Acute Rejection in the Modern Lung Transplant Era

Design and Rationale of Cytokine Filtration in Lung Transplantation (GLUSorb): Protocol for a Multicenter Clinical Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Lung transplantation (LTx) is the only treatment option for end-stage lung disease. Despite improvements, primary graft dysfunction (PGD) remains the leading cause of early mortality and precipitates chronic lung allograft dysfunction, the main factor in late mortality after LTx. PGD develops within the first 72 hours and impairs the oxygenation capacity of the lung, measured as partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2). Increasing the PaO2/FiO2 ratio is thus critical and has an impact on survival. There is a general lack of effective treatments for PGD. When a transplanted lung is not accepted by the immune system in the recipient, a systemic inflammatory response starts where cytokines play a critical role in initiating, amplifying, and maintaining the inflammation leading to PGD. Cytokine filtration can remove these cytokines from the circulation, thus reducing inflammation. In a proof-of-concept preclinical porcine model of LTx, cytokine filtration improved oxygenation and decreased PGD. In a feasibility study, we successfully treated patients undergoing LTx with cytokine filtration (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT05242289).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this clinical trial is to demonstrate the superiority of cytokine filtration in improving LTx outcome, based on its effects on oxygenation ratio, plasma levels of inflammatory markers, PGD incidence and severity, lung function, kidney function, survival, and quality of life compared with standard treatment with no cytokine filtration.

METHODS

This study is a Swedish national interventional randomized controlled trial involving 116 patients. Its primary objective is to investigate the potential benefits of cytokine filtration when used in conjunction with LTx. Specifically, this study aims to determine whether the application of cytokine filtration, administered for a duration of 12 hours within the initial 24 hours following a LTx procedure, can lead to improved patient outcomes. This study seeks to assess various aspects of patient recovery and overall health to ascertain the potential positive impact of this intervention on the posttransplantation course.

RESULTS

The process of patient recruitment for this study is scheduled to commence subsequent to a site initiation visit, which was slated to take place on August 28, 2023. The primary outcome measure that will be assessed in this research endeavor is the oxygenation ratio, a metric denoted as the highest PaO2/FiO2 ratio achieved by patients within a 72-hour timeframe following their LTx procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose that cytokine filtration could enhance the overall outcomes of LTx. Our hypothesis suggests potential improvements in LTx outcome and patient care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05526950; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05526950.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/52553.

Place-based heterogeneity in lung transplant recipient outcomes

Place is defined as a social or environmental area of residence with meaning to a patient. We hypothesize there is an association between place and the clinical outcomes of lung transplant recipients in the United States. In a retrospective cohort study of transplants between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019, in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, multivariable Cox regression models were used to test the association between place (through social and environmental factors) with readmission, lung rejection, and survival. Among 18,465 recipients, only 20% resided in the same county as the transplant center. Recipients from the most socially vulnerable counties when compared to the least vulnerable were more likely to have COPD as a native disease, Black or African American race, and travel long distances to reach a transplant center. Higher local life expectancy was associated with lower likelihood for readmission (odds ratio [OR] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84, 0.98, p = .01). Higher social vulnerability was associated with a higher likelihood of lung rejection (OR = 1.37, [CI]: 1.07, 1.76, p = .01). There was no association of residence with posttransplant survival. Recipient place-based factors were associated with complications and processes of care after transplant and warrant further investigation.

Time since primary transplant and poor functional status predict survival after redo lung transplant

BACKGROUND

In previous studies, lower functional status measured by Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) correlated with worse survival after redo lung transplant. We hypothesize that combining reduced functional status and time from primary lung transplant will correlate with the etiology of lung allograft failure after primary lung transplant and more accurately predict survival after redo lung transplant.

METHODS

This retrospective study was approved by University of Minnesota Institutional Review Board. From the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database, 739 patients underwent redo lung transplant (01/01/2005-8/30/2019). Pre-lung transplant characteristics, KPS, time between primary and redo lung transplant, outcomes, overall survival were evaluated. Paired comparisons were used to compare pre-transplant variables. A Cox regression model was fit to examine re-transplant survival. Due to non-proportional hazards, time between transplants was split into <1-year vs. 1+ years and analyzed with time-dependent coefficients, with follow-up time considered in three segments (0-6, 6-24, 24+ months).

RESULTS

After KPS grouping (10-40%, 50-70%, 80-100%), KPS 10-40% were less likely to be discharged after primary transplant and more likely required mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) bridging (P<0.001). Redo lung transplant survival was worse in the KPS 10-40% group who more likely underwent lung transplant <1 year after primary lung transplant. Mortality was significantly higher for patients who underwent redo lung transplant within one year of primary transplant when KPS was 10-40% (P<0.001). These patients were more likely to require redo lung transplant due to primary graft failure or acute cellular rejection.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional status and time from primary lung transplant are strong predictors of outcome after redo lung transplant. We categorized redo lung transplant recipients in two distinct groups. One group has early allograft failure and poor functional status with a very poor prognosis after redo lung transplant. The other group has chronic allograft failure and overall better functional status with relatively better survival after redo lung transplant. Salvage redo lung transplant for primary allograft failure or acute rejection is associated with low one year survival.

Lung Allograft Rejection

Rejection is a major complication following lung transplantation. Acute cellular rejection (ACR), and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) are risk factors for the subsequent development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction and worse outcomes after transplantation. Although ACR has well-defined histopathologic diagnostic criteria and grading, the diagnosis of AMR requires a multidisciplinary diagnostic approach. This article reviews the identification, clinical and pathologic features of, and therapeutic options for ACR and AMR.