Treatment of Chronic Active Antibody-mediated Rejection With Pulse Steroids, IVIG, With or Without Rituximab is Associated With Increased Risk of Pneumonia

Basics and Art of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation is one of the most challenging areas in the medical field. Despite that, it has already been established as a standard treatment option, especially in decompensated cirrhosis and selected cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and acute liver failure. Complications due to graft rejection, including mortality and morbidity, have greatly improved over time due to better immunosuppressive agents and management protocols. Currently, immunosuppression in liver transplant patients makes use of the best possible combinations of effective agents to achieve optimal immunosuppression for long-term graft survival. Induction agents are no longer used routinely, and the aim is to provide minimal immunosuppression in the maintenance phase. Currently available immunosuppressive agents are mainly classified as biological and pharmacological agents. Though the protocols may vary among the centers and over time, the basics of effective use usually remain similar. Most protocols use the combination of multiple agents with different mechanisms of action to reduce the dose and minimize the side effects. Along with the improvement in operative and perioperative techniques, this art of immunosuppression has contributed to the recent progress made in the outcomes of liver transplants. In this review, we will discuss the various types of immunosuppressive agents currently in use, the different protocols of immunosuppression used, and the art of optimal use for achieving maximum immunosuppression without increasing toxicity. We will also discuss the practical aspects of various immunosuppression regimens, including drug monitoring, and briefly discuss the concepts of immunosuppression minimization and withdrawal.

Post-Transplant Surveillance and Management of Chronic Active Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Renal Transplant Patients in Europe

Antibody mediated rejection (ABMR) is the leading cause of immune-related allograft failure following kidney transplantation. Chronic active ABMR (CABMR) typically occurs after one-year post-transplant and is the most common cause of late allograft failure. This study was designed to assess common practices in Europe for post-transplant surveillance 1 year after kidney transplant, as well as the diagnosis and management of CABMR. A 15-minute online survey with 58 multiple choice or open-ended questions was completed by EU transplant nephrologists, transplant surgeons and nephrologists. Survey topics included patient caseloads, post-transplant routine screening and treatment of CABMR. The results indicated that observing clinical measures of graft function form the cornerstone of post-transplant surveillance. This may be suboptimal, leading to late diagnoses and untreatable disease. Indeed, less than half of patients who develop CABMR receive treatment beyond optimization of immune suppression. This is attributable to not only late diagnoses, but also a lack of proven efficacious therapies. Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG), steroid pulse and apheresis are prescribed by the majority to treat CABMR. While biologics can feature as part of treatment, there is no single agent that is being used by more than half of physicians.

Chronic Active Antibody-mediated Rejection in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Treatment Response Rates and Value of Early Surveillance Biopsies

There is limited information on the value of short-term invasive and noninvasive monitoring in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) undergoing therapy for chronic active antibody-mediated rejection (cAMR).

Methods

We describe response rates in patients with cAMR receiving pulse steroids/IVIG ± rituximab 3-mo after index biopsy.

Results

The study included 82 consecutive KTR. Mean time from transplant to cAMR was 10 y. Mean peritubular capillaritis (ptc), glomerulitis (g), microvascular inflammation (MVI), C4d, and cg Banff scores were 1.1, 2.1, 3.2, 0.2, and 2, respectively. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urine protein creatinine (UPC) ratio were 38 mL/min and 1.6 g/g, respectively. Thirty (37%) patients lost their allograft during the mean follow-up of 2.4 y. In patients treated with pulse steroids/IVIG (n = 41), response rates for eGFR, UPC, donor-specific antibodies (DSAs), and MVI were 27%, 49%, 7%, and 19%, respectively. In the pulse steroids/IVIG/rituximab group, response rates were 66%, 61%, 20%, and 69%, respectively. Univariate analysis identified response in eGFR (HR = 0.03; P = 0.001; 95% CI, 0.004-0.26), UPC (HR = 0.38; P = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.18-0.82), and DSA (HR = 0.11; P = 0.004; 95% CI, 0.02-0.49) as predictors of graft survival. Multivariate analysis only retained eGFR response (HR = 0.12; P = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.02-0.64).

Conclusions

In cAMR, short-term response to treatment for kidney function and DSA was associated with graft survival, but the role of early surveillance biopsies needs further evaluation.