A Combined microRNA and Chemokine Profile in Urine to Identify Rejection After Kidney Transplantation

Trends in Precision Medicine and Pharmacogenetics as an Adjuvant in Establishing a Correct Immunosuppressive Therapy for Kidney Transplant: An Up-to-Date Historical Overview

Kidney transplantation is currently the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage kidney diseases. Although significant advancements in kidney transplantation have been achieved over the past decades, the host's immune response remains the primary challenge, often leading to potential graft rejection. Effective management of the immune response is essential to ensure the long-term success of kidney transplantation. To address this issue, immunosuppressives have been developed and are now fully integrated into the clinical management of transplant recipients. However, the considerable inter- and intra-patient variability in pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of these drugs represents the primary cause of graft rejection. This variability is primarily attributed to the polymorphic nature (genetic heterogeneity) of genes encoding xenobiotic-metabolizing enzymes, transport proteins, and, in some cases, drug targets. These genetic differences can influence drug metabolism and distribution, leading to either toxicity or reduced efficacy. The main objective of the present review is to report an historical overview of the pharmacogenetics of immunosuppressants, shedding light on the most recent findings and also suggesting how relevant is the research and investment in developing validated NGS-based commercial panels for pharmacogenetic profiling in kidney transplant recipients. These advancements will enable the implementation of precision medicine, optimizing immunosuppressive therapies to improve graft survival and kidney transplanted patient outcomes.

miRNAs, dd-cf-DNA, and Chemokines as Potential Noninvasive Biomarkers for the Assessment of Clinical Graft Evolution and Personalized Immunosuppression Requirement in Solid Organ Transplantation

ABSTRACT

The use of noninvasive biomarkers may reduce the need for biopsy and guide immunosuppression adjustments during transplantation. The scientific community in solid organ transplantation currently considers that chemokines, T- and B-cell immunophenotypes, and gene expression, among other molecular biomarkers, have great potential as diagnostic and predictive biomarkers for graft evolution; however, in clinical practice, few valid early biomarkers have emerged. This review focuses on the most relevant scientific advances in this field in the last 5 years regarding the role of 3 biomarkers: miRNAs, chemokines, and ddcf-DNA, in both adult and pediatric populations. An update was provided on the scores based on the combination of these biomarkers. The most-featured articles were identified through a literature search of the PubMed database. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the potential clinical applications of these biomarkers in the diagnosis and prediction of graft outcomes and discusses the reasons why none have been implemented in clinical practice to date. Translating these biomarkers into routine clinical practice and combining them with pharmacogenetics and pharmacokinetic monitoring is challenging; however, it is the key to present/future individualized immunosuppressive therapies. It is essential that they be shown to be applicable and robust in real-life patient conditions and properly evaluate their added value when combined with the standard-of-care factor monitoring for graft clinical assessment. Partnership strategies among scientists, academic institutions, consortia, including expert working groups and scientific societies, and pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology companies should promote the development of prospective, randomized, multicenter intervention studies for adequate clinical validation of these biomarkers and their monitoring frequency, and their commercialization to make them available to transplant physicians.

Current and emerging tools for simultaneous assessment of infection and rejection risk in transplantation

Infection and rejection are major complications that impact transplant longevity and recipient survival. Balancing their risks is a significant challenge for clinicians. Current strategies aimed at interrogating the degree of immune deficiency or activation and their attendant risks of infection and rejection are imprecise. These include immune (cell counts, function and subsets, immunoglobulin levels) and non-immune (drug levels, viral loads) markers. The shared risk factors between infection and rejection and the bidirectional and intricate relationship between both entities further complicate transplant recipient care and decision-making. Understanding the dynamic changes in the underlying net state of immunity and the overall risk of both complications in parallel is key to optimizing outcomes. The allograft biopsy is the current gold standard for the diagnosis of rejection but is associated with inherent risks that warrant careful consideration. Several biomarkers, in particular, donor derived cell-free-DNA and urinary chemokines (CXCL9 and CXCL10), show significant promise in improving subclinical and clinical rejection risk prediction, which may reduce the need for allograft biopsies in some situations. Integrating conventional and emerging risk assessment tools can help stratify the individual's short- and longer-term infection and rejection risks in parallel. Individuals identified as having a low risk of rejection may tolerate immunosuppression wean to reduce medication-related toxicity. Serial monitoring following immunosuppression reduction or escalation with minimally invasive tools can help mitigate infection and rejection risks and allow for timely diagnosis and treatment of these complications, ultimately improving allograft and patient outcomes.

Rejection markers in kidney transplantation: do new technologies help children?

Recent insights in allorecognition and graft rejection mechanisms revealed a more complex picture than originally considered, involving multiple pathways of both adaptive and innate immune response, supplied by efficient inflammatory synergies. Current pillars of transplant monitoring are serum creatinine, proteinuria, and drug blood levels, which are considered as traditional markers, due to consolidated experience, low cost, and widespread availability. The most diffuse immunological biomarkers are donor-specific antibodies, which are included in routine post-transplant monitoring in many centers, although with some reproducibility issues and interpretation difficulties. Confirmed abnormalities in these traditional biomarkers raise the suspicion for rejection and guide the indication for graft biopsy, which is still considered the gold standard for rejection monitoring. Rapidly evolving new "omic" technologies have led to the identification of several novel biomarkers, which may change the landscape of transplant monitoring should their potential be confirmed. Among them, urinary chemokines and measurement of cell-free DNA of donor origin are perhaps the most promising. However, at the moment, these approaches remain highly expensive and cost-prohibitive in most settings, with limited clinical applicability; approachable costs upon technology investments would speed their integration. In addition, transcriptomics, metabolomics, proteomics, and the study of blood and urinary extracellular vesicles have the potential for early identification of subclinical rejection with high sensitivity and specificity, good reproducibility, and for gaining predictive value in an affordable cost setting. In the near future, information derived from these new biomarkers is expected to integrate traditional tools in routine use, allowing identification of rejection prior to clinical manifestations and timely therapeutic intervention. This review will discuss traditional, novel, and invasive and non-invasive biomarkers, underlining their strengths, limitations, and present or future applications in children.

Epigenetic Regulation in Kidney Transplantation

Kidney transplantation is a standard care for end stage renal disease, but it is also associated with a complex pathogenesis including ischemia-reperfusion injury, inflammation, and development of fibrosis. Over the past decade, accumulating evidence has suggested a role of epigenetic regulation in kidney transplantation, involving DNA methylation, histone modification, and various kinds of non-coding RNAs. Here, we analyze these recent studies supporting the role of epigenetic regulation in different pathological processes of kidney transplantation, i.e., ischemia-reperfusion injury, acute rejection, and chronic graft pathologies including renal interstitial fibrosis. Further investigation of epigenetic alterations, their pathological roles and underlying mechanisms in kidney transplantation may lead to new strategies for the discovery of novel diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic interventions.

Adipose tissue macrophages and atherogenesis – a synergy with cholesterolaemia

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a major obstacle to the long-term success in kidney transplantation. Diagnosis of ABMR is determined according to the internationally recognized Banff criteria. However, a significant proportion of patients does not meet all the defined criteria, and the outcome of such cases remains poorly understood. The histology of ABMR frequently lacks sensitivity and specificity. More importantly, mixed forms of ABMR and T cell-mediated rejection as well as findings of nonspecific injury are common in clinical settings. Donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) are detectable only in half of the ABMR cases by histology. Prognostic role of non-HLA antibodies against various endothelial proteins has been discussed. Antibody independent NK cell activation reflecting killer-cells’ inhibitory receptor incompatibility is suggested in microvascular inflammation in DSA negative patients. Molecular assessment of ABMR has been prioritized to overcome high interobserver variability and improve diagnostics in mixed forms of rejections and in DSA negative cases. Finally, donor-derived cell-free DNA detected in a recipient’s peripheral blood sample has been proposed as a noninvasive marker for diagnosis of graft rejection, and thus might serve as a liquid biopsy in the near future. Despite all achievements, diagnosing ABMR in kidney allografts remains to be a challenge in a significant number of cases.