Anti-Blood Group Antibodies in Intravenous Immunoglobulin May Complicate Interpretation of Antibody Titers in ABO-Incompatible Transplantation

Intravenous immunoglobulin in kidney transplantation: Mechanisms of action, clinical applications, adverse effects, and hyperimmune globulin

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has been developed for over 40 years. The mechanisms of action of IVIG are complex and diverse, and there may be multiple mechanisms that combine to influence it. IVIG has been used in kidney transplantation for desensitization, treatment of antibody-mediated rejection, and ABO-incompatible transplantation. and treatment or prevention of some infectious diseases. Hyperimmune globulins such as cytomegalovirus hyperimmune globulin (CMV-IG) and hepatitis B hyperimmune globulin (HBIG) have also been used to protect against cytomegalovirus and hepatitis B virus, respectively. However, IVIG is also associated with some rare but serious adverse effects and some application risks, and clinicians need to weigh the pros and cons and develop individualized treatment programs to benefit more patients. This review will provide an overview of the multiple mechanisms of action, clinical applications, adverse effects, and prophylactic measures of IVIG, and hyperimmune globulin will also be introduced in it.

Advancement in preoperative desensitization therapy for ABO incompatible kidney transplantation recipients

ABO incompatibility has long been considered an absolute contraindication for kidney transplantation. However, with the increasing number of patients with ESRD in recent years, ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation (ABOi-KT) has expanded the types of donors by crossing the blood group barrier through preoperative desensitization therapy. At present, the desensitization protocols consist of removal of preexisting ABO blood group antibody titers and prevention of ABO blood group antibody return. Studies have suggested similar patient and graft survival among ABOi-KT and ABOc-KT recipients. In this review, we will summarize the effective desensitization regimens of ABOi-KT, aiming to explore effective ways to improve the success rate and the long-term survival rate of ABOi-KT recipients.

Outcomes in AB0 Incompatible Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Case – Control Study

Background

Patients waiting for a kidney transplant by far exceed available organs. AB0 incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (AB0i LDKT) represents an additional therapeutic strategy, but with higher risk for complications. We aimed at evaluating outcomes of AB0i LDKTs compared to compatible (AB0c) controls at our Institution.

Methods

Retrospective matched case – control study (1:2) comparing AB0i vs. AB0c LDKTs from March 2012 to September 2021. Considered outcomes: graft function, acute rejection, sepsis, CMV infection, BK virus reactivation, death-censored graft survival, patient survival.

Results

Seventeen AB0i LDKTs matched to 34 AB0c controls. We found excellent graft function, comparable in the two groups, at all considered intervals, with an eGFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) of 67 vs. 66 at 1 year (p = 0.41), 63 vs. 64 at 3 years (p = 0.53). AB0i recipients had a statistically significant higher incidence of acute rejection, acute antibody-mediated rejection and sepsis within 30 days (p = 0.016; p = 0.02; p = 0.001), 1 year (p = 0.012; p = 0.02; p = 0.0004) and 3 years (p = 0.004; p = 0.006; p = 0.012) after surgery. There was no difference in CMV infection, BK virus reactivation, death-censored graft survival between the two groups. Patient survival was inferior in AB0i group at 1 and 3 years (88.2 vs. 100%; log-rank p = 0.03) due to early death for opportunistic infections. AB0i LDKTs spent longer time on dialysis (p = 0.04) and 82.3 vs. 38.3% controls had blood group 0 (p = 0.003).

Conclusions

AB0i LDKT is an effective therapeutic strategy with graft function and survival comparable to AB0c LDKTs, despite higher rates of acute rejection and sepsis. It is an additional opportunity for patients with less chances of being transplanted, as blood group 0 individuals.

ABO incompatibility in renal transplantation

ABO blood group incompatibility (ABO-I) was historically considered an absolute contraindication to kidney transplantation due to the significant risk of acute antibody-mediated rejection and early graft loss. Nevertheless, the urge to minimize the gap between the candidates' number on the waitlist for kidney transplants and the available kidney donors encourage investigation into finding ways to use organs from ABO-I kidney donors, especially in the era of using more potent immunosuppression therapies. This review aims to discuss a general overview of ABO-I kidney transplantation and the different protocols adopted by some transplant centers to meaningfully overcome this barrier.

ABO-incompatible living kidney transplantation

ABO-incompatible living kidney transplantation is nowadays a routine procedure to expand living donor pool. The past decades have seen the evolution of desensitization protocol and immunosuppression regimen. Despite increased bleeding events, infectious complications, and rejection episodes reported in some studies, favorable graft and patient survival rate are now achieved, regardless of various protocols among transplant centers. Several issues such as the usage of rituximab and standardization of blood group antibody titration remain to be settled. The deposition of C4d is no longer the histopathologic hallmark of antibody-mediated rejection, which have inspired innovative strategies of peripheral molecular screening and the improvement of histological diagnosis of AMR (antibody-mediated rejection). The better understanding of the underlying mechanism might facilitate the distinction and therapeutic schemes of AMR.

Current protocols and outcomes of ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation

One of the principal obstacles in transplantation from living donors is that approximately 30% are immunologically incompatible because of the presence in the recipient of antibodies directed against the human leukocyte antigen system of the donor or because of the incompatibility of the ABO system. The aim of this review is to describe the more recent data from the literature on the different protocols used and the clinical outcomes of ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation. Two different strategies are used to overcome these barriers: desensitization of the recipient to remove the antibodies and to prevent their rebound after transplantation and the exchange of organs between two or more pairs. The largest part of this review is dedicated to describing the techniques of desensitization. Even if the first reports of successful renal transplantation between ABO-incompatible pairs have been published by 1980, the number of ABO-incompatible transplants increased substantially in this century because of our improved knowledge of the immune system and the availability of new drugs. Rituximab has substantially replaced splenectomy. The technique of apheresis has improved and more recently a tailored desensitization proved to be the more efficient strategy avoiding an excess of immunosuppression with the related side effects. Recent reports document outcomes for such transplantation similar to the outcomes of standard transplantation.

Latest insights on ABO-incompatible living-donor renal transplantation

This review summarizes the latest insights on ABO‐incompatible living‐donor renal transplantation. Desensitization protocols and clinical outcomes were investigated, and a comparison was made with kidney‐paired donation, which is not permitted in Japan for ethical reasons. Although renal transplantation is greatly beneficial for most patients with end‐stage kidney disease, many of these patients must remain on dialysis therapy for extended periods due to the scarcity of organs from deceased donors. ABO blood type incompatibility was once believed to be a contraindication to renal transplantation due to the increased risk for antibody‐mediated rejection and early graft loss attributable to isoagglutinins. Recently, pretransplant desensitization strategies, such as removal of isoagglutinins and antibody‐producing cells, have achieved successful outcomes, although it remains unclear whether graft survival and patient morbidity are equivalent to those for ABO‐compatible renal transplantation. The present review suggested that ABO‐incompatible living‐donor renal transplantation might be a favorable radical renal replacement therapy for patients with end‐stage kidney disease.

N-Methyl-d-aspartate Receptor Antibody Encephalitis: A Concise Review of the Disorder, Diagnosis, and Management

Anti-NMDA ( N-methyl-d-aspartate) receptor (anti-NMDAR) encephalitis is one of the most common paraneoplastic encephalitides. It occurs in both sexes, across all age ranges, and may occur in the presence or absence of an associated tumor. Its pathogenesis and clinical presentation relate to the presence of IgG1 or IgG3 antibodies targeting the NR1 subunit of the NMDA receptor, leading to a disinhibition of neuronal excitatory pathways. Initial clinical manifestations may be nonspecific, resembling a viral-like illness; however, with disease progression, symptoms can become quite severe, including prominent psychiatric features, cognitive problems, motor dysfunction, and autonomic instability. Anti-NMDAR encephalitis may even result in death in severe untreated cases. Diagnosis can be challenging, given that initial laboratory and radiographic results are typically nonspecific. The majority of patients respond to first or second-line treatments, although therapeutic options remain limited, usually consisting of tumor removal (if there is confirmation of an underlying malignancy) in conjunction with prompt initiation of immunosuppressive medications along with intravenous immunoglobulins and/or plasma exchange. Although the clinical presentation of anti-NMDAR encephalitis overlaps with several other more common neurological and psychiatric disorders, early diagnosis and treatment is essential for a positive prognosis. Here, we concisely review the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and clinical management of this disease.

HLA Class Ia and Ib Polyreactive Anti-HLA-E IgG2a Monoclonal Antibodies (TFL-006 and TFL-007) Suppress Anti-HLA IgG Production by CD19+ B Cells and Proliferation of CD4+ T Cells While Upregulating Tregs

The anti-HLA-E IgG2a mAbs, TFL-006 and TFL-007, reacted with all HLA-I antigens, similar to the therapeutic preparations of IVIg. Indeed, IVIg lost its HLA reactivity, when its HLA-E reactivity was adsorbed out. US-FDA approved IVIg to reduce antibodies in autoimmune diseases. But the mechanism underlying IVIg-mediated antibody reduction could not be ascertained due to the presence of other polyclonal antibodies. In spite of it, the cost prohibitive high or low IVIg is administered to patients waiting for donor organ and for allograft recipients for lowering antiallograft antibodies. A mAb that could mimic IVIg in lowering Abs, with defined mechanism of action, would be highly beneficial for patients. Demonstrably, the anti-HLA-E mAbs mimicked several functions of IVIg relevant to suppressing the antiallograft Abs. The mAbs suppressed activated T cells and anti-HLA antibody production by activated B cells, which were dose-wise superior to IVIg. The anti-HLA-E mAb expanded CD4+, CD25+, and Foxp3+ Tregs, which are known to suppress T and B cells involved in antibody production. These defined functions of the anti-HLA-E IgG2a mAbs at a level superior to IVIg encourage developing their humanized version to lower antibodies in allograft recipients, to promote graft survival, and to control autoimmune diseases.

ABO-Incompatible Kidney Transplantation

ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation has long been considered a contraindication to successful kidney transplantation. During the last 25 years, increasing organ shortage enforced the development of strategies to overcome the ABO antibody barrier. In the meantime, ABOi kidney transplantation has become a routine procedure with death-censored graft survival rates comparable to the rates in compatible transplantations. Desensitization is usually achieved by apheresis and B cell-depleting therapies that are accompanied by powerful immunosuppression. Anti-A/B antibodies are aimed to be below a certain threshold at the time of ABOi kidney transplantation and during the first 2 weeks after surgery. Thereafter, even a rebound of anti-A/B antibodies does not appear to harm the kidney transplant, a phenomenon that is called accommodation, but is poorly understood. There is still concern, however, that infectious complications such as viral disease, Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, and severe urinary tract infections are increased after ABOi transplantations. Recent data from the Collaborative Transplant Study show that during the first year after kidney transplantation, one additional patient death from an infectious complication occurs in 100 ABOi kidney transplant recipients. Herein, we review the recent evidence on ABOi kidney transplantation with a focus on desensitization strategies and respective outcomes.