Diagnostic performance of kSORT, a blood-based mRNA assay for noninvasive detection of rejection after kidney transplantation: A retrospective multicenter cohort study

Blood Gene Signature as a Biomarker for Subclinical Kidney Allograft Rejection: Where Are We?

The observation decades ago that inflammatory injuries because of an alloimmune response might be present even in the absence of concomitant clinical impairment in allograft function conduced to the later definition of subclinical rejection. Many studies have investigated the different subclinical rejections defined according to the Banff classification (subclinical T cell-mediated rejection and antibody-mediated rejection), overall concluding that these episodes worsened long-term allograft function and survival. These observations led several transplant teams to perform systematic protocolar biopsies to anticipate treatment of rejection episodes and possibly prevent allograft loss. Paradoxically, the invasive characteristics and associated logistics of such procedures paved the way to investigate noninvasive biomarkers (urine and blood) of subclinical rejection. Among them, several research teams proposed a blood gene signature developed from cohort studies, most of which achieved excellent predictive values for the occurrence of subclinical rejection, mainly antibody-mediated rejection. Interestingly, although all identified genes relate to immune subsets and pathways involved in rejection pathophysiology, very few transcripts are shared among these sets of genes, highlighting the heterogenicity of such episodes and the difficult but mandatory need for external validation of such tools. Beyond this, their application and value in clinical practice remain to be definitively demonstrated in both biopsy avoidance and prevention of clinical rejection episodes. Their combination with other biomarkers, either epidemiological or biological, could contribute to a more accurate picture of a patient's risk of rejection and guide clinicians in the follow-up of kidney transplant recipients.

European Society of Organ Transplantation Consensus Statement on Testing for Non-Invasive Diagnosis of Kidney Allograft Rejection

To address the need for improved biomarkers for kidney transplant rejection, European Society of Organ Transplantation (ESOT) convened a dedicated working group comprised of experts in kidney transplant biomarkers to review literature pertaining to clinical and subclinical acute rejection to develop guidelines in the screening and diagnosis of acute rejection that were subsequently discussed and voted on during the Consensus Conference that took place in person in Prague. The findings and recommendations of the Working Group on Molecular Biomarkers of Kidney Transplant Rejection are presented in this article.

Immune monitoring of allograft status in kidney transplant recipients

Kidney transplant patients require careful management of immunosuppression to avoid rejection while minimizing the risk of infection and malignancy for the best long-term outcome. The gold standard for monitoring allograft status and immunosuppression adequacy is a kidney biopsy, but this is invasive and costly. Conventional methods of allograft monitoring, such as serum creatinine level, are non-specific. Although they alert physicians to the need to evaluate graft dysfunction, by the time there is a clinical abnormality, allograft damage may have already occurred. The development of novel and non-invasive methods of evaluating allograft status are important to improving graft outcomes. This review summarizes the available conventional and novel methods for monitoring allograft status after kidney transplant. Novel and less invasive methods include gene expression, cell-free DNA, urinary biomarkers, and the use of artificial intelligence. The optimal method to manage patients after kidney transplant is still being investigated. The development of less invasive methods to assess allograft function has the potential to improve patient outcomes and allow for a more personalized approach to immunosuppression management.

Performance and Advancement of the Kidney Solid Organ Response Test

BACKGROUND

The kidney solid organ response test (kSORT) has been investigated for the prediction of acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients with conflicting results. We aimed to investigate if the kSORT assay score is associated with rejection or immune quiescence.

METHODS

The blinded association between rejection and kSORT > 9 were investigated. Optimization of kSORT prediction was evaluated after unblinding to determine the optimal prediction cutoff value of kSORT score. Additionally, the predictive capability of the kSORT gene set was assessed using blinded normalized gene expression data from microarray (Affymetrix) and qPCR assays.

RESULTS

Of the 95 blood samples analyzed, 18 patients had blood samples before transplant, 77 patients after transplant and 71 had clinically indicated biopsies of which 15 biopsies showed acute rejection and 16 showed chronic active antibody-mediated rejection. When 31 patients with rejection were compared to the remaining 64 patients, positive predictive value (PPV) was 54.29% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 75% when stratified using a kSORT score > 9, and PPV was 57.89% and NPV was 78.95% when stratified using a kSORT score > 5. Using the kSORT assay for detection of rejection showed an area under the curve value of 0.71. Microarray data improved prediction accuracy with PPV of 53% and NPV of 84% compared to qPCR results (PPV and NPV were 36% and 66%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The kSORT assay has the potential to be used as a predictive tool for active rejection and/or immune quiescence, but additional studies will be useful in improving and refining the kSORT assay, in particular the prediction algorithm.

Implantable bioelectronic systems for early detection of kidney transplant rejection

Early-stage organ transplant rejection can be difficult to detect. Percutaneous biopsies occur infrequently and are risky, and measuring biomarker levels in blood can lead to false-negative and -positive outcomes. We developed an implantable bioelectronic system capable of continuous, real-time, long-term monitoring of the local temperature and thermal conductivity of a kidney for detecting inflammatory processes associated with graft rejection, as demonstrated in rat models. The system detects ultradian rhythms, disruption of the circadian cycle, and/or a rise in kidney temperature. These provide warning signs of acute kidney transplant rejection that precede changes in blood serum creatinine/urea nitrogen by 2 to 3 weeks and approximately 3 days for cases of discontinued and absent administration of immunosuppressive therapy, respectively.

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.

Alloimmune risk assessment for antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplantation: A practical proposal

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease. Although an improvement in graft survival has been observed in the last decades with the use of different immunosuppressive drugs, this is still limited in time with antibody-mediated rejection being a main cause of graft-loss. Immune monitoring and risk assessment of antibody-mediated rejection before and after kidney transplantation with useful biomarkers is key to tailoring treatments to achieve the best outcomes. Here, we provide a review of the rationale and several accessible tools for immune monitoring, from the most classic to the modern ones. Finally, we end up discussing a practical proposal for alloimmune risk assessment in kidney transplantation, including histocompatibility leukocyte antigen (HLA) and non-HLA antibodies, HLA molecular mismatch analysis and characterization of peripheral blood immune cells.

Diagnostic Potential of Minimally Invasive Biomarkers: A Biopsy-centered Viewpoint From the Banff Minimally Invasive Diagnostics Working Group

With recent advances and commercial implementation of minimally invasive biomarkers in kidney transplantation, new strategies for the surveillance of allograft health are emerging. Blood and urine-based biomarkers can be used to detect the presence of rejection, but their applicability as diagnostic tests has not been studied. A Banff working group was recently formed to consider the potential of minimally invasive biomarkers for integration into the Banff classification for kidney allograft pathology. We review the existing data on donor-derived cell-free DNA, blood and urine transcriptomics, urinary protein chemokines, and next-generation diagnostics and conclude that the available data do not support their use as stand-alone diagnostic tests at this point. Future studies assessing their ability to distinguish complex phenotypes, differentiate T cell-mediated rejection from antibody-mediated rejection, and function as an adjunct to histology are needed to elevate these minimally invasive biomarkers from surveillance tests to diagnostic tests.

Progress in kidney transplantation: The role for systems immunology

The development of systems biology represents an immense breakthrough in our ability to perform translational research and deliver personalized and precision medicine. A multidisciplinary approach in combination with use of novel techniques allows for the extraction and analysis of vast quantities of data even from the volume and source limited samples that can be obtained from human subjects. Continued advances in microfluidics, scalability and affordability of sequencing technologies, and development of data analysis tools have made the application of a multi-omics, or systems, approach more accessible for use outside of specialized centers. The study of alloimmune and protective immune responses after solid organ transplant offers innumerable opportunities for a multi-omics approach, however, transplant immunology labs are only just beginning to adopt the systems methodology. In this review, we focus on advances in biological techniques and how they are improving our understanding of the immune system and its interactions, highlighting potential applications in transplant immunology. First, we describe the techniques that are available, with emphasis on major advances that allow for increased scalability. Then, we review initial applications in the field of transplantation with a focus on topics that are nearing clinical integration. Finally, we examine major barriers to adapting these methods and discuss potential future developments.

The MMDx® diagnostic system: A critical re-appraisal of its knowledge gaps and a call for rigorous validation studies

Transcriptomics generates pathogenetic insights not obtainable by histology, but translation of these insights into diagnostic tests is not a trivial task. This opinion-piece critically appraises declarative MMDx statements, such as the infallibility of machine learning algorithms, measurements of gene expression with >99% precision, and "unambiguous reclassifications" of contentious biopsies such as those with borderline change, polyomavirus nephropathy, chronic active T-cell or mixed rejection, isolated intimal arteritis, and renal medullary pathology. It is shown that molecular diagnoses that do not agree with histology cannot be attributed primarily to pathology reading errors. Neither can all molecular calls derived from arbitrary binary thresholds be automatically accepted as the ground truth. Important other sources of discrepancies between clinico-pathologic and molecular calls include: (a) organ being studied, (b) disease definition, (c) clinical histologic, and gene expression heterogeneity within the same diagnostic label, (d) size and composition of comparator groups, (e) molecular noise, (f) variability in output of different machine learning algorithms, and (g) the nonavailability of a molecular classifier for chronic active TCMR. Carefully designed clinical trials are needed to determine which of the proposed indications of MMDx provide incremental value over existing standard of care protocols.

Peripheral blood immune cell profiling of acute corneal transplant rejection

Acute rejection (AR) of corneal transplants (CT) has a profound effect on subsequent graft survival but detailed immunological studies in human CT recipients are lacking. In this multi-site, cross-sectional study, clinical details and blood samples were collected from adults with clinically diagnosed AR of full-thickness (FT)-CT (n = 35) and posterior lamellar (PL)-CT (n = 21) along with Stable CT recipients (n = 177) and adults with non-transplanted corneal disease (n = 40). For those with AR, additional samples were collected 3 months later. Immune cell analysis was performed by whole-genome microarrays (whole blood) and high-dimensional multi-color flow cytometry (peripheral blood mononuclear cells). For both, no activation signature was identified within the B cell and T cell repertoire at the time of AR diagnosis. Nonetheless, in FT- but not PL-CT recipients, AR was associated with differences in B cell maturity and regulatory CD4⁺ T cell frequency compared to stable allografts. These data suggest that circulating B cell and T cell subpopulations may provide insights into the regulation of anti-donor immune response in human CT recipients with differing AR risk. Our results suggest that, in contrast to solid organ transplants, genetic or cellular assays of peripheral blood are unlikely to be clinically exploitable for prediction or diagnosis of AR.

Molecular Markers of Kidney Transplantation Outcome: Current Omics Tools and Future Developments

Purpose of review: The emerging field of molecular predictive medicine is aiming to change the traditional medical approach in renal transplantation. Many studies have explored potential biomarker molecules with predictive properties in renal transplantation, issued from omics research. Herein, we review the biomarker molecules of four technologies (i.e., Genomics, Transcriptomics, Proteomics, and Metabolomics) associated with favorable kidney transplant outcomes. Recent findings: Several panels of molecules have been associated with the outcome that the majority of markers are related to inflammation and immune response; although. other molecular ontologies are also represented, such as proteasome, growth, regeneration, and drug metabolism. Throughout this review, we highlight the lack of properly validated statistical demonstration. Indeed, the most preeminent molecular panels either remain at the limited size study stage or are not confirmed during large-scale studies. At the core of this problem, we identify the methodological shortcomings and propose a comprehensive workflow for discovery and validation of molecular biomarkers that aims to improve the relevance of these tools in the future. Summary: Overall, adopting a patient management through omics approach could bring remarkable improvement to transplantation success. An increased effort and investment between scientists, medical biologists, and clinicians seem to be the path toward a proper solution.

Validation of a gene expression signature to measure immune quiescence in kidney transplant recipients in the CLIA setting

Aim: Allograft rejection remains a major cause of graft failure in kidney transplantation. Here the authors report the validation of a non-invasive molecular diagnostic assay, AlloMap Kidney, using peripheral blood. Methods: The AlloMap Kidney test is a gene expression profile utilizing the RNA-seq platform to measure immune quiescence in kidney transplant patients. Results/Conclusions: Analytical validation showed robust performance characteristics with an accuracy correlation coefficient of 0.997 and a precision coefficient of variation of 0.049 across testing. Clinical validation from the prospective, multi-center studies of 235 samples (66 rejection and 169 quiescence specimens) demonstrated the sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 66% for allograft rejection, while the negative predictive value was 95% to discriminate rejection from quiescence at 10% prevalence of rejection.

Emerging biomarkers in kidney transplantation and challenge of clinical implementation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite improvement in short-term outcomes after kidney transplantation, long-term outcomes remain suboptimal. Conventional biomarkers are limited in their ability to reliably identify early immunologic and nonimmunologic injury. Novel biomarkers are needed for noninvasive diagnosis of subclinical injury, prediction of response to treatment, and personalization of the care of kidney transplant recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent biotechnological advances have led to the discovery of promising molecular biomarker candidates. However, translating potential biomarkers from bench to clinic is challenging, and many potential biomarkers are abandoned prior to clinical implementation. Despite these challenges, several promising urine, blood, and tissue novel molecular biomarkers have emerged and are approaching incorporation into clinical practice.

SUMMARY

This article highlights the challenges in adopting biomarker-driven posttransplant management and reviews several promising emerging novel biomarkers that are approaching clinical implementation.

Noninvasive Assessment of the Alloimmune Response in Kidney Transplantation

Transplantation remains the optimal mode of kidney replacement therapy, but unfortunately long-term graft survival after 1 year remains suboptimal. The main mechanism of chronic allograft injury is alloimmune, and current clinical monitoring of kidney transplants includes measuring serum creatinine, proteinuria, and immunosuppressive drug levels. The most important biomarker routinely monitored is human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) with the frequency based on underlying immunologic risk. HLA-DSA should be measured if there is graft dysfunction, immunosuppression minimization, or nonadherence. Antibody strength is semiquantitatively estimated as mean fluorescence intensity, with titration studies for equivocal cases and for following response to treatment. Determination of in vitro C1q or C3d positivity or HLA-DSA IgG subclass analysis remains of uncertain significance, but we do not recommend these for routine use. Current evidence does not support routine monitoring of non-HLA antibodies except anti-angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies when the phenotype is appropriate. The monitoring of both donor-derived cell-free DNA in blood or gene expression profiling of serum and/or urine may detect subclinical rejection, although mainly as a supplement and not as a replacement for biopsy. The optimal frequency and cost-effectiveness of using these noninvasive assays remain to be determined. We review the available literature and make recommendations.

Emerging monitoring technologies in kidney transplantation

Non-invasive technologies to monitor kidney allograft health utilizing high-throughput assays of blood and urine specimens are emerging out of the research realm and slowly becoming part of everyday clinical practice. HLA epitope analysis and eplet mismatch score determination promise a more refined approach to the pre-transplant recipient-donor HLA matching that may lead to reduced rejection risk. High-resolution HLA typing and multiplex single antigen bead assays are identifying potential new offending HLA antibody subtypes. There is increasing recognition of the deleterious role non-HLA antibodies play in post-transplant outcomes. Donor-derived cell-free DNA detected by next-generation sequencing is a promising biomarker for kidney transplant rejection. Multi-omics techniques are shedding light on discrete genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic signatures that correlate with and predict allograft outcomes. Over the next decade, a comprehensive approach to optimize kidney matching and monitor transplant recipients for acute and chronic graft dysfunction will likely involve a combination of those emerging technologies summarized in this review.

Clinical Validation of an Immune Quiescence Gene Expression Signature in Kidney Transplantation

Background

Despite advances in immune suppression, kidney allograft rejection and other injuries remain a significant clinical concern, particularly with regards to long-term allograft survival. Evaluation of immune activity can provide information about rejection status and help guide interventions to extend allograft life. Here, we describe the validation of a blood gene expression classifier developed to differentiate immune quiescence from both T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) and antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR).

Methods

A five-gene classifier (DCAF12, MARCH8, FLT3, IL1R2, and PDCD1) was developed on 56 peripheral blood samples and validated on two sample sets independent of the training cohort. The primary validation set comprised 98 quiescence samples and 18 rejection samples: seven TCMR, ten ABMR, and one mixed rejection. The second validation set included eight quiescence and 11 rejection samples: seven TCMR, two ABMR, and two mixed rejection. AlloSure donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) was also evaluated.

Results

AlloMap Kidney classifier scores in the primary validation set differed significantly between quiescence (median, 9.49; IQR, 7.68-11.53) and rejection (median, 13.09; IQR, 11.25-15.28), with P<0.001. In the second validation set, the cohorts were statistically different (P=0.03) and the medians were similar to the primary validation set. The AUC for discriminating rejection from quiescence was 0.786 for the primary validation and 0.800 for the second validation. AlloMap Kidney results were not significantly correlated with AlloSure, although both were elevated in rejection. The ability to discriminate rejection from quiescence was improved when AlloSure and AlloMap Kidney were used together (AUC, 0.894).

Conclusion

Validation of AlloMap Kidney demonstrated the ability to differentiate between rejection and immune quiescence using a range of scores. The diagnostic performance suggests that assessment of the mechanisms of immunologic activity is complementary to allograft injury information derived from AlloSure dd-cfDNA. Together, these biomarkers offer a more comprehensive assessment of allograft health and immune quiescence.

Liquid biopsies: donor-derived cell-free DNA for the detection of kidney allograft injury

In kidney transplantation, the use of minimally invasive damage biomarkers that are more sensitive and specific than plasma creatinine will be crucial to enable early, actionable detection or exclusion of structural kidney damage due to acute or chronic rejection. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), which can be quantified, for example, through next-generation sequencing, droplet digital PCR and quantitative PCR, is a candidate biomarker with great potential for enabling comprehensive monitoring of allograft injury. dd-cfDNA has a favourable overall diagnostic performance for the detection of rejection and its high negative predictive value might be especially useful for avoiding unnecessary biopsies. Elevated dd-cfDNA levels have been shown to be detectable before graft injury can be clinically identified using current diagnostic methods. Moreover, dd-cfDNA falls rapidly to baseline levels after successful treatment for rejection owing to its short half-life. dd-cfDNA can detect graft injury caused by immune activation owing to insufficient immunosuppression and might therefore also help guide immunosuppression dosing. The fractional abundance of dd-cfDNA can be affected by changes in the recipient cfDNA (for example, due to infection or physical exercise) but the use of absolute quantification of dd-cfDNA overcomes this limitation. Serial dd-cfDNA determinations might therefore facilitate cost-effective personalized clinical management of kidney transplant recipients to reduce premature graft loss.

Beyond the Biopsy: Monitoring Immune Status in Kidney Recipients

Improved long-term kidney allograft survival is largely related to better outcomes at 12 months, in association with declining acute rejection rates and more efficacious immunosuppression. Finding the right balance between under- and overimmunosuppression or rejection versus immunosuppression toxicity remains one of transplant's holy grails. In the absence of precise measures of immunosuppression burden, transplant clinicians rely on nonspecific, noninvasive tests and kidney allograft biopsy generally performed for cause. This review appraises recent advances of conventional monitoring strategies and critically examines the plethora of emerging tests utilizing tissue, urine, and blood samples to improve upon the diagnostic precision of allograft surveillance.

Challenges of Diagnosing Antibody-Mediated Rejection: The Role of Invasive and Non-Invasive Biomarkers

Kidney transplantation is the best treatment modality for end-stage kidney disease, leading to improvement in a patient’s quality and quantity of life. With significant improvements in short-term outcomes, prolonging long-term allograft and patient survival remain ongoing challenges. The ability to monitor allograft function, immune tolerance and predict rejection accurately would enable personalization and better prognostication during post-transplant care. Though kidney biopsy remains the backbone of transplant diagnostics, emerging biomarkers can help detecting kidney allograft injury early enough to prevent permanent damage and detect injury before it is clinically apparent. In this review, we summarize the recent biomarkers that have shown promise in the prediction of acute rejection with a focus on antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplantation.