Incidence, risk factors, and long-term outcomes associated with antibody-mediated rejection - The long-term Deterioration of Kidney Allograft Function (DeKAF) prospective cohort study

Emerging Therapies for Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Kidney Transplantation

Despite the advances in immunosuppressive medications, antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) continues to be a major cause of kidney allograft failure and remains a barrier to improving long-term allograft survival. Recently, there have been significant advances in the understanding of the pathophysiological process of AMR, along with the development of new therapeutic options. Additionally, surveillance protocols with donor-derived cell-free DNA and gene profile testing have been established, leading to the early detection of AMR. A multitude of clinical trials are ongoing, opening numerous opportunities for improving outcome in kidney transplant recipients. In this brief review, we discuss the emerging therapies for managing both active and chronic active AMR and highlight the ongoing clinical trials.

Anti-interleukin-6 Antibody Clazakizumab in Antibody-mediated Renal Allograft Rejection: Accumulation of Antibody-neutralized Interleukin-6 Without Signs of Proinflammatory Rebound Phenomena

BACKGROUND

Blockade of interleukin-6 (IL-6) has emerged as a promising therapeutic option for antibody-mediated rejection. Subtherapeutic anti-IL-6 antibody level or treatment cessation following prolonged cytokine neutralization may result in proinflammatory rebound phenomena via accumulation of IL-6 and/or modulated gene expression of major components of the IL-6/IL-6 receptor (IL-6R) axis.

METHODS

We evaluated biologic material obtained from a randomized controlled, double-blind phase 2 trial designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the anti-IL-6 monoclonal antibody clazakizumab in late antibody-mediated rejection. Twenty kidney transplant recipients, allocated to clazakizumab or placebo, received 4-weekly doses over 12 wks, followed by a 40-wk extension where all recipients received clazakizumab. Serum proteins were detected using bead-based immunoassays and RNA transcripts using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (peripheral blood) or microarray analysis (serial allograft biopsies).

RESULTS

Clazakizumab treatment resulted in a substantial increase in median total (bound and unbound to drug) serum IL-6 level (1.4, 8015, and 13 600 pg/mL at 0, 12, and 52 wks), but median level of free (unbound to drug) IL-6 did not increase (3.0, 2.3, and 2.3 pg/mL, respectively). Neutralization of IL-6 did not boost soluble IL-6R or leukocyte or allograft expression of IL-6, IL-6R, and glycoprotein 130 mRNA. Cessation of treatment at the end of the trial did not result in a meaningful increase in C-reactive protein or accelerated progression of graft dysfunction during 12 mo of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our results argue against clinically relevant rebound phenomena and modulation of major components of the IL-6/IL-6R axis following prolonged IL-6 neutralization with clazakizumab.

Emerging drugs for antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation: a focus on phase II & III trials

INTRODUCTION

Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure. Its therapy continues to be challenge, and no treatment has been approved for the market thus far.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we discuss the pathophysiology and phenotypic presentation of ABMR, the current level of evidence to support the use of available therapeutic strategies, and the emergence of tailored drugs now being evaluated in systematic clinical trials. We searched PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov and Citeline's Pharmaprojects for pertinent information on emerging anti-rejection strategies, laying a focus on phase II and III trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, we rely on the use of apheresis for alloantibody depletion and intravenous immunoglobulin (referred to as standard of care), preferentially in early active ABMR. Recent systematic trials have questioned the benefits of using the CD20 antibody rituximab or the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. However, there are now several promising treatment approaches in the pipeline, which are being trialed in phase II and III studies. These include interleukin-6 antagonism, CD38-targeting antibodies, and selective inhibitors of complement. On the basis of the information that has emerged so far, it seems that innovative treatment strategies for clinical use in ABMR may be available within the next 5-10 years.

Innovative immunosuppression in kidney transplantation: A challenge for unmet needs

Due to the optimal results obtained in kidney transplantation and to the lack of interest of the industries, new innovative drugs in kidney transplantation are difficult to be encountered. The best strategy to find the new drugs recently developed or under development is to search in the sections of kidney transplantation still not completely covered by the drugs on the market. These unmet needs are the prevention of delayed graft function (DGF), the protection of the graft over the long time and the desensitization of preformed anti human leukocyte antigen antibodies and the treatment of the acute antibody-mediated rejection. These needs are particularly relevant due to the expansion of some kind of kidney transplantation as transplantation from non-heart beating donor and in the case of antibody-incompatible grafts. The first are particularly exposed to DGF, the latter need a safe desensitization and a safe treatments of the antibody mediated rejections that often occur. Particular caution is needed in treating these drugs. First, they are described in very recent studies and the follow-up of their effect is of course rather short. Second, some of these drugs are still in an early phase of study, even if in well-conducted randomized controlled trials. Particular caution and a careful check need to be used in trials launched 2 or 3 years ago. Indeed, is always necessary to verify whether the study is still going on or whether and why the study itself was abandoned.

Caveolin-1 in Kidney Chronic Antibody-Mediated Rejection: An Integrated Immunohistochemical and Transcriptomic Analysis Based on the Banff Human Organ Transplant (B-HOT) Gene Panel

Caveolin-1 overexpression has previously been reported as a marker of endothelial injury in kidney chronic antibody-mediated rejection (c-ABMR), but conclusive evidence supporting its use for daily diagnostic practice is missing. This study aims to evaluate if Caveolin-1 can be considered an immunohistochemical surrogate marker of c-ABMR. Caveolin-1 expression was analyzed in a selected series of 22 c-ABMR samples and 11 controls. Caveolin-1 immunohistochemistry proved positive in peritubular and glomerular capillaries of c-ABMR specimens, irrespective of C4d status whereas all controls were negative. Multiplex gene expression profiling in c-ABMR cases confirmed Caveolin-1 overexpression and identified additional genes (n = 220) and pathways, including MHC Class II antigen presentation and Type II interferon signaling. No differences in terms of gene expression (including Caveolin-1 gene) were observed according to C4d status. Conversely, immune cell signatures showed a NK-cell prevalence in C4d-negative samples compared with a B-cell predominance in C4d-positive cases, a finding confirmed by immunohistochemical assessment. Finally, differentially expressed genes were observed between c-ABMR and controls in pathways associated with Caveolin-1 functions (angiogenesis, cell metabolism and cell–ECM interaction). Based on our findings, Caveolin-1 resulted as a key player in c-ABMR, supporting its role as a marker of this condition irrespective of C4d status.

Cost, healthcare utilization, and outcomes of antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplant recipients in the US

BACKGROUND

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is one of the leading causes of graft loss in kidney transplant recipients but little is known about the associated cost and healthcare burden of AMR.

METHODS

We developed an algorithm to detect AMR using the 2006-2011 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) using ICD-10 and billing codes as there is no specific ICD-10 or procedure code for AMR. We then compared healthcare utilization, cost, and risk of graft failure or death in AMR. patients versus matched controls.

RESULTS

The algorithm had a 39.4% true-positive rate (69/175) and a 4.1% false-positive rate (110/2,655). We identified 5,679/101,554 (5.6%) with AMR, who had a nearly 3-fold higher risk of graft failure (hazard ratio [HR], 2.75, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.50 to 3.03; p < .0001) and death (HR, 2.59; 95% CI, 2.35 to 2.86; p < .0001) at 2 years, nearly 5 times the hospitalizations in the 60 d before AMR diagnosis, and increased nephrology and emergency department visits. Mean AMR attributable healthcare costs were 4 times higher than matched controls, at $13,066 more per patient in the 60 d before AMR diagnosis and $35,740 per patient per year higher in the 2 years after AMR diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

US kidney transplant recipients with AMR have substantially greater healthcare utilization and higher costs and risk of graft loss and mortality.