1
|
Abstract
Besides conventional medical therapies, therapeutic apheresis has become an important adjunctive or alternative therapeutic option to immunosuppressive agents for primary or secondary kidney diseases and kidney transplantation. The available therapeutic apheresis techniques used in kidney diseases, including plasma exchange, double-filtration plasmapheresis, immunoadsorption, and low-density lipoprotein apheresis. Plasma exchange is still the leading extracorporeal therapy. Recently, growing evidence supports the potential benefits of double-filtration plasmapheresis and immunoadsorption for more specific and effective clearance of pathogenic antibodies with fewer side effects. However, more randomized controlled trials are still needed. Low-density lipoprotein apheresis is also an important supplementary therapy used in patients with recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. This review collects the latest evidence from recent studies, focuses on the specific advantages and disadvantages of these techniques, and compares the discrepancy among them to determine the optimal therapeutic regimens for certain kidney diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi-Yuan Chen
- Department of Nephrology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Xin Sun
- Department of Nephrology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Wei Huang
- Department of Nephrology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Fang-Fang He
- Department of Nephrology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Chun Zhang
- Department of Nephrology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Shen J, Liu C, Yan P, Wang M, Guo L, Liu S, Chen J, Rosenholm JM, Huang H, Wang R, Zhang H. Helper T Cell (CD4 +) Targeted Tacrolimus Delivery Mediates Precise Suppression of Allogeneic Humoral Immunity. Research (Wash D C) 2022; 2022:9794235. [PMID: 35958106 PMCID: PMC9343082 DOI: 10.34133/2022/9794235] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 06/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a major cause of dysfunction and loss of transplanted kidney. The current treatments for ABMR involve nonspecific inhibition and clearance of T/B cells or plasma cells. However, the prognosis of patients following current treatment is poor. T follicular helper cells (Tfh) play an important role in allograft-specific antibodies secreting plasma cell (PC) development. Tfh cells are therefore considered to be important therapeutic targets for the treatment of antibody hypersecretion disorders, such as transplant rejection and autoimmune diseases. Tacrolimus (Tac), the primary immunosuppressant, prevents rejection by reducing T cell activation. However, its administration should be closely monitored to avoid serious side effects. In this study, we investigated whether Tac delivery to helper T (CD4+) cells using functionalized mesoporous nanoparticles can block Tfh cell differentiation after alloantigen exposure. Results showed that Tac delivery ameliorated humoral rejection injury in rodent kidney graft by suppressing Tfh cell development, PC, and donor-specific antibody (DSA) generation without causing severe side effects compared with delivery through the drug administration pathway. This study provides a promising therapeutic strategy for preventing humoral rejection in solid organ transplantation. The specific and controllable drug delivery avoids multiple disorder risks and side effects observed in currently used clinical approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jia Shen
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Chang Liu
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, Turku 20520, Finland
- Turku Bioscience Centre, University of Turku and Åbo Akademi University, Turku 20520, Finland
| | - Pengpeng Yan
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Meifang Wang
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Luying Guo
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Shuaihui Liu
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Jianghua Chen
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Jessica M. Rosenholm
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, Turku 20520, Finland
| | - Hongfeng Huang
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
| | - Rending Wang
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, China
- Organ Donation and Coordination Office, The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, China
| | - Hongbo Zhang
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, Turku 20520, Finland
- Turku Bioscience Centre, University of Turku and Åbo Akademi University, Turku 20520, Finland
- Department of Orthopaedics, Shanghai Key Laboratory for Prevention and Treatment of Bone and Joint Diseases, Shanghai Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mayer KA, Budde K, Jilma B, Doberer K, Böhmig GA. Emerging drugs for antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation: a focus on phase II & III trials. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs 2022; 27:151-167. [PMID: 35715978 DOI: 10.1080/14728214.2022.2091131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katharina A Mayer
- Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Klemens Budde
- Department of Nephrology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Bernd Jilma
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - Konstantin Doberer
- Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Georg A Böhmig
- Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Doberer K, Schiemann M, Strassl R, Haupenthal F, Dermuth F, Görzer I, Eskandary F, Reindl‐Schwaighofer R, Kikić Ž, Puchhammer‐Stöckl E, Böhmig GA, Bond G. Torque teno virus for risk stratification of graft rejection and infection in kidney transplant recipients-A prospective observational trial. Am J Transplant 2020; 20:2081-2090. [PMID: 32034850 PMCID: PMC7496119 DOI: 10.1111/ajt.15810] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2019] [Revised: 01/28/2020] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
The nonpathogenic and ubiquitous torque teno virus (TTV) is associated with immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients. Studies in kidney transplant patients proposed TTV quantification for risk stratification of graft rejection and infection. In this prospective trial (DRKS00012335) 386 consecutive kidney transplant recipients were subjected to longitudinal per-protocol monitoring of plasma TTV load by polymerase chain reaction for 12 months posttransplant. TTV load peaked at the end of month 3 posttransplant and reached steady state thereafter. TTV load after the end of month 3 was analyzed in the context of subsequent rejection diagnosed by indication biopsy and infection within the first year posttransplant, respectively. Each log increase in TTV load decreased the odds for rejection by 22% (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.97; P = .027) and increased the odds for infection by 11% (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06-1.15; P < .001). TTV was quantified at a median of 14 days before rejection was diagnosed and 27 days before onset of infection, respectively. We defined a TTV load between 1 × 106 and 1 × 108 copies/mL as optimal range to minimize the risk for rejection and infection. These data support the initiation of an interventional trial assessing the efficacy of TTV-guided immunosuppression to reduce infection and graft rejection in kidney transplant recipients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Konstantin Doberer
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Martin Schiemann
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Robert Strassl
- Division of VirologyDepartment of Laboratory MedicineMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Frederik Haupenthal
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Florentina Dermuth
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Irene Görzer
- Center for VirologyMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Farsad Eskandary
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | | | - Željko Kikić
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | | | - Georg A. Böhmig
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Gregor Bond
- Division of Nephrology and DialysisDepartment of Medicine IIIMedical University ViennaViennaAustria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ahmadpoor P, Aglae C, Cariou S, Pambrun E, Renaud S, Garo F, Darmon R, Schultz C, Prelipcean C, Reboul P, Moranne O. Physiological role of plasma and its components and the clinical implications of different methods of apheresis: A narrative review. Ther Apher Dial 2020; 25:262-272. [PMID: 32710797 DOI: 10.1111/1744-9987.13567] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2020] [Revised: 06/17/2020] [Accepted: 07/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Nowadays, therapeutic plasmapheresis (TP) is accepted as part of the treatment for specific groups of diseases. The availability of different methods, including double filtration and adsorption, increases selectivity for the removal of substances. However, the use of these techniques requires a thorough understanding of the characteristics and components of plasma. By considering pivotal papers from several databases, the aim of this narrative review is to describe the characteristics of plasma related to apheresis techniques. We have tried to cover the clinical implications including physiology, estimation of plasma volume, viscosity, and a description of its components including the size, volume of distribution, and half-lives of the different substances to be removed or maintained depending on the clinical situation and applied apheresis technique. Applying this knowledge will help us to choose the right method and dosage and improve the efficacy of the procedure by preventing or addressing any complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pedram Ahmadpoor
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Cedric Aglae
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Sylvain Cariou
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Emilie Pambrun
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Sophie Renaud
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Florian Garo
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Ruben Darmon
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Celine Schultz
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Camelia Prelipcean
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Pascal Reboul
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France
| | - Olivier Moranne
- Service Nephrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, CHU Carémeau, Université de Montpellier-Nîmes, Nîmes, France.,EA2415, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| |
Collapse
|