A comparison of methods of plasmapheresis for the treatment of late antibody mediated rejection in kidney transplant recipients

Introduction We compared the outcomes associated with plasma exchange (PE), double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP), or immunoadsorption (IA) in the treatment of late antibody mediated rejection (AMR). Methods Sixty-nine kidney transplantation (KTx) recipients with late AMR were retrospectively categorized according to management with PE (n = 30), DFPP (n = 22) or IA (n = 17). Allograft loss was compared across treatment groups by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression. Results Study groups were similar regarding age, sex, donor type, kidney function, donor specific antibodies, and post-KTx follow-up time. Five-year graft survival trended higher with IA (70.6%) compared to PE (36.7%) and DFPP (27.3%) (p = 0.06). In multivariate Cox regression, baseline eGFR (HR per ml/min/1.73 m(2) [95% CI]; 0.96 [0.94-0.99]), rituximab use (HR [95% CI]; 0.42 [0.21-0.84]), interstitial inflammation (i) (HR [95% CI]; 2.05 [1.13-3.69]), and transplant glomerulopathy (cg) (HR [95% CI]; 1.46 [1.13-1.87]) were associated with graft loss. Conclusion These results motivate the need for continued assessment of rituximab and plasmapheresis in larger studies.

Automated summary

This study compared the outcomes of plasma exchange (PE), double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP), and immunoadsorption (IA) in the treatment of late antibody mediated rejection (AMR) in kidney transplantation recipients. The results showed that IA had a higher graft survival rate. Multivariate analysis indicated that baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, rituximab use, interstitial inflammation, and transplant glomerulopathy were associated with graft loss.