4.6 Article

Comparative Transcriptional and Phenotypic Peripheral Blood Analysis of Kidney Recipients Under Cyclosporin A or Sirolimus Monotherapy

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 10, Issue 12, Pages 2604-2614

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03302.x

Keywords

Calcineurin inhibitors; gene expression; immunosuppression; kidney transplantation; sirolimus; tolerance

Funding

  1. Wyeth
  2. Generalitat de Catalunya-European Social Funds [2006FI-00346]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III (SPAIN)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Due to its low level of nephrotoxicity and capacity to harness tolerogenic pathways, sirolimus (SRL) has been proposed as an alternative to calcineurin inhibitors in transplantation. The exact mechanisms underlying its unique immunosuppressive profile in humans, however, are still not well understood. In the current study, we aimed to depict the in vivo effects of SRL in comparison with cyclosporin A (CSA) by employing gene expression profiling and multiparameter flow cytometry on blood cells collected from stable kidney recipients under immunosuppressant monotherapy. SRL recipients displayed an increased frequency of CD4 + CD25highFoxp3 + T cells. However, this was accompanied by an increased number of effector memory T cells and by enrichment in NFkB-related pro-inflammatory expression pathways and monocyte and NK cell lineage-specific transcripts. Furthermore, measurement of a transcriptional signature characteristic of operationally tolerant kidney recipients failed to detect differences between SRL and CSA-treated recipients. In conclusion, we show here that the blood transcriptional profile induced by SRL monotherapy in vivo does not resemble that of operationally tolerant recipients and is dominated by innate immune cells and NFkB-related pro-inflammatory events. These data provide novel insights on the complex effects of SLR on the immune system in clinical transplantation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available