4.7 Article

Preformed circulating HLA-specific memory B cells predict high risk of humoral rejection in kidney transplantation

Journal

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 88, Issue 4, Pages 874-887

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1038/ki.2015.205

Keywords

antibody-mediated rejection; HLA-specific memory B cells; immune monitoring; kidney transplantation

Funding

  1. national public grants [FIS PI10/01786, PI13/01263]
  2. Spanish Red de Investigacion Renal (REDinREN) [RD12/0021]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The accurate evaluation of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) has allowed a precise identification of sensitized patients at risk of antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR). However, the scale of the humoral response is not always fully addressed, as it excludes the complete memory B-cell (mBC) pool such as that caused by antigen-specific mBC. Using a novel B-cell ELISpot assay approach, we assessed circulating mBC frequencies against class I and II HLA antigens in highly sensitized and nonsensitized patients in the waiting list for kidney transplantation. Also, kidney transplant patients undergoing ABMR were evaluated for the presence of donor-specific mBCs both at the time of rejection and before transplantation. For this purpose, 278 target HLA-sp antigens from 70 patients were studied and compared to circulating HLA-sp antibodies. Both class I and II HLA-sp mBC frequencies were identified in highly sensitized individuals but not in nonsensitized and healthy individuals, many years after first sensitization. Also, high donor-specific mBC responses were clearly found both during ABMR and before transplantation, regardless of circulating DSA. The higher the donor-specific mBC response, the more aggressive the allograft rejection. Thus, assessing donor-specific mBC frequencies may be relevant to better refine patient alloimmune-risk stratification, and provides new insight into the mechanisms of the adaptive humoral alloimmune response taking place in kidney 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available