Immunoglobulin abnormalities in 1677 solid organ transplant recipients. Implications for posttransplantation follow-up
Language English Country Netherlands Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
31398462
DOI
10.1016/j.trim.2019.101229
PII: S0966-3274(19)30053-X
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Algorithms MeSH
- Survival Analysis MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Transplantation, Homologous MeSH
- Cohort Studies MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Follow-Up Studies MeSH
- Paraproteinemias diagnosis epidemiology mortality MeSH
- Mass Screening MeSH
- Postoperative Complications diagnosis epidemiology mortality MeSH
- Graft Rejection diagnosis epidemiology mortality MeSH
- Risk MeSH
- Organ Transplantation * MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic epidemiology MeSH
BACKGROUND: Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is a severe complication of solid organ transplantation (SOT). However, there is no consensus on PTLD screening methods. Gammopathies (GP), which occur in 10-25% of SOT recipients, have been linked to subsequent development of PTLD. Therefore, GP detection methods, such as serum protein electrophoresis (SPE), serum protein immunofixation (SIFE), urine protein immunofixation (UIFE) and the quantitative measurement of serum free light chains (SFLC) are candidate methods for PTLD screening. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the frequency of PTLD and GP, association of GP with subsequent PTLD, allograft loss or death and the diagnostic performance of SPE/SIFE in PTLD screening. The main objective was to explore, whether GP detection methods can be used to enhance the efficiency of PTLD screening and to formulate a concise algorithm for posttransplantation (post-Tx) follow-up. METHODS: We performed a cohort study on 1677 SOT recipients with SPE/SIFE data who underwent kidney, liver, heart, pancreas, Langerhans islets or multiple organ transplantation at the Institute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine between 1966 and 2015. The median (IQR) of follow-up time was 8.0 (4.0-12.0) years. RESULTS: The frequencies of PTLD and GP in SOT recipients were 2.8% and 6.4%, respectively. The frequencies of transient GP, GP of undetermined significance and malignant GP were 33%, 63% and 4% respectively. The median time between SOT and GP detection was 2.0 (interquartile range 1.0-7.0) years. GP was associated with a significantly higher risk of PTLD, allograft loss and death, with hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of a 6.06 (2.51-14.64), 2.61 (1.49-4.6) and 1.99 (1.2-3.3), respectively. Additionally, GP was associated with 2.98-fold increased risk of allograft loss in kidney transplant patients. SPE diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for PTLD were 14.8% and 93.9%, respectively. PTLD was diagnosed more often and earlier if SPE/SIFE was included in the post-Tx follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: GP after SOT is associated with a high risk of PTLD, allograft loss and poor survival. The combination of SPE, SIFE, SFLC and UIFE is optimal for GP detection. These methods aid in identifying patients who are at risk for PTLD or allograft damage and should be included in regular post-Tx follow-up.
References provided by Crossref.org