The tubulitis with/without interstitial inflammation not meeting criteria for T-cell-mediated rejection (minimal allograft injury) is the most frequent histological findings in early transplant biopsies. The course of transcriptional changes in sequential kidney graft biopsies has not been studied yet. Molecular phenotypes were analyzed using the Molecular Microscope® Diagnostic System (MMDx) in 46 indication biopsies (median 13 postoperative days) diagnosed as minimal allograft injury and in corresponding follow-up biopsies at 3 months. All 46 patients with minimal injury in early biopsy received steroid pulses. MMDx interpreted indication biopsies as no-rejection in 34/46 (74%), T-cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) in 4/46 (9%), antibody-mediated rejection in 6/46 (13%), and mixed rejection in 2/46 (4%) cases. Follow-up biopsies were interpreted by MMDx in 37/46 (80%) cases as no-rejection, in 4/46 (9%) as TCMR, and in 5/46 (11%) as mixed rejection. Follow-up biopsies showed a decrease in MMDx-assessed acute kidney injury (P = 0.001) and an increase of atrophy-fibrosis (P = 0.002). The most significant predictor of MMDx rejection scores in follow-up biopsies was the tubulitis classifier score in initial biopsies (AUC = 0.84, P = 0.002), confirmed in multivariate binary regression (OR = 16, P = 0.016). Molecular tubulitis score at initial biopsy has the potential to discriminate patients at risk for molecular rejection score at follow-up biopsy.

Alberta Transplant Applied Genomics Centre Edmonton AB Canada

Department of Nephrology and Transplant Center Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech Republic

Department of Pathology Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech Republic

Transplant Laboratory Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech Republic

University of Alberta Edmonton AB Canada

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Schweitzer EJ, Drachenberg CB, Anderson L, et al. Significance of the Banff borderline biopsy. Am J Kidney Dis 1996; 28: 585.

Halloran PF, Reeve J, Akalin E, et al. Real time central assessment of kidney transplant indication biopsies by microarrays: the INTERCOMEX study. Am J Transplant 2017; 17: 2851.

Halloran PF, Pereira AB, Chang J, et al. Potential impact of microarray diagnosis of T cell-mediated rejection in kidney transplants: the INTERCOM study. Am J Transplant 2013; 13: 2352.

Loupy A, Haas M, Roufosse C, et al. The Banff 2019 kidney meeting report (I): updates on and clarification of criteria for T cell- and antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 2020; 20: 2318.

Madill-Thomsen K, Perkowska-Ptasinska A, Bohmig GA, et al. Discrepancy analysis comparing molecular and histology diagnoses in kidney transplant biopsies. Am J Transplant 2019; 20: 1341.

Hruba P, Brabcova I, Gueler F, et al. Molecular diagnostics identifies risks for graft dysfunction despite borderline histologic changes. Kidney Int 2015; 88: 785.

Roberts IS, Reddy S, Russell C, et al. Subclinical rejection and borderline changes in early protocol biopsy specimens after renal transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 77: 1194.

Palomar R, Ruiz JC, Val-Bernal F, et al. Borderline changes in kidney transplantation: evolution of treated cases versus nontreated. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 2314.

Gaber LW. Borderline changes in the Banff schema: rejection or no rejection? Transplant Proc 2004; 36: 755.

de Freitas DG, Sellares J, Mengel M, et al. The nature of biopsies with “borderline rejection” and prospects for eliminating this category. Am J Transplant 2012; 12: 191.

Nankivell BJ, Borrows RJ, Fung CL, O'Connell PJ, Allen RD, Chapman JR. The natural history of chronic allograft nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2326.

Stegall MD, Park WD, Larson TS, et al. The histology of solitary renal allografts at 1 and 5 years after transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 698.

Stegall MD, Cornell LD, Park WD, Smith BH, Cosio FG. Renal allograft histology at 10 years after transplantation in the tacrolimus era: evidence of pervasive chronic injury. Am J Transplant 2018; 18: 180.

Brouard S, Renaudin K, Soulillou JP. Revisiting the natural history of IF/TA in renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 647.

Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC, et al. Banff '05 meeting report: differential diagnosis of chronic allograft injury and elimination of chronic allograft nephropathy ('CAN'). Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 518.

Haas M, Loupy A, Lefaucheur C, et al. The Banff 2017 kidney meeting report: revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next-generation clinical trials. Am J Transplant 2018; 18: 293.

Reeve J, Bohmig GA, Eskandary F, et al. Assessing rejection-related disease in kidney transplant biopsies based on archetypal analysis of molecular phenotypes. JCI Insight 2017; 2: 1.

Reeve J, Bohmig GA, Eskandary F, et al. Generating automated kidney transplant biopsy reports combining molecular measurements with ensembles of machine learning classifiers. Am J Transplant 2019; 19: 2719.

Einecke G, Reeve J, Gupta G, et al. Factors associated with kidney graft survival in pure antibody-mediated rejection at the time of indication biopsy: importance of parenchymal injury but not disease activity. Am J Transplant 2020; 1-11.

Meehan SM, Siegel CT, Aronson AJ, et al. The relationship of untreated borderline infiltrates by the Banff criteria to acute rejection in renal allograft biopsies. J Am Soc Nephrol 1999; 10: 1806.

Dahan K, Audard V, Roudot-Thoraval F, et al. Renal allograft biopsies with borderline changes: predictive factors of clinical outcome. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1725.

Nankivell BJ, Agrawal N, Sharma A, et al. The clinical and pathological significance of borderline T cell-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 2019; 19: 1452.

Mansour H, Homs S, Desvaux D, et al. Intragraft levels of Foxp3 mRNA predict progression in renal transplants with borderline change. J Am Soc Nephrol 2008; 19: 2277.

Einecke G, Reeve J, Sis B, et al. A molecular classifier for predicting future graft loss in late kidney transplant biopsies. J Clin Invest 2010; 120: 1862.

Sarwal M, Chua MS, Kambham N, et al. Molecular heterogeneity in acute renal allograft rejection identified by DNA microarray profiling. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 125.

Mengel M, Chang J, Kayser D, et al. The molecular phenotype of 6-week protocol biopsies from human renal allografts: reflections of prior injury but not future course. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 708.

Rush D, Nickerson P, Gough J, et al. Beneficial effects of treatment of early subclinical rejection: a randomized study. J Am Soc Nephrol 1998; 9: 2129.

Haas M, Kraus ES, Samaniego-Picota M, Racusen LC, Ni W, Eustace JA. Acute renal allograft rejection with intimal arteritis: histologic predictors of response to therapy and graft survival. Kidney Int 2002; 61: 1516.

Ozdemir BH, Demirhan B, Ozdemir FN, Dalgic A, Haberal M. The role of microvascular injury on steroid and OKT3 response in renal allograft rejection. Transplantation 2004; 78: 734.

Loupy A, Aubert O, Orandi BJ, et al. Prediction system for risk of allograft loss in patients receiving kidney transplants: international derivation and validation study. BMJ 2019; 366: l4923.