D. Serón Nephrology Department Hospital Vall d’Hebron Barcelona Interpretation of sequential protocol biopsies in terms of prognosis and clinical implications.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Significance of the total i-score
Advertisements

Chronic vascular injury of the kidney allograft: The contribution of rejection Heinz Regele Heinz Regele Department of Pathology Innsbruck Medical University.
Tuesday Case Conference May Biopsy finding LM –Glomeruli are normal in size to mildly enlarged Mild enlargement of the mesangial areas with occasional.
Kidney allografts with biopsy features of chronic mixed rejection reflect poorer survival than those with pure chronic antibody-mediated rejection D. Dobi,
The Value of Zero-Hour Implantation Biopsies Volker Nickeleit Nephropathology Laboratory, Department of Pathology The University of North Carolina, Chapel.
AN ANALYSIS OF CADAVER DONOR AND KIDNEY BIOPSY PARAMETERS WITH CORRELATION TO TRANSPLANT OUTCOMES Martin Mozes MD, Mel Schwartz MD, Janis Orlowski MD Michael.
30-Year Retrospective on Organ Transplant Immunosuppression in the Era of Calcineurin Inhibitors Herwig-Ulf Meier-Kriesche, MD Professor of Medicine Department.
Role of recurrent disease for late allograft loss Fernando G. Cosio Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN 10 th Banff conference on allograft pathology.
C4d staining and morphology in protocol biopsies Michael Mengel* For the ESPRIT-Group European Study Group For Protocol Biopsies In Renal Transplantation.
Proteinuria Outcome Lupus Nephritis Classes of Lupus Nephritis I.Minimal II.Mesangial III.Focal proliferative* IV.Diffuse proliferative* V.Membranous**
The value of protocol biopsies in renal allografts Gordana Petrusevska Skopje, Macedonia Gordana Petrusevska Skopje, Macedonia.
Jeremy Chapman Westmead Hospital, Sydney CMV Infection and Allograft Rejection : Are we missing the point?
Calcineurin Inhibitor Toxicity In Kidney Allograft Protocol Biopsies Neeraja Kambham M.D. Stanford University.
The Banff Classification: Slide Seminar Kim Solez, M.D.
Donor Organ Selection Criteria: What is Ideal? A Consensus (?) Discussion.
Utility of morphometry in the study of donor and protocol biopsies D. Serón Servicio de Nefrología Hospital Bellvitge Barcelona.
The European experience with protocol biopsies Ian Roberts Oxford, UK Oxford Pathology.
Slide Seminar Drugs and Kidney Case 3 Heinz Regele Department of Pathology.
Sum Scores and Scores of Individual Components in Clinical Practice and Clinical Trials Lillian W. Gaber University of Tennessee.
Draft guideline for scoring and reporting interstitial fibrosis Working Group on Fibrosis Banff 09 Colvin RB Banff 2009.
Causes of Graft Loss over 10 Years in CsA-Treated Patients Recurrent disease 6% Vascular 8% PNF 5% Acute Rejection 11% Other 3% CAN 40% Death 27% Marcén.
8th Banff Conference on Allograft PathologyEdmonton, July 2005 Proteinuria with sirolimus therapy. Christophe Legendre Hôpital Necker, Université.
The Oxford classification of IgA-nephropathy: A review based on the Polish renal biopsy registry Agnieszka Perkowska-Ptasińska1, Małgorzata Węgrowska-Danilewicz,
Proteinuria as a Surrogate Outcome in IgA Nephropathy Ron Hogg MD Scott & White Medical Center Temple, Texas.
Agnieszka Perkowska-Ptasinska1, M. Ciszek, A.L. Urbanowicz, L. Paczek,
Clinical Appraisal of an Article on Prognosis The Clinical Question Will the prognosis of patients with gout be affected by the administration allupurinol?
Monitoring HLA-specific antibodies
INFLUENCE OF HLA MISMATCH ON GRAFT SURVIVAL IN RENAL TRASPLANTATION IN ADULTS IN ARGENTINA Bisigniano Liliana MD., López-Rivera Arturo MD., Tagliafichi.
Renal Medicine David Johnson Princess Alexandra Hospital Brisbane, Australia A Comparison of APD vs CAPD on Patient Outcomes A Comparison of APD vs CAPD.
Patient developed acute and chronic renal failure in 1999 associated with a renal stone. History, and a diagnosis of chronic pyelonephritis. She was started.
Protein casts, nodular glomerulosclerosis in a graft biopsy samples Agnieszka Perkowska-Ptasinska Transplantation Institute, Medical University of Warsaw,
1 Influence of donor & recipient risk factors and the choice of immunosuppression Long term outcome after renal transplantation Influence of donor & recipient.
Pathology of Kidney and the Urinary tract
Study of cytokine gene polymorphism and graft outcome in live-donor kidney transplantation By Rashad Hassan MD Amgad El-Agroudy, Ahmad Hamdy, Amani Mostafa.
Severe vascular lesions and poor functional outcome
Interactive Case Discussion Case 6 Dr Megha S Uppin Asst Prof Dept of Pathology Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences Hyderabad.
Kidney transplant case Niels Marcussen Hans Dieperink Odense University Hospital.
Dick de Zeeuw Department of Clinical Pharmacology University Medical Center Groningen The Netherlands Albuminuria; a tool for measuring non-blood pressure.
Humoral rejection: What the pathologist needs to know Humoral rejection: What the pathologist needs to know Heinz Regele Heinz Regele Clinical Institute.
RAPAMUNE ® TM 1 Randomization Variable Day* to Day 386 Randomization Variable Day* to Day 386 RAPA, C min, TN0.765 CsA, C min, TN0.201 Gender0.117 Increasing.
Prognostic significance of C4-positive vs. negative rejection Heinz Regele Heinz Regele Department of Pathology Innsbruck Medical University Heinz Regele.
Implications of MDRD for Validity of Proteinuria as a Surrogate Endpoint.
Table 1. Clinicopathological findings at biopsy Clinical Number of patients Age (years) Gender (%Male) eGFR (ml/min/1.73m 2 ) UPE (g/day) Serum albumin.
Andreas A. Rostved, MD Research assistant Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Transplantation Rigshospitalet – Copenhagen University Hospital Denmark.
Supplemental Table A. Baseline proteinuria predicting renal outcome in multivariable Cox-Hazard model PredictorsHR95% CIp value Baseline UPE, g/day
C4d in pancreas transplant biopsies: the Leiden experience Ingeborg Bajema Ingeborg Bajema Ingeborg Bajema.
Histological markers of CNI nephrotoxicity: Specific or not specific? Marion Rabant MD, Renaud Snanoudj MD, Virginie Royal MD, C. Girardin, E.Morelon MD.
U # Cad Tx 15 years ago Recent  creatinine with mild proteinuria No RAS.
U # Chronic renal failure – secondary to IgA nephropathy. Deceased donor kidney transplant – August Complicated by delayed graft.
Impact of Recipient and Donor Non-immunological factors on the Outcome of Expanded Criteria Deceased Donors Kidney Transplantation Dr Hajar Al Hayyan.
Pathology of Renal Transplantation
Am J Kidney Dis. 2014;63(6): R3 박세정 /prof. 이태원 Comparative Effectiveness of Early Versus Conventional Timing of Dialysis Initiation in Advanced.
Rapid Fibrosis and Significant Histologic Recurrence of Hepatitis C After Liver Transplant Is Associated With Higher Tumor Recurrence Rates in Hepatocellular.
Nephrology R4 이홍주 / prof. 임천규. J Clin Pathol 2009;62:505–515.
The significance of Focal C4d+: The WU experience Helen Liapis, M.D. Professor of Pathology & immunology Kedainis RL et al. Am J Transplant Apr;9(4):812-9.
U # LRD kid tx March/99 Original Dis IgA.
Anastasiia Raievska (Veramed)
U # /121 Cad Tx 14/05/2004 Creatinine early December US normal.
Enterprise | Interest Nothing to disclose.
Severity of primary MPGN, rather than MPGN type, determines renal survival and post- transplantation recurrence risk  M.A. Little, P. Dupont, E. Campbell,
U
C. Chalklin, C. Colmont, A. Zaidi, J. Warden-Smith, E. Ablorsu
Interplay of subclinical fibrosis
Volume 80, Issue 12, Pages (December 2011)
Volume 69, Issue 10, Pages (May 2006)
Risk factor Treatment GFR at baseline GFR at 5 years p Cadaveric donor
Post-transplant membranous glomerulonephritis as a manifestation of chronic antibody-mediated rejection Hyeon Joo Jeong, Beom Jin Lim, Myoung Soo Kima,
Volume 72, Issue 6, Pages (September 2007)
Severity of primary MPGN, rather than MPGN type, determines renal survival and post- transplantation recurrence risk  M.A. Little, P. Dupont, E. Campbell,
Avasare et al. Am J Nephrol 2017;45:99-106  (DOI: / )
Presentation transcript:

D. Serón Nephrology Department Hospital Vall d’Hebron Barcelona Interpretation of sequential protocol biopsies in terms of prognosis and clinical implications

12345years Biopsy SCr  mol/l

Lesions are too advanced The biopsy was done too late There is nothing we can do

The assumption that renal allograft histology should be perfectly normal during quiescence has not been adequately investigated Burdick JF et al, Transplantation 1984; 38: 679

Characteristics of early routine renal allograft biopsies Protocol biopsies done at 1-4 weeks Quantification of interstitial infiltrates with a morphometric technique in HE stained biopsies DiagnosisNcel/mm 2 interstitium __________________________________________ ATN in native kidney9451  101 Stable function41290  179 Post-transplant ATN71335  182 Acute rejection52269  215* __________________________________________ Burdick JF et al, Transplantation 1984; 38: 679

Protocol biopsies Are lesions observed in protocol biopsies relevant from the clinical point of view?

CAN in (2y) protocol biopsies predicts renal function deterioration Graft function deterioration:  SCr >20% at 2-4y CADI: interstitial inflammation & fibrosis + glomerular sclerosis +mesangial matrix increase + vascular intimal proliferation + tubular atrophy StableDeteriorated _________________________________________ CADI1.79  < _________________________________________ N = 94 patients Isoniemi H, Transplantation 1994

Chronic lesions at 6m and graft survival years CGD<6 (n=54) CGD>6 (n=35) p= Dimény E, Clin Transplantation 1995; 58(11): 1195 N = 89 patients %graft survival

IF/TA is an independent predictor of graft survival Serón D, Kidney Int 1997: 51: years CAN=41 Normal=53 p=0.024 N=94 patients % graft survival RR95% CI _____________________________ SCr ( ) (  mol/l) CAN 5.98( ) (yes vs. no) _____________________________

Sirius red derived V IntFib and time to graft failure Grimm PC et al, J Am Soc Nephrol 2003

CAN, transplant vasculopathy and survival 3 m protocol Bx, n= meses p < % deatt censored graft survival Normal IF/TA (cv-score  1 Serón D, Transplantation 2000; 69: 1849 UnivariateMultivariate VariableRR 95%CI RR 95%CI __________________________________ SCr (  mol/l)1.009 ( )- Prot (g/l)1.002 ( )- IF/TA4.64 ( )4.53( ) IF/TA (cv-score)13.61( )9.45 ( ) IF/TA

SCR + IF/TA and graft survival 95 pediatric recipients from a living donor Shishido et al, JASN 2003; 14: 1046 IF/TA without SCR IF/TA with SCR Normal 1 year protocol Bx

Predicting decline in allograft function Biopsy at 1 year (living 69%), Tx , n=292 Primary endpoint: death censored graft loss or > 50%  GFR beyond 1y Cosio FG et al, Am J Transplant 2005

SCR, CAN and graft survival Protocol Bx < 6m; n=435 Moreso F et al Am J Transplant 2006; 6: months Normal=186 SCR=74 IF/TA=110 IF/TA+SCR=65

Function and structure are independent predictors of outcome Moreso F et al. AJT 2006; 6: 747

Predictive value of clinical variables and different histological patterns on 7 y death censored graft survival n=361 pts, protocol Bx before 6 m, follow up > 7y SurrogateCategoryAccuracySensitivitySpecificity ______________________________________________________________ Acute rejectionyes72%30%80% 3-month SCr>1.8 mg/dl73%58%76% Protocol biopsyIF/TA67%65%67% Protocol biopsyIF/TA + cv-score  181%21%92% Protocol biopsy IF/TA + SCR78%31%86% ______________________________________________________________ Seron D & Moreso F. Kidney Int 200; 72:690

Poor predictive value of serum creatinine for renal allograft loss 1st RT > 17y, , at least 2y follow up SCr > 1.8 mg/dl VariableFollow upObs%FailedORCI AUC _____________________________________________________________________________ SCr at 1y 2y SCr at 1y7y _____________________________________________________________________________ Kaplan B et al. AJT 2003; 3: 1560 While renal function is a strong risk factor and highly correlated with graft failure, the utility of renal function as a predictive tool for graft loss is limited

GFR AUC = ( ); p=0.001 Banff score AUC = ( ); p=0.001 ROC AUC for graft failure at 5 y n=430 early protocol BX Unpublished observation

Histology is not only a predictive variable but a surrogate variable

SRL and CsA withdrawal Randomization 3m: n = 430 SRL+CsA, n = 215 SRL, n = 215 SRL > 5 ng/mL CsA ng/mL Steroids ++ N = 525

Oberbauer R, Transpl Int 2005; 1: 22 A reduction in CADI score is associated with improved survival Mota A et al., AJT 2004; 4: 953

Benefit Risk

Questions How much contributes one protocol biopsy to predict outcome? Two sequential protocol biopsies improve the predictive value of histology

Questions How much contributes a protocol biopsy to predict outcome? Two Sequential protocol biopsies improve the predictive value of histology?

Inclusion criteria Protocol Bx < 6 m GFR (MDRD4) > 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 Proteinuria < 1 g/day Stable function > 5 years of follow up Protocol Bx > m EARLY Prot Bx LATE Prot Bx

Patients and biopsies june 88-december 2003 Bx < 6m458Bx 12-24m250 Bx < 6m 430 with tissue Bx 12-24m 231 with tissue

PREDICTIVE VALUE OF ONE BIOPSY n=430

Statistical approach Cox proportional hazard model a.) Predictive clinical variables b.) Predictive clinical and histological variables

Characteristics of patients n=430 Donor age37±17 Donor sex (%male)70% Recipient age46±14 Recipient sex (%male)63% PRA (%)7.5±19 HLA DR mm0.63±0.58 CIT (h)22±6 Retransplantation64/430 (17.5%) VHC16% DGF17% Acute rejection 19% Graft loss 146 (33.2%) Death censored graft loss104 (24.2%) Time of biopsy (months) 4.3±1.7 GFR ml/min/1.73m253±14 Proteinuria g/d0.30±0.21

Histological data at the time of biopsy n=430 ______________________________ N glomeruli13±8 N arteries5±4 g0.15±0.48 i0.58±0.68 t0.38±0.61 v0.01±0.11 ah0.16±0.45 Acute score1.13±1.31 cg0.13±0.34 ci0.46±0.64 ct0.45±0.62 cv0.20±0.54 mm0.25±0.45 Chronic score1.24±1.65 ______________________________

Clinical variables and death censored graft survival VariableUnivariateMultivariate RR (95% CI)P p Donor age1.013 ( ) ( )0.004 Recipient age0.98 ( ) ( )0.000 PRA (%)1.014( ) ( )0.008 GFR (ml/min)0.97 ( ) ( )0.004 HCV pos2.29 ( ) ( )ns Proteinuria mg/d1.001 ( ) ( )ns

SCR - IF/TA No SCR - IF/TA SCR - no IF/TA No SCR - no IF/TA,5,6,7,8,9 1 Cum. Survival Time (months) P = SCR - IF/TA no SCR - IF/TA Histological diagnosis and graft survival

Clinical variables and death censored graft survival VariableUnivariateMultivariate RR (95% CI)P p Donor age1.013 ( ) ( )0.003 Recipient age0.98 ( ) ( )0.001 PRA (%)1.014( ) ( )0.008 GFR (ml/min)0.97 ( ) ( )0.009 HCV (pos)2.29 ( ) ( )ns Proteinuria mg/d1.001 ( ) ( )ns SCR-IF/TA1.92 ( ) ( )0.029

Is it worth to include histology in multivariate models to predict graft survival?

The contribution of histology to predict death-censored graft failure Donor age Recipient age, PRA, GFR Clinical variables Clinical + histological variables Donor age Recipient age PRA GFR Histology Model 1 Model 2

The contribution of histology to predict death-censored graft failure Donor age Recipient age, PRA, GFR Clinical variables Clinical + histological variables Donor age Recipient age PRA GFR Histology Model 1 Model 2

The contribution of histology to predict death-censored graft failure Donor ageyears Recipient ageyears PRA% GFRml/min/1.73m 2 Histologyyes/no

First classification of acute rejction

The contribution of histology to predict death-censored graft failure Donor ageyears Recipient ageyears PARA% GFRml/min Histologyyes/no risk

Beta coefficient of Cox regression model to calculate risk scores Variableβ coefficient β coefficient without histologywith histology ___________________________________________________ Donor age (year)+0.020(+2.0) (+2.0) Patient age (year)-0.035(-3.5) (-3.5) GFR (ml/min)-0.024(-2.4) (-2.2) PARA (%)+0.011(+1.1) (+1.1) SCR&IF/TAn.a (+55.9) ____________________________________________________ H(t)=H 0 (t) x exp (β 1 x 1 + β 2 x 2 + β 3 x 3 +…+ β k x k )

Beta coefficient of Cox regression model to calculate risk scores Risk score without histology =(2*Donor age)+ (-3.5*patient age)+ (-2.4*GFR)+ (1.1*PRA) Risk score with histology =(2*Donor age)+ (-3.5*patient age)+ (-2.2*GFR)+(1.1*PRA)+(55.9*SCR&IF/TA)

Q1Q1 Q2Q2 Q3Q3 Q4Q4 Classification of patients according to risk scores Risk score

Q1Q2Q3Q4 Q19951O Q Q Q With histology Without histology p<0.0001

Changes in quartile classification due to inclusion of histology in the statistical model: 15%

Death censored graft failure using quartiles of risk scores Without histologyWith histology months

Validation Modelling sample Testing sample

TWO BIOPSIES <6m and 12-24m N=231

Two sequential biopsies N=231 6m12-24m _____________________________________________ Time of biopsy (M) 4.3± ±6.0 GFR ml/min/1.73m253±1452±15ns Proteinuria g/d0.30± ± ______________________________________________

Acute scoreChronic score P= P=0.003

progression Reliability of IF/TA diagnosis I II III Protocol Bx regression 2 nd without 2 nd withIF/TA _____________________________________ 1 st without IF/TA54 (34.8%)39 (25.2%) 1 st with IF/TA 19 (12.2%)43 (27.7%) _____________________________________ N Serón D et al. KI 2002; 61:727

Error associated with the diagnosis of IF/TA in sequential protocol biopsies Progression to IF/TA25.2% Regression of IF/TA12.2% 25% Sampling + intraobserver error Serón D et al. KI 2002; 61:727

Two sequential Bx 1st Bx 1st diagnosis 2ndBx 2nd diagnosis Integrated diagnosis Prediction of graft survival

Interpretation of sequential protocol biopsies in terms of prognosis and clinical implications Normal 2ndSCR 2ndIF/TA 2ndSCR+IFTA 2nd Normal 1st SCR 1st IF/TA 1st SCR+IF/TA 1st91158 IF/TA IF/TA + SCR SCR normal

Two sequential biopsies ( integrated diagnosis) (n = 231),5,6,7,8,9 1 Cum. Survival Time IF/TA - SCR IF/TA - no SCR No IF/TA - SCR No IF/TA - no SCR p=0.04

SCR-IF/TA No SCR-IF/TA SCR-noIF/TA NoSCR-noIF/TA,5,6,7,8, Time P = 0.12,5,6,7,8, Time P = 0.29 Early and late biopsies (n=231) Early Late

Comments Histology contributes to better define patients at risk for graft failure Two sequential biosies done 1 year apart increase the predictive value of histology on graft failure

Acknowledgements F Moreso D Hernandez M Hueso C Fernandez Gamiz M Gomà JM Cruzado O Bestard JM Grinyo M Carrera