Predictors of outcome in Acute Antibody-Mediated Rejections Experience of the Broussais / H.E.G.P. / Saint-Louis hospitals 1992-2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
HEART TRANSPLANTATION
Advertisements

Números.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory
Who Wants to be a Millionaire? Adapted from TCEA 2002
Pre-operative Imatinib for metastatic, recurrent and locally advanced GISTs E. Efthimiou, S Mudan E. Efthimiou, S Mudan On behalf of the Sarcoma Group.
FibroTest in the diagnosis of HBV
EuroCondens SGB E.
Worksheets.
& dding ubtracting ractions.
Addition and Subtraction Equations
Multiplication X 1 1 x 1 = 1 2 x 1 = 2 3 x 1 = 3 4 x 1 = 4 5 x 1 = 5 6 x 1 = 6 7 x 1 = 7 8 x 1 = 8 9 x 1 = 9 10 x 1 = x 1 = x 1 = 12 X 2 1.
Division ÷ 1 1 ÷ 1 = 1 2 ÷ 1 = 2 3 ÷ 1 = 3 4 ÷ 1 = 4 5 ÷ 1 = 5 6 ÷ 1 = 6 7 ÷ 1 = 7 8 ÷ 1 = 8 9 ÷ 1 = 9 10 ÷ 1 = ÷ 1 = ÷ 1 = 12 ÷ 2 2 ÷ 2 =
OPTN Modifications to Heart Allocation Policy Implemented July 12, 2006 Changed the allocation order for medically urgent (Status 1A and 1B) patients Policy.
LUNG TRANSPLANTATION Pediatric Recipients ISHLT 2006 J Heart Lung Transplant 2006;25:
HEART-LUNG TRANSPLANTATION Overall ISHLT 2005 J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:
2004 ISHLT J Heart Lung Transplant 2004; 23: HEART-LUNG TRANSPLANTATION Overall.
HEART-LUNG TRANSPLANTATION
HEART TRANSPLANTATION Pediatric Recipients ISHLT 2007 J Heart Lung Transplant 2007;26:
HEART TRANSPLANTATION Pediatric Recipients ISHLT 2008 J Heart Lung Transplant 2008;27:
LUNG TRANSPLANTATION Pediatric Recipients ISHLT 2007 J Heart Lung Transplant 2007;26.
Performance of Hedges & Long Futures Positions in CBOT Corn Goodland, Kansas March 2, 2009 Daniel OBrien, Extension Ag Economist K-State Research and Extension.
17th European Society on Hypertension Meeting Milan, 2007 INGENIOUS HYPERCARE: RENAL PHENOTYPE Josep Redon. MD, PhD, FAHA Hypertension Clinic. Internal.
CALENDAR.
0 - 0.
1  1 =.
Supported by ESRC Large Grant. What difference does a decade make? Satisfaction with the NHS in Northern Ireland in 1996 and 2006.
Around the World AdditionSubtraction MultiplicationDivision AdditionSubtraction MultiplicationDivision.
Fractions mean division. 1 4 of 28 =28 ÷ 4=7 How would you find out what of 28 is? 3 4.
Adding Adding by Partitioning Vertically.
Chronic kidney disease
Year 6/7 mental test 5 second questions
突破信息检索壁垒 -SciFinder Scholar 介绍
A Fractional Order (Proportional and Derivative) Motion Controller Design for A Class of Second-order Systems Center for Self-Organizing Intelligent.
Break Time Remaining 10:00.
The basics for simulations
Look at This PowerPoint for help on you times tables
Does political competition matter for public goods provision? Evidence from Russian regions Olga Vasilyeva Amur State University.
1 Prediction of electrical energy by photovoltaic devices in urban situations By. R.C. Ott July 2011.
Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run
Antibody-Mediated Rejection
Immunofluorescence Detection of Complement Activation Products C4d and C3d: Cleveland Clinic Experience Carmela D. Tan August 12, 2009.
Least Common Multiples and Greatest Common Factors
When you see… Find the zeros You think….
LN-251 SimINERTIAL Performance
Before Between After.
Benjamin Banneker Charter Academy of Technology Making AYP Benjamin Banneker Charter Academy of Technology Making AYP.
Subtraction: Adding UP
Test B, 100 Subtraction Facts
: 3 00.
5 minutes.
The Effect of Peloid Application in Out-patient Setting on Knee Osteoarthritis Results of a Pilot Study E Odabaşı, R Tekin, H Erdem, İ.Şimşek, M Turan.
Number bonds to 10,
Static Equilibrium; Elasticity and Fracture
Resistência dos Materiais, 5ª ed.
Clock will move after 1 minute
& dding ubtracting ractions.
Select a time to count down from the clock above
Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten 05/04/15 Seite 1 Training EPAM and CANopen Basic Solution: Password * * Level 1 Level 2 * Level 3 Password2 IP-Adr.
Case no. 7. Eva Honsova Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine Pathology Department Prague, Czech Republic
Complement in Heart Allograft Biopsies E. Rene Rodriguez W. M. Baldwin, III.
Monitoring HLA-specific antibodies
Humoral rejection: What the pathologist needs to know Humoral rejection: What the pathologist needs to know Heinz Regele Heinz Regele Clinical Institute.
Prognostic significance of C4-positive vs. negative rejection Heinz Regele Heinz Regele Department of Pathology Innsbruck Medical University Heinz Regele.
Mechanism and Treatment of Antibody-Mediated Rejection
Anand Yuvaraj International Transplant Fellow
CASE PRESENTATION DR SANJAY MAITRA, DR DENISH SAVALIA,
a b c d e Supplemental figure 4
Presentation transcript:

Predictors of outcome in Acute Antibody-Mediated Rejections Experience of the Broussais / H.E.G.P. / Saint-Louis hospitals

Possible predictors Histologic type of rejection Renal function at diagnosis Antibody specificity Treatment Histologic lesions Kinetics of DSAs

Types of AHR Mauiyyedi, JASN 2002

Renal function at diagnosis Good Outcome (N=17) Bad Outcome (N=7) p At time of AMR Scr (µmol/L) ± SD242.6 ± ± 96 <.01 Time Tx-AMR (days)15 Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Antibody specificity Anti-HLA Lefaucheur AJT 2008

Antibody specificity Anti-Angiotensin II receptors Dragun, NEJM 2005

Antibody specificity Anti-MICA Zou, NEJM 2007

Antibody specificity Different modes of action Reliable detection assays Allowing diagnosis of AMR Allowing adapted Treatment Reducing delay AMR-TT

Adapted Treatment is essential OKT3IVIg PP/IVI g Ritux/ PP PP/IVI g/Ritu x Bort. (Velcade) Pts Pt Surv 100%84%100% G Surv 57%70%81%75%94%100% Author Feucht Kidney I 1993 Lefaucheur AJT 2007 Rocha Transpl 2003 Faguer Transpl 2007 Lefaucheur AJT 2009 Everly Transpl 2008

Impact of a single agent difficult to juge.. Kapotzas, Clin Tx 2008

Impact of a single agent difficult to judge.. Slatinska, Ther Aph Dial 2009 N=13 N=11 P=0,044

Comparison of Combination Plasmapheresis/IVIg/anti-CD20 versus High-Dose IVIg in the Treatment of AMR Group A: High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) regimen 01/ /2003 N=12 pts Group B: Plasmapheresis (PP) / IVIg / anti-CD20 (PP/IVIg/anti-CD20) regimen 01/ /2005 N=12 pts Lefaucheur AJT 2009

Kaplan Meier plot of graft survival in patients with AMR according to treatment type Lefaucheur AJT 2009

Adapted treatment may vary according to the Ab specificity…. Dragun, NEJM 2005 ARBs

Adapted treatment may vary according to the Ab specificity…. Sumitran-Holgersson, Transpl Anti-thrombotic

Anti-endothelial cells Abs S1S2N.H.S.TNF VCAM ICAM Lucciari Hum Immunol 2000 Anti-adhesion

Anti HLA class I antibodies The Good, the Bad and the Ugly… E.F. Reed, JI 2008 Proliferation Cell survival mTor GbL rictor raptor mTor GbL Anti-prolif

Renal transplants 1998 – 2004 N=237 AMR + N=10 AMR - N=21 Renal transplants without pretransplant desensitization N=219 Pretransplant Class I or Class II anti-HLA Ab (ELISA) N=60 Pretransplant DSA Class I or Class II N=31 Desensitization (IVIg) N=18 AMR + N=5 AMR - N=13 No Pretransplant DSA AMR + N=6 Study design Determinants of poor graft outcome in patients with AMR Lefaucheur AJT 2007

21 pts (8.9%) with AMR AMR treatment: For all patients boluses of steroids + IVIg (2 g/kg monthly X 4 doses) For certain patients plasma exchange (28.6%) OKT3 (14.3%) Rituximab (4.8%) Follow-up: 30 ± 20 mo (8-78 mo) Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Prognostic factors of poor outcome in patients with AMR Bad outcome : GFR < 15 ml/min/1.73m 2 N=8 pts Good outcome : GFR > 15 ml/min/1.73m 2 N=13 pts SCr : 160 µmol/l ± 44 ACR Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Histologic factors associated with bad outcome in AMR pts Good OutcomeBad Outcomep First Biopsy 13 pts8 pts Glomerular PMNs Peritubular Capillary PMNs Peritubular Capillary Dilatation Interstitial Edema Last Biopsy 9 pts5 pts Glomerular Macrophages4.7 ± ± g1 – g31.8 ± ± Peritubular capillary macrophages5.8 ± ± Interstitial inflammation0.5 ± ± v1 – v30.2 ± ± Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Glomerular and capillary PMNs (first bx) Histologic factors associated with bad outcome in AMR pts Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Histologic factors associated with bad outcome in AMR pts Glomerular and capillary MNCs (bx > 3 mo) CD68 Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Vascular lesions (v1-v3) (p=0.01) Histologic factors associated with bad outcome in AMR pts C4d staining: no correlation CD68 Lefaucheur AJT 2007

DSAp* PreTransplant Class I and/or Class IINS Class I (+/- Class II)NS Class II (+/- Class I)NS Post-transplant Class I (+/- Class II)0.006 Class II (+/- Class I)0.10** Persistence of Class I or Class II0.035 Persistence of Class I0.020 Persistence of Class II0.10** Relationship of anti-HLA DSA status to outcome in the 21 pts with AMR Serologic factors associated with bad outcome in AMR pts Lefaucheur AJT 2007

Comparison of Combination Plasmapheresis/IVIg/anti-CD20 versus High-Dose IVIg in the Treatment of AMR Group A: High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) regimen 01/ /2003 N=12 pts Group B: Plasmapheresis (PP) / IVIg / anti-CD20 (PP/IVIg/anti-CD20) regimen 01/ /2005 N=12 pts Lefaucheur AJT 2009

Good Outcome (N=17) Bad Outcome (N=7) p At time of AMR Scr (µmol/L) ± SD242.6 ± ± 96 <.01 Histological characteristics * Glomerular PMNs1.5 ± ± C4d+ (N, %)17 (100%)7 (100%) NS Serological characteristics DSA ELISA (N, %)13 (76.5%)6 (85.7%) NS DSA ELISA score 6-8 (N, %)11 (64.7%)6 (85.7%) NS DSA MFImax ± SD8360 ± ± DSA mean MFI ± SD Total MFI ± SD NS Comparison of clinical, histologic and serologic data of patients with Good Outcome (GFR > 15 mL/min/1.73m 2 ) and patients with Bad Outcome (GFR 15 mL/min/1.73m 2 )

IVIg PP/IVIg/anti-CD20 Variations in DSA MFImax between day 0 and 3 months post-AMR Variations in DSA MFImax between day 0 and 3 mo post-AMR expressed as % Δ MFI Diminution of DSAs levels is significantly greater in patients treated by PP/IVIg/anti-CD20 as compared to those treated by IVIg Lefaucheur AJT 2009

DSA Monitoring is key The absence of decrease of DSA post-treatment is associated with poor prognosis 24 patients, DSA at rejection and 3 months post TT 8000 Good evol. (n=18) Bad evol. (n=6) RejectionM3 % Δ: -21% % Δ: -52% P: 0,02P< 0,001 Lefaucheur, A.J.T. 2009

DSA Monitoring is key The absence of decrease of DSA post-treatment is associated with poor prognosis Everly, A.J.T. 2009

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the MFImax of DSAs detected 3 mo post-AMR associated with GFR 15 mL/min/1.73m2 at 36 months post-AMR. High levels of DSA post-treatment are associated with a higher risk of graft loss MFI max > 5000 Se 100% Sp 77.8%

Conclusion We need more studies… We need more markers…. Omics? High levels of DSA post-treatment higher risk of graft loss Monitoring of DSAs post-AMR to optimize the treatment

Many Thanks to: -C. Lefaucheur, C. Antoine Nephrology and Transplantation -C. Superbielle, J. Andrade Histocompatibility -D. Nochy, G. Hill Pathology