Sharing kidneys across donor-service area boundaries with sensitized candidates can be influenced by HLA C

Clinical Transplantation

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 56-61

  Bryan, Christopher F ^a   Luger, Alan M ^a   Smith, John L ^a   Warady, Bradley A ^a   Wakefield, Mark ^a   Schadde, Erik ^a   Murillo, Daniel ^a   Nelson, Paul W ^a  

^a Midwest Transplant Network   (United States)

Author keywords

Crossmatch; HLA C; Kidneys; Sensitized; Shared; Typing

Indexed keywords

HLA A ANTIGEN; HLA ANTIBODY; HLA B ANTIGEN; HLA C ANTIGEN;

ANTIGEN ANTIBODY REACTION; ANTIGEN SPECIFICITY; ARTICLE; B LYMPHOCYTE; CONTROLLED STUDY; GRAFT RECIPIENT; HLA MATCHING; HUMAN; IMMUNOGENICITY; KIDNEY DONOR; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RACE DIFFERENCE; T LYMPHOCYTE;

CATCHMENT AREA (HEALTH); COLD ISCHEMIA; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; HISTOCOMPATIBILITY TESTING; HLA-C ANTIGENS; HUMANS; IMMUNIZATION; KIDNEY FAILURE, CHRONIC; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; TISSUE AND ORGAN PROCUREMENT;

EID: 74949112721     PISSN: 09020063     EISSN: 13990012     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2009.01167.x     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Bray RA, Nolen JDL, Larsen C. Transplanting the highly sensitized patient: the emory algorithm. Am J Transplant 2006, 6:2307.
2. Vaidya S, Partlow D, Susskind B. Prediction of crossmatch outcome of highly sensitized patients by single and/or multiple antigen bead luminex assay. Transplantation 2006, 82:1524.
3. Fuggle SV, Martin S. Toward performing transplantation in highly sensitized patients. Transplantation 2004, 78:186.
4. Goodman RS, Taylor CJ, O'Rourke CM, Lynch A, Bradley JA, Key T. Utility of HLAMatchmaker and single-antigen HLA-antibody detection beads for identification of acceptable mismatches in highly sensitized patients awaiting kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2006, 81:1331.
5. Appel JZ, Hartwig MG, Cantu E. Role of flow cytometry to define unacceptable HLA antigens in lung transplant recipients with HLA-specific antibodies. Transplantation 2006, 81:1049.
6. Zangwill S, Ellis T, Stendahl G, Zahn A, Berger S, Tweddell J. Practical application of the virtual crossmatch. Pediatr Transplant 2007, 11:650.
7. Bryan CF, Susskind BM, Smith DM. Modeling virtual T and B cell HLA donor specific antibody (DSA) crossmatching with proficiency testing data. Am J Transplant 2007, 7(Suppl. 2):235.
8. Patel R, Terasaki PI. Significance of the positive crossmatch test in kidney transplantation. N Engl J Med 1969, 280:735.
9. Halloran PF, Schlaut J, Solez K, Srinivasa NS. The significance of the anti-class I response: II. Clinical and pathologic features of renal transplants with anti-class I-like antibody. Transplantation 1992, 53:550.
10. Chapmam JR, Taylor C, Ting A, Morris PJ. Hyperacute rejection of a renal allograft in the presence of anti-HLA-Cw5 antibody. Transplantation 1986, 42:91.
11. Ferrara GB, Tosi R, Longo A. Silent alleles at the HLA C locus. J Immunol 1978, 121:731.
12. Nelson KA, Youngs D, Warner PR. Limitations of the OPTN/UNOS CPRA system. Am J Transplant 2008, 8(Suppl. 2):604.
13. Tambur AR, Ramon DS, Kaufman DB. Perception versus reality?: virtual crossmatch-how to overcome some of the technical and logistic limitations. Am J Transplant 2009, 9:1886.