Inflammation lesions in kidney transplant biopsies: Association with survival is due to the underlying diseases

American Journal of Transplantation

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 489-499

  Sellares J ^a,b   De Freitas, D G ^a,b   Mengel, M ^a,c   Sis, B ^a,c   Hidalgo, L G ^a,b   Matas, A J ^d   Kaplan, B ^e   Halloran, Philip F ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Banff classification; Donor specific antibody; Pathology; Renal allograft rejection; Transplantation

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANTIBODY MEDIATED REJECTION; ARTERITIS; ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GLOMERULONEPHRITIS; GRAFT REJECTION; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INFLAMMATION; INTIMAL ARTERITIS; KIDNEY ALLOGRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY DISEASE; KIDNEY FIBROSIS; KIDNEY GRAFT; KIDNEY TRANSPLANT BIOPSY; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; KIDNEY TUBULE DAMAGE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; POLYOMA VIRUS NEPHROPATHY; PREDICTION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SCHOOL CHILD; SCORING SYSTEM; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT INDICATION; TUBULITIS;

EID: 79951974357     PISSN: 16006135     EISSN: 16006143     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03415.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Sis B,Mengel M, HaasMet al. Banff '09 meeting report: Antibody mediated graft deterioration and implementation of Banff working groups. Am J Transplant 2009; 10: 464-471.
2. Famulski KS, Einecke G, Sis B et al. Defining the canonical form of T-cell-mediated rejection in human kidney transplants. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 810-820.
3. Marcussen N, Lai R, Olsen TS, Solez K. Morphometric and immunohistochemical investigation of renal biopsies from patients with transplant ATN, native ATN, or acute graft rejection. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 470-476. (Pubitemid 26073825)
4. Drachenberg CB, Papadimitriou JC, Hirsch HH et al. Histological patterns of polyomavirus nephropathy: Correlation with graft outcome and viral load. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 2082-2092. (Pubitemid 39611638)
5. Yu F, Wu LH, Tan Y et al. Tubulointerstitial lesions of patients with lupus nephritis classified by the 2003 International Society of Nephrology and Renal Pathology Society system. Kidney Int 2010; 77: 820-829.
6. Hooke DH, Gee DC, Atkins RC. Leukocyte analysis using monoclonal-antibodies in human glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int 1987; 31: 964-972. (Pubitemid 17044903)
7. Nickeleit V, Mihatsch MJ. Kidney transplants, antibodies and rejection: Is C4d a magic marker? Nephrol Dial Transplant 2003; 18: 2232-2239.
8. Rush D, Arlen D, Boucher A et al. Lack of benefit of early protocol biopsies in renal transplant patients receiving TAC and MMF: A randomized study. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 2538-2545. (Pubitemid 47561621)
9. Nankivell BJ, Borrows RJ, Fung CL, O'Connell PJ, Allen RD, Chapman JR. Natural history, risk factors, and impact of subclinical rejection in kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 78: 242-249.
10. Hidalgo LG, Campbell PM, Sis B et al. De novo donor specific antibody at the time of kidney transplant biopsy associates with microvascular pathology and late graft failure. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 2532-2541.
11. Colvin RB. Antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection: Diagnosis and pathogenesis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2007; 18: 1046-1056. (Pubitemid 46536891)
12. Sis B, Einecke G, Chang J et al. Cluster analysis of lesions in kidney transplant biopsies: Microcirculation changes, tubulointerstitial inflammation, and scarring. Am J Transplant 2009; 10: 421-430.
13. Gaber LW, Moore LW, Gaber AO et al. Utility of standardized histological classification in the management of acute rejection. Transplant 1998; 65: 376-380. (Pubitemid 28095965)
14. Mengel M, Reeve J, Bunnag S et al. Molecular correlates of scarring in kidney transplants: The emergence of mast cell transcripts. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 169-178.
15. 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: 1516-1526. (Pubitemid 34304514)
16. Macdonald FI, Ashraf S, Picton M et al. Banff criteria as predictors of outcome following acute renal allograft rejection. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1999; 14: 1692-1697. (Pubitemid 29313047)
17. Mengel M, Reeve J, Bunnag S et al. Scoring total inflammation is superior to the current Banff inflammation score in predicting outcome and the degree of molecular disturbance in renal allografts. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1859-1867.
18. Einecke G, Reeve J, Sis B et al. Amolecular classifier for predicting future graft loss in late kidney transplant biopsies. J Clin Invest 2010; 120: 1862-1872.
19. Halloran PF, de Freitas DG, Einecke G et al. An integrated view of molecular changes, histopathology, and outcomes in kidney transplants. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2223-2230.
20. Sis B, Jhangri G, Bunnag S, Allanach K, Kaplan B, Halloran PF. Endothelial gene expression in kidney transplants with alloantibody indicates antibody-mediated damage despite lack of C4d staining. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 2312-2323.
21. Einecke G, Sis B, Reeve J et al. Antibody-mediated microcirculation injury is the major cause of late kidney transplant failure. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 2520-2531.
22. Sis B, Halloran PF. Endothelial transcripts uncover a previously unknown phenotype: C4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2010; 15: 42-48.
23. El Zoghby ZM, Stegall MD, Lager DJ et al. Identifying specific causes of kidney allograft loss. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 527-535.
24. Gaston RS, Cecka JM, Kasiske BL et al. Evidence for antibody-mediated injury as a major determinant of late kidney allograft failure 1. Transplant 2010; 90: 68-74.
25. Mengel M. The kidney transplant: New horizons. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2010; 19: 260-265.
26. Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 713-723. (Pubitemid 29082898)
27. Solez K, Colvin RB, Racusen LC et al. Banff 07 classification of renal allograft pathology: Updates and future directions. AmJ Transplant 2008; 8: 753-760. (Pubitemid 351347767)
28. Mengel M, Sis B, Halloran PF. SWOT analysis of Banff: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the international Banff consensus process and classification system for renal allograft pathology. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 2221-2226. (Pubitemid 47347849)
29. Mannon RB, Matas AJ, Grande J et al. Inflammation in areas of tubular atrophy in kidney allograft biopsies: A potent predictor of allograft failure. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2066-2073.
30. Solez K, Hansen HE, Kornerup HJ et al. Clinical validation and reproducibility of the Banff schema for renal allograft pathology. Transplant Proc 1995; 27: 1009-1011.
31. Colvin RB, Cohen AH, Saiontz C et al. Evaluation of pathologic criteria for acute renal allograft rejection: Reproducibility, sensitivity, and clinical correlation. J Am Soc Nephrol 1997; 8: 1930-1941.
32. Nickeleit V, Vamvakas EC, Pascual M, Poletti BJ, Colvin RB. The prognostic significance of specific arterial lesions in acute renal allograft rejection. J Am Soc Nephrol 1998; 9: 1301-1308. (Pubitemid 28283895)
33. Minervini MI, Torbenson M, Scantlebury V et al. Acute renal allograft rejection with severe tubulitis (Banff 1997 grade IB). Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 553-558.
34. Matas AJ, Sibley R, Mauer M, Sutherland DE, Simmons RL, Najarian JS. The value of needle renal allograft biopsy: I. A retrospective study of biopsies performed during putative rejection episodes. Ann Surg 1983; 197: 226-237.
35. Kooijmans-Coutinho MF, Hermans J, Schrama E et al. Interstitial rejection, vascular rejection, and diffuse thrombosis of renal allografts. Predisposing factors, histology, immunohistochemistry, and relation to outcome. Transplantation 1996; 61: 1338-1344.
36. Magil A, Rubin J, Ladewig L, Johnson M, Goldstein MB, Bear RA. Renal biopsy in acute allograft rejection. Significance of moderate vascular lesions in long-term graft survival. Nephron 1980; 26: 180-183.
37. van Saase JL, Van Der Woude FJ, Thorogood J et al. The relation between acute vascular and interstitial renal allograft rejection and subsequent chronic rejection. Transplant 1995; 59: 1280-1285.
38. Mueller A, Schnuelle P, Waldherr R, Van Der Woude FJ. Impact of the Banff '97 classification for histological diagnosis of rejection on clinical outcome and renal function parameters after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2000; 69: 1123-1127. (Pubitemid 30217596)
39. Schroeder TJ, Weiss MA, Smith RD, Stephens GW, First MR. The efficacy of OKT3 in vascular rejection. Transplantation 1991; 51: 312-315.
40. Gaber LW. Role of renal allograft biopsy inmulticenter clinical trials in transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis 1998; 31(6 Suppl 1): S19-S25. (Pubitemid 28265212)
41. Vincenti F, Charpentier B, Vanrenterghem Y et al. A phase III study of belatacept-based immunosuppression regimens versus cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients (BENEFIT study). Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 535-546.