C. Wickliffe

Bio: C. Wickliffe is an academic researcher from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Organ procurement organization & Kidney transplantation. The author has an hindex of 9, co-authored 10 publications receiving 428 citations. Previous affiliations of C. Wickliffe include Johns Hopkins University.

Survival Benefit with Kidney Transplants from HLA-Incompatible Live Donors

Abstract: Background A report from a high-volume single center indicated a survival benefit of receiving a kidney transplant from an HLA-incompatible live donor as compared with remaining on the waiting list, whether or not a kidney from a deceased donor was received. The generalizability of that finding is unclear. Methods In a 22-center study, we estimated the survival benefit for 1025 recipients of kidney transplants from HLA-incompatible live donors who were matched with controls who remained on the waiting list or received a transplant from a deceased donor (waiting-list-or-transplant control group) and controls who remained on the waiting list but did not receive a transplant (waiting-list-only control group). We analyzed the data with and without patients from the highest-volume center in the study. Results Recipients of kidney transplants from incompatible live donors had a higher survival rate than either control group at 1 year (95.0%, vs. 94.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 89.6% for the waiting-list-only control group), 3 years (91.7% vs. 83.6% and 72.7%, respectively), 5 years (86.0% vs. 74.4% and 59.2%), and 8 years (76.5% vs. 62.9% and 43.9%) (P Conclusions This multicenter study validated single-center evidence that patients who received kidney transplants from HLA-incompatible live donors had a substantial survival benefit as compared with patients who did not undergo transplantation and those who waited for transplants from deceased donors. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).

Antibody-Mediated Rejection Due to Preexisting versus De Novo Donor-Specific Antibodies in Kidney Allograft Recipients

Abstract: Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) can occur in patients with preexisting anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) or in patients who develop de novo DSA. However, how these processes compare in terms of allograft injury and outcome has not been addressed. From a cohort of 771 kidney biopsy specimens from two North American and five European centers, we performed a systematic assessment of clinical and biologic parameters, histopathology, circulating DSA, and allograft gene expression for all patients with ABMR (n=205). Overall, 103 (50%) patients had preexisting DSA and 102 (50%) had de novo DSA. Compared with patients with preexisting DSA ABMR, patients with de novo DSA ABMR displayed increased proteinuria, more transplant glomerulopathy lesions, and lower glomerulitis, but similar levels of peritubular capillaritis and C4d deposition. De novo DSA ABMR was characterized by increased expression of IFNγ-inducible, natural killer cell, and T cell transcripts, but less expression of AKI transcripts compared with preexisting DSA ABMR. The preexisting DSA ABMR had superior graft survival compared with the de novo DSA ABMR (63% versus 34% at 8 years after rejection, respectively; P<0.001). After adjusting for clinical, histologic, and immunologic characteristics and treatment, we identified de novo DSA ABMR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.82 compared with preexisting DSA ABMR; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.07 to 3.08; P=0.03); low eGFR (<30 ml/min per 1.73 m2) at diagnosis (HR, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.48 to 7.23; P<0.001); ≥0.30 g/g urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.47 to 4.09; P<0.001); and presence of cg lesions (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.79; P=0.002) as the main independent determinants of allograft loss. Our findings support the transplant of kidneys into highly sensitized patients and should encourage efforts to monitor patients for de novo DSA.

Donor-Specific Antibodies in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Abstract: Donor-specific antibodies have become an established biomarker predicting antibody-mediated rejection. Antibody-mediated rejection is the leading cause of graft loss after kidney transplant. There are several phenotypes of antibody-mediated rejection along post-transplant course that are determined by the timing and extent of humoral response and the various characteristics of donor-specific antibodies, such as antigen classes, specificity, antibody strength, IgG subclasses, and complement binding capacity. Preformed donor-specific antibodies in sensitized patients can trigger hyperacute rejection, accelerated acute rejection, and early acute antibody-mediated rejection. De novo donor-specific antibodies are associated with late acute antibody-mediated rejection, chronic antibody-mediated rejection, and transplant glomerulopathy. The pathogeneses of antibody-mediated rejection include not only complement-dependent cytotoxicity, but also complement-independent pathways of antibody-mediated cellular cytotoxicity and direct endothelial activation and proliferation. The novel assay for complement binding capacity has improved our ability to predict antibody-mediated rejection phenotypes. C1q binding donor-specific antibodies are closely associated with acute antibody-mediated rejection, more severe graft injuries, and early graft failure, whereas C1q nonbinding donor-specific antibodies correlate with subclinical or chronic antibody-mediated rejection and late graft loss. IgG subclasses have various abilities to activate complement and recruit effector cells through the Fc receptor. Complement binding IgG3 donor-specific antibodies are frequently associated with acute antibody-mediated rejection and severe graft injury, whereas noncomplement binding IgG4 donor-specific antibodies are more correlated with subclinical or chronic antibody-mediated rejection and transplant glomerulopathy. Our in-depth knowledge of complex characteristics of donor-specific antibodies can stratify the patient’s immunologic risk, can predict distinct phenotypes of antibody-mediated rejection, and hopefully, will guide our clinical practice to improve the transplant outcomes.

Recommended Treatment for Antibody-mediated Rejection After Kidney Transplantation: The 2019 Expert Consensus From the Transplantion Society Working Group.

Abstract: With the development of modern solid-phase assays to detect anti-HLA antibodies and a more precise histological classification, the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) has become more common and is a major cause of kidney graft loss. Currently, there are no approved therapies and treatment guidelines are based on low-level evidence. The number of prospective randomized trials for the treatment of AMR is small, and the lack of an accepted common standard for care has been an impediment to the development of new therapies. To help alleviate this, The Transplantation Society convened a meeting of international experts to develop a consensus as to what is appropriate treatment for active and chronic active AMR. The aim was to reach a consensus for standard of care treatment against which new therapies could be evaluated. At the meeting, the underlying biology of AMR, the criteria for diagnosis, the clinical phenotypes, and outcomes were discussed. The evidence for different treatments was reviewed, and a consensus for what is acceptable standard of care for the treatment of active and chronic active AMR was presented. While it was agreed that the aims of treatment are to preserve renal function, reduce histological injury, and reduce the titer of donor-specific antibody, there was no conclusive evidence to support any specific therapy. As a result, the treatment recommendations are largely based on expert opinion. It is acknowledged that properly conducted and powered clinical trials of biologically plausible agents are urgently needed to improve patient outcomes.