In 1990, an international grading scheme for the grading of pulmonary allograft rejection was adopted by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) and was modified in 1995 by an expanded group of pathologists. The original and revised classifications have served the lung transplant community well, facilitating communication between transplant centers with regard to both patient management and research. In 2006, under the direction of the ISHLT, a multi-disciplinary review of the biopsy grading system was undertaken to update the scheme, address inconsistencies of use, and consider the current knowledge of antibody-mediated rejection in the lung. This article summarizes the revised consensus classification of lung allograft rejection. In brief, acute rejection is based on perivascular and interstitial mononuclear infiltrates, Grade A0 (none), Grade A1 (minimal), Grade A2 (mild), Grade A3 (moderate) and Grade A4 (severe), as previously. The revised (R) categories of small airways inflammation, lymphocytic bronchiolitis, are as follows: Grade B0 (none), Grade B1R (low grade, 1996, B1 and B2), Grade B2R (high grade, 1996, B3 and B4) and BX (ungradeable). Chronic rejection, obliterative bronchiolitis (Grade C), is described as present (C1) or absent (C0), without reference to presence of inflammatory activity. Chronic vascular rejection is unchanged as Grade D. Recommendations are made for the evaluation of antibody-mediated rejection, recognizing that this is a controversial entity in the lung, less well developed and understood than in other solid-organ grafts, and with no consensus reached on diagnostic features. Differential diagnoses of acute rejection, airway inflammation and chronic rejection are described and technical considerations revisited. This consensus revision of the working formulation was approved by the ISHLT board of directors in April 2007.

Revision of the 1990 Working Formulation for the Standardization of Nomenclature in the Diagnosis of Heart Rejection

Atherosclerosis is a chronic disease of the arterial wall where both innate and adaptive immunoinflammatory mechanisms are involved. Inflammation is central at all stages of atherosclerosis. It is implicated in the formation of early fatty streaks, when the endothelium is activated and expresses chemokines and adhesion molecules leading to monocyte/lymphocyte recruitment and infiltration into the subendothelium. It also acts at the onset of adverse clinical vascular events, when activated cells within the plaque secrete matrix proteases that degrade extracellular matrix proteins and weaken the fibrous cap, leading to rupture and thrombus formation. Cells involved in the atherosclerotic process secrete and are activated by soluble factors, known as cytokines. Important recent advances in the comprehension of the mechanisms of atherosclerosis provided evidence that the immunoinflammatory response in atherosclerosis is modulated by regulatory pathways, in which the two anti-inflammatory cytokines interleukin-10 and transforming growth factor-beta play a critical role. The purpose of this review is to bring together the current information concerning the role of cytokines in the development, progression, and complications of atherosclerosis. Specific emphasis is placed on the contribution of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines to pathogenic (innate and adaptive) and regulatory immunity in the context of atherosclerosis. Based on our current knowledge of the role of cytokines in atherosclerosis, we propose some novel therapeutic strategies to combat this disease. In addition, we discuss the potential of circulating cytokine levels as biomarkers of coronary artery disease.

/pdf/cytokines-in-atherosclerosis-pathogenic-and-regulatory-k5l4m0ggqp.pdf

Cytokines in atherosclerosis: pathogenic and regulatory pathways.

We examine here several diseases that are associated with inappropriate activation of the chemokine network. Detailed comment has been restricted to pathological states for which there are compelling data either from clinical observations or animal models. These include cardiovascular disease, allergic inflammatory disease, transplantation, neuroinflammation, cancer and HIV-associated disease. Discussion focuses on therapeutic directions in which the rapidly evolving chemokine field appears to be headed.

Chemokines and disease.

Institutional Affiliations Chair Costanzo MR: Midwest Heart Foundation, Lombard Illinois, USA Task Force 1 Dipchand A: Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto Ontario, Canada; Starling R: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Anderson A: University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Chan M: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Desai S: Inova Fairfax Hospital, Fairfax, Virginia, USA; Fedson S: University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Fisher P: Ochsner Clinic, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; Gonzales-Stawinski G: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Martinelli L: Ospedale Niguarda, Milano, Italy; McGiffin D: University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama, USA; Parisi F: Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesu, Rome, Italy; Smith J: Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Task Force 2 Taylor D: Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA; Meiser B: University of Munich/Grosshaden, Munich, Germany; Baran D: Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, Newark, New Jersey, USA; Carboni M: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA; Dengler T: University of Hidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Feldman D: Minneapolis Heart Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA; Frigerio M: Ospedale Niguarda, Milano, Italy; Kfoury A: Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, Utah, USA; Kim D: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Kobashigawa J: Cedar-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA; Shullo M: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; Stehlik J: University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA; Teuteberg J: University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; Uber P: University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Zuckermann A: University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Task Force 3 Hunt S: Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA; Burch M: Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK; Bhat G: Advocate Christ Medical Center, Oak Lawn, Illinois, USA; Canter C: St. Louis Children Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; Chinnock R: Loma Linda University Children's Hospital, Loma Linda, California, USA; Crespo-Leiro M: Hospital Universitario A Coruna, La Coruna, Spain; Delgado R: Texas Heart Institute, Houston, Texas, USA; Dobbels F: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Grady K: Northwestern University, Chicago, Illlinois, USA; Kao W: University of Wisconsin, Madison Wisconsin, USA; Lamour J: Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York, USA; Parry G: Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Patel J: Cedar-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA; Pini D: Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Rozzano, Italy; Pinney S: Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York, USA; Towbin J: Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA; Wolfel G: University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA Independent Reviewers Delgado D: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Eisen H: Drexler University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Goldberg L: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Hosenpud J: Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA; Johnson M: University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA; Keogh A: St Vincent Hospital, Sidney, New South Wales, Australia; Lewis C: Papworth Hospital Cambridge, UK; O'Connell J: St. Joseph Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia, USA; Rogers J: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA; Ross H: University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Russell S: Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Vanhaecke J: University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium.

http://www.jsht.jp/uploads/ISHLT_GL_TaskForce2_110810.pdf

The International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1034/j.1600-6143.2003.00072.x

Antibody-mediated rejection criteria - an addition to the Banff 97 classification of renal allograft rejection.

Background Acute cellular rejection is the mechanism of most immune-related injury in cardiac transplant recipients. However, antibody-mediated humoral rejection (HR) has also been implicated as an important clinical entity following orthotopic heart transplantation. Humoral rejection has been reported to play a role in graft dysfunction in the early post-transplant period, and to be a risk factor for the development of transplant coronary artery disease. Some involved in transplantation pathology doubt the existence of clinically significant humoral rejection in cardiac allografts. Those who recognize its existence disagree on its possible role in graft dysfunction or graft coronary artery disease. In this study, we report clinical features of patients with the pathologic diagnosis of HR at our institution since July 1997, when we began systematic surveillance for humoral rejection. Methods We reviewed medical records of patients with the pathologic diagnosis of HR without concurrent cellular rejection between July 1997 and January 2001. Diagnosis was based on routine histology (“swollen cells” distending capillaries, interstitial edema and hemorrhage) and immunofluorescence (capillary deposition of immunoglobulin and complement with HLA-DR positivity), or immunoperoxidase staining of paraffin-embedded tissue (numerous CD68-positive macrophages and fewer swollen endothelial cells distending capillaries). Results A total of 44 patients (4 to 74 years old) showed evidence of HR without concurrent cellular rejection at autopsy or on one or more biopsies. Although females comprised only 26% of our transplant population, 23 patients (52%) with HR were female. A positive peri-operative flow cytometry T-cell crossmatch was observed in 32% of HR patients compared with 12% of controls ( p = 0.02). Hemodynamic compromise consisting of shock, hypotension, decreased cardiac output/index and/or a rise in capillary wedge or pulmonary artery pressure was observed in 47% of patients at the time of diagnosis of HR. Six patients (5 females) died (14% mortality) with evidence of HR at or just before autopsy, 6 days to 16 months after transplantation. The incidence of transplant coronary artery disease was 10% greater at 1 year, and 36% greater at 5 years, in patients with HR when compared with non-HR patients. Conclusion Humoral rejection was associated with acute hemodynamic compromise in 47% of patients, and was the direct cause of death in 6 patients (13%). Humoral rejection is a clinicopathologic entity with a high incidence in women and is associated with acute hemodynamic compromise, accelerated transplant coronary artery disease and death.

Humoral rejection in cardiac transplantation: risk factors, hemodynamic consequences and relationship to transplant coronary artery disease.

Background Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) remains the leading cause of late mortality in heart transplant recipients. Activated T lymphocytes and macrophages infiltrate the donor heart before vascular intimal thickening develops, but the specific mediators of mononuclear cell recruitment leading to CAV are unknown. Therefore, we sought to define the relationship between chemokine gene expression and production, T lymphocyte and macrophage recruitment, and intimal thickening in a murine model of CAV. Methods B10.A or B10.BR strain hearts were transplanted heterotopically into B10.BR mice. Recipients were killed at 1, 4, 7, 14, and 30 days. Donor hearts were assayed for chemokine gene expression with ribonuclease protection and for protein with ELISA. Intragraft cellular infiltration was defined immunohistochemically. Intimal thickening was quantitated morphometrically. Results Early and late patterns of intragraft chemokine expression associated with distinct cellular infiltration were identified. First, transient MIP-2 and MCP-1/JE production in isografts and allografts correlated with neutrophil and macrophage infiltration. MCP-1/JE production and macrophage infiltration was greater in allografts than isografts. Second, allografts demonstrated sustained lymphotactin, RANTES, and IP-10 expression, beginning at day 4, correlating with persistent macrophage and T lymphocyte infiltration. Intimal thickening became evident at 14 days. Isografts did not display the late pattern of sustained chemokine gene expression, cellular infiltration, or intimal thickening. Conclusions Transient, early MIP-2, and MCP-1/JE production in isografts and allografts correlated with neutrophil and macrophage recruitment, and is likely related to ischemia-reperfusion. In allografts, the delayed induction of chemokines specific for macrophages and T lymphocytes correlated with mononuclear cell infiltration and preceded intimal thickening. This study thus demonstrates a dual pattern of chemokine induction correlating with intragraft mononuclear cell recruitment, associated with ischemia-reperfusion and CAV development. Chemokine-directed interventions may interfere with leukocyte trafficking and inhibit CAV development.

Early and late chemokine production correlates with cellular recruitment in cardiac allograft vasculopathy.

BACKGROUND RANTES (regulated on activation, normal T cell expressed and secreted) production has been shown to correlate with mononuclear cell recruitment and precede intimal thickening in cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV). However, the cells that produce RANTES in CAV are undefined. Therefore, in an MHC II-mismatched murine model of CAV, we sought to (1) define the cellular sources of RANTES and (2) determine the role of CD4+ lymphocytes in RANTES production during CAV development. METHODS B6.CH-2bm12 strain donor hearts were transplanted heterotopically into wild-type (WT) or CD4 knockout (CD4KO) C57BL/6 mice (MHC II mismatch). No immunosuppression was used. Recipients were sacrificed at 7, 14, and 24 days. Intragraft RANTES gene expression and protein levels were determined with ribonuclease protection assay and ELISA, respectively. At days 7 and 24, RANTES production by graft-infiltrating cells was defined with intracellular RANTES staining and multicolor FACS analysis. Intimal thickening was quantitated morphometrically. In murine hearts and in six explanted human hearts with advanced CAV, RANTES was also localized immunohistochemically. RESULTS NK, NKT, and gammadelta+ cells, in addition to CD4+, CD8+ lymphocytes, and CD11b+ macrophages, produced RANTES in early and late stages of CAV. RANTES-producing NK, NKT, and gammadelta+ cells tripled in number during CAV development; by day 24, NK and gammadelta+ cells each outnumbered CD4+ lymphocytes and CD11b+ macrophages. The presence of CD4+ lymphocytes was required for sustained RANTES production in allografts, which correlated with mononuclear cell recruitment and preceded intimal thickening. In murine and explanted human hearts with advanced CAV, RANTES immunolocalized with graft-infiltrating mononuclear cells and vessel wall cells. CONCLUSIONS We present evidence that other cell types in addition to CD4+, CD8+ T lymphocytes, and CD11b+ macrophages contribute significantly to RANTES production in CAV. In this MHC II-mismatched murine model of CAV, sustained RANTES production requires CD4+ lymphocytes, correlates with mononuclear cell recruitment, and precedes intimal thickening. In experimental and human CAV, vessel wall cells may also produce RANTES. Interventions aimed at inhibiting RANTES production in CAV may need to target several types of cells, and neutralization of RANTES bioactivity may reduce mononuclear cell recruitment and CAV development.

Rantes production during development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy.

Background Rejection continues to be one of the leading causes of death during the first year after cardiac transplantation. With the advent of more potent immunosuppressive therapies, the incidence of graft rejection has been reported to be decreasing. Yet, this trend has not been well established due to differences in the interpretation of and the protocols for endomyocardial biopsy specimens. Additionally, the incidence of humoral (noncellular) rejection has not been adequately addressed. Methods Six thousand one hundred thirty endomyocardial biopsy specimens in 487 cardiac transplant recipients during the first year posttransplantation from 1990 to 2000 were reviewed to assess the incidences of acute cellular and treated noncellular rejection episodes. Cellular rejection was defined as ISHLT grades 3–4; noncellular rejection as a 20% decrease in echo LVEF, cardiac index Results The incidence of noncellular rejection has remained relatively unchanged at approximately 20% (P = nonsignificant for all years); in contrast, there has been a significant decrease (P Conclusion The incidence of noncellular rejection in cardiac transplant recipients has remained unchanged through the 1990s despite improved immunosuppressive therapies, which have significantly decreased the incidence of acute cellular rejection. There appears to be a need for newer immunosuppressive agents to effectively treat noncellular rejection. Clinical trials using allograft rejection as a major endpoint will need to increase the enrollment of patients to achieve adequate power to demonstrate differences between study groups.

Incidence of acute cellular rejection and non-cellular rejection in cardiac transplantation

Chronic rejection, or cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), remains the leading cause of late death in heart transplant recipients. The precise role and contributions of T lymphocyte subsets to CAV development remains unknown. Methods. Donor hearts from B6.C-H2 bm12 mice were transplanted into T lymphocyte subset knockout recipients and T lymphocyte-reconstituted nude recipients. No immunosuppression was used. Intimal proliferation was measured morphometrically. In vitro studies were performed to analyze the donor-specific activation status of recipient CD8 + lymphocytes by examining cellular proliferation, interleukin-2 secretion, and interleukin-2Ra expression. Intracellular cytokine staining assay was performed to determine both the profile and source of intragraft cytokines. Results. Hearts transplanted into wild-type recipients developed severe CAV by 24 days. Intimal lesions were absent in the hearts that were transplanted into nude and CD4-/- knockout mice (containing CD8 + lymphocytes). In contrast, the donor hearts in CD8-/-knockout recipients (containing CD4 + lymphocytes) developed CAV, but significantly less than in wild-type. Adoptive transfer of T lymphocyte subset populations into nude recipients confirmed that CAV was absolutely contingent on CD4 + lymphocytes, and that CD8 + lymphocytes played an additive role in intimal lesion progression in the presence of CD4 + lymphocytes. Although CD8 + lymphocytes alone did not cause CAV in vivo, we demonstrated that MHC class II disparate alloantigens activated CD8 + lymphocytes both in vivo and in vitro. Finally, both CD4 + and CD8 + lymphocytes contributed to the intragraft IL-2 and IFN-y production. Conclusions. In this MHC class II mismatched murine model, CAV is a T lymphocyte dependent event, and absolutely contingent on the presence of CD4 + lymphocytes. Furthermore, CD8 + lymphocytes (1) are activated by MHC class II disparate antigens and (2) play a significant role in the progression of lesion development. Finally, both CD4 + and CD8 + lymphocytes contribute to CAV development via secretion of IFN-γ, a known mediator of CAV in this model.

Maria L. Espejo

Papers

Humoral rejection in cardiac transplantation: risk factors, hemodynamic consequences and relationship to transplant coronary artery disease.

Early and late chemokine production correlates with cellular recruitment in cardiac allograft vasculopathy.

Rantes production during development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy.

Incidence of acute cellular rejection and non-cellular rejection in cardiac transplantation

CD8+ lymphocytes augment chronic rejection in a MHC class II mismatched model.