Advertisement

Exploring pre-surgery donor-specific antibodies in the context of organ shortage in liver transplant

  • Savio G. Barreto
  • Mark E. Brooke-Smith
  • Eu Ling Neo
  • Paul Dolan
  • Richard Leibbrandt
  • Tim Emery
  • Robert Carroll
  • Alan Wigg
  • John W. ChenEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Background

There is a growing disparity between the number of liver transplant (LT) candidates and availability of suitable liver allografts. Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), secondary to positive donor-specific antibodies (DSA), remains a concern in liver transplantation. This study aimed to correlate expression of DSA on pre-transplant screening and outcomes of LT, specifically development of AMR in liver allografts and liver function profile in the post-operative period.

Methods

Data of consecutive patients undergoing orthotopic LT (OLT) at the South Australian Liver Transplant Unit was analysed. All patients underwent DSA testing pre-transplant.

Results

Within a cohort of 96 patients, over a post-OLT median follow-up of 849 days, only 2 patients (2%) developed AMR. While both patients had a positive DSA test preoperatively, overall DSA positivity was noted in 31% patients, with a specificity for prediction of AMR of 0.708. No significant association was noted between AMR (p = 0.092), T cell–mediated rejection/TCMR (p = 0.797) or late hepatic artery thrombosis/LHAT (p = 0.521). There was no significant interaction effect between DSA positivity and serum bilirubin or transaminases over a period of 100 days.

Conclusion

AMR following LT is uncommon. A positive DSA pre-transplant does not imply a definite risk of AMR. Also, there does not exist a significant interaction in time between DSA expression and serum bilirubin or transaminase levels. Until there emerges evidence to the contrary, it appears reasonable to consider DSA-positive donors within the broad context of marginal donors in the context of a worldwide shortage of LT donor allografts.

Keywords

Rejection Thrombosis Outcomes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Dr Catriona Brennan (Consultant Pathologist, SA Pathology, Flinders Medical Centre and Lecturer, Flinders University, Adelaide) for providing pathology photomicrographs and for advice

Nicole Williams (Clinical Nurse Transplant Co-ordinator) for help with data collection

Author’s contributions

Conceptualisation and design: JWC, SGB. Data collection: SGB, TE. Data analysis: SGB, RL, RC. Drafting manuscript: SGB. Editing the manuscript for intellectual content: JWC, AW, MBS, ELN, PD, RC. Final approval of the manuscript: all authors

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Supplementary material

423_2019_1831_MOESM1_ESM.docx (13 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 12 kb).
423_2019_1831_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (13 kb)
ESM 2 (XLSX 12 kb).

References

  1. 1.
    Jadlowiec CC, Taner T (2016) Liver transplantation: current status and challenges. World J Gastroenterol 22:4438–4445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Casavilla A, Ramirez C, Shapiro R et al (1995) Experience with liver and kidney allografts from non-heart-beating donors. Transplantation 59:197–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dasari BVM, Schlegel A, Mergental H et al (2017) The use of old donors in liver transplantation. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 31:211–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Busuttil RW, Tanaka K (2003) The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 9:651–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beal EW, Black SM, Mumtaz K et al (2017) High center volume does not mitigate risk associated with using high donor risk organs in liver transplantation. Dig Dis Sci 62(9):2578-2585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ozhathil DK, Li YF, Smith JK et al (2011) Impact of center volume on outcomes of increased-risk liver transplants. Liver Transpl 17:1191–1199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patel R, Terasaki PI (1969) Significance of the positive crossmatch test in kidney transplantation. N Engl J Med 280:735–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Terasaki PI (2003) Humoral theory of transplantation. Am J Transplant 3:665–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Demetris AJ, Bellamy C, Hubscher SG et al (2016) Comprehensive update of the Banff Working Group on liver allograft pathology: introduction of antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 2016(16):2816–2835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kulkarni HS, Bemiss BC, Hachem RR (2015) Antibody-mediated rejection in lung transplantation. Curr Transplant Rep 2:316–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Demetris AJ, Bellamy CO, Gandhi CR et al (2016) Functional immune anatomy of the liver-as an allograft. Am J Transplant 16:1653–1680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O'Leary JG, Michelle Shiller S, Bellamy C et al (2014) Acute liver allograft antibody-mediated rejection: an inter-institutional study of significant histopathological features. Liver Transpl 20:1244–1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Taner T, Gandhi MJ, Sanderson SO et al (2012) Prevalence, course and impact of HLA donor-specific antibodies in liver transplantation in the first year. Am J Transplant 12:1504–1510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    EASL (2016) EASL Clinical practice guidelines: liver transplantation. J Hepatol 64:433–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bekker J, Ploem S, de Jong KP (2009) Early hepatic artery thrombosis after liver transplantation: a systematic review of the incidence, outcome and risk factors. Am J Transplant 9:746–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lefaucheur C, Loupy A, Vernerey D et al (2013) Antibody-mediated vascular rejection of kidney allografts: a population-based study. Lancet 381:313–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cuadrado A, San Segundo D, Lopez-Hoyos M et al (2015) Clinical significance of donor-specific human leukocyte antigen antibodies in liver transplantation. World J Gastroenterol 21:11016–11026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Loupy A, Vernerey D, Tinel C et al (2015) Subclinical rejection phenotypes at 1 year post-transplant and outcome of kidney allografts. J Am Soc Nephrol. 26:1721–1731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Orandi B, Chow E, Hsu A et al (2015) Quantifying renal allograft loss following early antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 15:489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    O'Leary JG, Kaneku H, Demetris AJ et al (2014) Antibody-mediated rejection as a contributor to previously unexplained early liver allograft loss. Liver Transpl 20:218–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Castillo-Rama M, Castro MJ, Bernardo I et al (2008) Preformed antibodies detected by cytotoxic assay or multibead array decrease liver allograft survival: role of human leukocyte antigen compatibility. Liver Transpl 14:554–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    O'Leary JG, Demetris AJ, Friedman LS et al (2014) The role of donor-specific HLA alloantibodies in liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 14:779–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hogen R, DiNorcia J, Dhanireddy K (2017) Antibody-mediated rejection: what is the clinical relevance? Curr Opin Organ Transplant 22:97–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cheng EY (2017) The role of humoral alloreactivity in liver transplantation: lessons learned and new perspectives. J Immunol Res 2017:3234906PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Del Bello A, Congy-Jolivet N, Muscari F et al (2014) Prevalence, incidence and risk factors for donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies in maintenance liver transplant patients. Am J Transplant 14:867–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaneku H, O'Leary JG, Banuelos N et al (2013) De novo donor-specific HLA antibodies decrease patient and graft survival in liver transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 13:1541–1548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Demetris AJ, Nakamura K, Yagihashi A et al (1992) A clinicopathological study of human liver allograft recipients harboring preformed IgG lymphocytotoxic antibodies. Hepatology 16:671–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Levitsky J, Goldberg D, Smith AR et al (2017) Acute rejection increases risk of graft failure and death in recent liver transplant recipients. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 15:584–593 e582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Levitsky J, Kaneku H, Jie C et al (2016) Donor-specific hla antibodies in living versus deceased donor liver transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 16:2437–2444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sis B, Jhangri GS, Bunnag S et al (2009) Endothelial gene expression in kidney transplants with alloantibody indicates antibody-mediated damage despite lack of C4d staining. Am J Transplant 9:2312–2323CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hepatobiliary Unit, Division of Surgery and Perioperative MedicineFlinders Medical CentreAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.College of Medicine and Public HealthFlinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia
  3. 3.South Australia Liver Transplant UnitFlinders Medical CentreAdelaideAustralia
  4. 4.HPB Surgery UnitThe Royal Adelaide HospitalAdelaideAustralia
  5. 5.South Australian Transplantation & Immunogenetics Service, Australian Red Cross Blood ServiceAdelaideAustralia
  6. 6.Department of Renal MedicineThe Royal Adelaide HospitalAdelaideAustralia
  7. 7.School of MedicineThe University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  8. 8.Hepatology and Liver Transplantation UnitFlinders Medical CentreAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations