Advertisement

Complication from Desensitization

  • Duck Jong HanEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Sensitization to human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) has been one of the major clinical challenges for successful kidney transplantation. In end-stage renal disease, kidney transplantation provides benefits compared with dialysis in terms of improved patient survival better quality of life, and lower ongoing costs after the first year. Living donor kidney transplantation has an advantage with improved allograft survival, and performed earlier and electively compared with deceased donor transplantation. However sensitized patients are increasing in number on transplant waiting lists, and their prospect of getting a transplant is less than nonsensitized patients due to immunological incompatibility with the donor. Strategy for sensitized patients are listing for a compatible deceased donor transplant or, if they have a living donor, either selecting a kidney exchange program or undergoing a desensitization procedure. Desensitization procedures may be undertaken to increase access to either living or deceased donor transplants, and in some situations may also be employed to facilitate participation in a kidney exchange, in less immunological barrier to be overcome. The question of whether individuals are better off with a desensitization treatment followed by HLA-incompatible living donor transplantation or waiting on the deceased donor kidney transplant list for a compatible transplant has recently been addressed by two large multicenter studies, with conflicting results. A multicenter study from the United States published in the New England Journal of Medicine [365;318 326.2011] concluded that there was a strong survival benefit for sensitized patients undergoing desensitization followed by HLA-incompatible living donor kidney transplant compared with those remaining on the waiting list. Of interest, a second study, published in the Lancet, [389;727 734.2017] found no significant survival advantage for desensitized patients compared with similar patients remaining on the waiting list in the United Kingdom. Controversies still remain regarding how desensitization can be achieved and which techniques are effective and safe.

In this chapter various complications from the desensitization will be dealt with in current use of medications or armamentum.

Keywords

Desensitization Adverse effects Kidney transplantation 

References

  1. 1.
    Keith DS, Vranic GM. Approach to the highly sensitized kidney transplant candidate. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016 Apr 7;11(4):684–93.  https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.05930615.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tsutsumi Y, Yamamoto Y, Shimono J, et al. Hepatitis B virus reactivation with rituximab-containing regimen. World J Hepatol. 2013;5(11):612–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chung BH, Yun JT, Ha SE, Kim JI, Moon IS, Choi BS, Park CW, Kim YS, Yang CW. Combined use of rituximab and plasmapheresis pre-transplant increases post-transplant infections in renal transplant recipients with basiliximab induction therapy. Transpl Infect Dis. 2013;15(6):559–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nakao T, Ushigome H, Kawai K, et al. Evaluation of rituximab dosage for ABO-incompatible living-donor kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2015;47(3):644–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yang SH, Kuo SH. Reactivation of hepatits B virus during rituximab treatment of a patient with follicular lymphoma. Ann Hematol. 2009;87:325–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Huang YH, Hsiao LT, Hong YC, et al. Randomized controlled trial of entecavir prophylaxis for rituximab-associated hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with lymphoma and resolved hepatitis B. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(22):2765–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loomba R, Rowley A, Wesley R, et al. Systematic review: the effect of preventive lamivudine on hepatitis B reactivation during chemotherapy. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(7):519–28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mozessohn L, Chan KK, Feld JJ, Hicks LK. Hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients receiving rituximab for lymphoma: a meta-analysis. J Viral Hepat. 2015;22(10):842–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee J, Park JY, Huh KH, Kim BS, et al. Rituximab and hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive kidney transplant recipients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2017;32(4):722–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tallantyre EC, Whittam DH, Jolles S, et al. Correction to: secondary antibody deficiency: a complication of anti-CD20 therapy for neuroinflammation. J Neurol. 2018;265(5):1123.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Healy EG, Phadke R, Kidd M, Reilly MM, Lunn MP. Clinical, neuropathological and radiological evidence for a rare complication of rituximab therapy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2015;25(7):589–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shah S, Jaggi K, Greenberg K, Geetha D. Immunoglobulin levels and infection risk with rituximab induction for anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis. Clin Kidney J. 2017;10(4):470–4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Okada M, Watarai Y, Iwasaki K, et al. Favorable results in ABO-incompatible renal transplantation without B cell-targeted therapy: advantages and disadvantages of rituximab pretreatment. Clin Transpl. 2017;31(10):e13071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morath C, Zeier M, Döhler B, Opelz G, Süsal C. ABO-Incompatible kidney transplantation. Front Immunol. 2017;8:234.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morath C, Zeier M, Süsal C. Increased risk of infection-associated death with incompatible kidney transplantations. Transpl Int. 2017;30(12):1209–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Habicht A, Bröker V, Blume C, et al. Increase of infectious complications in ABO-incompatible kidney transplant recipients—a single centre experience. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011;26(12):4124–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lentine KL, Axelrod D, Klein C, et al. Early clinical complications after ABO-incompatible live-donor kidney transplantation: a national study of medicare-insured recipients. Transplantation. 2014;98(1):54–65.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Naciri Bennani H, Abdulrahman Z, Allal A, et al. Early post-transplant complications following ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation. J Nephropathol. 2016;5(1):19–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Opelz G, Morath C, Süsal C, et al. Three-year outcomes following 1420 ABO-incompatible living-donor kidney transplants performed after ABO antibody reduction: results from 101 centers. Transplantation. 2015;99(2):400–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barnett AN, Manook M, Nagendran M, et al. Tailored desensitization strategies in ABO blood group antibody incompatible renal transplantation. Transpl Int. 2014;27(2):187–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Choi BH, Cho HK, Jung JH, et al. How to reduce lethal infectious complications in ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2015;47(3):653–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Choi BH, Han DJ. Ongoing higher infection rate in ABO-incompatible kidney transplant recipient: is it a serious problem? A single-center experience. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2016;91:37.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kwon H, Kim YH, Choi JY, et al. Analysis of 4000 kidney transplantations in a single center: across immunological barriers. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(32):e4249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Trivin C, Tran A, Moulin B, et al. Infectious complications of a rituximab-based immunosuppressive regimen in patients with glomerular disease. Clin Kidney J. 2017;10(4):461–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schrezenmeier E, Budde K, Staeck O, et al. Incidence of infectious disease and malignancies after rituximab therapy in kidney transplant recipients: results from a cohort in germany. Transplant Proc. 2017;49(10):2269–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Clatworthy MR, Watson CJ, Plotnek G, et al. B-cell-depleting induction therapy and acute cellular rejection. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(25):2683–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Agarwal A, Vieira CA, Book BK, Sidner RA, Fineberg NS, Pescovitz MD. Rituximab, anti-CD20, induces in vivo cytokine release but does not impair ex vivo T-cell responses. Am J Transplant. 2004 Aug;4(8):1357–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lioté H, Lioté F, Séroussi B, et al. Rituximab-induced lung disease: a systematic literature review. Eur Respir J. 2010;35(3):681–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wan Zaidi WA, Wan Jamaludin WF, Tumian NR, Abdul Wahid SF. Rituximab-induced lung disease. Med J Malaysia. 2016;71(4):209–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hadjinicolaou AV, Nisar MK, Parfrey H, et al. Non-infectious pulmonary toxicity of rituximab: a systematic review. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51(4):653–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Child N, O’Carroll M, Berkahn L. Rituximab-induced interstitial lung disease in a patient with immune thrombocytopenia purpura. Intern Med J. 2012;42(3):e12–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ahn SH, Kim SM, Sung JJ. Rituximab-induced interstitial lung disease in a patient with aquaporin-4 immunoglobulin G-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018;20:192–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Verma SK. Updated cardiac concerns with rituximab use: a growing challenge. Indian Heart J. 2016;68(Suppl 2):S246–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ureshino H, Nishioka A, Kojima K, et al. Rituximab-induced acute thrombocytopenia in high tumor burden follicular lymphoma. Intern Med. 2016;55(15):2061–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Blanco B, Pérez-Simón JA, Sánchez-Abarca L, et al. Treatment with bortezomib of human CD4+ T cells preserves natural regulatory T cells and allows the emergence of a distinct suppressor T-cell population. Haematologica. 2009;94(7):975–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jeong JC, Jambaldorj E, Kwon HY, Kim MG, Im HJ, Jeon HJ, In JW, Han M, Koo TY, Chung J, Song EY, Ahn C, Yang J. Desensitization using bortezomib and high-dose immunoglobulin increases rate of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(5):e2635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shah N, Meouchy J, Qazi Y. Bortezomib in kidney transplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2015;20(6):652–6.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MOT.0000000000000252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Moreno Gonzales MA, Gandhi MJ, Schinstock CA, et al. Doses of bortezomib for desensitization is not well tolerated and is associated with only modest reductions in anti-HLA antibody. Transplantation. 2017;101(6):1222–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Eskandary F, Regele H, Bond G, et al. Bortezomib in late antibody-mediated kidney transplant rejection—a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial (BORTEJECT study). Am J Transplant. 2018;18(S4):326.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Eskandary F, Regele H, Baumann L, et al. A randomized trial of bortezomib in late antibody-mediated kidney transplant rejection. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018;29(2):591–605.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kwun J, Burghuber C, Manook M, et al. Humoral compensation after bortezomib treatment of allosensitized recipients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;28(7):1991–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lemy A, Toungouz M, Abramowicz D. Bortezomib: a new player in pre- and post-transplant desensitization? Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2010;25(11):3480–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rault R, Piraino B, Johnston JR, Oral A. Pulmonary and renal toxicity of intravenous immunoglobulin. Clin Nephrol. 1991;36(2):83–6.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pierce LR, Jain N. Risks associated with the use of intravenous immunoglobulin. Transfus Med Rev. 2003;17(4):241–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sin YH, Kim YJ, Oh JS, et al. Graft rupture after high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in a renal transplant patient. Nephrology (Carlton). 2014;19(Suppl 3):35–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Vo AA, Cam V, Toyoda M, et al. Safety and adverse events profiles of intravenous gammaglobulin products used for immunomodulation: a single-center experience. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;1(4):844–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jordan S, Cunningham-Rundles C, McEwan R. Utility of intravenous immune globulin in kidney transplantation: efficacy, safety, and cost implications. Am J Transplant. 2003;3(6):653–64.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kahwaji J, Barker E, Pepkowitz S, et al. Acute hemolysis after high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in highly HLA sensitized patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4(12):1993–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Welsh KJ, Bai Y. Therapeutic plasma exchange as a therapeutic modality for the treatment of IVIG complications. J Clin Apher. 2015;30(6):371–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Stenton SB, Dalen D, Wilbur K. Myocardial infarction associated with intravenous immune globulin. Ann Pharmacother. 2005;39(12):2114–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kakuta Y, Satoh S, Watarai Y, et al. Transplant recipients using plasmapheresis and super high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin. Transplant Direct. 2017;4(1):e336.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Davis J. Eculizumab. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65(17):1609–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cornell LD, Schinstock CA, Gandhi MJ, et al. Positive crossmatch kidney transplant recipients treated with eculizumab: outcomes beyond 1 year. Am J Transplant. 2015;15(5):1293–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Stegall MD, Diwan T, Raghavaiah S, et al. Terminal complement inhibition decreases antibody-mediated rejection in sensitized renal transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2011;11(11):2405–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    West-Thielke P, Progar K, Campara M, et al. Eculizumab for prevention of antibody-mediated rejection in blood group-incompatible renal transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2018;50(1):66–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Johnson CK, Leca N. Eculizumab use in kidney transplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2015;20(6):643–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kulkarni S, Kirkiles-Smith NC, Deng YH, et al. Eculizumab therapy for chronic antibody-mediated injury in kidney transplant recipients: a pilot randomized Controlled trial. Am J Transplant. 2017;17(3):682–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tillou X, Poirier N, Le Bas-Bernardet S, et al. Recombinant human C1-inhibitor prevents acute antibody-mediated rejection in alloimmunized baboons. Kidney Int. 2010;78(2):152–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Jordan SC, Choi J, Aubert O, et al. A phase I/II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessing safety and efficacy of C1 esterase inhibitor for prevention of delayed graft function in deceased donor kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2018;18:2955.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Vo AA, Zeevi A, Choi J, et al. A phase I/II placebo-controlled trial of C1-inhibitor for prevention of antibody-mediated rejection in HLA sensitized patients. Transplantation. 2015;99(2):299–308.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Montgomery RA, Orandi BJ, Racusen L, et al. Plasma-derived C1 esterase inhibitor for acute antibody-mediated rejection following kidney transplantation: results of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled pilot study. Am J Transplant. 2016;16(12):3468–78.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Viglietti D, Gosset C, Loupy A, et al. C1 Inhibitor in acute antibody-mediated rejection nonresponsive to conventional therapy in kidney transplant recipients: a pilot study. Am J Transplant. 2016;16(5):1596–603.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Järnum S, Bockermann R, Runström A, et al. The bacterial enzyme IdeS cleaves the IgG-type of B cell receptor (BCR), abolishes BCR-mediated cell signaling, and inhibits memory B cell activation. J Immunol. 2015;195(12):5592–601.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Lorant T, Bengtsson M, Eich T, et al. Safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of degradation of anti-HLA antibodies by IdeS (imlifidase) in chronic kidney disease patients. Am J Transplant. 2018;18:2752–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Jordan SC, Lorant T, Choi J, et al. IgG endopeptidase in highly sensitized patients undergoing transplantation. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:442–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Huang E, Jordan SC. Immunoglobulin G-degrading enzyme of Streptococcus pyogenes (IdeS), desensitization, and the kidney allocation system: complementary approaches to Increase transplantation in highly HLA sensitized patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018;13(5):799–801.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lonze BE, Tapapudi VS, et al. IdeS (imlifi dase): a novel agent that cleaves human IgG and permits successful kidney transplantation across high-strength donor-specific antibody. Ann Surg. 2018;268(3):488–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kishimoto T. IL-6: from its discovery to clinical applications. Int Immunol. 2010;22(5):347–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Choi J, Aubert O, Vo A, et al. Assessment of tocilizumab (anti-interleukin-6 receptor monoclonal) as a potential treatment for chronic antibody-mediated rejection and transplant glomerulopathy in HLA-sensitized renal allograft recipients. Am J Transplant. 2017;17(9):2381–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Pate S, Mohan S, Fernandez H, et al. Tocilizumab stabilizes renal function in kidney transplant recipients with chronic active antibody mediated rejection (CAAMR). Am J Transplant. 2018;18(S4):326.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Vo AA, Choi J, Kim I, et al. A phase I/II trial of the interleukin-6 receptor-specific humanized monoclonal (tocilizumab) + intravenous immunoglobulin in difficult to desensitize patients. Transplantation. 2015;99(11):2356–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Jordan SC, Choi J, Kim I, et al. Interleukin-6, a cytokine critical to mediation of inflammation, autoimmunity and allograft rejection: therapeutic implications of IL-6 receptor blockade. Transplantation. 2017;101(1):32–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Choi J, Aubert O, Louie S, et al. Extended experience using tocilizumab (anti-IL6R, TCZ) for the treatment of chronic antibody mediated rejection (CABMR). Am J Transplant. 2018;18(S4):326.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Szczeklik W, Wawrzycka K, Włudarczyk A, Sega A, Nowak I, Seczyńska B, Fajfer I, Zając K, Królikowski W, Kózka M. Complications in patients treated with plasmapheresis in the intensive care unit. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2013;45(1):7–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Zhang YY, Tang Z, Chen DM, et al. Comparison of double filtration plasmapheresis with immunoadsorption therapy in patients with anti-glomerular basement membrane nephritis. BMC Nephrol. 2014;15:128.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Zschiedrich S, Jänigen B, Dimova D, et al. One hundred ABO-incompatible kidney transplantations between 2004 and 2014: a single-centre experience. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2016;31(4):663–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of General SurgeryAsan Medical CenterSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations