Chronic Renal Allograft Dysfunction An unsolved problem

Transcription

1 hronic Renal Allograft Dysfunction An unsolved problem Johan (Hans) W. de Fijter, D, PhD Professor of edicine and Nephrology Director of the Kidney and the Pancreas Transplant Program eiden niversity edical enter eiden, The Netherlands atalan Transplantation Society, Barcelona arch 18 th, 2015

2 Graft survival, % Kidney Transplantation ong-term outcomes remain poor and inadequate year 5 year 10 year 90,6 91,1 91,5 88,7 100 D DD-S DD-E ,3 72, ,5 62, ,7 48, , White Americans Hispanic Americans African Americans TS E NOS WA NOS HA NOS AA Gondos A, et al. Transplantation 2013;95: S OPTN / SRTR: Annual Report 2007

3 Graft oss Death with function dominated by ardiovascular Disease 75% No Graft oss Kidney Transplant Recipients n= % Graft Failure incl. PNF 10.5% Death with Graft Function 28.2% 15.2% 13.8% 11.6% ardiovascular Infections alignancies Other 31.2% nknown ean follow-up: 50.3 ± 32.6 months El-Zoghby Z, et al. Am J Transplant. 2009;9:

4 Hazard Ratio by egfr Decline 12-onth egfr Distribution (%) Robust association between GFR and V-mortality One-year egfr <50 m/min/1.73m 2 is associated with inferior outcome Relationship between egfr and graft failure over 10-years follow-up (ox proportional hazard adjusted for multiple covariates) 32.0 Hazard ratio (95% I) egfr distribution month egfr (m/min/1.73m 2 ) Kasiske B, et al. Am J Kidney Dis 2011;57:

5 GFR a robust risk factor for cardiovascular mortality Standardized ardiovascular Event Rate (GP mean follow-up 2.8 years) 45 <45 Go AS et al, N Eng J ed 2004, 351:

6 umulative incidence of chronic renal failure Non-Renal Solid Organ Transplant recipients High risk of renal failure 0,35 0,30 0,25 0,20 0,15 iver ung Heart 0,10 0,05 0, onths since transplantation No. at risk iver 36,849 28,495 24,041 19,508 15,724 12,564 9,844 7,345 5,292 3,614 2,261 ung 7,643 5,633 4,316 3,184 2,327 1,629 1, Heart 24,024 19,885 17,238 14,687 12,341 10,022 7,997 6,104 4,526 3,096 1,991 From: Ojo AO, et al. N Engl J ed. 2003;349:

7 egfr (ml/min) Early NI-reduction in iver Transplant recipients Impressive improvement in native renal function Evolution of Renal Fuction over time (On-Treatment population) Renal endpoints at 24-months (ITT population) P= TA-WD EVR + rta TA- egfr (m/min/1.73m 2 ) ,7 77,5 67, EVR+rTA (n=184) TA elimination (n=163) TA- (n=186) Reduced TA/EVR 10, Time post Tx, months Saliba F. Presented at the AASD, 2012; Boston TA elimination/evr 14, Δ egfr (%) Saliba F, et al. Am J Transplant. 2013;3:

8 BENEFIT: long-term extension study Belatacept vs. NI: Renal Function at 5 Years Rostaing et al., Am J Transplant 2013;13:

9 hronic Renal Allograft Dysfunction Immunosuppression: Too much or not enough? Disease recurrence BK nephropathy hronic Renal Allograft Dysfunction ate ABR ate cellular and/or humoral rejection Transplant glomerulitis/-opathy 4d deposition in peritubular capillaries NI-induced nephrotoxicity Hyalinosis of arterioles Focal glomerulosclerosis IF/TA odified from: Pascual, et al. N Engl J ed. 2002;346: and olvin RB. N Engl J ed. 2003; 349:

10 Graft survival, % Anti-HA Abs detected after transplantation Inferior long-term renal allograft outcome Kidney allograft survival according to HA-Abs status (N=1014) NDSA (n=209) No anti-ha antibodies (n=712) DSA (n=93) 83% 70% P<0.001 P< Time after HA antibody testing, years 5 49% achmann N, et al. Transplantation. 2009:

11 Antibody-ediated Rejection Represents a small but definite component of renal transplant failure 4.6% nknown 11.7% Acute rejection 2% ABR 16.3% edical 75% No Graft oss Kidney Transplant Recipients n= % Graft Failure incl. PNF 10.5% Death with Graft Function 30.7% IF/TA 36.6% Glomerular ~15% Recurrent Disease ~15% Transplant Glomerulopathy Evidence from Histology: hronic tissue injury (any 2 of below): - Arterial intimal fibrosis w/o elastosis - Duplication of the GB - ulti-laminated PT basement membrane - IF/TA Evidence from Tissue staining: Ab action/deposition (e.g. d4 in PT) Evidence from Serology: Anti-HA or other anti-donor antibody ean follow-up: 50.3 ± 32.6 months El-Zoghby Z, et al. Am J Transplant. 2009;9:

12 4d-staining for the diagnosis of ABR Neither completely specific nor sensitive enough 1,2 4d Banff classification Fluctuations in 4d-status in a DSA-positive patient in the first post-transplant year d = 2 (focal) 4d = 0 (negative) 4d = 1 (minimal) 4d = 3 (diffuse) 0 Transplantation Time after transplantation - Progression to TGP in DSA-positive patients with micro-vascular inflammation, but w/o 4d deposition 3 - High endothelial cell-specific gene expression leading to ABR in renal transplant biopsy samples with DSA but w/o 4d 4 - Positive 4d occurs with recurrent glomerular diseases (N; IX-GN) 4 1. olvin RB. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007;18: ; 2. oupy A, et al. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2012;8:348 57; 3. oupy A, et al. Am J Transplant. 2011;11:56 65; 4. Sis B, et al. Am J Transplant. 2009;9:

13 De novo donor-specific HA-antibodies Evidence derived from Histology, 4d-staining and Serology icrovascular inflammation 4d-positive PT staining uminex-based assays also have limitations: - What is the association between dndsa and risk of ABR? - What is the DSA-threshold for the diagnosis DSA-positive? - Role of IgG isotypes and/or the ability to bind complement? oupy A, et al. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2012;8:348 57; engel, et al. Am J Transplant. 2012;12:

14 Probability of Graft Survival Donor-specific anti-ha Abs after transplantation omplement fixing or non-complement fixing antibodies Probability of Graft Survival onsecutive patients, population-based study (N=1016) 1 Allograft survival and DSA-status Allograft survival DSA+1q-status 1.0 DSA 1.0 DSA DSA+, 1q DSA DSA+, 1q P<0.001 by log-rank test 0.2 P<0.001 by log-rank test Years after Transplantation No. at Risk DSA DSA Years after Transplantation No. at Risk DSA DSA+/1q DSA+/1q The distribution of graft-injury phenotypes and rates of allograft survival were similar across all classes. Both class I and class II of donor-specific anti-ha antibodies after transplantation were harmful 2 1. oupy A, et al. N Engl J ed. 2013;369: ; 2. efaucheur, et al. N Engl J ed. 2014;370:85 86.

15 ean Banff score ean Banff score omplement-binding DSAs Association with Tissue damage/inflammation ean Banff score Percent of patients ean Banff score ean Banff score Graft histopathology (N=1016) according to HA-DSA status A icrovascular inflammation 4 P<0.001 B 4d graft deposition 80 P<0.001 Transplant glomerulopathy 0.6 P< P< P< P< DSA- DSA+/1q- DSA+/1q DSA- DSA+/1q- DSA+/1q+ DSA- DSA+/1q- DSA+/1q+ D Interstitial inflammation and tubulitis E Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy F Arteriosclerosis 2.0 P< P= P= Data based on 1016 kidney-allograft biopsies performed in the first year after transplantation. (845 at 1-year and 171 during acute rejection in the first year). oupy A, et al. N Engl J ed. 2013;369: DSA- DSA+/1q- DSA+/1q+ DSA- DSA+/1q- DSA+/1q+ DSA- DSA+/1q- DSA+/1q+ 0.0

16 umulative survival Antibodies not binding complement Equally associated with inferior graft survival Graft survival in RTRs tested for anti-ha immunoglobulin subclasses (n=274; 2008) no-abs Non-complement omplement fixing fixing Antibodies Antibodies (p<0.001)* (p=0.002) * Antibodies at the last date of testing *log rank test vs. no-antibodies Arnold et al. Transplant Int 2014;27: Years after transplantation

17 linical Immunosuppression ong-term outcome after kidney transplantation Diabetes; Hypertension; Hyperlipidemia Inadequate Renal Allograft Function - Structural vascular changes (Hyalinosis; apillaritis; Glomerulitis) - Irreversible renal changes (Fibrosis; Transplant Glomerulopathy)

18 1: Reduced exposure to NIs in RTRs ower rejection rates do not translate in better long-term outcome parameters egfr (G in m/min) Regimen tested Standard-dose sa ( ng/m first 3 months & ng/m thereafter) n egfr (-G) m/min BPAR % 1-Yr GS % ± ow-dose sa ( ng/m) ± ow-dose TA (3 7 ng/m) ± ow-dose sirolimus ± Ekberg, et al. N Eng J ed. 2007;357: EITE SYPHONY omparable egfr results at 3-years SYPHONY trial: 12-month and 36-month egfr a Standard sa ow sa ow Tac SR Ekberg H et al. Am J Transpl 2009;9: Treatment group

19 ow acute rejection rate vs. excess BKV replication ommon in RTRs and associated with graft loss Viruria median 16 weeks Retrospective analysis of 34,937 RTRs (SRTR: ) Significant difference in overall graft survival at 3 years Probability Time post-transplant (weeks) BK-PVAN 1 10% 1,2 BKV viremia ~10 20% 2 Viremia median 23 weeks Nephropathy median 28 weeks Overall graft survival BKV treatment within 6 mo No treatment within 6 mo og-rank p<0.001 BKV viruria 30 50% Time post-transplant (months) BKV seropositive ~90% 2,3 1. Egli A et al. J Infect Dis 2009;199:837 46; 2. Hirsch HH et al. N Engl J ed 2002;347:488 96; 3. Nickeleit V et al. N Engl J ed 2000;342: ; 4. Schold JD et al. Transpl Int 2009;22:626 34

20 2: Prolonged Ni/S vs. New-onset Diabetes Dominant impact on patient survival beyond the first Year After the first year, a history of acute rejection had no effect on outcome. ole EH. et al. lin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2008;3:

21 Freedom from BPAR (%) Empiric dose reduction/drug withdrawal Ni- and/or S-elimination with mtoris Patient free of BPAR ZES trial Ni-elimination with EVR at 4.5 months Intention-to-treat population ONEPT trial Ni-elimination with SR at 3-months Intention-to-treat population % 9.7% 1, % 3.4% 0, ,50 Steroid withdrawal 25 0 Everolimus (n=154) sa (n=146) Days post-transplant 0,25 0,00 p log Rank = Days post-transplant SR group sa group Adapted from Budde K et al. ancet 2011;377: ebranchu Y, et al. Am J Transplant. 2011;11:

22 Survival 3: Risk for de novo DSA and ABR 1. Incompatibility for HA class-ii antigens edian 10-year graft survival for the 15% of patients with de novo DSA was 40% lower than those w/o DSA (59% vs 96%, P<0.0001) 1,0 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 de novo DSA de novo anti-ha antibodies No antibody Pre-transplant anti-ha Follow-up, years P < Independent predictors for de novo DSA formation: 1) HA-DR mismatch 2) Non-adherence (pediatric recipients) 3) History of rejection or protocol biopsy with SR between month 0-6 Wiebe, et al. Am J Transplant. 2012;12:

23 AR-free survival (%) ost dndsa are HA-DQ specific inkage disequilibrium between HA-DR and -DQ AR-free survival by DR & DQ matching DQ & DR mismatch and corresponding DSA 100 ismatch (n) Patients (n, %) orresponding DSAs (n, %) DR & DQ vs. other categories: P=0.01 DR 0-DR 146 (28.9) 0 1-DR 263 (52.1) 20 (7.6) 2-DR 96 (19.0) 9 (9.4) 0-DQ 184 (36.4) 0 70 DQ 1-DQ 250 (49.5) 35 (14.0) 2-DQ 71 (14.1) 15 (21.1) DR/DQ zero [98.0%] DQ alone [97.4%] DR alone [98.6%] DR & DQ [88.5%] DR =0 DQ (21.4) 0 DQ 1 38 (7.5) 2 (5.3) DR 1 DQ 0 75 (14.9) 2 (2.7) DQ (56.2) 60 (21.1) Time post transplant (months) Willicombe, et al. Transplantation. 2012;94:

24 Risk for Antibody-mediated Rejection 2. Non-adherence For-cause biopsies (n=315) between with documented failure (n=56) in 3 N-A enters Polyoma virus nephropathy 7% edical/surgical conditions 11% 64% ABR, probably ABR or ixed rejection Glomerulonephritis 18% ABR 50% Probably ABR 9% ixed rejection 5% Sellares J, et al. Am J Transplant. 2012;12:

25 DSA occur with all types of immunosuppressive regimen 3. Inadequate Overall Immunosuppression Immunosuppression N DSA posttransplantation sa 43% (n=129)*; Tac 35% (n=106)* w/aza 16% (n=50)*; w/f 34% (n=102)* % (n=302): de novo HA antibodies 9.2% (n= 93): de novo DSA achmann N, et al. Transplantation 2009; 87: NI (sa or Tac) Prednisone F F (2 g/d); Prednisone Tac (8 10 ng/m: first 3 mo; 6 8 thereafter sa (2: ng/m first 3 mo; thereafter % (n=54) de novo DSA % (n=34) de novo DQ-DSA - 9,8% (n=20) de novo DQ-DSA + other DSA % (n=316) de novo DSA at 4.8 yrs. (0.2-7) 7.6% (n= 77) 1q+ Freitas A, et al. Transplantation. 2013;95: ; oupy A, et al. N Engl J ed. 2013;369: ; sa (n=129); Tac (n=57) % (n=47) de novo DSA within 10 years Everly J, et al. Transplantation. 2013;95: F/PA + sa + Pred F/PA + Tac + Pred Aza + sa + Pred sa/tac + Sir + Pred 78 16% de novo DSA within first year 19% de novo DSA within first year 5% de novo DSA within first year 3% de novo DSA within first year Banasik, et al. Transplant Proc. 2013;45: ; sa/tac F/ZR/AZA/EVR Tac+F+glucocorticoids: (n=48) sa+f+glucocorticoids: (n=4) EVR+sA+glucocorticoids: (n=3) % (n=39) de novo HA antibody Ashimine S, et al. Kidney Int. 2014;85:425 30; 55 10% de novo DSA at 1 year 28% de novo DSA at 3 years ibri I, et al. Am J Transplant. 2013;13: Belatacept, more intensive + F (n=219) 66 6% de novo DSA by year 3 Belatacept, less intensive + F (n=226) 5% de novo DSA by year 3 sa + F (n=221) oupy A et al. N Engl J ed 2013;369: % de novo DSA by year 3 *Data reflects proportion and numbers of patients with HA antibodies post-transplantation. Vincenti F, et al. Am J Transplant. 2012;12:

26 Inadequate control over immune reactivity Ni-elimination (mo 4.5) followed by Steroid-withdrawal in 60% Retrospective single-center analysis, pooled data from participation in two (comparable) trials Incidence of DSA (uminex) Incidence of late ABR (For-cause biopsy) Everolimus (14/61) p=0.048 Everolimus (8/61) iclosporine (7/65) p=0.036 iclosporine (2/65) DSA <d14 (n=2) Independent risk factors: Everolimus (=Ni/S stop) arm 2.67 ( ) iving donor 2.39 ( ) HA-mismatch ( ) iefeldt, et al. Am J Transplant. 2012;12: Independent risk factors: Everolimus (=Ni/S stop) arm 5.35 ( ) iving donor 5.78 ( ) HA-mismatch ( ) Treated AR first year ( )

27 4: Transplant Glomerulopathy Antibodies against non-ha antigens Transplant Glomerulopathy Gloor et al., Am J Transpl, 2007;7:2124

28 HA-identical Kidney Transplant Recipients (siblings) Impact of pre-transplant %-PRA (HA & non-ha antigens) 1-yr Graft survival according to PRA 10-yr Functional graft survival according to PRA Opelz et al., ancet 2005, 365:1570-6

29 Agonistic antibodies against the AT1-R Refractory vascular rejection in RTRs (n=33) Dragun D et al N Eng J ed 2005

30 Pretransplant H class I related chain A antibodies Early kidney graft loss and Tissue expression Pre-transplant antibodies against IA non HA-sensitized RTRs Sequential kidney biopsies pre-implantation and at day-7 stained with IB antibody (A) Very low levels of tubular IB expression on the renal tubules in the donor kidney biopsy (B) p-regulated IB expression 7 days post-transplant in proximal and distal tubular cytoplasm p=0.004 First graft/well matched/low-risk/non-sensitized Zou Y et al. N Engl J ed 2007;357: Quiroga I et al. Transplantation 2006;81:

31 hronic Renal Allograft Dysfunction Inadequate renal (allograft) function is a robust independent risk factor for excess cardiovascular mortality, especially with concomitant diabetes. ABR is a relative small component of overall graft loss 1, but a definite cause of premature graft failure 2 De novo DSA have been documented in RTRs while treated according to all major immunosuppressive maintenance regimen 7,8. ajor risk factors include Incompatibility for HA-class II, and/or Non-adherence, and/or Inadequate overall immunosuppression linical immunosuppression is further challenged by: ow acute rejection rates vs. excess BKV-replication Prolonged Ni- and S-use vs. unfavourable V risk profile (GFR/D/HT) Inappropriate (empiric) dose reduction(s) and chronic/late (humoral) rejection 1. El-Zoghby Z, et al. Am J Transplant. 2009;9: Sellares J, et al. Am J Transplant. 2012;12: Djamali A, et al. Am J Transplant 2014;14:255-71; 4. oupy A, et al. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2012;8:348 57; 5. Freitas, et al. Transplantation 2013;95: ; 6. oupy A, et al. N Engl J ed. 2013;369: ; 7. Vincenti F, et al. Am J Transplant ;12:210-7; 8. Ashimine S, et al. Kidney Int. 2013