Serum samples from recipients were obtained within 48 hours before transplantation. Pre-transplant

Similar documents
Overview of New Approaches to Immunosuppression in Renal Transplantation

Steroid Minimization: Great Idea or Silly Move?

Summary of Results for Laypersons

Induction Immunosuppression With Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin in Pediatric Liver Transplantation

Solid Organ Transplantation 1. Chapter 55. Solid Organ Transplant, Self-Assessment Questions

Efficacy and Safety of Thymoglobulin and Basiliximab in Kidney Transplant Patients at High Risk for Acute Rejection and Delayed Graft Function

Pediatric Liver Transplantation Outcomes in Korea

Emerging Drug List EVEROLIMUS

Victims of success: Do we still need clinical trials? Robert S. Gaston, MD CTI Clinical Trials and Consulting University of Alabama at Birmingham

Increased Early Rejection Rate after Conversion from Tacrolimus in Kidney and Pancreas Transplantation

The legally binding text is the original French version TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 30 November 2011

Controversies in Renal Transplantation. The Controversial Questions. Patrick M. Klem, PharmD, BCPS University of Colorado Hospital

Overall Goals and Objectives for Transplant Hepatology EPAs:

ABO. ABO ABO ABO ABO ABO ABO ABO ABO. Key words ABO. Alexandre ABO ABO. double filtration plasmapheresis, DFPP. antibody-mediated rejection, AMR

PUO in the Immunocompromised Host: CMV and beyond

Steroid-Resistant Acute Rejections After Liver Transplant

Considering the early proactive switch from a CNI to an mtor-inhibitor (Case: Male, age 34) Josep M. Campistol

Aljoša Kandus Renal Transplant Center, Department of Nephrology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Slovenia

American Journal of Transplantation 2009; 9 (Suppl 3): S1 S157 Wiley Periodicals Inc.

Long term liver transplant management

Immunosuppressants. Assistant Prof. Dr. Najlaa Saadi PhD Pharmacology Faculty of Pharmacy University of Philadelphia

Post-Transplant Monitoring for the Development of Anti-Donor HLA Antibodies

Transplantation in highly sensitised patients treated with intravenous immunoglobulin and Rituximab

What is the Best Induction Immunosuppression Regimen in Kidney Transplantation? Richard Borrows: Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham

Evaluation of a Weight-based Rabbit Anti-thymocyte Globulin Induction Dosing Regimen for Kidney Transplant Recipients

Date: 23 June Context and policy issues:

Withdrawal of Immunosuppression in Pediatric Liver Transplant Recipients in Korea

LIVER TRANSPLANTATION FOR OVERLAP SYNDROMES OF AUTOIMMUNE LIVER DISEASES

European Risk Management Plan. Measures impairment. Retreatment after Discontinuation

Long-term prognosis of BK virus-associated nephropathy in kidney transplant recipients

Alemtuzumab Induction in Non-Hepatitis C Positive Liver Transplant Recipients

Post Operative Management in Heart Transplant นพ พ ชร อ องจร ต ศ ลยศาสตร ห วใจและทรวงอก จ ฬาลงกรณ

Chapter 6: Transplantation

Ten-year outcomes in a randomized phase II study of kidney transplant recipients administered belatacept 4-weekly or 8-weekly

Serologic Markers CONVENTIONAL ANTIBODIES ANTIBODIES UNCONVENTIONAL. AIH Type I

Clinical Outcomes of Renal Transplantation in Hepatitis C Virus Positive Recipients

NAPRTCS Annual Transplant Report

Post Transplant Immunosuppression: Consideration for Primary Care. Sameh Abul-Ezz, M.D., Dr.P.H.

TRANSPLANT IMMUNOLOGY. Shiv Pillai Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT and Harvard

Literature Review: Transplantation July 2010-June 2011

Immunosuppression: evolution in practice and trends,

How to improve long term outcome after liver transplantation?

BK virus infection in renal transplant recipients: single centre experience. Dr Wong Lok Yan Ivy

2017 BANFF-SCT Joint Scientific Meeting. Personalized Medicine in Liver Transplantation

Transplant Hepatology

Chapter 22: Hematological Complications

NAPRTCS Annual Transplant Report

Intravenous immunoglobulin in BK virus nephropathy

Liver Transplant Immunosuppression

Supplementary Appendix

Effect of Calcineurin Inhibitors on Survival and Histologic Disease Severity in HCV-Infected Liver Transplant Recipients

Donor-Specific HLA Class I and CREG Antibodies in Complement-Dependent Cytotoxicity-Negative Renal Transplants

BK Virus (BKV) Management Guideline: July 2017

Cases: CMV, HCV, BKV and Kidney Transplantation. Simin Goral, MD University of Pennsylvania Medical Center

For Immediate Release Contacts: Jenny Keeney Astellas US LLC (847)

Research Article The Induction of IgM and IgG Antibodies against HLA or MICA after Lung Transplantation

Transplantation in Australia and New Zealand

Symposium. Post-operative Management Of Pediatric Heart Transplantation : A Brief Review

OBJECTIVES. Phases of Transplantation and Immunosuppression

Evaluation of Two New Antibody Detection Techniques in Kidney Transplantation. Doctoral Thesis. Dr. Petra Gombos

Supplementary appendix

Histopathology of De Novo Autoimmune Hepatitis

Re: Final Appraisal Determination - Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplant in adults (review of technology appraisal guidance 85)

Intruduction PSI MODE OF ACTION AND PHARMACOKINETICS

The new Banff vision of the role of HLA antibodies in organ transplantation: Improving diagnostic system and design of clinical trials

CURRICULUM VITAE July 5, Name Chang-Kwon Oh. Date of Birth August 15, 1961

ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation in elderly patients over 60 years of age

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Recurrent Cytomegalovirus Infection in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Belatacept: An Update of Ongoing Clinical Trials

SELECTED ABSTRACTS. All (n) % 3-year GS 88% 82% 86% 85% 88% 80% % 3-year DC-GS 95% 87% 94% 89% 96% 80%

Use of immune function test in monitoring immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients

A comparative study of the ATP concentrations in the peripheral CD4 + lymphocytes of living-donor and cadaveric-donor renal transplant recipients

Virtual Crossmatch in Kidney Transplantation

Cover Page. The handle holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation.

Pharmacology notes Interleukin-2 receptor-blocking monoclonal antibodies: evaluation of 2 new agents

Liver Transplant: What s Different? Brian Lin, MD, FACEP Emergency Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, San Francisco UCSF Clinical Assistant Professor

Clinical Study Renal Transplantation in Hepatitis C Positive Patients: ASingleCentreExperience

Lionel Rostaing, Nassim Kamar: Alefacept and Transplantation. Alefacept Treatment in the Setting of Transplantation

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 11 October 2017 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta481

HLA and Non-HLA Antibodies in Transplantation and their Management

Progress in Pediatric Kidney Transplantation

Immune Cell Function Assay

Nephrology Grand Rounds

Alemtuzumab Induction in Renal Transplantation

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 11 October 2017 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta482

Effectiveness of Intraportal Prostaglandin E1 Administration After Liver Transplantation

Scottish Medicines Consortium

Case Report Beneficial Effect of Conversion to Belatacept in Kidney-Transplant Patients with a Low Glomerular-Filtration Rate

Divya Jain Arwindekar, DO Transplant Nephrologist Advocate Christ Medical Center & Associates in Nephrology

Research Article Anti-HLA and Anti-MICA Antibodies in Liver Transplant Recipients: Effect on Long-Term Graft Survival

Case Report Treatment of Cytomegalovirus Infection with Cidofovir and CMV Immune Globulin in a Lung Transplant Recipient

Potential Catalysts in Therapeutics

K For patients who have never been tested for HCV, it is. K It is suggested that HCV-infected patients not previously

Immunopathology of T cell mediated rejection

Outcomes after liver transplantation in accordance with ABO compatibility: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin (Thymoglobulin Ò )

Immunosuppressant medicines and your transplant

KDIGO GN Guideline update Evidence summary. Steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome. Corticosteroid therapy for nephrotic syndrome in children

Marta Farrero Torres₁, Marcelo Pando₂, Dolly Tyan₂, Hannah Valantine₃, Spenser Smith₃, Kiran Khush₃

SINCE the introduction of Imuran and

Transcription:

SDC, Patients and Methods Complement-dependent lymphocytotoxic crossmatch test () Serum samples from recipients were obtained within 48 hours before transplantation. Pre-transplant donor-specific CXM was performed by the standard CDC technique. In brief, the donor s B and T lymphocytes were isolated from peripheral blood, the recipient s serum was added, and the mixture was incubated at room temperature or 37 C for 60 minutes. This was followed by a 120-minute incubation with rabbit complement in order to detect any cytotoxic antibody activity against donor cells. Target cell lysis was determined by trypan blue exclusion. The CXM test was interpreted as positive when more than 20% of donor lymphocytes were lysed in excess of the baseline rate. If the test was positive, the recipient s serum was treated with dithiothreitol (DTT) for 30 minutes to act as a reducing agent to inactivate immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies, and the test was subsequently repeated (8). A negative CXM after DTT reduction was indicative of the presence of IgM antibodies only, whereas a positive CXM in spite of DTT treatment indicated the presence of immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies. Immunosuppressive regimen Before 2001, the immunosuppression protocol consisted of standard triple-drug therapy with cyclosporine, mycophenolate, and methylprednisolone. However, since 2001, a four-drug routine immunosuppressive protocol was established which included basiliximab (Simulect, Novartis), a calcineurin inhibitor (tacrolimus or cyclosporine), mycophenolate, and methylprednisolone. Basiliximab, an IL-2R antibody, was given for immune induction during the intraoperative period and then on postoperative day four. Tacrolimus (Prograft, Astellas) was started at a dose of 0.5 mg twice daily on postoperative day three. Trough concentrations of tacrolimus were adjusted to 10-12 ng/ml for the first month, and then tapered over 6 months to a maintenance level of 5-8 ng/ml. Cyclosporine (Sandimmune, Novartis) was given at a dose of 2 mg/kg/day orally, and subsequently adjusted to maintain blood levels of 200-300 ng/ml for the first month. After the first month, target levels were set at 100-150 ng/ml. A total of 1.5 g (two doses of 750 mg) of mycophenolate (CellCept, Roche) was provided the day following liver transplantation. The mycophenolate dose was adjusted according to the occurrence of hematologic or gastrointestinal side effects.

A total of 500 mg of methylprednisolone was injected in all patients during the anhepatic period, followed by 500 mg on the first postoperative day. Thereafter, the drug was gradually tapered to 32 mg/day over a period of 10 days, and discontinued by 12 months after LT. None of the patients received immunosuppression therapy with anti-lymphocyte antibodies.

SDC, Table S1. Comparison of liver function test values for aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase between positive and negative lymphocytotoxic crossmatch recipients Posttransplant day Aspartate aminotransferase (U/L) Alanine aminotransferase (U/L) Negative True positive P-value Negative True positive P-value 0 (immediate) 259.9 256.1 0.793 161.7 148.4 0.149 0 (6 hr later) 448.1 335.1 0.023 342.2 311.0 0.014 1 597.1 694.5 0.015 440.6 528.8 0.025 2 502.8 729.5 0.021 461.8 577.5 0.107 3 281.9 341.7 0.017 367.8 419.2 0.093 4 143.5 156.3 0.051 263.8 299.3 0.163 5 87.2 88.3 0.117 197.5 209.4 0.179 6 72.5 62.4 0.497 167.3 159.6 0.578 7 83.1 48.5 0.471 162.2 131.6 0.602 8 90.3 50.4 0.227 172.9 127.1 0.191 9 79.6 48.0 0.010 189.5 127.4 0.013 10 135.7 47.0 0.008 216.2 128.5 0.003 11 93.7 51.8 0.177 221.9 135.8 0.009 12 75.1 54.0 0.347 218.4 151.6 0.098 13 67.3 77.0 0.577 211.3 165.3 0.145 14 62.0 59.6 0.558 207.7 176.9 0.179 1 month 44.4 40.4 0.169 99.4 83.8 0.320 3 months 36.2 38.1 0.915 49.7 55.0 0.883 6 months 41.9 35.7 0.430 48.4 44.0 0.826 12 months 41.8 46.3 0.369 47.7 52.7 0.096 24 months 43.9 90.8 0.566 46.3 53.6 0.154 36 months 40.9 37.3 0.684 43.0 36.0 0.831 48 months 41.5 35.8 0.935 41.1 33.6 0.948 60 months 37.6 29.7 0.439 38.2 26.2 0.178 * All values are expressed as means

SDC, Table S2. Effect of true positive lymphocytotoxic crossmatch and false positive lymphocytotoxic crossmatch (IgM autoantibodies) on liver transplant outcome Values are expressed as number (%); CXM, crossmatch; *aab, IgM autoantibod A+B, absence of IgM autoantibody in recipient sera, A+C, finally reported negative result; CMV, Cytomegalovir Negative CXM Positive CXM aab* ( ) aab* (+) P-value True negative True positive False positive B vs. C vs. Final CXM result (A) (B) (C) A+B A+C Total B vs. A C vs. A B vs. C A vs. B v A+C A+B C Number of case 1011 80 42 1091 1053 1133 Allograft rejection 188 18 13 206 201 219 0.390 0.456 0.068 0.052 0.308 0.105 (18.6) (22.5) (31.0) (18.9) (19.1) (19.3) Biliary complication 274 27 13 301 287 314 0.200 0.211 0.583 0.633 0.754 0.394 (27.1) (33.8) (31.0) (27.6) (27.3) (27.7) Vascular complication Hepatic artery 48 4 2 52 50 54 0.788 0.788 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.995 (4.7) (5.0) (4.8) (4.8) (4.7) (4.8) Hepatic vein 28 3 2 31 30 33 0.491 0.502 0.338 0.348 1.000 0.677 (2.8) (3.8) (4.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.9) Portal vein 55 5 1 60 56 61 0.797 0.613 0.721 0.723 0.663 0.648 (5.4) (6.3) (2.4) (5.5) (5.3) (5.4) Viral disease recurrence Hepatitis B virus 79 6 2 85 81 79 0.920 0.950 0.765 0.766 0.713 0.766 (7.8) (7.5) (4.8) (7.8) (7.7) (7.0) Hepatitis C virus 35 7 0 42 35 42 0.176 0.171 0.395 0.400 0.094 0.171 (3.5) (8.8) (0.0) (3.8) (3.3) (3.7) CMV infection 325 30 9 355 334 364 0.325 0.286 0.144 0.130 0.071 0.196 (32.1) (37.5) (21.4) (32.5) (31.7) (32.1) de novo malignancy 43 8 7 51 50 58 0.061 0.058 0.003 0.004 0.287 0.000 (4.3) (10.0) (16.7) (4.7) (4.7) (5.1) Re-transplantation 37 4 1 41 38 42 0.535 0.532 1.000 1.000 0.659 0.745 (3.7) (5.0) (2.4) (3.8) (3.6) (3.7) Graft loss (GL) 237 24 11 261 248 272 0.186 0.193 0.681 0.736 0.658 0.394 (23.4) (30.0) (26.2) (23.9) (23.6) (24.0) Liver-specific GL 110 17 5 127 115 132 0.005 0.006 0.800 1.000 0.202 0.021 (10.9) (21.3) (11.9) (11.6) (10.9) (11.7) Patient death 223 22 11 245 234 256 0.261 0.277 0.528 0.570 0.877 0.454 (22.1) (27.5) (26.2) (22.5) (22.2) (22.6) SDC, Table S3. Multivariate analysis to identify risk factors for liver-specific graft survival Variables in the equation B SE Wald df 95.0% CI for Exp(B) p-value Exp(B) Lower Upper Type of donor (living vs. deceased) -0.154 0.277 0.308 1 0.579 0.857 0.498 1.476 Type of recipient (adult vs. pediatric) 0.190 0.323 0.347 1 0.556 1.210 0.642 2.279 Relationship with the donor -0.268 0.227 1.387 1 0.239 0.765 0.490 1.195 Donor gender -0.390 0.180 4.679 1 0.031 0.677 0.475 0.964

Recipient gender -0.037 0.208 0.032 1 0.859 0.964 0.641 1.449 Allograft rejection -0.230 0.200 1.321 1 0.250 0.795 0.537 1.176 Biliary complication -0.129 0.196 0.434 1 0.510 0.879 0.598 1.291 Hepatic artery complication -1.489 0.256 33.852 1 0.000 0.226 0.137 0.372 Hepatic vein complication -0.686 0.350 3.838 1 0.049 0.504 0.254 1.000 Portal vein complication -0.381 0.316 1.450 1 0.228 0.683 0.368 1.270 Hepatitis B viral disease recurrence -0.463 0.261 3.149 1 0.076 0.629 0.378 1.050 Hepatitis C viral disease recurrence -0.569 0.360 2.495 1 0.114 0.566 0.280 1.147 Cytomegalovirus infection 0.303 0.201 2.266 1 0.132 1.354 0.913 2.009 de novo malignancy 0.843 0.517 2.660 1 0.103 2.324 0.844 6.399 True positive crossmatch -0.622 0.267 5.421 1 0.020 0.537 0.318 0.906 IgM autoantibody in recipient sera 0.201 0.464 0.187 1 0.665 1.222 0.492 3.037