The consolidation of single antigens beads (SAB-panIgG) assay in the detection of preformed anti-HLA antibodies has improved transplantation success. However, its high sensitivity has limited the allograft allocation for sensitized patients, increasing their waiting time. A modification of the standard SAB-panIgG assay allows the detection of that sub-set of antibodies capable of binding C1q (SAB-C1q assay). However, the clinical usefulness of SAB-C1q assay for determining the unacceptable mismatches is under discussion. We retrospectively analyzed the impact of preformed donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) according to the C1q-binding ability on allograft outcome, examining 389 single-kidney transplanted patients from deceased donors. Recipients with preformed C1q-binding DSA showed the lowest allograft survival up to 7-years (40.7%) compared to patients with preformed non-C1q-binding DSA (73.4%; p=0.001) and without DSA (79.1%; p<0.001). Allograft survival rate was similar between patients with preformed non-C1q-binding DSA and patients without preformed DSA (p=0.403). Interestingly, among the high-MFI DSA (≥10,000) population (n=46), those patients whose DSA were further capable of binding C1q showed a poorer allograft outcome (38.4% vs. 68.9%; p=0.041). Moreover, in our multivariate predictive model for assessing the risk of allograft-loss, the presence of C1q-binding DSA (HR 4.012; CI 95% 2.326-6.919; p<0.001), but not of non-C1q-binding DSA (HR 1.389; CI 95% 0.784-2.461; p=0.260) remained an independent predictor after stratifying the DSA population according to the C1q-binding ability and adjusting the model for other pre-transplantation predictive factors including donor age, cold-ischemia time and HLA-DR mismatches. In conclusion, the unacceptable mismatch definition according to the SAB-C1q assay would improve the risk stratification of allograft loss and increase the limited allograft allocation of highly sensitized patients, shortening their waiting time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Molina et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: