Peritubular Capillaries C4d Deposits in Renal Allograft Biopsies and Anti HLA I/II Alloantibodies Screening. Incidence and Clinical Importance

Aim: To characterise clinically the patients with C4d in peritubular capillaries deposits (C4dPTCD) and/or circulating anti-HLA class I/II alloantibodies. To determine the correlation between positive C4dPTCD and circulating anti-HLA class I/II alloantibodies during episodes of graft dysfunction. Subjects and Methods: C4d staining was performed in biopsies with available frozen tissue obtained between January 2004 and December 2006. The study was prospective from March 2005, when a serum sample was obtained at the time of biopsy to detect circulating anti-HLA class I/II alloantibodies. Results: We studied 109 biopsies in 86 cadaver renal transplant patients. Sixteen of these (14.7%) presented diffuse positive C4dPTCD. There was a 13.5% rate of +C4dPTCD incidence within the first six months of transplantation and 16% after six months (p>0.05). Half of the +C4dPTCD in the first six months was associated with acute humoral rejection. After six months, the majority of +C4dPTCD (n=7/8) was present in biopsies with evidence of interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy and/or transplant glomerulopathy. The C4dPTCD was more frequent in patients with positive anti-HCV antibodies(p<0.0001), a previous renal transplant (p=0.007), and with a panel reactivity antibody (PRA) ≥ 50%(p=0.0098). The anti-HCV+ patients had longer time on dialysis (p=0.0019) and higher PRA(p=0.005). Circulating anti-HLA I/II alloantibodies were screened in 46 serum samples. They were positive in 10.9% of samples, all obtained after six months post transplant. Circulating alloantibodies were absent in 92.5% of the C4d negative biopsies. Conclusion: We found an association between the presence of C4dPTCD and 2nd transplant recipients,higher PRA and the presence of anti-HCV antibodies. The presence of HCV antibodies is not a risk factor for C4dPTCD per se, but appears to reflect longer time on dialysis and presensitisation. In renal dysfunction a negative alloantibody screening is associated with a reduced risk of C4dPTCD (<10%).

Specificity and Sensitivity of Screening for Anti-HLA Antibodies in Kidney Allograft Dysfunction

BACKGROUND: Prospective testing for posttransplant circulating anti-HLA antibodies seems to be a critical noninvasive tool, but confirmatory data are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over the last 3 years, peritubular capillary (PTC) C4d deposition was prospectively sought by an immunofluorescence technique applied to frozen tissue in biopsies obtained for allograft dysfunction. Screening for circulating anti-HLA class I/II alloantibodies (AlloAb) by the flow cytometric test was performed simultaneously. RESULTS: We evaluated 132 sets of biopsies and simultaneous serum samples. PTC C4d deposition was demonstrated in 15.9% (21/132) of biopsies. Circulating anti-HLA I/II AlloAb were detected in 25% (33/132) of serum samples. Employing receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curves for all C4d-positive biopsies, screening for AlloAb showed a global specificity of 82% and sensitivity of 61.9%. When this analysis was restricted to biopsies obtained in the first month posttransplantation, the sensitivity increased to 81.8%, but the specificity decreased to 76.9%. After the first month posttransplantation, we observed sensitivity of 40.0% and a specificity of 86.4%. In the first month posttransplantation, all patients with a diagnosis of acute antibody-mediated rejection displayed circulating anti-HLA class I/II, but not always at the same time as the C4d-positive biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: In the first month posttransplantation, prospective monitoring of anti-HLA antibodies may be useful. The high sensitivity allows the identification of patients at risk, affording an earlier diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection. After the first month, the test can be used to evaluate allograft dysfunction episodes, since positivity is highly suggestive of an antibody-mediated process.

C4d Presence in Kidney Allograft Biopsy: Sensitivity and Specifity of Immunoperoxidase vs Immunofluorescence

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the sensitivity/specificity of immunoperoxidase method in comparison with the standard immunofluorescence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of 87 biopsies made for allograft dysfunction. Immunofluorescence (IF) was performed in frozen allograft biopsies using monoclonal antibody anti-C4d from Quidel®. The indirect immunoperoxidase (IP) technique was performed in paraffin-embebbed tissue with polyclonal antiserum from Serotec®. Biopsies were independently evaluated by two nephropathologist according Banff 2007 classification. RESULTS: By IF, peritubular C4d deposition were detected in 60 biopsies and absent in 27 biopsies. The evaluation of biopsy by IP was less precise due to the presence of background and unspecific staining. We find 13.8% (12/87) of false negative and Banff classification concordance in 79.3% (69/87) of cases (table1). The ROC curve study reveal a specificity of 100% and sensitivity of 80.0 % of IP method in relation to the gold standard (area under curve:0.900; 95% Confidence interval :0.817-0.954; p=0.0001). Banff Classification C4d Cases Immunofluorescence Immunoperoxidase n =87 Diffuse Negative 3 (3.4%) Focal Negative 9 (10.3%) Negative Negative 27 (31.0%) Diffuse Diffuse 33 (37.9%) Focal Focal 9 (10.3%) Diffuse Focal 6 (6.9%) CONCLUSION: The IP method presents a good specificity, but lesser sensitivity to C4d detection in allograft dysfunction. The evaluation is more difficult, requiring more experience of the observer than IF method. If frozen tissue is unavailable, the use of IP for C4d detection is acceptable.

C4d Detection in Renal Allograft Biopsies: Immunohistochemistry vs. Immunofluorescence

Introduction. Peritubular capillary complement 4d staining is one of the criteria for the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection, and research into this is essential to kidney allograft evaluation. The immunofluorescence technique applied to frozen sections is the present gold-standard method for complement 4d staining and is used routinely in our laboratory. The immunohistochemistry technique applied to paraffin-embedded tissue may be used when no frozen tissue is available. Material and Methods. The aim of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemistry compared with immunofluorescence. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of the immunohistochemistry vs. the immunofluorescence technique. For this purpose complement 4d staining was performed retrospectively by the two methods in indication biopsies (n=143) and graded using the Banff 07 classification. Results. There was total classification agreement between methods in 87.4% (125/143) of cases. However, immunohistochemistry staining caused more difficulties in interpretation, due to nonspecific staining in tubular cells and surrounding interstitium. All cases negative by immunofluorescence were also negative by immunohistochemistry. The biopsies were classified as positive in 44.7% (64/143) of cases performed by immunofluorescence vs. 36.4% (52/143) performed by immunohistochemistry. Fewer biopsies were classified as positive diffuse in the immunohistochemistry group(25.1% vs. 31.4%) and more as positive focal (13.2% vs. 11.1%). More cases were classified as negative by immunohistochemistry (63.6% vs. 55.2%). Study by ROC curve showed immunohistochemistry has a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 81.2% in relation to immunofluorescence (AUC: 0.906; 95% confidence interval: 0.846-0.949; p=0.0001). Conclusions. The immunohistochemistry method presents an excellent specificity but lower sensitivity to C4d detection in allograft dysfunction. The evaluation is more difficult, requiring a more experienced observer than the immunofluorescence method. Based on these results, we conclude that the immunohistochemistry technique can safely be used when immunofluorescence is not available.

Thoracic Manifestations of Connective Tissue Diseases

Connective tissue diseases (CTDs) comprise several immunologic systemic disorders, each of which associated with a particular set of clinical manifestations and autoimmune profile. CTDs may cause numerous thoracic abnormalities, which vary in frequency and pattern according to the underlying disorder. The CTDs that most commonly involve the respiratory system are progressive systemic sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, Sjögren syndrome, polymyositis, dermatomyositis, and mixed connective tissue disease. Pulmonary abnormalities in this group of patients may result from CTD-related lung disease or treatment complications, namely drug toxicity and opportunistic infections. The most important thoracic manifestations of CTDs are interstitial lung disease and pulmonary arterial hypertension, with nonspecific interstitial pneumonia being the most common pattern of interstitial lung disease. High-resolution computed tomography is a valuable tool in the initial evaluation and follow-up of patients with CTDs. As such, general knowledge of the most common high-resolution computed tomographic features of CTD-related lung disease allows the radiologist to contribute to better patient management.