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.