Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Jun 1;26(3):314-320.
doi: 10.1097/MOT.0000000000000878.

Desensitization and management of allograft rejection

Affiliations
Review

Desensitization and management of allograft rejection

Lorenzo Zaffiri. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. .

Abstract

Purpose of review: Chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) limits the success of lung transplantation. Among the risk factors associated with CLAD, we recognize pretransplant circulating antibodies against the human leukocyte antigens (HLA), acute cellular rejection (ACR) and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). This review will summarize current data surrounding management of desensitization, ACR, AMR, and CLAD.

Recent findings: Strategies in managing in highly sensitized patients waiting for lung transplant include avoidance of specific HLA antigens and reduction of circulating anti-HLA antibodies at time of transplant. Several multimodal approaches have been studied in the treatment of AMR with a goal to clear circulating donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) and to halt the production of new antibodies. Different immunosuppressive strategies focus on influence of the host immune system, particularly T-cell responses, in order to prevent ACR and the progression of CLAD.

Summary: The lack of significant evidence and consensus limits to draw conclusion regarding the impact of specific immunosuppressive regimens in the management of HLA antibodies, ACR, and CLAD. Development of novel therapeutic agents and use of multicenter randomized clinical trials will allow to better define patient-specific treatments and improve the length and quality of life of lung transplant recipients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

References

    1. Diamond JM, Arcasoy S, Kennedy CC, et al. Report of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Working Group on Primary Lung Graft Dysfunction, part II: Epidemiology, risk factors, and outcomes-A 2016 Consensus Group statement of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 2017; 36:1104–1113.
    1. Levy L, Huszti E, Renaud-Picard B, et al. Risk assessment of chronic lung allograft dysfunction phenotypes: validation and proposed refinement of the 2019 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation classification system. J Heart Lung Transplant 2020; 39:761–770.
    1. Verleden GM, Glanville AR, Lease ED, et al. Chronic lung allograft dysfunction: definition, diagnostic criteria, and approaches to treatment-a consensus report from the Pulmonary Council of the ISHLT. J Heart Lung Transplant 2019; 38:493–503.
    1. Shah AS, Nwakanma L, Simpkins C, et al. Pretransplant panel reactive antibodies in human lung transplantation: an analysis of over 10,000 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85:1919–1924.
    1. Gammie JS, Pham SM, Colson YL, et al. Influence of panel-reactive antibody on survival and rejection after lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1997; 16:408–415.

LinkOut - more resources