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
. 2021 Nov 16:8:781195.
doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.781195. eCollection 2021.

Spot Urine Protein Excretion in the First Year Following Kidney Transplantation Associates With Allograft Rejection Phenotype at 1-Year Surveillance Biopsies: An Observational National-Cohort Study

Affiliations

Spot Urine Protein Excretion in the First Year Following Kidney Transplantation Associates With Allograft Rejection Phenotype at 1-Year Surveillance Biopsies: An Observational National-Cohort Study

Manca Oblak et al. Front Med (Lausanne). .

Abstract

Introduction: Urine protein excretion is routinely measured to assess kidney allograft injury, but the diagnostic value of this measurement for kidney transplant pathology remains unclear. Here we investigated whether spot urine protein excretion in the first year following transplantation associates with allograft rejection phenotype at 1-year surveillance biopsies and de-novo occurrence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA). Patients and Methods: This prospective, observational national-cohort study included 139 non-sensitized patients who received a deceased donor kidney transplant between December 2014 and 2018. All patients received basiliximab induction and tacrolimus-based immunosuppression. Estimated protein excretion rate (ePER) was calculated monthly from spot urine protein-to-creatinine ratios. At 1-year, all recipients underwent surveillance graft biopsy and were screened for de-novo DSA. Screening-positive sera were subjected to single antigen bead (SAB) testing. The occurrence of de-novo DSA was determined based on SAB reactivity patterns using a mean fluorescence intensity threshold >1,000. Results: Among the 139 study patients, 27 patients (19%) had histologic evidence of T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), and 9 patients (7%) had histologic evidence of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) at 1-year surveillance biopsy. One year after transplant, 19 patients (14%) developed de-novo DSA. Compared with patients without rejection and no de-novo DSA, mixed-effects linear regression analysis showed a significant difference in slope of ePER during the first year in patients with AMR and de-novo DSA at 1-year (46, 95% CI 25-68 mg/day/1.73 m2 per month and 34, 95% CI 20-49 mg/day/1.73 m2 per month, respectively). Patients with vascular TCMR also showed a significant difference in ePER slope over time compared with patients with non-rejection findings (31, 95% CI 9-52 mg/day/1.73 m2 per month). The discriminatory power of ePER for intragraft rejection processes was better in patients with AMR (AUC 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-0.99; P < 0.001) than in those with TCMR (AUC 0.68, 95% CI 0.59-0.79; P = 0.002), with 89% sensitivity and 93% specificity for proteinuria >550 mg/day/1.73m2. Conclusions: An increase in ePER in the first year following kidney transplantation associates with AMR, vascular TCMR and de-novo DSA at 1-year and may be used as a non-invasive clinical marker of intragraft endothelial cell injury.

Keywords: T-cell mediated rejection; antibody-mediated rejection; donor-specific antibodies; kidney transplantation; urine protein excretion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Estimated protein excretion rate (ePER, mean and 95% CI) in the first year following kidney transplantation according to main histologic findings at 1-year surveillance biopsies (A) and de-novo occurrence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) (B). AMR, antibody-mediated rejection; TCMR, T cell-mediated rejection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Estimated protein excretion rate (ePER, mean and 95% CI) in the first year following kidney transplantation according to allograft rejection phenotypes at 1-year surveillance biopsies. AMR, antibody-mediated rejection; TCMR, T cell-mediated rejection.

References

    1. El-Zoghby ZM, Stegall MD, Lager DJ, Kremers WK, Amer H, Gloor JM, et al. . Identifying specific causes of kidney allograft loss. Am J Transplant. (2009) 9:527–35. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02519.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sellarés J, de Freitas DG, Mengel M, Reeve J, Einecke G, Sis B, et al. . Understanding the causes of kidney transplant failure: the dominant role of antibody-mediated rejection and nonadherence. Am J Transplant. (2012) 12:388–99. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03840.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Naesens M, Kuypers DR, De Vusser K, Evenepoel P, Claes K, Bammens B, et al. . The histology of kidney transplant failure: a long-term follow-up study. Transplantation. (2014) 98:427–35. 10.1097/TP.0000000000000183 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Williams WW, Taheri D, Tolkoff-Rubin N, Colvin RB. Clinical role of the renal transplant biopsy. Nat Rev Nephrol. (2012) 8:110–21. 10.1038/nrneph.2011.213 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bosmans JL, Ysebaert DK, Verpooten GA. Chronic allograft nephropathy: what have we learned from protocol biopsies? Transplantation. (2008) 85:S38–41. 10.1097/TP.0b013e318169c5d0 - DOI - PubMed