- Journal of Heart & Lung Transplantation. 2018; 37(3):340-348.
BACKGROUND: Survival after lung transplantation is limited by chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). Immunomodulatory therapies such as extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) and alemtuzumab (AL) have been described for refractory CLAD, but comparative outcomes are not well defined. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed spirometric values and clinical outcomes after therapy with ECP, AL, or no treatment (NT) in patients with CLAD who underwent transplant between January 2005 and December 2014. We used inverse probability-weighted regression adjustment (IPWRA) to adjust for potential confounders affecting treatment choice. RESULTS: Of 267 patients, 31 received immunomodulatory therapies for CLAD, and 78 received NT. The slope of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) decline significantly improved after treatment with AL and with ECP compared with pre-treatment FEV1 slope; however, there was no significant change in slope of forced vital capacity (FVC). Comparison with NT was limited because of clinical differences in treatment groups. After IPWRA, we found no significant difference in mean difference of FEV1 slope (ml/month) when comparing treatment with NT, suggesting stabilization of lung function in the treatment group. We found no difference between the 2 immunomodulatory therapies 1, 3, and 6 months post-treatment (-49.9 [95% CI -581.8, +482.0], p = 0.85; +27.7 [95% CI -167.6, +223.0], p = 0.78; -9.6 [95% CI -167.5, +148.2], p = 0.91). We found no difference in mean FVC slope or differences between ECP and AL in infection rates or survival after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Immunomodulatory therapy for CLAD with ECP or AL was associated with a significant change in FEV1 slope post-treatment compared with pre-treatment slope, with minimal effect on FVC. There was no difference between the 2 therapies in their effect on pulmonary function. Copyright © 2018 International Society for the Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND:
There is no standard definition for “HLA incompatible” transplants. For the first time, we systematically assessed how HLA incompatibility was defined in contemporary peer-reviewed publications and its prognostic implication to transplant outcomes.
Â
METHODS:
We combined 2 independent searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2015 to 2019. Content-expert reviewers screened for original research on outcomes of HLA-incompatible transplants (defined as allele or molecular mismatch and solid-phase or cell-based assays). We ascertained the completeness of reporting on a predefined set of variables assessing HLA incompatibility, therapies, and outcomes. Given significant heterogeneity, we conducted narrative synthesis and assessed risk of bias in studies examining the association between death-censored graft failure and HLA incompatibility.
Â
RESULTS:
Of 6656 screened articles, 163 evaluated transplant outcomes by HLA incompatibility. Most articles reported on cytotoxic/flow T-cell crossmatches (n = 98). Molecular genotypes were reported for selected loci at the allele-group level. Sixteen articles reported on epitope compatibility. Pretransplant donor-specific HLA antibodies were often considered (n = 143); yet there was heterogeneity in sample handling, assay procedure, and incomplete reporting on donor-specific HLA antibodies assignment. Induction (n = 129) and maintenance immunosuppression (n = 140) were frequently mentioned but less so rejection treatment (n = 72) and desensitization (n = 70). Studies assessing death-censored graft failure risk by HLA incompatibility were vulnerable to bias in the participant, predictor, and analysis domains.
Â
CONCLUSIONS:
Optimization of transplant outcomes and personalized care depends on accurate HLA compatibility assessment. Reporting on a standard set of variables will help assess generalizability of research, allow knowledge synthesis, and facilitate international collaboration in clinical trials.
Â
Â
