Cuadrado-Payán Elena, González-Roca Eva, Rodríguez-Espinosa Diana, Molina-Andújar Alicia, Montagud-Marrahi Enrique, Arana Carolt, González-Rojas Angela, Esforzado Nuria, Torregrosa Vicens, Ventura-Aguiar Pedro, Argudo María, Serrano-Jorcano Daniel, Ramírez-Bajo Maria José, Bañón-Maneus Elisenda, Casas Silvia, Broseta José Jesus, Puig-Butille Joan Anton, Revuelta Ignacio, Diekmann Fritz, Cucchiari David
Servicio de Nefrología y Trasplante Renal, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain; Laboratori Experimental de Nefrologia i Trasplantament (LENIT), Fundació de Recerca Clínic Barcelona-Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi I Sunyer (FRCB-IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain.
Laboratorio CORE de Biología Molecular, Centro de Diagnóstico Biomédico (CDB), Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Nefrologia (Engl Ed). 2025 Apr;45(4):294-301. doi: 10.1016/j.nefroe.2025.03.004. Epub 2025 Apr 10.
The introduction of donor-derived free DNA (ddcfDNA) has emerged as an accurate non-invasive biomarker to diagnose rejection, compared to classical ones. Here we evaluate our experience after its implementation in our center as an in-house technique.
Single-center cross-sectional study with extraction of cell-free DNA in blood and quantification of the ddcfDNA using the AlloSeqcfDNA assay (CareDx) at the time of performing biopsies 'per protocol' or 'per indication' between December 2020 and December 2023.
172 graft biopsies were included (59 for protocol and 113 for cause) in 112 kidney transplant recipients. Among the biopsies, 19 borderline rejections, 11 T-cell mediated rejections, and 30 antibody-mediated rejections were identified. The median ddcfDNA in each diagnostic group was: 0.40% (0.23%-0.82%) in borderline, 0.60% (0.23%-1.91%) in cellular, and 1.48% (0.77%-3.4%) in antibody-mediated rejection (P < .001). In the 112 biopsies with no signs of rejection, the median ddcfDNA was 0.33% (0.17%-0.54%) (P < .001). Cases with positive DSAs and rejection showed higher levels of ddcfDNA than positive DSAs without rejection (P = .010), and ddcfDNA levels were significantly associated with microvascular inflammation and C4d positivity. The area under the ROC curves of ddcfDNA to discriminate any type of rejection from the absence of rejection was 0.74 (0.65-0.82) and, excluding borderline rejection from the analysis, 0.80 (0.72-0.89), outperforming other markers of renal function.
Implementing ddcfDNA analysis at our center as a clinical tool has proven valuable for distinguishing biopsy-confirmed acute rejection, particularly antibody-mediated rejection, outperforming classic renal function markers. Its hospital-based implementation supports timely and accurate diagnosis, improving transplant management and prognosis.
与传统生物标志物相比,供体来源的游离DNA(ddcfDNA)作为一种准确的非侵入性生物标志物已出现用于诊断排斥反应。在此,我们评估了在我们中心将其作为内部技术实施后的经验。
单中心横断面研究,在2020年12月至2023年12月期间,按照“方案”或“指征”在进行活检时提取血液中的游离DNA,并使用AlloSeqcfDNA检测法(CareDx)对ddcfDNA进行定量。
纳入了112例肾移植受者的172次移植肾活检(59次按方案进行,113次因病因进行)。在活检中,确定了19例临界排斥反应、11例T细胞介导的排斥反应和30例抗体介导的排斥反应。每个诊断组中的ddcfDNA中位数为:临界排斥反应组为0.40%(0.23%-0.82%),细胞介导排斥反应组为0.60%(0.23%-1.91%),抗体介导排斥反应组为1.48%(0.77%-3.4%)(P <.001)。在112次无排斥反应迹象的活检中,ddcfDNA中位数为0.33%(0.17%-0.54%)(P <.001)。伴有阳性供体特异性抗体(DSA)和排斥反应的病例显示出比无排斥反应的阳性DSA病例更高的ddcfDNA水平(P = 0.010),并且ddcfDNA水平与微血管炎症和C4d阳性显著相关。ddcfDNA用于区分任何类型排斥反应与无排斥反应的ROC曲线下面积为0.74(0.65-0.82),排除临界排斥反应进行分析时为0.80(0.72-0.89),优于其他肾功能标志物。
在我们中心将ddcfDNA分析作为一种临床工具实施已证明对于区分活检确诊的急性排斥反应,特别是抗体介导的排斥反应有价值,优于经典肾功能标志物。其在医院内的实施有助于及时准确诊断,改善移植管理和预后。