Screening Panel-Reactive Antibody Negative,Single-Antigen Positive: A Case Report

Abstract

Sensitized patients remain a challenge for successful transplant. Virtual crossmatch is used to determine the presence or absence of donor-specific antibodies. A 60-year-old woman with a negative screening for panel-reactive antibodies (PRA) received an A*11, A*68 type kidney with a negative anti-human globulin/complement-dependent cytotoxicity (AHG-CDC) crossmatch. Her transplant course was complicated by delayed graft function, and she required hemodialysis. On day 8 after receiving the transplant, she had a kidney biopsy that showed features of antibody-mediated rejection/severe acute tubular necrosis, which was treated by plasmapheresis for 5 sessions and intravenous immunoglobulin (2 g/kg). Her serum level of creatinine decreased from 6.7 to 3.6 mg/dL (600–320 μmol/L). Panel-reactive antibody by Luminex was repeated and again was negative. Single-antigen detection was tried next. Surprisingly, A*11:02 came up positive with a mean fluorescence intensity of 9500. High-resolution donor HLA type was A*68:01 and A*11:01. A*11:02 is not part of the screening Luminex PRA whereas the 11:01 allele is. Serologically, HLA-A11 has 2 defined splits, A11.1 and A11.2, which encode A*11:01 and A*11:02, respectively. In this case, the A*11:02 antibody does not seem to be responsible for the increasing creatinine level. However, if the donor had been A*11:02, a humeral rejection would have occurred and been missed by a virtual crossmatch. Thus virtual crossmatch may not work at all times. Screening for PRA by single antigens is suggested even in PRA-negative cases, if only virtual crossmatch is to be used.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Patel

Terasaki

. Significance of the positive crossmatch test in kidney transplantation N Engl J Med. 1969;280(14):735–739.

Gloor

Winters

Cornell

. Baseline donor-specific antibody levels and outcomes in positive crossmatch kidney transplantation Am J Transplant. 2010;10(3):582–589.

Cecka

Kucheryavaya

Reinsmoen

Leffell

. Calculated PRA: Initial results show benefits for sensitized patients and a reduction in positive crossmatches Am J Transplant. 2011;11(4):719–724.

Cecka

. Calculated PRA (CPRA): The new measure of sensitization for transplant candidates Am J Transplant. 2010;10(1):26–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02927.

Gebel

Bray

Nickerson

. Pre-transplant assessment of donor-reactive, HLA-specific antibodies in renal transplantation: Contraindication vs. risk Am J Transplant. 2003;3(12):1488–1500.

Patel

Pancoska

Mulgaonkar

Weng

. Renal transplantation in patients with pre-transplant donor-specific antibodies and negative flow cytometry crossmatches Am J Transplant. 2007;7(10):2371–2377.

Amico

Honger

Mayr

Steiger

Hopfer

Schaub

. Clinical relevance of pretransplant donor-specific HLA antibodies detected by single-antigen flow-beads Transplantation. 2009;87(11):1681–1688.

Morris

Phelan

Jendrisak

Mohanakumar

. Virtual crossmatch by identification of donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies by solid-phase immunoassay: A 30-month analysis in living donor kidney transplantation Hum Immunol. 2010;71(3):268–273.

Jacob

De Goey

Gandhi

. Positive virtual crossmatch with negative flow crossmatch results in two cases Transpl Immunol. 2011;25(1):77–81.

10.

Bingaman

Murphey

Palma-Vargas

Wright

. A virtual crossmatch protocol significantly increases access of highly sensitized patients to deceased donor kidney transplantation Transplantation. 2008;86(12):1864–1868.

11.

Dragun

Catar

Philippe

. Non-HLA antibodies in solid organ transplantation: Recent concepts and clinical relevance Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2013;18(4):430–435.

12.

Jackowski

Kuchipudi

Levis

. 22-P: Do antibodies against denatured antigens still exist with the ibeads assay? Hum Immunol. 2013;74(suppl):65.

13.

Hajeer

Al Balwi

Uyar

Aytul F

. HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1 and -DQB1 allele and haplotype frequencies in saudis using next generation sequencing technique Tissue Antigens. 2013;82(4):252–258. doi: 10.1111/tan.12200.