Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Ian W. Gibson is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Ian W. Gibson.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2008

Banff 07 Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology: Updates and Future Directions

Kim Solez; Robert B. Colvin; Lorraine C. Racusen; Mark Haas; B. Sis; Michael Mengel; Philip F. Halloran; William M. Baldwin; Giovanni Banfi; A. B. Collins; F. Cosio; Daisa Silva Ribeiro David; Cinthia B. Drachenberg; G. Einecke; Agnes B. Fogo; Ian W. Gibson; Samy S. Iskandar; Edward S. Kraus; Evelyne Lerut; Roslyn B. Mannon; Michael J. Mihatsch; Brian J. Nankivell; Volker Nickeleit; John C. Papadimitriou; Parmjeet Randhawa; Heinz Regele; Karine Renaudin; Ian S.D. Roberts; Daniel Serón; R. N. Smith

The 9th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology was held in La Coruna, Spain on June 23–29, 2007. A total of 235 pathologists, clinicians and scientists met to address unsolved issues in transplantation and adapt the Banff schema for renal allograft rejection in response to emerging data and technologies. The outcome of the consensus discussions on renal pathology is provided in this article. Major updates from the 2007 Banff Conference were: inclusion of peritubular capillaritis grading, C4d scoring, interpretation of C4d deposition without morphological evidence of active rejection, application of the Banff criteria to zero‐time and protocol biopsies and introduction of a new scoring for total interstitial inflammation (ti‐score). In addition, emerging research data led to the establishment of collaborative working groups addressing issues like isolated ‘v’ lesion and incorporation of omics‐technologies, paving the way for future combination of graft biopsy and molecular parameters within the Banff process.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2003

Antibody-mediated rejection criteria - an addition to the Banff 97 classification of renal allograft rejection.

Lorraine C. Racusen; Robert B. Colvin; Kim Solez; Michael J. Mihatsch; Philip F. Halloran; Patricia Campbell; Michael Cecka; Jean-Pierre Cosyns; Anthony J. Demetris; Michael C. Fishbein; Agnes B. Fogo; Peter N. Furness; Ian W. Gibson; Pekka Häyry; Lawrence Hunsickern; Michael Kashgarian; Ronald H. Kerman; Alex Magil; Robert A. Montgomery; Kunio Morozumi; Volker Nickeleit; Parmjeet Randhawa; Heinz Regele; D. Serón; Surya V. Seshan; Ståle Sund; Kiril Trpkov

Antibody‐mediated rejection (AbAR) is increasingly recognized in the renal allograft population, and successful therapeutic regimens have been developed to prevent and treat AbAR, enabling excellent outcomes even in patients highly sensitized to the donor prior to transplant. It has become critical to develop standardized criteria for the pathological diagnosis of AbAR. This article presents international consensus criteria for and classification of AbAR developed based on discussions held at the Sixth Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology in 2001. This classification represents a working formulation, to be revisited as additional data accumulate in this important area of renal transplantation.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2007

Banff '05 Meeting Report: Differential Diagnosis of Chronic Allograft Injury and Elimination of Chronic Allograft Nephropathy (‘CAN’)

Kim Solez; Robert B. Colvin; Lorraine C. Racusen; B. Sis; Philip F. Halloran; Patricia E. Birk; Patricia Campbell; Marilia Cascalho; A. B. Collins; Anthony J. Demetris; Cinthia B. Drachenberg; Ian W. Gibson; Paul C. Grimm; Mark Haas; Evelyne Lerut; Helen Liapis; Roslyn B. Mannon; P. B. Marcus; Michael Mengel; Michael J. Mihatsch; Brian J. Nankivell; Volker Nickeleit; John C. Papadimitriou; Jeffrey L. Platt; Parmjeet Randhawa; Ian S. Roberts; L. Salinas-Madriga; Daniel R. Salomon; D. Serón; M. T. Sheaff

The 8th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology was held in Edmonton, Canada, 15–21 July 2005. Major outcomes included the elimination of the non‐specific term ‘chronic allograft nephropathy’ (CAN) from the Banff classification for kidney allograft pathology, and the recognition of the entity of chronic antibody‐mediated rejection. Participation of B cells in allograft rejection and genomics markers of rejection were also major subjects addressed by the conference.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2014

Banff 2013 Meeting Report: Inclusion of C4d‐Negative Antibody‐Mediated Rejection and Antibody‐Associated Arterial Lesions

Mark Haas; B. Sis; Lorraine C. Racusen; Kim Solez; Robert B. Colvin; M. C R Castro; Daisa Silva Ribeiro David; Elias David-Neto; Serena M. Bagnasco; Linda C. Cendales; Lynn D. Cornell; A. J. Demetris; Cinthia B. Drachenberg; C. F. Farver; Alton B. Farris; Ian W. Gibson; Edward S. Kraus; Helen Liapis; Alexandre Loupy; Volker Nickeleit; Parmjeet Randhawa; E. R. Rodriguez; David Rush; R. N. Smith; Carmela D. Tan; William D. Wallace; Michael Mengel

The 12th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology was held in Comandatuba, Brazil, from August 19–23, 2013, and was preceded by a 2‐day Latin American Symposium on Transplant Immunobiology and Immunopathology. The meeting was highlighted by the presentation of the findings of several working groups formed at the 2009 and 2011 Banff meetings to: (1) establish consensus criteria for diagnosing antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR) in the presence and absence of detectable C4d deposition; (2) develop consensus definitions and thresholds for glomerulitis (g score) and chronic glomerulopathy (cg score), associated with improved inter‐observer agreement and correlation with clinical, molecular and serological data; (3) determine whether isolated lesions of intimal arteritis (“isolated v”) represent acute rejection similar to intimal arteritis in the presence of tubulointerstitial inflammation; (4) compare different methodologies for evaluating interstitial fibrosis and for performing/evaluating implantation biopsies of renal allografts with regard to reproducibility and prediction of subsequent graft function; and (5) define clinically and prognostically significant morphologic criteria for subclassifying polyoma virus nephropathy. The key outcome of the 2013 conference is defining criteria for diagnosis of C4d‐negative ABMR and respective modification of the Banff classification. In addition, three new Banff Working Groups were initiated.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2014

Banff 2013 meeting report

Mark Haas; B. Sis; Lorraine C. Racusen; Kim Solez; Robert B. Colvin; Maria Castro; Daisa Silva Ribeiro David; Elias David-Neto; Serena M. Bagnasco; Linda C. Cendales; Lynn D. Cornell; A. J. Demetris; Cinthia B. Drachenberg; C. F. Farver; Alton B. Farris; Ian W. Gibson; Edward S. Kraus; Helen Liapis; Alexandre Loupy; Nickeleit; Parmjeet Randhawa; E. R. Rodriguez; David N. Rush; R. N. Smith; Carmela D. Tan; William D. Wallace; Michael Mengel; Christopher Bellamy

The 12th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology was held in Comandatuba, Brazil, from August 19–23, 2013, and was preceded by a 2‐day Latin American Symposium on Transplant Immunobiology and Immunopathology. The meeting was highlighted by the presentation of the findings of several working groups formed at the 2009 and 2011 Banff meetings to: (1) establish consensus criteria for diagnosing antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR) in the presence and absence of detectable C4d deposition; (2) develop consensus definitions and thresholds for glomerulitis (g score) and chronic glomerulopathy (cg score), associated with improved inter‐observer agreement and correlation with clinical, molecular and serological data; (3) determine whether isolated lesions of intimal arteritis (“isolated v”) represent acute rejection similar to intimal arteritis in the presence of tubulointerstitial inflammation; (4) compare different methodologies for evaluating interstitial fibrosis and for performing/evaluating implantation biopsies of renal allografts with regard to reproducibility and prediction of subsequent graft function; and (5) define clinically and prognostically significant morphologic criteria for subclassifying polyoma virus nephropathy. The key outcome of the 2013 conference is defining criteria for diagnosis of C4d‐negative ABMR and respective modification of the Banff classification. In addition, three new Banff Working Groups were initiated.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2012

Evolution and clinical pathologic correlations of de novo donor-specific HLA antibody post kidney transplant.

Chris Wiebe; Ian W. Gibson; Tom Blydt-Hansen; Martin Karpinski; Julie Ho; Leroy Storsley; Aviva Goldberg; Patricia E. Birk; David Rush; Peter Nickerson

The natural history for patients with de novo donor‐specific antibodies (dnDSA) and the risk factors for its development have not been well defined. Furthermore, clinical and histologic correlation with serologic data is limited. We studied 315 consecutive renal transplants without pretransplant DSA, with a mean follow‐up of 6.2 ± 2.9 years. Protocol (n = 215) and for cause (n = 163) biopsies were analyzed. Solid phase assays were used to screen for dnDSA posttransplant. A total of 47 out of 315 (15%) patients developed dnDSA at a mean of 4.6 ± 3.0 years posttransplant. Independent predictors of dnDSA were HLA‐DRβ1 MM > 0 (OR 5.66, p < 0.006); and nonadherence (OR 8.75, p < 0.001); with a strong trend toward clinical rejection episodes preceding dnDSA (OR 1.57 per rejection episode, p = 0.061). The median 10‐year graft survival for those with dnDSA was lower than the No dnDSA group (57% vs. 96%, p < 0.0001). Pathology consistent with antibody‐mediated injury can occur and progress in patients with dnDSA in the absence of graft dysfunction and furthermore, nonadherence and cellular rejection contribute to dnDSA development and progression to graft loss.


Journal of The American Society of Nephrology | 2004

Proteomic-Based Detection of Urine Proteins Associated with Acute Renal Allograft Rejection

Stefan Schaub; David N. Rush; John A. Wilkins; Ian W. Gibson; Tracey Weiler; Kevin Sangster; Lindsay Nicolle; Martin Karpinski; John Jeffery; Peter Nickerson

At present, the diagnosis of renal allograft rejection requires a renal biopsy. Clinical management of renal transplant patients would be improved by the development of non-invasive markers of rejection that can be measured frequently. This study sought to determine whether such candidate proteins can be detected in urine using mass spectrometry. Four patient groups were rigidly defined on the basis of allograft function, clinical course, and allograft biopsy result: acute clinical rejection group (n = 18), stable transplant group (n = 22), acute tubular necrosis group (n = 5), and recurrent (or de novo) glomerulopathy group (n = 5). Urines collected the day of the allograft biopsy were analyzed by mass spectrometry. As a normal control group, 28 urines from healthy individuals were analyzed the identical manner, as well as 5 urines from non-transplanted patients with lower urinary tract infection. Furthermore, sequential urine analysis was performed in patients in the acute clinical rejection and the stable transplant group. Three prominent peak clusters were found in 17 of 18 patients (94%) with acute rejection episodes, but only in 4 of 22 patients (18%) without clinical and histologic evidence for rejection and in 0 of 28 normal controls (P < 0.001). In addition, the presence or absence of these peak clusters correlated with the clinicopathologic course in most patients. Acute tubular necrosis, glomerulopathies, lower urinary tract infection, and cytomegalovirus viremia were not confounding variables. In conclusion, proteomic technology together with stringent definition of patient groups can detect urine proteins associated with acute renal allograft rejection. Identification of these proteins may prove useful as non-invasive diagnostic markers for rejection and the development of novel therapeutic agents.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2013

Class II HLA Epitope Matching—A Strategy to Minimize De Novo Donor‐Specific Antibody Development and Improve Outcomes

Chris Wiebe; Denise Pochinco; Tom Blydt-Hansen; Julie Ho; Patricia E. Birk; Martin Karpinski; Aviva Goldberg; Leroy Storsley; Ian W. Gibson; David Rush; Peter Nickerson

De novo donor‐specific antibody (dnDSA) develops in 15–25% of renal transplant recipients within 5 years of transplantation and is associated with 40% lower graft survival at 10 years. HLA epitope matching is a novel strategy that may minimize dnDSA development. HLAMatchmaker software was used to characterize epitope mismatches at 395 potential HLA‐DR/DQ/DP conformational epitopes for 286 donor–recipient pairs. Epitope specificities were assigned using single antigen HLA bead analysis and correlated with known monoclonal alloantibody epitope targets. Locus‐specific epitope mismatches were more numerous in patients who developed HLA‐DR dnDSA alone (21.4 vs. 13.2, p < 0.02) or HLA‐DQ dnDSA alone (27.5 vs. 17.3, p < 0.001). An optimal threshold for epitope mismatches (10 for HLA‐DR, 17 for HLA‐DQ) was defined that was associated with minimal development of Class II dnDSA. Applying these thresholds, zero and 2.7% of patients developed dnDSA against HLA‐DR and HLA‐DQ, respectively, after a median of 6.9 years. Epitope specificity analysis revealed that 3 HLA‐DR and 3 HLA‐DQ epitopes were independent multivariate predictors of Class II dnDSA. HLA‐DR and DQ epitope matching outperforms traditional low‐resolution antigen‐based matching and has the potential to minimize the risk of de novo Class II DSA development, thereby improving long‐term graft outcome.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2017

The Banff 2015 Kidney Meeting Report: Current Challenges in Rejection Classification and Prospects for Adopting Molecular Pathology

Alexandre Loupy; Mark Haas; Kim Solez; Lorraine C. Racusen; Daniel Serón; Brian J. Nankivell; Robert B. Colvin; Marjan Afrouzian; Enver Akalin; Nada Alachkar; Serena M. Bagnasco; J. U. Becker; Lynn D. Cornell; C. Drachenberg; Duska Dragun; H. de Kort; Ian W. Gibson; Edward S. Kraus; C. Lefaucheur; C. Legendre; Helen Liapis; Thangamani Muthukumar; Volker Nickeleit; Babak J. Orandi; Walter D. Park; Marion Rabant; Parmjeet Randhawa; Elaine F. Reed; Candice Roufosse; Surya V. Seshan

The XIII Banff meeting, held in conjunction the Canadian Society of Transplantation in Vancouver, Canada, reviewed the clinical impact of updates of C4d‐negative antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR) from the 2013 meeting, reports from active Banff Working Groups, the relationships of donor‐specific antibody tests (anti‐HLA and non‐HLA) with transplant histopathology, and questions of molecular transplant diagnostics. The use of transcriptome gene sets, their resultant diagnostic classifiers, or common key genes to supplement the diagnosis and classification of rejection requires further consensus agreement and validation in biopsies. Newly introduced concepts include the i‐IFTA score, comprising inflammation within areas of fibrosis and atrophy and acceptance of transplant arteriolopathy within the descriptions of chronic active T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR) or chronic ABMR. The pattern of mixed TCMR and ABMR was increasingly recognized. This report also includes improved definitions of TCMR and ABMR in pancreas transplants with specification of vascular lesions and prospects for defining a vascularized composite allograft rejection classification. The goal of the Banff process is ongoing integration of advances in histologic, serologic, and molecular diagnostic techniques to produce a consensus‐based reporting system that offers precise composite scores, accurate routine diagnostics, and applicability to next‐generation clinical trials.


American Journal of Transplantation | 2013

Multicenter Validation of Urinary CXCL9 as a Risk‐Stratifying Biomarker for Kidney Transplant Injury

Donald E. Hricik; Peter Nickerson; Richard N. Formica; Emilio D. Poggio; David Rush; Kenneth A. Newell; Jens Goebel; Ian W. Gibson; Robert L. Fairchild; M. Riggs; K. Spain; David Ikle; Nancy D. Bridges; Peter S. Heeger

Noninvasive biomarkers are needed to assess immune risk and ultimately guide therapeutic decision‐making following kidney transplantation. A requisite step toward these goals is validation of markers that diagnose and/or predict relevant transplant endpoints. The Clinical Trials in Organ Transplantation‐01 protocol is a multicenter observational study of biomarkers in 280 adult and pediatric first kidney transplant recipients. We compared and validated urinary mRNAs and proteins as biomarkers to diagnose biopsy‐proven acute rejection (AR) and stratify patients into groups based on risk for developing AR or progressive renal dysfunction. Among markers tested for diagnosing AR, urinary CXCL9 mRNA (odds ratio [OR] 2.77, positive predictive value [PPV] 61.5%, negative predictive value [NPV] 83%) and CXCL9 protein (OR 3.40, PPV 67.6%, NPV 92%) were the most robust. Low urinary CXCL9 protein in 6‐month posttransplant urines obtained from stable allograft recipients classified individuals least likely to develop future AR or a decrement in estimated glomerular filtration rate between 6 and 24 months (92.5–99.3% NPV). Our results support using urinary CXCL9 for clinical decision‐making following kidney transplantation. In the context of acute dysfunction, low values can rule out infectious/immunological causes of injury. Absent urinary CXCL9 at 6 months posttransplant defines a subgroup at low risk for incipient immune injury.

Collaboration


Dive into the Ian W. Gibson's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Tom Blydt-Hansen

University of British Columbia

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David Rush

University of Manitoba

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Julie Ho

University of Manitoba

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Chris Wiebe

University of Manitoba

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David N. Rush

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge