J. Yee

Gene-Expression Profiling for Rejection Surveillance after Cardiac Transplantation

BACKGROUND Endomyocardial biopsy is the standard method of monitoring for rejection in recipients of a cardiac transplant. However, this procedure is uncomfortable, and there are risks associated with it. Gene-expression profiling of peripheral-blood specimens has been shown to correlate with the results of an endomyocardial biopsy. METHODS We randomly assigned 602 patients who had undergone cardiac transplantation 6 months to 5 years previously to be monitored for rejection with the use of gene-expression profiling or with the use of routine endomyocardial biopsies, in addition to clinical and echocardiographic assessment of graft function. We performed a noninferiority comparison of the two approaches with respect to the composite primary outcome of rejection with hemodynamic compromise, graft dysfunction due to other causes, death, or retransplantation. RESULTS During a median follow-up period of 19 months, patients who were monitored with gene-expression profiling and those who underwent routine biopsies had similar 2-year cumulative rates of the composite primary outcome (14.5% and 15.3%, respectively; hazard ratio with gene-expression profiling, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 1.68). The 2-year rates of death from any cause were also similar in the two groups (6.3% and 5.5%, respectively; P=0.82). Patients who were monitored with the use of gene-expression profiling underwent fewer biopsies per person-year of follow-up than did patients who were monitored with the use of endomyocardial biopsies (0.5 vs. 3.0, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Among selected patients who had received a cardiac transplant more than 6 months previously and who were at a low risk for rejection, a strategy of monitoring for rejection that involved gene-expression profiling, as compared with routine biopsies, was not associated with an increased risk of serious adverse outcomes and resulted in the performance of significantly fewer biopsies. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00351559.)

Clinical usefulness of gene-expression profile to rule out acute rejection after heart transplantation: CARGO II

Abstract Aims A non-invasive gene-expression profiling (GEP) test for rejection surveillance of heart transplant recipients originated in the USA. A European-based study, Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational II Study (CARGO II), was conducted to further clinically validate the GEP test performance. Methods and results Blood samples for GEP testing (AlloMap®, CareDx, Brisbane, CA, USA) were collected during post-transplant surveillance. The reference standard for rejection status was based on histopathology grading of tissue from endomyocardial biopsy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC), negative (NPVs), and positive predictive values (PPVs) for the GEP scores (range 0–39) were computed. Considering the GEP score of 34 as a cut-off (>6 months post-transplantation), 95.5% (381/399) of GEP tests were true negatives, 4.5% (18/399) were false negatives, 10.2% (6/59) were true positives, and 89.8% (53/59) were false positives. Based on 938 paired biopsies, the GEP test score AUC-ROC for distinguishing ≥3A rejection was 0.70 and 0.69 for ≥2–6 and >6 months post-transplantation, respectively. Depending on the chosen threshold score, the NPV and PPV range from 98.1 to 100% and 2.0 to 4.7%, respectively. Conclusion For ≥2–6 and >6 months post-transplantation, CARGO II GEP score performance (AUC-ROC = 0.70 and 0.69) is similar to the CARGO study results (AUC-ROC = 0.71 and 0.67). The low prevalence of ACR contributes to the high NPV and limited PPV of GEP testing. The choice of threshold score for practical use of GEP testing should consider overall clinical assessment of the patients baseline risk for rejection.

Cell-Free DNA and Active Rejection in Kidney Allografts

Histologic analysis of the allograft biopsy specimen is the standard method used to differentiate rejection from other injury in kidney transplants. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is a noninvasive test of allograft injury that may enable more frequent, quantitative, and safer assessment of allograft rejection and injury status. To investigate this possibility, we prospectively collected blood specimens at scheduled intervals and at the time of clinically indicated biopsies. In 102 kidney recipients, we measured plasma levels of dd-cfDNA and correlated the levels with allograft rejection status ascertained by histology in 107 biopsy specimens. The dd-cfDNA level discriminated between biopsy specimens showing any rejection (T cell-mediated rejection or antibody-mediated rejection [ABMR]) and controls (no rejection histologically), P<0.001 (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve [AUC], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.61 to 0.86). Positive and negative predictive values for active rejection at a cutoff of 1.0% dd-cfDNA were 61% and 84%, respectively. The AUC for discriminating ABMR from samples without ABMR was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.97). Positive and negative predictive values for ABMR at a cutoff of 1.0% dd-cfDNA were 44% and 96%, respectively. Median dd-cfDNA was 2.9% (ABMR), 1.2% (T cell-mediated types ≥IB), 0.2% (T cell-mediated type IA), and 0.3% in controls (P=0.05 for T cell-mediated rejection types ≥IB versus controls). Thus, dd-cfDNA may be used to assess allograft rejection and injury; dd-cfDNA levels <1% reflect the absence of active rejection (T cell-mediated type ≥IB or ABMR) and levels >1% indicate a probability of active rejection.

Utility of Gene Expression Profiling Score Variability to Predict Clinical Events in Heart Transplant Recipients

Background Gene expression profiling test scores have primarily been used to identify heart transplant recipients who have a low probability of rejection at the time of surveillance testing. We hypothesized that the variability of gene expression profiling test scores within a patient may predict risk of future events of allograft dysfunction or death. Method Patients from the IMAGE study with rejection surveillance gene expression profiling tests performed at 1- to 6-month intervals were selected for this cohort study. Gene expression profiling score variability was defined as the standard deviation of an individual’s cumulative test scores. Gene expression profiling ordinal score (range, 0–39), threshold score (binary value=1 if ordinal score ≥34), and score variability were studied in multivariate Cox regression models to predict future clinical events. Results Race, age at time of transplantation, and time posttransplantation were significantly associated with future events in the univariate analysis. In the multivariate analyses, gene expression profiling score variability, but not ordinal scores or scores over threshold, was independently associated with future clinical events. The regression coefficient P values were <0.001, 0.46, and 0.773, for gene expression profiling variability, ordinal, and threshold scores, respectively. The hazard ratio for a 1 unit increase in variability was 1.76 (95% CI, 1.4–2.3). Discussion The variability of a heart recipient’s gene expression profiling test scores over time may provide prognostic utility. This information is independent of the probability of acute cellular rejection at the time of testing that is rendered from a single ordinal gene-expression profiling test score.

Gene expression profiling to study racial differences after heart transplantation

Background The basis for increased mortality after heart transplantation in African Americans and other non-Caucasian racial groups is poorly defined. We hypothesized that increased risk of adverse events is driven by biological factors. To test this hypothesis in the IMAGE study, we determined whether the event rate of the primary outcome of acute rejection, graft dysfunction, death, or re-transplantation varied by race as a function of calcineurin inhibitor levels and gene expression profile (GEP) scores. Methods We determined the event rate of the primary outcome, comparing racial groups, stratified by time post-transplant. Logistic regression was used to compute the relative risk across racial groups and linear modeling was used to measure the dependence of CNI levels and GEP score on race. Results In 580 patients followed for a median of 19 months, the incidence of the primary endpoint in African Americans, other non-Caucasians, and Caucasians was 18.3%, 22.2%, and 8.5%, respectively (p<0.001). There were small but significant correlations of race and tacrolimus trough levels to GEP score. Tacrolimus levels were similar between races. Of patients receiving tacrolimus, other non-Caucasians had higher GEP scores than the other racial groups. African American recipients demonstrated a unique decrease in expression of the FLT3 gene in response to higher tacrolimus levels. Conclusions African Americans and other non-Caucasian heart transplant recipients were 2.5–3 times more likely than Caucasians to experience outcome events in IMAGE. The increased risk of adverse outcomes may be partly due to the biology of the alloimmune response, which is less effectively inhibited at similar tacrolimus levels in minority racial groups.

Risk evaluation using gene expression screening to monitor for acute cellular rejection in heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND Gene expression profiling (GEP) was developed for non-invasive surveillance of acute cellular rejection. Despite its widespread use, there has been a paucity in outcome data for patients managed with GEP outside of clinical trials. METHODS The Outcomes AlloMap Registry (OAR) is an observational, prospective, multicenter study including patients aged ≥ 15 years and ≥ 55 days post-cardiac transplant. Primary outcome was death and a composite outcome of hemodynamically significant rejection, graft dysfunction, retransplantation, or death. Secondary outcomes included readmission rates and development of coronary allograft vasculopathy and malignancies. RESULTS The study included 1,504 patients, who were predominantly Caucasian (69%), male (74%), and aged 54.1 ± 12.9 years. The prevalence of moderate to severe acute cellular rejection (≥2R) was 2.0% from 2 to 6 months and 2.2% after 6 months. In the OAR there was no association between higher GEP scores and coronary allograft vasculopathy (p = 0.25), cancer (p = 0.16), or non-cytomegalovirus infection (p = 0.10). Survival at 1, 2, and 5 years post-transplant was 99%, 98%, and 94%, respectively. The composite outcome occurred in 103 patients during the follow-up period. GEP scores in dual-organ recipients (heart-kidney and heart-liver) were comparable to heart-alone recipients. CONCLUSIONS This registry comprises the largest contemporary cohort of patients undergoing GEP for surveillance. Among patients selected for GEP surveillance, survival is excellent, and rates of acute rejection, graft dysfunction, readmission, and death are low.