Dataset Information

Expression of complement components differs between kidney allografts from living and deceased donors.

ABSTRACT: A disparity remains between graft survival of renal allografts from deceased donors and from living donors. A better understanding of the molecular mechanisms that underlie this disparity may allow the development of targeted therapies to enhance graft survival. Here, we used microarrays to examine whole genome expression profiles using tissue from 53 human renal allograft protocol biopsies obtained both at implantation and after transplantation. The gene expression profiles of living-donor kidneys and pristine deceased-donor kidneys (normal histology, young age) were significantly different before reperfusion at implantation. Deceased-donor kidneys exhibited a significant increase in renal expression of complement genes; posttransplantation biopsies from well-functioning, nonrejecting kidneys, regardless of donor source, also demonstrated a significant increase in complement expression. Peritransplantation phenomena, such as donor death and possibly cold ischemia time, contributed to differences in complement pathway gene expression. In addition, complement gene expression at the time of implantation was associated with both early and late graft function. These data suggest that complement-modulating therapy may improve graft outcomes in renal transplantation.

SUBMITTER: Naesens M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2723986 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Expression of complement components differs between kidney allografts from living and deceased donors.

Naesens Maarten M Li Li L Ying Lihua L Sansanwal Poonam P Sigdel Tara K TK Hsieh Szu-Chuan SC Kambham Neeraja N Lerut Evelyne E Salvatierra Oscar O Butte Atul J AJ Sarwal Minnie M MM

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN 20090514 8

A disparity remains between graft survival of renal allografts from deceased donors and from living donors. A better understanding of the molecular mechanisms that underlie this disparity may allow the development of targeted therapies to enhance graft survival. Here, we used microarrays to examine whole genome expression profiles using tissue from 53 human renal allograft protocol biopsies obtained both at implantation and after transplantation. The gene expression profiles of living-donor kidn ...[more]

PMID: 19443638

Similar Datasets

Project description:The survival of transplant kidneys using deceased donors (DD) is inferior to living donors (LD). In this study, we conducted a whole-transcriptome expression analysis of 24 human kidney biopsies paired 30 minutes and 3 months post-transplantation using DD and LD. The transcriptome profile was found significantly different between two time points regardless of donor types. There were 446 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between DD and LD at 30 minutes and 146 DEGs at 3 months, with 25 genes common to both time points. These DEGs reflected donor injury and acute immune responses associated with inflammation and cell death as early as at 30 minutes, which could be a precious window of potential intervention. DEGs at 3 months mainly represented the changes of adaptive immunity, immunosuppressive treatment, remodeling or fibrosis via different networks and signaling pathways. The expression level of 20 DEGs involved in kidney diseases, and 10 genes found dysregulated at 30 minutes were validated by quantitative PCR (qPCR) in the 24 samples analyzed by microarray as well as in a validation cohort of 33 unpaired allograft biopsies. Their expression levels were found correlated with renal function and histology at 12 months, suggesting they could be potential biomarkers to predict kidney function. This analysis revealed that SERPINA3, SLPI and CBF is upregulated at 30 minutes in DD compared to LD, whereas FTCD and TASPN7 are up-regulated at both time points; at 3 months VCAN and TIMP1 are up-regulated, whereas FOS is decreased in both donors. Taken together, divergent transcriptomic signatures between DD and LD, and changed by the time post-transplantation, might contribute to different allograft survival of two type kidney donors. Some DEGs such as FTCD and TASPN7 could be novel biomarkers not only for timely diagnosis, but also early for precise genetic intervention at donor preservation, implantation and post-transplantation, in particular to effectively improve the quality and survival of DD.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:The fraction of kidneys procured for transplant that are discarded is rising in the United States. Identifying donors from whom only one kidney was discarded allows us to control for donor traits and better assess reasons for organ discard. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study using United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research file data to identify deceased donors from whom two kidneys were procured and at least one was transplanted. Unilateral pairs were defined as kidney pairs from a single donor from whom one kidney was discarded ("unilateral discard") but the other was transplanted ("unilateral transplant"). Organ quality was estimated using the Kidney Donor Risk Index and Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI). We compared all-cause graft failure rates for unilateral transplants to those for bilateral transplant Kaplan-Meier methods, and life table methodology was used to evaluate 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of transplants from bilateral and unilateral donors. RESULTS:Compared with bilateral donors (i.e., both kidneys transplanted) (n=80,584), unilateral donors (i.e., only one kidney transplanted) (n=7625) had higher mean terminal creatinine (1.3±2.1 mg/dl versus 1.1±0.9 mg/dl) and KDPI (67%±25% versus 42%±27%), were older, and were more likely to have hypertension, diabetes, hepatitis C, terminal stroke, or meet Centers for Disease Control and Prevention high-risk donor criteria. Unilateral discards were primarily attributed to factors expected to be similar in both kidneys from a donor: biopsy findings (22%), no interested recipient (13%), and donor history (7%). Anatomic abnormalities (14%), organ damage (11%), and extended ischemia (6%) accounted for about 30% of discards, but were the commonest reasons among low KDPI kidneys. Among kidneys with KDPI?60%, there was an incremental difference in allograft survival over time (for unilateral versus bilateral transplants, 1-year survival: 83% versus 87%; 3-year survival: 69% versus 73%; 5-year survival: 51% versus 58%). CONCLUSIONS:A large number of discarded kidneys were procured from donors whose contralateral kidneys were transplanted with good post-transplant outcomes.

Project description:Background and objectivesIn kidney transplantation, the relative contribution of donor versus other factors on clinical outcomes is unknown. We sought to quantify overall donor effects on transplant outcomes for kidney donations from deceased donors.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsFor paired donations from deceased donors resulting in transplants to different recipients, the magnitude of donor effects can be quantified by examining the excess of concordant outcomes within kidney pairs beyond chance concordance. Using data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network between the years 2013 and 2017, we examined concordance measures for delayed graft function, death-censored 1-year graft failure, and death-censored 3-year graft failure. The concordance measures were excess relative risk, excess absolute risk, and the fixation index (where zero is no concordance and one is perfect concordance). We further examined concordance in strata of kidneys with similar values of the Kidney Donor Profile Index, a common metric of organ quality.ResultsIf the transplant of the kidney mate resulted in delayed graft function, risk for delayed graft function was 19% higher (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 18% to 20%), or 1.76-fold higher (95% CI, 1.73- to 1.80-fold), than baseline. If a kidney graft failed within 1 year, then the kidney mate's risk of failure was 6% higher (95% CI, 4% to 9%), or 2.85-fold higher (95% CI, 2.25- to 3.48-fold), than baseline. For 3-year graft failure, the excess absolute risk was 7% (95% CI, 4% to 10%) but excess relative risk was smaller, 1.91-fold (95% CI, 1.56- to 2.28-fold). Fixation indices were 0.25 for delayed graft function (95% CI, 0.24 to 0.27), 0.07 for 1-year graft failure (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.09), and 0.07 for 3-year graft failure (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.10). Results were similar in strata of kidneys with a similar Kidney Donor Profile Index.ConclusionsOverall results indicated that the donor constitution has small or moderate effect on post-transplant clinical outcomes.

Dataset Information

Expression of complement components differs between kidney allografts from living and deceased donors.

Publications

Expression of complement components differs between kidney allografts from living and deceased donors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure