Search

BackgroundRejection remains the leading cause of allograft loss, and a major barrier to improving long-term outcomes after intestinal transplantation. Our aim is to define the prevalence and investigate the role of donor-specific antibody (DSA) on intestinal graft outcomes.MethodsThe study includes 109 transplants performed in 95 recipients at a single center. Patients were screened for DSA pretransplant, monitored regularly posttransplant and when clinically indicated using the single-antigen bead Luminex assay. Standard induction immunosuppression was with interleukin-2 receptor antagonists, and antithymocyte globulin in high-risk recipients. Maintenance regimens were tacrolimus-based.ResultsPretransplant DSA was detected in 12 (11%) recipients with 50% continuing to have circulating antibodies posttransplant. An additional 24 (25%) patients developed de novo DSA, and of these, 71% had persistent antibodies. Recipients with preformed DSA demonstrated elevated risks of early graft failure, whereas those with de novo DSA experienced accelerated graft loss once DSA was detected, reaching a 28% failure rate within 2 years. HLA-DQ mismatch is a significant risk factor for de novo DSA emergence, whereas the persistence of antibodies is predicted by DSA strength and specificity. Although inclusion of the liver in the intestinal allograft imparts an immunological advantage against rejection-related graft loss, this protective effect was lost among recipients with persistent DSA.ConclusionsThe presence of DSA is associated with inferior graft outcomes among intestinal transplant recipients. An enhanced understanding of the mechanisms by which DSA causes allograft injury, and effective strategies targeting humoral immune reactivity are needed to improve long-term intestinal graft outcomes.

ImportanceSerum α-fetoprotein (AFP) is a biomarker for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) associated with a more aggressive tumor phenotype and inferior outcomes after a liver transplant (LT). Data on the outcomes for patients with HCCs that do not produce AFP are limited.ObjectiveTo compare characteristics and outcomes among LT recipients with radiographically apparent HCC lesions with AFP-producing tumors or with tumors that do not produce AFP (hereafter referred to as non-AFP-producing tumors), and to identify factors influencing recurrence in LT recipients with non-AFP-producing tumors.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective analysis at a university transplant center of 665 adults with HCC who underwent an LT during the period from 1989 to 2013. Of the 665 LT recipients, 457 (68.7%) had AFP-producing tumors, and 208 (31.3%) had non-AFP-producing tumors (the maximum AFP level before an LT was ≤10 ng/mL). Dates of study analysis were from August 2015 to June 2016.InterventionLiver transplant.Main outcomes and measuresRecurrence-free survival and recurrence rates.ResultsPatients with non-AFP-producing tumors had radiographic tumor characteristics similar to those of patients with AFP-producing tumors, but, pathologically, they had fewer lesions (25% vs 35% with >2 lesions; P = .03), smaller cumulative tumor diameters (4.2 vs 5.0 cm; P = .02), fewer microvascular (17% vs 22%) and macrovascular (2% vs 9%) invasions (P 2 tumors [HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.72-14.4; P = .003]; cumulative diameter [1.70 per log SD; 1.12-2.59; P 2 tumors [4.39; 1.32-14.6; P = .02]; cumulative diameter [2.32 per log SD; 1.43-3.77; P = .001]; microvascular [3.07; 1.02-9.24; P = .05] and macrovascular invasion [8.75; 2.15-35.6; P = .002]).Conclusions and relevanceNearly one-third of patients with radiographically apparent HCC have non-AFP-producing tumors that have more favorable pathologic characteristics, lower posttransplant recurrence, and superior survival compared with patients with AFP-producing tumors. Posttransplant HCC recurrence for patients with non-AFP-producing tumors is predicted by important radiologic and pathologic factors, and is negligible for patients within the Milan criteria. Stratifying patients by AFP status in addition to radiological criteria may improve the selection process for and the prioritization of transplant candidates.

ImportanceSerum α-fetoprotein (AFP) is a biomarker for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) associated with a more aggressive tumor phenotype and inferior outcomes after a liver transplant (LT). Data on the outcomes for patients with HCCs that do not produce AFP are limited.ObjectiveTo compare characteristics and outcomes among LT recipients with radiographically apparent HCC lesions with AFP-producing tumors or with tumors that do not produce AFP (hereafter referred to as non-AFP-producing tumors), and to identify factors influencing recurrence in LT recipients with non-AFP-producing tumors.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective analysis at a university transplant center of 665 adults with HCC who underwent an LT during the period from 1989 to 2013. Of the 665 LT recipients, 457 (68.7%) had AFP-producing tumors, and 208 (31.3%) had non-AFP-producing tumors (the maximum AFP level before an LT was ≤10 ng/mL). Dates of study analysis were from August 2015 to June 2016.InterventionLiver transplant.Main outcomes and measuresRecurrence-free survival and recurrence rates.ResultsPatients with non-AFP-producing tumors had radiographic tumor characteristics similar to those of patients with AFP-producing tumors, but, pathologically, they had fewer lesions (25% vs 35% with >2 lesions; P = .03), smaller cumulative tumor diameters (4.2 vs 5.0 cm; P = .02), fewer microvascular (17% vs 22%) and macrovascular (2% vs 9%) invasions (P 2 tumors [HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.72-14.4; P = .003]; cumulative diameter [1.70 per log SD; 1.12-2.59; P 2 tumors [4.39; 1.32-14.6; P = .02]; cumulative diameter [2.32 per log SD; 1.43-3.77; P = .001]; microvascular [3.07; 1.02-9.24; P = .05] and macrovascular invasion [8.75; 2.15-35.6; P = .002]).Conclusions and relevanceNearly one-third of patients with radiographically apparent HCC have non-AFP-producing tumors that have more favorable pathologic characteristics, lower posttransplant recurrence, and superior survival compared with patients with AFP-producing tumors. Posttransplant HCC recurrence for patients with non-AFP-producing tumors is predicted by important radiologic and pathologic factors, and is negligible for patients within the Milan criteria. Stratifying patients by AFP status in addition to radiological criteria may improve the selection process for and the prioritization of transplant candidates.

Decitabine, an epigenetic modifier that reactivates genes otherwise suppressed by DNA promoter methylation, is effective for some, but not all cancer patients, especially those with solid tumors. It is commonly recognized that to overcome resistance and improve outcome, treatment should be guided by tumor biology, which includes genotype, epigenotype, and gene expression profile. We therefore took an integrative approach to better understand melanoma cell response to clinically relevant dose of decitabine and identify complementary targets for combined therapy. We employed eight different melanoma cell strains, determined their growth, apoptotic and DNA damage responses to increasing doses of decitabine, and chose a low, clinically relevant drug dose to perform whole-genome differential gene expression, bioinformatic analysis, and protein validation studies. The data ruled out the DNA damage response, demonstrated the involvement of p21(Cip1) in a p53-independent manner, identified the TGFbeta pathway genes CLU and TGFBI as markers of sensitivity to decitabine and revealed an effect on histone modification as part of decitabine-induced gene expression. Mutation analysis and knockdown by siRNA implicated activated beta-catenin/MITF, but not BRAF, NRAS or PTEN mutations as a source for resistance. The importance of protein stability predicted from the results was validated by the synergistic effect of Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, in enhancing the growth arrest of decitabine in otherwise resistant melanoma cells. Our integrative analysis show that improved therapy can be achieved by comprehensive analysis of cancer cells, identified biomarkers for patient's selection and monitoring response, as well as targets for improved combination therapy.

Decitabine, an epigenetic modifier that reactivates genes otherwise suppressed by DNA promoter methylation, is effective for some, but not all cancer patients, especially those with solid tumors. It is commonly recognized that to overcome resistance and improve outcome, treatment should be guided by tumor biology, which includes genotype, epigenotype, and gene expression profile. We therefore took an integrative approach to better understand melanoma cell response to clinically relevant dose of decitabine and identify complementary targets for combined therapy. We employed eight different melanoma cell strains, determined their growth, apoptotic and DNA damage responses to increasing doses of decitabine, and chose a low, clinically relevant drug dose to perform whole-genome differential gene expression, bioinformatic analysis, and protein validation studies. The data ruled out the DNA damage response, demonstrated the involvement of p21(Cip1) in a p53-independent manner, identified the TGFbeta pathway genes CLU and TGFBI as markers of sensitivity to decitabine and revealed an effect on histone modification as part of decitabine-induced gene expression. Mutation analysis and knockdown by siRNA implicated activated beta-catenin/MITF, but not BRAF, NRAS or PTEN mutations as a source for resistance. The importance of protein stability predicted from the results was validated by the synergistic effect of Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, in enhancing the growth arrest of decitabine in otherwise resistant melanoma cells. Our integrative analysis show that improved therapy can be achieved by comprehensive analysis of cancer cells, identified biomarkers for patient's selection and monitoring response, as well as targets for improved combination therapy.