The Banff schema for antibody-mediated rejection: Lost in translation?

The aim of this study was to determine how the Banff antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) classification for kidney transplantation is interpreted in practice and impacts therapy. The Banff Antibody-Mediated Injury Workgroup electronically surveyed clinicians and pathologists worldwide regarding diagnosis and treatment for six case-based scenarios. The participants’ (95 clinicians and 72 renal pathologists) assigned diagnoses were compared to the Banff intended diagnoses (reference standard). The assigned diagnoses and reference standard differed by 26.1% (SD 28.1%) for pathologists and 34.5%(SD 23.3%) for clinicians. The greatest discordance between the reference standard and clinicians’ diagnosis was when histologic features of ABMR were present but donor-specific antibody was undetected [49.4%(43/87)]. For pathologists, the greatest discordance was in the case of acute/active ABMR C4d staining negative in a positive crossmatch transplant recipient[33.8%(23/68)]. Treatment approaches were heterogeneous, but linked to the assigned diagnosis. When acute/active ABMR was diagnosed by the clinician, treatment was recommended 95.3%(SD 18.4%) of the time versus only 77.7%(SD 39.2%) of the time when chronic active ABMR was diagnosed (P