Publication:
The Banff 2017 Kidney Meeting Report: Revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell–mediated rejection, antibody‐mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next‐generation clinical trials

Thumbnail Image

Open/View Files

Date

2018

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

John Wiley and Sons Inc.
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Haas, M., A. Loupy, C. Lefaucheur, C. Roufosse, D. Glotz, D. Seron, B. J. Nankivell, et al. 2018. “The Banff 2017 Kidney Meeting Report: Revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell–mediated rejection, antibody‐mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next‐generation clinical trials.” American Journal of Transplantation 18 (2): 293-307. doi:10.1111/ajt.14625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14625.

Research Data

Abstract

The kidney sessions of the 2017 Banff Conference focused on 2 areas: clinical implications of inflammation in areas of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (i‐IFTA) and its relationship to T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR), and the continued evolution of molecular diagnostics, particularly in the diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). In confirmation of previous studies, it was independently demonstrated by 2 groups that i‐IFTA is associated with reduced graft survival. Furthermore, these groups presented that i‐IFTA, particularly when involving >25% of sclerotic cortex in association with tubulitis, is often a sequela of acute TCMR in association with underimmunosuppression. The classification was thus revised to include moderate i‐IFTA plus moderate or severe tubulitis as diagnostic of chronic active TCMR. Other studies demonstrated that certain molecular classifiers improve diagnosis of ABMR beyond what is possible with histology, C4d, and detection of donor‐specific antibodies (DSAs) and that both C4d and validated molecular assays can serve as potential alternatives and/or complements to DSAs in the diagnosis of ABMR. The Banff ABMR criteria are thus updated to include these alternatives. Finally, the present report paves the way for the Banff scheme to be part of an integrative approach for defining surrogate endpoints in next‐generation clinical trials.

Description

Keywords

Meeting Report, classification systems: Banff classification, kidney transplantation/nephrology, molecular biology, pathology/histopathology, rejection, translational research/science

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories