The XV. Banff conference for allograft pathology was held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics in Pittsburgh, PA (USA) and focused on refining recent updates to the classification, advances from the Banff working groups, and standardization of molecular diagnostics. This report on kidney transplant pathology details clarifications and refinements to the criteria for chronic active (CA) T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR), borderline, and antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). The main focus of kidney sessions was on how to address biopsies meeting criteria for CA TCMR plus borderline or acute TCMR. Recent studies on the clinical impact of borderline infiltrates were also presented to clarify whether the threshold for interstitial inflammation in diagnosis of borderline should be i0 or i1. Sessions on ABMR focused on biopsies showing microvascular inflammation in the absence of C4d staining or detectable donor‐specific antibodies; the potential value of molecular diagnostics in such cases and recommendations for use of the latter in the setting of solid organ transplantation are presented in the accompanying meeting report. Finally, several speakers discussed the capabilities of artificial intelligence and the potential for use of machine learning algorithms in diagnosis and personalized therapeutics in solid organ transplantation.

The XVI-th Banff Meeting for Allograft Pathology was held in Banff, Alberta, Canada, from 19th-23rd September 2022, as a joint meeting with the Canadian Society of Transplantation. To mark the 30^th anniversary of the first Banff Classification, pre-meeting discussions were held on the past, present, and future of the Banff Classification. This report is a summary of the meeting highlights that were most important in terms of their effect on the Classification, including discussions around microvascular inflammation and biopsy-based transcript analysis for diagnosis. In a post-meeting survey, agreement was reached on the delineation of the following phenotypes: (1) "Probable antibody-mediated rejection (AMR)", which represents DSA-positive cases with some histological features of AMR but below current thresholds for a definitive AMR diagnosis; and (2) "Microvascular inflammation (MVI), DSA-negative and C4d-negative", a phenotype of unclear cause requiring further study, which represents cases with MVI not explained by DSA. Although biopsy-based transcript diagnostics are considered promising and remain an integral part of the Banff Classification (limited to diagnosis of AMR), further work needs to be done to agree on the exact classifiers, thresholds, and clinical context of use.

Late antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure. Uncontrolled studies have suggested efficacy of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, but no systematic trial has been undertaken to support its use in ABMR. In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial (the Bortezomib in Late Antibody-Mediated Kidney Transplant Rejection [BORTEJECT] Trial), we investigated whether two cycles of bortezomib (each cycle: 1.3 mg/m² intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11) prevent GFR decline by halting the progression of late donor-specific antibody (DSA)–positive ABMR. Forty-four DSA-positive kidney transplant recipients with characteristic ABMR morphology (median time after transplant, 5.0 years; pretransplant DSA documented in 19 recipients), who were identified on cross-sectional screening of 741 patients, were randomly assigned to receive bortezomib (n=21) or placebo (n=23). The 0.5-ml/min per 1.73 m² per year (95% confidence interval, −4.8 to 5.8) difference detected between bortezomib and placebo in eGFR slope (primary end point) was not significant (P=0.86). We detected no significant differences between bortezomib- and placebo-treated groups in median measured GFR at 24 months (33 versus 42 ml/min per 1.73 m²; P=0.31), 2-year graft survival (81% versus 96%; P=0.12), urinary protein concentration, DSA levels, or morphologic or molecular rejection phenotypes in 24-month follow-up biopsy specimens. Bortezomib, however, associated with gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity. In conclusion, our trial failed to show that bortezomib prevents GFR loss, improves histologic or molecular disease features, or reduces DSA, despite significant toxicity. Our results reinforce the need for systematic trials to dissect the efficiency and safety of new treatments for late ABMR.

Significance Statement: There is no proven effective treatment for a major cause of graft failure, late antibody-mediated rejection, but IL-6, a cytokine known to promote B cell immunity, may be a promising therapeutic target. The authors describe the results of a phase 2 randomized clinical trial involving 20 patients, designed to evaluate the safety (primary endpoint) and efficacy (secondary endpoint analysis) of an anti–IL-6 antibody, clazakizumab, versus placebo in late antibody-mediated rejection. Although the occurrence of serious infections and diverticulitis presented important safety signals, clazakizumab was associated with an early decrease in donor-specific antibody levels, modulated antibody-mediated rejection activity, and slowed the decline of renal function. Preliminary efficacy results suggest a potentially beneficial effect of clazakizumab and may therefore support the design of larger trials with a longer duration of follow-up. Background: Late antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of transplant failure. Blocking IL-6 has been proposed as a promising therapeutic strategy. Methods: We performed a phase 2 randomized pilot trial to evaluate the safety (primary endpoint) and efficacy (secondary endpoint analysis) of the anti–IL-6 antibody clazakizumab in late ABMR. The trial included 20 kidney transplant recipients with donor-specific, antibody-positive ABMR ≥365 days post-transplantation. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive 25 mg clazakizumab or placebo (4-weekly subcutaneous injections) for 12 weeks (part A), followed by a 40-week open-label extension (part B), during which time all participants received clazakizumab. Results: Five (25%) patients under active treatment developed serious infectious events, and two (10%) developed diverticular disease complications, leading to trial withdrawal. Those receiving clazakizumab displayed significantly decreased donor-specific antibodies and, on prolonged treatment, modulated rejection-related gene-expression patterns. In 18 patients, allograft biopsies after 51 weeks revealed a negative molecular ABMR score in seven (38.9%), disappearance of capillary C4d deposits in five (27.8%), and resolution of morphologic ABMR activity in four (22.2%). Although proteinuria remained stable, the mean eGFR decline during part A was slower with clazakizumab compared with placebo (−0.96; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], −1.96 to 0.03 versus −2.43; 95% CI, −3.40 to −1.46 ml/min per 1.73 m² per month, respectively, P=0.04). During part B, the slope of eGFR decline for patients who were switched from placebo to clazakizumab improved and no longer differed significantly from patients initially allocated to clazakizumab. Conclusions: Although safety data indicate the need for careful patient selection and monitoring, our preliminary efficacy results suggest a potentially beneficial effect of clazakizumab on ABMR activity and progression.

Sclerostin serum levels are increased in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Osteoporosis and CKD often occur simultaneously. Currently antisclerostin antibodies are in clinical development for the treatment of osteoporosis. The objective of this study was to study the renal handling of sclerostin. This was a cross-sectional study. The study was conducted at a university hospital and outpatient renal clinic. One hundred twenty men and women with CKD stage 1-5 participated in the study. Measurements of sclerostin in urine and serum (ELISA), renal function [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)], electrolytes, α1-microglobulin, PTH, vitamin D, and markers of bone turnover were conducted. Eight human kidney biopsies were stained for sclerostin using immunohistochemistry. Urinary excretion of sclerostin was measured. Urinary sclerostin excretion increased with declining eGFR (R=-0.75, P<.001), from 10.4 (±12.7) pmol/L in patients with eGFR greater than 90 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (CKD stage 1) to 117.9 (±65.4) pmol/L in patients with eGFR less than 15 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (CKD stage 5, P<.001). Fractional excretion of sclerostin increased with declining eGFR (R=-0.83, P<.001) from 0.45% (±0.6%) in CKD 1 to 26.3% (±17.6%) in CKD 5 (P<.001). Fractional excretion of sclerostin correlated with fractional excretion of α1-microglobulin (R=0.82, P<.001). No association between serum sclerostin and fractional excretion of phosphorus was found in a multivariate analysis. Sclerostin was detected in proximal tubular cells, showing a diffuse cytoplasmic staining pattern. Increased sclerostin serum levels in CKD patients are not due to decreased renal elimination. On the contrary, renal elimination increases with declining kidney function. Whether this has consequences on antisclerostin antibody dosing, efficacy, or safety in patients with CKD remains to be determined.

Background Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) represents one of the cardinal causes of late allograft loss after kidney transplantation, and there is great need for noninvasive tools improving early diagnosis of this rejection type. One promising strategy might be the quantification of peripheral blood DNA levels of the highly prevalent and apathogenic Torque Teno virus (TTV), which might mirror the overall level of immunosuppression and thus help determine the risk of alloimmune response. Methods To assess the association between TTV load in the peripheral blood and AMR, 715 kidney transplant recipients (median, 6.3 years posttransplantation) were subjected to a systematical cross-sectional AMR screening and, in parallel, TTV quantification. Results Eighty-six of these recipients had donor-specific antibodies and underwent protocol biopsy, AMR-positive patients (n = 46) showed only 25% of the TTV levels measured in patients without AMR (P = 0.003). In a generalized linear model, higher TTV levels were associated with a decreased risk for AMR after adjustment for potential confounders (risk ratio 0.94 per TTV log level; 95% confidence interval 0.90-0.99; P = 0.02). Conclusions Future studies will have to clarify whether longitudinal assessment of TTV load might predict AMR risk and help guide the type and intensity of immunosuppression to prevent antibody-mediated graft injury.