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.

Accurate diagnosis and grading of rejection and other pathological processes are of paramount importance to guide therapeutic interventions in patients with pancreas allograft dysfunction. A multi‐disciplinary panel of pathologists, surgeons and nephrologists was convened for the purpose of developing a consensus document delineating the histopathological features for diagnosis and grading of rejection in pancreas transplant biopsies. Based on the available published data and the collective experience, criteria for the diagnosis of acute cell‐mediated allograft rejection (ACMR) were established. Three severity grades (I/mild, II/moderate and III/severe) were defined based on lesions known to be more or less responsive to treatment and associated with better‐ or worse‐graft outcomes, respectively. The features of chronic rejection/graft sclerosis were reassessed, and three histological stages were established. Tentative criteria for the diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection were also characterized, in anticipation of future studies that ought to provide more information on this process. Criteria for needle core biopsy adequacy and guidelines for pathology reporting were also defined. The availability of a simple, reproducible, clinically relevant and internationally accepted schema for grading rejection should improve the level of diagnostic accuracy and facilitate communication between all parties involved in the care of pancreas transplant recipients.

The first Banff proposal for the diagnosis of pancreas rejection (Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 237) dealt primarily with the diagnosis of acute T‐cell‐mediated rejection (ACMR), while only tentatively addressing issues pertaining to antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR). This document presents comprehensive guidelines for the diagnosis of AMR, first proposed at the 10th Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology and refined by a broad‐based multidisciplinary panel. Pancreatic AMR is best identified by a combination of serological and immunohistopathological findings consisting of (i) identification of circulating donor‐specific antibodies, and histopathological data including (ii) morphological evidence of microvascular tissue injury and (iii) C4d staining in interacinar capillaries. Acute AMR is diagnosed conclusively if these three elements are present, whereas a diagnosis of suspicious for AMR is rendered if only two elements are identified. The identification of only one diagnostic element is not sufficient for the diagnosis of AMR but should prompt heightened clinical vigilance. AMR and ACMR may coexist, and should be recognized and graded independently. This proposal is based on our current knowledge of the pathogenesis of pancreas rejection and currently available tools for diagnosis. A systematized clinicopathological approach to AMR is essential for the development and assessment of much needed therapeutic interventions.

The First World Consensus Conference on Pancreas Transplantation provided 49 jury deliberations regarding the impact of pancreas transplantation on the treatment of diabetic patients, and 110 experts’ recommendations for the practice of pancreas transplantation. The main message from this consensus conference is that both simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) and pancreas transplantation alone can improve long-term patient survival, and all types of pancreas transplantation dramatically improve the quality of life of recipients. Pancreas transplantation may also improve the course of chronic complications of diabetes, depending on their severity. Therefore, the advantages of pancreas transplantation appear to clearly surpass potential disadvantages. Pancreas after kidney transplantation increases the risk of mortality only in the early period after transplantation, but is associated with improved life expectancy thereafter. Additionally, preemptive SPK, when compared to SPK performed in patients undergoing dialysis, appears to be associated with improved outcomes. Time on dialysis has negative prognostic implications in SPK recipients. Increased long-term survival, improvement in the course of diabetic complications, and amelioration of quality of life justify preferential allocation of kidney grafts to SPK recipients. Audience discussions and live voting are available online at the following URL address: http://mediaeventi.unipi.it/category/1st-world-consensus-conference-of-pancreas-transplantation/246.

Long-term clinicopathological studies of BK-associated nephropathy (PyVAN) are not available. We studied 206 biopsies (71 patients), followed 3.09 ± 1.46 years after immunosuppression reduction. The biopsy features (% immunostain for PyV large T ag + staining and inflammation ± acute rejection) were correlated with viral load dynamics and serum creatinine to define the clinicopathological status (PyVCPS). Incidence of acute rejection was 28% in the second biopsy and 50% subsequently (25% mixed T cell–mediated allograft rejection (TCMR) + antibody-mediated allograft rejection (AMR); rejection overall affected 38% of patients (>50% AMR). Graft loss was 15.4% (0.8–5.3 years after PyVAN); 76% had complete viral clearance (mean 28 weeks). The only predictors of graft loss were acute rejection (TCMR p = 0.008, any type p = 0.07), and increased “t” and “ci” in the second biopsy (p = 0.006 and 0.048). Higher peak viremia correlated with poorer viral clearance (p = 0.002). Presumptive and proven PyVAN had similar presentation, evolution, and outcome. Late PyVAN (>2 years, 9.8%) justifies BK viremia evaluation at any point with graft dysfunction and/or biopsy evaluation. This study describes the histological evolution of PyVAN and corresponding clinicopathological correlations. Although the pathological features overall reflect the viral and immunological interactions, the PyVAN course remains difficult to predict based on any single feature. Appropriate clinical management requires repeat biopsies and determination of the PyVCPS at relevant time points, for corresponding personalized immunosuppression adjustment.