ASN's Mission

To create a world without kidney diseases, the ASN Alliance for Kidney Health elevates care by educating and informing, driving breakthroughs and innovation, and advocating for policies that create transformative changes in kidney medicine throughout the world.

learn more

Contact ASN

1401 H St, NW, Ste 900, Washington, DC 20005

email@asn-online.org

202-640-4660

The Latest on X

Kidney Week

Abstract: SA-PO464

Mapping Potential Errors in Histology by Comparison with Molecular Phenotyping in 1208 Kidney Transplant Biopsies

Session Information

Category: Transplantation

  • 1702 Transplantation: Clinical and Translational

Authors

  • Halloran, Philip F., University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Reeve, Jeff, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Group or Team Name

  • MMDx-Kidney study group
Background

Histologic interpretation of biopsies is empirical because there has been no external standard for comparison. For kidney transplants, the emergence of a centralized molecular diagnostic system for kidney transplant biopsies, the Molecular Microscope™ system (MMDx) (Nature Reviews Nephrology 12:534, 2016) provides an external standard for assessing the accuracy of histologic diagnoses.

Methods

In 1208 prospective indication biopsies, we compared diagnoses of rejection (Banff criteria) assigned by local standard-of-care histology in 13 experienced international centers to the MMDx assessments by microarrays (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01299168).

Results

MMDx used archetype scores derived from 84 classifier equations to assign diagnoses of antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) (subclassified early-stage, fully-developed and late-stage) and T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) (J. Reeve et al. JCI Insight 2017 (In Press) . Disagreement with histology was 39%: 16% in biopsies with no histologic rejection, but 72% in biopsies with histologic rejection. Discrepancies were particularly common in TCMR, early-stage ABMR, and mixed rejection. Analyzing 161 selected discrepancies in detail (figure 1) revealed 3 classes of discrepancies: errors by pathologists applying complex Banff rules (N=59/161); previously flagged errors in Banff rules e.g. isolated v lesions (N=42/161); or inherent limitations (non-specificity) of histology lesions (N=60/161). For example, tubulitis occurs in many renal inflammatory diseases, including ABMR, and is not exclusive to TCMR.

Conclusion

There is a high rate of errors in standard–of-care histology assessments in experienced centers, particularly in rejection-related conditions. Potential solutions include simplifying and correcting rules; using probabilistic regression equations (AJT 16: 1183, 2016); and incorporating molecular assessments. Supported by Canada Foundation for Innovation and Transcriptome Sciences Inc.

Funding

  • Commercial Support –