The efficiency of humoral immune transfer depends on both the graft and the immunosuppressive treatment

被引:5
作者
Dahmen, U
Li, J
Gu, Y
Doebel, L
Fan, LM
Polywka, S
Dirsch, O
Broelsch, CE
机构
[1] Univ Klinikum Essen, Klin & Poliklin Allgemeine & Transplantat Chirurg, D-45122 Essen, Germany
[2] Univ Hosp Eppendorf, Inst Microbiol & Virol, Hamburg, Germany
[3] Univ Hosp Essen, Inst Pathol, Essen, Germany
关键词
adoptive immune transfer; hepatitis B vaccine; heart transplantation; kidney transplantation; liver transplantation; rat;
D O I
10.1111/j.1432-2277.2003.tb00280.x
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
The present study was designed to compare the efficiency of adoptive transfer of humoral immunity after liver, kidney, and heart transplantation in relation to the number of passenger lymphocytes, and to estimate the risk of a detrimental effect and the chance of a beneficial effect. Hepatitis B virus surface-antigen-vaccinated brown Norway rats (BNs) and AxC 9935 Irish (ACI rats) served as donors, and na Lewis (LEW) rats as recipients. The liver grafts contained 100 times more passenger lymphocytes than heart grafts, and the kidney grafts approximately ten times more, indicated by monoclonal CD45 antibody staining. Transient anti-HBs immunity did occur after transplantation of all three organ grafts. In all rejecting groups, the serum recipient-to-donor anti-HBs titer ratio (R/D ratio) was below 0.10%, with heart recipients showing half the level (0.05%) of liver recipients (0.09%). Under immunosuppression, R/D ratio doubled in liver or kidney recipients, but remained unaffected in heart recipients. Immune transfer was most efficient in immune-suppressed liver recipients in the spontaneously tolerant strain combination as indicated by a significantly higher R/D ratio (0.32%) and a longer titer persistence (up to 9 weeks) than in all other groups. Therefore, mainly liver and kidney graft recipients carry a risk, but also a chance of benefiting from the transfer of donor-derived immunity.
引用
收藏
页码:161 / 167
页数:7
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]  
AHMED KY, 1987, TRANSPLANTATION, V43, P163
[2]  
Aikawa A, 1996, TRANSPLANT P, V28, P1288
[3]   ANTI-A AUTOANTIBODIES WITH UNUSUAL PROPERTIES IN A PATIENT ON RENAL DIALYSIS [J].
BIRD, GWG ;
WINGHAM, J .
IMMUNOLOGICAL COMMUNICATIONS, 1980, 9 (02) :155-159
[4]   ANTI-A OF DONOR LYMPHOCYTE ORIGIN IN 3 RECIPIENTS OF ORGANS FROM THE SAME DONOR [J].
BRACEY, AW .
VOX SANGUINIS, 1987, 53 (03) :181-183
[5]   DELAYED HEMOLYSIS RESULTING FROM ANTI-A1 AFTER LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION [J].
BRECHER, ME ;
MOORE, SB ;
REISNER, RK ;
RAKELA, J ;
KROM, RAF .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 1989, 91 (02) :232-235
[6]  
Burroughs AK, 2000, LIVER TRANSPLANT, V6, pS35, DOI 10.1053/jlts.2000.18690
[7]   Six-year clinical effect of donor bone marrow infusions in renal transplant patients [J].
Ciancio, G ;
Miller, J ;
Garcia-Morales, RO ;
Carreno, M ;
Burke, GW ;
Roth, D ;
Kupin, W ;
Tzakis, AG ;
Ricordi, C ;
Rosen, A ;
Fuller, L ;
Esquenazi, V .
TRANSPLANTATION, 2001, 71 (07) :827-835
[8]  
DAHMEN U, 2003, IN PRESS VIRAL HEPAT, V10
[9]   Microchimerism and rejection in clinical transplantation [J].
Elwood, ET ;
Larsen, CP ;
Maurer, MH ;
Routenberg, KL ;
Neylan, NF ;
Whelchel, JD ;
OBrien, DP ;
Pearson, TC .
LANCET, 1997, 349 (9062) :1358-1360
[10]   TRANSMISSION OF IDIOPATHIC (AUTOIMMUNE) THROMBOCYTOPENIC PURPURA BY LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION [J].
FRIEND, PJ ;
MCCARTHY, LJ ;
FILO, RS ;
LEAPMAN, SB ;
PESCOVITZ, MD ;
LUMENG, L ;
POUND, D ;
ARNOLD, K ;
HOFFMAN, R ;
MCFARLAND, JG ;
ASTER, RH .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1990, 323 (12) :807-811