Biopsy and Blood Gene Expression Distinguish Injury, Subclinical and Clinical Rejection in Kidney Transplant Recipients.
Sunil M Kurian, Christabel N Rebello, Sook Hyeon Park, Raymond L Heilman, Emilio D Poggio, Michael M Abecassis, Christopher L Marsh, John J Friedewald
Abstract
Open AccessBackground: Long-term outcomes in kidney transplantation remain suboptimal, with subclinical acute rejection (subAR) frequently going undetected by conventional methods. We hypothesized that subAR represents a molecular precursor to clinical acute rejection (cAR). Leveraging a large National Institutes of Health-funded cohort with matched kidney tissue and peripheral blood samples, our primary objective was to determine whether subAR and cAR share molecular patterns, establishing subAR as an early stage of cAR. As a secondary aim, we compared biopsy and blood gene expression profiles to identify unique and shared pathways and to assess their diagnostic utility. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of gene expression data from an observational clinical trial. We analyzed 578 blood and biopsy samples from 129 kidney transplant recipients enrolled in a multicenter observational study. Gene expression differences were analyzed using ANOVA with false discovery rate correction and molecular pathways analysis. Samples were matched and classified based on histologic findings and blood-based molecular diagnostics. Results: Gene expression and pathway analyses revealed that subAR exhibits a molecular profile consistent with a milder form of clinical rejection in both tissue and blood. Molecular signatures distinguished immune-mediated injury from nonimmune injury. Notably, tissue gene expression profiling in cases that were misclassified by peripheral blood diagnostics were like correctly classified cases, suggesting that histology alone may not reliably define true clinical phenotypes. Conclusions: Molecular profiling of tissue and blood reflects distinct but complementary aspects of transplant biology and confirms that subAR and cAR share overlapping molecular profiles, supporting the hypothesis that subAR represents an early stage in the progression toward clinical rejection. These findings highlight the limitations of relying solely on histological evaluation and support the use of molecular tissue profiling as an adjunct to histology, particularly in diagnostically ambiguous cases. Molecular profiling provides a supporting framework for identifying subclinical rejection and guiding personalized immunosuppression to improve long-term outcomes.