Objectives: There are no comparable trials concerning the use of rituximab among renal transplant recipients with acute antibody-mediated rejection. Here, we compared early and late acute antibody-mediated rejection in renal transplant recipients in terms of response to rituximab therapy.
Materials and methods: Of 1230 kidney transplants performed at Hamed Al-Essa Organ Transplant Center (Kuwait) over the past 10 years, 103 recipients developed acute antibody-mediated rejections and were subcategorized into 4 groups according to the onset of rejection and rituximab treatment. All patients received the standard treatment for acute antibody-mediated rejection according to our protocol (plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin). We added rituximab to the treatment regimen in 2 groups of patients: 27 patients with early rejection (group 1) and 38 patients with late rejection (group 2). Groups 3 and 4 represented nonrituximab groups, with 20 patients with early (group 3) and 18 patients with late rejection (group 4). We compared the 4 groups regarding graft and patient outcomes.
Results: All patients were comparable regarding patient age, sex, pretransplant type of dialysis, viral profile, type of induction, donor criteria, and pretransplant comorbidities. We observed that delayed and slow graft function were significantly higher in groups 1 and 3 (P = .016); however, we found no significant differences in the 4 groups regarding new-onset diabetes after transplant, BK viral infection, and malignancy. Graft outcomes were significantly better in groups 1 and 2 than in groups 3 and 4 (P = .028). However, patient outcomes were comparable in the 4 groups (P > .05).
Conclusions: Early acute antibody-mediated rejection in renal transplant recipients had significantly better outcomes when rituximab was added to the standard treatment regimen.