The kidney sessions of the 2017 Banff Conference focused on 2 areas: clinical implications of inflammation in areas of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (i‐IFTA) and its relationship to T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR), and the continued evolution of molecular diagnostics, particularly in the diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection (ABMR). In confirmation of previous studies, it was independently demonstrated by 2 groups that i‐IFTA is associated with reduced graft survival. Furthermore, these groups presented that i‐IFTA, particularly when involving >25% of sclerotic cortex in association with tubulitis, is often a sequela of acute TCMR in association with underimmunosuppression. The classification was thus revised to include moderate i‐IFTA plus moderate or severe tubulitis as diagnostic of chronic active TCMR. Other studies demonstrated that certain molecular classifiers improve diagnosis of ABMR beyond what is possible with histology, C4d, and detection of donor‐specific antibodies (DSAs) and that both C4d and validated molecular assays can serve as potential alternatives and/or complements to DSAs in the diagnosis of ABMR. The Banff ABMR criteria are thus updated to include these alternatives. Finally, the present report paves the way for the Banff scheme to be part of an integrative approach for defining surrogate endpoints in next‐generation clinical trials.

The Symphony study showed that at 1 year posttransplant, a regimen based on daclizumab induction, 2 g mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), low-dose tacrolimus and steroids resulted in better renal function and lower acute rejection and graft loss rates compared with three other regimens: two with low-doses of cyclosporine or sirolimus instead of tacrolimus and one with no induction and standard cyclosporine dosage. This is an observational follow-up for 2 additional years with the same endpoints as the core study. Overall, 958 patients participated in the follow-up. During the study, many patients changed their immunosuppressive regimen (e.g. switched from sirolimus to tacrolimus), but the vast majority (95%) remained on MMF. During the follow-up, renal function remained stable (mean change: -0.6 ml/min), and rates of death, graft loss and acute rejection were low (all about 1% per year). The MMF and low-dose tacrolimus arm continued to have the highest GFR (68.6 +/- 23.8 ml/min vs. 65.9 +/- 26.2 ml/min in the standard-dose cyclosporine, 64.0 +/- 23.1 ml/min in the low-dose cyclosporine and 65.3 +/- 26.2 ml/min in the low-dose sirolimus arm), but the difference with the other arms was not significant (p = 0.17 in an overall test and 0.077, 0.039 and 0.11, respectively, in pair-wise tests). The MMF and low-dose tacrolimus arm also had the highest graft survival rate, but with reduced differences between groups over time, and the least acute rejection rate. In the Symphony study, the largest ever prospective study in de novo kidney transplantation, over 3 years, daclizumab induction, MMF, steroids and low-dose tacrolimus proved highly efficacious, without the negative effects on renal function commonly reported for standard CNI regimens.

Late antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure. Uncontrolled studies have suggested efficacy of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, but no systematic trial has been undertaken to support its use in ABMR. In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial (the Bortezomib in Late Antibody-Mediated Kidney Transplant Rejection [BORTEJECT] Trial), we investigated whether two cycles of bortezomib (each cycle: 1.3 mg/m intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11) prevent GFR decline by halting the progression of late donor-specific antibody (DSA)-positive ABMR. Forty-four DSA-positive kidney transplant recipients with characteristic ABMR morphology (median time after transplant, 5.0 years; pretransplant DSA documented in 19 recipients), who were identified on cross-sectional screening of 741 patients, were randomly assigned to receive bortezomib (=21) or placebo (=23). The 0.5-ml/min per 1.73 m per year (95% confidence interval, -4.8 to 5.8) difference detected between bortezomib and placebo in eGFR slope (primary end point) was not significant (=0.86). We detected no significant differences between bortezomib- and placebo-treated groups in median measured GFR at 24 months (33 versus 42 ml/min per 1.73 m; =0.31), 2-year graft survival (81% versus 96%;=0.12), urinary protein concentration, DSA levels, or morphologic or molecular rejection phenotypes in 24-month follow-up biopsy specimens. Bortezomib, however, associated with gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity. In conclusion, our trial failed to show that bortezomib prevents GFR loss, improves histologic or molecular disease features, or reduces DSA, despite significant toxicity. Our results reinforce the need for systematic trials to dissect the efficiency and safety of new treatments for late ABMR.