Recurrent and de novo Glomerulonephritis After Kidney Transplantation

Abstract

The prevalence, pathogenesis, predictors, and natural course of patients with recurrent glomerulonephritis (GN) occurring after kidney transplantation remains incompletely understood, including whether there are differences in the outcomes and advances in the treatment options of specific GN subtypes, including those with de novo GN. Consequently, the treatment options and approaches to recurrent disease are largely extrapolated from the general population, with responses to these treatments in those with recurrent or de novo GN post-transplantation poorly described. Given a greater understanding of the pathogenesis of GN and the development of novel treatment options, it is conceivable that these advances will result in an improved structure in the future management of patients with recurrent or de novo GN. This review focuses on the incidence, genetics, characteristics, clinical course, and risk of allograft failure of patients with recurrent or de novo GN after kidney transplantation, ascertaining potential disparities between “high risk” disease subtypes of IgA nephropathy, idiopathic membranous glomerulonephritis, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis. We will examine in detail the management of patients with high risk GN, including the pre-transplant assessment, post-transplant monitoring, and the available treatment options for disease recurrence. Given the relative paucity of data of patients with recurrent and de novo GN after kidney transplantation, a global effort in collecting comprehensive in-depth data of patients with recurrent and de novo GN as well as novel trial design to test the efficacy of specific treatment strategy in large scale multicenter randomized controlled trials are essential to address the knowledge deficiency in this disease.

Introduction

Primary glomerulonephritis (GN) continues to be one of the leading causes of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in the United States (US) and worldwide. According to the 2018 Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) registry report, GN as cause of ESKD accounted for 17% of incident treated ESKD patients (1). In the US, GN as cause of ESKD comprised of 7 and 13% of incident ESKD initiated on dialysis and have received kidney transplants, respectively; with similar proportion reported in the United Kingdom (2, 3). GN is a heterogeneous group of immunological kidney diseases with distinct histological subtypes, causes (primary vs. secondary) and clinical phenotypes, resulting in substantial differences in the prognosis after kidney transplantation in patients with dissimilar GN subtypes, including the risk of disease recurrence post-transplantation (4–7). Consequently, clinicians must provide sufficient information with regards to the risk of disease recurrence post-transplant, when considering the medical suitability of potential kidney transplant candidates with GN for kidney transplantation (4–6, 8–11).

Following kidney transplantation, recurrent or de novo GN in the renal allograft is an important cause of premature allograft failure (12). All GN subtypes can potentially recur after transplantation, with the prevalence of GN recurrence between 3 and 15%, particularly in patients with high risk subtypes of IgA nephropathy, idiopathic membranous GN, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), and membranoproliferative GN (MPGN) (4, 5, 9, 13, 14). Nevertheless, the incidence of de novo or recurrent GN after kidney transplantation is likely to be under-estimated because of the likelihood of selection bias (i.e., systematic differences in the selection and listing of ESKD patients with different GN subtypes), varying biopsy practices, ascertainment of the primary cause of ESKD, differing follow-up period, disparate clinical presentations ranging from asymptomatic urinary abnormalities to rapidly progressive GN, misclassification, and indication bias (where kidney biopsy may be carried out only for specific clinical indication and therefore may fail to identify asymptomatic incidental cases of early disease recurrence) and the competing risk of other causes of allograft failures. The risk of GN recurrence is typically directly related to incremental time post-transplant, with the majority of GN recurrence resulting in allograft failure occurring after 3–5 years post-transplant, although early recurrences can occur in patients with GN subtypes of MPGN and FSGS.

Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, and Outcomes of GN Recurrence After Kidney Transplantation

The understanding and characterization of the incidence of GN recurrence occurring after kidney transplantation is largely confined to the availability of data from several large registries and single center reports from the US, Australia, and New Zealand (4, 5, 9, 13). The incidence of GN recurrence post-transplant varies according to GN subtypes and time post-transplantation. Of patients with ESKD secondary to primary GN, particularly FSGS and MPGN, there is a high risk of GN recurrence with a substantial proportion of patients with disease recurrence experiencing premature allograft failure.

Recurrent IgA Nephropathy

Recurrent IgA nephropathy is relatively common, but typically occurs late post-transplant with cumulative incidence of disease recurrence at 15 years of 15% although the risk of disease recurrence may be reducing over time (Table 1) (5, 17). There is substantial variation between studies but likely to reflect disparate follow-up period, differing biopsy practices between centers and the relative benign presentations of the majority of patients (presenting with microscopic hematuria or evidence of IgA deposition in allograft biopsies). Following disease recurrence, up to 40% of patients with recurrent IgA nephropathy have been reported to lose their allografts, predominantly from disease recurrence (up to 60%) (5). Compared with other GN subtypes, the long-term allograft and patient outcomes of patients with IgA nephropathy are substantially better. In the US Renal Data System analysis of 32,131 patients with ESKD secondary to IgA nephropathy, the rates of all-cause mortality, overall allograft failure and death censored allograft failure were 1.2, 3.4, and 2.6 events/100-person-years, respectively; compared with respective 2.8, 6.7, and 5.1 events/100-person-years for patients with MPGN; 2.5, 6.1, and 4.4 events/100-person-years, respectively for patients with FSGS; and 3.1, 6.1, and 4.0 events/100-person-years, respectively for patients with idiopathic membranous GN (6). In this study, the proportion of allograft failure secondary to disease recurrence was 1.6% for those with IgA nephropathy, compared with 5.6, 2.7, and 3.3% for those with MPGN, FSGS, and idiopathic membranous GN, respectively (6). In contrast, data from the ANDATA registry showed that 5-year allograft survival following disease recurrence was similar between IgA nephropathy, idiopathic membranous GN, and FSGS, with the allograft survival of patients with MPGN substantially poorer compared to other GN subtypes (5).

Several risk factors for disease recurrence have been described including younger age, recipients of zero-HLA-mismatched live-related donor kidneys, steroid-avoidance or early steroid-withdrawal immunosuppressive regimens, the non-use of induction therapy (whereas anti-thymocyte globulin [ATG] may be associated with a lower risk of recurrence), HLA allelic subtypes, crescentic (and rapidly progressive) IgA nephropathy in the native kidneys and shorter total ischemic time, but given these findings were identified in population cohort studies, it is difficult to ascertain the true causality of these risk factors for disease recurrence (5, 15, 16, 18–25). There are several molecules, including galactose-deficient IgA1 (Gd-IgA1), IgG anti-Gd-IgA1 antibodies, glycan-specific IgG antibodies, and soluble CD89 (an Fc receptor for IgA) that may be implicated in the pathogenesis of IgA nephropathy, the presence of which may portend a greater risk of disease progression and possibly disease recurrence post-transplant (26–32). There are several other non-specific serum and urine biomarkers that may predict the risk of disease recurrence after kidney transplantation, but the prognostic (and predictive) performance of many of these biomarkers have not been truly established or validated in independent population cohorts (Table 2). There are numerous other prognostic markers that have been investigated to predict disease progression of IgA nephropathy affecting the native kidneys, but the clinical relevance of these biomarkers in predicting disease recurrence post-transplant remains undetermined (51).

The optimal treatment of recurrent IgA nephropathy remains unknown and there are no current studies to suggest that alterations in immunosuppression will improve allograft outcomes (52). The current practice is to maintain (or change to) a calcineruin-inhibitor (CNI) and corticosteroids-based immunosuppressive regimen in addition to anti-proteinuric treatments, although the optimal dosing/target therapeutic CNI level or specific CNI type in the treatment of those with recurrent disease remains unknown (Table 3). In cases of crescentic rapidly progressive IgA nephropathy, more aggressive immunosuppression (e.g., cyclophosphamide or rituximab) may be considered but this is largely unproven and unlikely to successfully reverse the disease process (53–56). The potential benefit of tonsillectomy in disease recurrence has been limited to case reports and therefore cannot be recommended as a treatment option for patients with recurrent IgA nephropathy (57, 58).

Recurrent Primary FSGS

Up to 1 in 3 patients with primary FSGS will experience disease recurrence after kidney transplantation, with the risk of allograft failure (predominantly from GN recurrence) 5-times the risk compared to those without disease recurrence (Table 1) (4, 5). In an ANZDATA registry analysis comprising of 736 first kidney transplant recipients with biopsy-proven primary FSGS, 10% of patients experienced disease recurrence, with disease recurrence associated with substantially poorer 5-year allograft survival of 52% (95% confidence interval [95%CI], 40%, 63%), compared with 83% (95%CI 79%, 86%) in those without recurrent disease (p < 0.001) (59). However, the true incidence of recurrent disease remains unknown as secondary forms of FSGS can occur late post-transplant, resulting in difficulties in differentiating primary from secondary forms.

In contrast to patients with primary FSGS, familial FSGS in adults, comprising of those with mutations of podocin or structural podocyte proteins [e.g., NPHS2, including those with homozygous or compound heterozygous mutations in podocin or the p.R229Q variant; slit diaphragm-associated transient receptor potential channel C6 [TRPC6] gain-of-function mutation] and apolipoprotein L-1 genotype have low to no risk (<3%) of disease recurrence post-transplant suggesting the relative importance of genetic testing in the evaluation of a subset of patients with adult-onset FSGS for transplantation (60–67). Other than a known family history of chronic kidney disease (which may suggest an autosomal dominant inheritance), many of the genetic mutations associated with adult-onset FSGS have an incomplete penetrance and therefore, the identification of patients with familial FSGS remains challenging (68). Clinicians should consider undertaking genetic screening for patients with adult-onset FSGS when there is uncertainty regarding the likelihood of primary (atypical clinical/pathological features or poor response to immunosuppressive treatment) and secondary (no obvious causes identified) FSGS or when there is a clear family history of FSGS (69, 70). Taking into consideration the cost associated with genetic screening in all patients with adult-onset FSGS, it may not be cost-effective to screen all patients (even with the above criteria) and therefore, it may be more practical to consider screening for patients with a clear family history of FSGS or those with a potential live-related donor for transplantation, including undertaking genetic screening of the donors for the same genetic mutations (if present in the potential recipients). In the absence of genetic mutation in the potential recipients, genetic screening of live-related donors is not currently recommended, although cases of live donors developing FSGS post-donation have been reported (66, 71). A shared-decision approach between clinicians and patients regarding the clinical rationale for genetic screening for patients and potential live-related donors should be considered, balancing between the cost, the clinical utility of the information in the current/future medical management of these patients pre- and post-transplant and the implications for prognostication (post-transplant) and appropriateness of genetic counseling. A similar practical approach to genetic testing may be considered for pediatric patients with FSGS, including those with idiopathic steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome with FSGS pathology. In a Spanish cohort of 98 children or adolescent patients with FSGS (<18 years at presentation), none of the 7 patients (presented with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome and documented NPHS2 mutation) who had received a kidney transplant experienced disease recurrence, suggesting that similar to the adult population, there is a low risk of FSGS recurrence in pediatric patients with genetic FSGS post-transplant (72, 73). There are several other risk factors for disease recurrence in patient with primary FSGS that have been identified, although these are primarily non-specific clinical parameters including younger age at presentation, recipients of live-donor kidneys, non-white ethnicity, severe manifestations of disease at presentation, rapid progression to ESKD, and prior allograft failure from disease recurrence (5, 59, 74).

The pathogenesis of disease recurrence in patients with primary FSGS remains unclear, with no studies confirming the presence of circulating permeability factor(s) causing podocyte injury instigating early disease recurrence. A pathogenic role of the circulating serum soluble urokinase receptor (suPAR) has been proposed, by activating podocyte β(3) integrin resulting in effacement of foot processes and proteinuria, which may contribute to the development of primary FSGS. In two cohorts of pediatric and adult patients with primary FSGS from North America [n = 70, North America–based FSGS clinical trial [FSGS-CT] cohort] (75) and Europe (n = 94, PodoNet Registry cohort) (76), serum suPAR level (threshold of 3,000 pg/ml) was elevated in over 50% of patients (84% FSGS-CT and 55% PoDoNet cohorts), compared with 6% of age- and sex-matched healthy controls (n = 150) (77, 78). Interestingly, in the European cohort, serum suPAR level was higher in patients with familial FSGS compared to those with non-genetic primary FSGS, but this finding will need to be validated in other cohorts. In addition, reduction of serum suPAR level with immunosuppressive treatment was associated with a greater likelihood of achieving clinical remission, raising the possibility that suPAR may be involved in the pathogenesis of this disease (78). However, this patho-physiological link remains debatable (37, 79–81). Furthermore, serum suPAR level can also be non-specifically elevated in other pathological processes including inflammation and infection and has been shown to be an independent prognostic biomarker in predicting future risk of CVD and mortality in the general population (82, 83).

Nevertheless, the diagnostic test accuracy of suPAR in differentiating primary FSGS from other proteinuric diseases or to predict disease recurrence after transplantation remains suboptimal (84, 85) and consequently, the clinical utility of routinely monitoring suPAR levels post-transplant to predict those at risk of disease recurrence remains poorly defined. Other potential biomarkers including urine suPAR, Anti-CD40 autoantibody, and angiotensin receptor II type 1 (AT1R) antibody appear promising but further studies are required to determine the accuracy of these prognostic biomarkers in predicting disease recurrence (Table 2). Close monitoring for proteinuria in high risk patients, with regular checks of urine protein/creatinine ratio or self-check urine dip-stick in the first 3 months post-transplant are recommended, and proceeding to a kidney biopsy (tissues should be sent for electron microscopy to detect early effacement of foot processes) if there is persistent or increasing proteinuria (86).

The management of patients with recurrent primary FSGS remains challenging, with treatment strategies informed predominantly by small case series (Table 3). Plasmapheresis is often preferred and recommended (in the American Society for Apheresis guidelines) in the treatment of primary FSGS recurrence in the allograft of both pediatric and adult patients (87–89). The efficacy of adjunctive therapy including rituximab and CNI such as cyclosporine remains uncertain. The case report of the efficacy of rituximab in ameliorating early primary FSGS recurrence post-transplant in a child with post-transplant lymphoma had generated considerable interest and suggested that B cells may have a role in the pathogenesis of disease recurrence in a subgroup of patients with primary FSGS (90). Recent research showed that rituximab binds sphingomyelin phosphodiesterase acid-like 3b (SMPDL-3b) protein, resulting in preservation of podocyte SMPDL-3b expression, preventing podocyte apoptosis, and maintaining the integrity of podocyte actin cytoskeleton, therefore highlighting the biological rationale of this therapy in patients with FSGS independent of its effect on B cells (91). Given the lack of convincing evidence to suggest B cells is directly implicated in the pathogenesis of primary and recurrent FSGS (despite one small biopsy series showing higher number of glomerular B cells in patients with FSGS) (92), the mechanism by which rituximab may be effective in reducing proteinuria in patients with recurrent FSGS may be through its effect on podocyte function (91, 93). CNI such as cyclosporine, through the inhibitory effect on T cell function and stabilization effect on actin cytoskeleton in kidney podocytes, has been shown to induce clinical remission in patients with recurrent FSGS. In patients already maintained on CNI and have experienced disease recurrence post-transplant, there is no data to suggest that changing to an alternative CNI (e.g., from cyclosporine to tacrolimus or from tacrolimus to cyclosporine) will be effective. However, a switch to CNI if patients were on mammalian target of rapamycin [mTOR]-inhibitor is advocated, given that mTOR-inhibitor, especially at higher doses have been associated with the development of de novo FSGS (94–96). What remains unknown is whether plasmapheresis is always necessary and whether rituximab should be considered as first line therapy for disease recurrence or reserved only for cases of recurrence refractory to plasmapheresis (97).

The roles of pre-emptive plasmapheresis (pre and/or post-transplantation), immunoadsorption therapy, and other novel options such as ofatumumab or B7-1 blockers (abatacept and belatacept) to prevent disease recurrence or to treat recurrence appear promising but the efficacy of these treatments remain debatable and not always consistent or supported in subsequent studies (98–105). Ofatumumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that induces profound B cell depletion appears promising in the prevention (n = 1) and treatment (n = 2, achieved partial remission) of recurrent FSGS occurring post-kidney transplant but this needs to be confirmed in large studies (103, 106, 107). The initial treatment success surrounding the efficacy of abatacept, an inhibitor of B7-1 co-stimulatory molecule in achieving clinical remission in 5 patients with FSGS (4 patients with rituximab-resistant recurrent FSGS post-kidney transplant and 1 patient with steroid-resistant primary FSGS; all with positive B7-1 immunostaining of podocytes) has not been corroborated in other cohorts (100). Five subsequent studies showed that abatacept or belatacept was not effective in the treatment of 23 patients with FSGS recurrence post-kidney transplant, although the majority of the patients did not have positive podocyte B7-1 expression (101, 102, 105, 108, 109).

In a retrospective historical-control study of 26 pediatric patients with FSGS, prophylactic pre- and post-transplant plasmapheresis did not prevent FSGS recurrence compared to those who did not undergo similar prophylactic treatment (110). Several pilot studies evaluating the efficacy of an intensive and prolonged plasmapheresis with and without high-dose corticosteroids and maintenance CNI therapy or rituximab (2 studies, n = 22 adult patients with primary FSGS recurrence [2 in native kidneys], up to 15 months of treatment) or immunoadsorption (n = 12 pediatric patients with early FSGS recurrence) may be effective in achieving partial or complete remission but given the retrospective nature of these studies in a small number of patients, these and other treatment regimens will need further appraisal in randomized controlled trials to ascertain the optimal management in preventing or treatment of FSGS recurrence (104, 111, 112). A practical approach in the management of FSGS recurrence post-transplantation should initially include plasmapheresis, maximizing anti-proteinuric therapy, and converting to a CNI-based immunosuppressive regimen (where possible), with B cell depletion (rituximab) considered as adjunctive treatment or in resistant cases (Table 3). There is currently insufficient data to suggest that the pre-emptive use of plasmapheresis ± rituximab will reduce the risk of disease recurrence post-transplant.

Recurrent Primary MPGN

Disease recurrence post-transplant from primary MPGN is relatively common, with over 50% of recurrence occurring within the first 24 months post-transplant (Table 1) (5, 13, 48, 49, 113, 114). In patients who had experienced disease recurrence, the risk of allograft failure is relatively high with 5-year allograft survival post-disease recurrence of only 30% (5). The introduction of a new classification of MPGN, which considers the differences in the pathogenesis and histological findings of MPGN subtypes (i.e., immune complex-mediated MPGN and complement-mediated MPGN), has enabled a more accurate assessment of the nature and course of the disease, including the risk of disease recurrence after kidney transplantation (115–117). Immune-complex mediated MPGN is characterized by the glomerular deposition of polyclonal or monoclonal immunoglobulins (Ig), whereas C3 glomerulopathy [comprising of C3GN and dense deposit disease (DDD)] is characterized by the glomerular deposition of C3 in the absence of Ig deposition (115, 117, 118). The pattern of glomerular Ig and complement product deposition may help to differentiate between the MPGN subtypes and has also provided much needed insights and information on the pathogenesis of the different disease processes (4, 116). Even though DDD (previously known as MPGN type II) and C3GN are distinctive diseases, the clinical course, pathogenesis and histological features of these two diseases may be similar. There is a high rate of post-transplant recurrence for both C3GN and DDD, with over 50% of patients with disease recurrence reported to experience allograft failure, although the number of patients in these studies was relatively small (119, 120). The timing and clinical presentations of patients with C3GN and DDD may be dissimilar, with DDD more likely to recur later post-transplant and often associated with no clinical manifestations other than allograft dysfunction. C3GN and DDD are characterized by the presence of strong glomerular staining for C3 and electron deposits on electron microscopy, but these diseases are potentially morphologically distinguishable by the nature and ultrastructural characteristics of these electron dense deposits (115, 121–123). The predominance of C3 deposition suggest the presence of dysregulated alternate complement cascade, resulting in the amplification and subsequent overproduction of C3 and related products of the terminal complement cascade (124). The exact cause of the complement dysregulation remains uncertain, although genetic mutations (e.g., presence of H402 and V62 alleles of Factor H, mutations of Factor H, and I genes) or autoantibodies (e.g., C3 or C4 nephritic factor directed against C3 convertase or Factor H autoantibodies) resulting in dysfunctional complement regulatory proteins and therefore uncontrolled amplification of the C3 protein have been implicated in the pathogenesis of this disease (125–129). In a case series of 21 kidney transplant recipients with C3GN as the cause of ESKD, monoclonal gammopathy was present in 3 of 14 (21%) patients who had experienced disease recurrence (suggesting the involvement of classical complement pathway), which was associated with a more rapid rate of disease recurrence (median time to recurrence 4 vs. 43 months, respectively) and allograft failure compared to those without monoclonal gammopathy (119).

For immune-mediated MPGN, the patterns and types of Ig deposits may have diagnostic and prognostic significance. The presence of serum monoclonal proteins (48, 49), with and without low complement levels (±glomerular C4d deposition) (130), implying activation of the complement cascade was associated with a less favorable clinical course post-transplant, with higher risk of recurrence and disease progression following recurrence. Similarly, the presence of glomerular monoclonal Ig deposits (typically IgG3κ and IgG3λ, but IgG2λ has been reported) was associated with poorer prognosis, characterized by early disease recurrence and substantially greater risk of premature allograft failure following disease recurrence (131–134). Up to 70% of patients with immune-mediated GN and monoclonal deposits have no evidence of plasma cell dyscrasia (i.e., absence of serum and urine monoclonal Ig proteins or evidence of plasma cell dyscrasia in the bone marrow), whereas in the remaining 30% of patients, patients often have detectable elevated monoclonal proteins without fulfilling the criteria for multiple myeloma (often termed “monoclonal gammopathies of renal significance”) (135–137). It is important to note that these disease processes on occasions have overlapping clinical and histological features (e.g., monoclonal gammopathy may be present in both immune complex-mediated and complement-mediated MPGN) and clinicians should consider undertaking a panel of investigations for all patients with MPGN being assessed for transplantation (Figure 1). Despite the advances in the current understanding of the pathogenesis and risk of disease recurrence in patients with MPGN, there continues to be residual uncertainties as to the relationships between patient and disease characteristics and the risk of disease recurrence and longer-term prognosis. Clinicians should be alerted of the need to undertake pre-transplant screening for monoclonal gammopathy ± hematology review in patients with MPGN, while ensuring close monitoring post-transplant for signs of disease recurrence. Open discussion to ensure patients with MPGN are counseled appropriately such that they are cognizant of the risk of disease recurrence post-transplant, weighing between this risk of premature allograft failure (if disease recurs) against that associated with remaining on dialysis (138). Figures 2A–D show the light microscopy and ultrastructural features of a kidney transplant recipient who had developed asymptomatic MPGN recurrence 12-months post-transplant, with similar patterns of electron dense deposits as the primary disease.

Figure 1

Figure 2

The approach to treatment for recurrent disease is not well-established, limited to case series of successful treatment with the use of plasmapheresis and other immunosuppressive agents including cyclophosphamide, eculizumab, and rituximab (139–142). However, the optimal treatment strategy remains unknown (100, 101, 143, 144). In a case series of 7 patients with C3 glomerulopathy treated with eculizumab for a duration between 3 and 28 months (n = 5 with C3GN and n = 2 with DDD), 3 (all with C3GN) of the 7 patients had received a kidney transplant. Of these 3 patients, 2 had experienced disease recurrence between 3 and 48 months post-transplant, and 1 patient had developed de novo C3GN at 135 months post-transplant (original ESKD attributed to FSGS). The initiation of eculizumab in these 3 patients resulted in stabilization of kidney function and proteinuria in 2 patients, with no response in 1 patient and treatment with eculizumab was subsequently discontinued (139). Other reports comprising of 6 pediatric patients with MPGN I, C3GN, or DDD (n = 5 native kidneys and n = 1 with recurrence of C3 glomerulopathy post-kidney transplant) showed a modest benefit of eculizumab in reducing proteinuria and stabilization of kidney function suggesting a potential therapeutic role of eculizumab in a subgroup of patients (145, 146). Nevertheless, given the heterogeneity in the use and varying treatment responses to eculizumab in these cases (and small number of cases of post-transplant recurrence), larger studies are required to ascertain the true benefits of eculizumab in the treatment of disease recurrence post-transplant. The use of plasmapheresis and/or rituximab in the treatment of primary MPGN recurrence post-transplant has been limited to a small number of cases (n = 9), with modest response observed in half the cases. In one patient who had developed recurrent crescentic DDD and had failed treatment with rituximab and plasmapheresis, the introduction of eculizumab therapy led to discernible clinical and biochemical responses (119, 140, 141, 147, 148). In a retrospective Spanish cohort study of 60 patients with C3GN (affecting native kidneys), patients who were maintained on immunosuppressive treatment, particularly corticosteroids and mycophenolate were more likely to achieve clinical remission compared to untreated patients or those on other immunosuppressive regimens (149). However, the relevance of this observation in the treatment of disease recurrence post-transplantation is unknown with no current data to support a dose increase of mycophenolate or a change from an alternative regimen to a mycophenolate-based immunosuppressive regimen.

The new classification and current knowledge of MPGN may assist clinicians to adopt a personalized treatment strategy according to the most likely pathogenesis of the disease process (e.g., consideration of plasmapheresis and anti-B cell therapy for immune complex-mediated GN or those with monoclonal gammopathy or to consider eculizumab for C3 glomerulopathy) and the availability of more cases with longer-term follow-up data will be essential in determining the most appropriate treatment options for patients who have development recurrent disease post-transplant (Table 3).

Recurrent Idiopathic Membranous GN

The discoveries of major podocyte antigens and the pathogenic autoantibody against the podocyte antigen phospholipase A2 receptor (PLA2R) have led to breakthroughs in the understanding, management, and treatment of patients with idiopathic membranous GN (150, 151). The ability to test for the presence of anti-PLA2R autoantibody has resulted in improved recognition and differentiating primary vs. secondary membranous GN, as well as assisting clinicians in the management of patients pre and post-transplantation, identifying those patients at high risk of post-transplant disease recurrence that may benefit from more intensive monitoring post-transplant as well as monitoring response to treatment (44, 152, 153). Nevertheless, the absence of PLA2R autoantibody does not definitively exclude cases of idiopathic membranous GN (45, 154). The diagnostic test accuracy of circulating anti-PLA2R autoantibody in differentiating primary from secondary membranous GN is acceptable, with reported test sensitivity of 65% (63–67%), specificity of 97% (97–98%), positive likelihood ratio of 15.65 (9.95–24.62), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.37 (0.32–0.42) (155). Similar test performance accuracy is shown for the positive glomerular staining of PLA2R antigen (155, 156). A second antibody specific for the autoantigen thrombospondin type 1 domain–containing 7A (THSD7A) has been detected in up to 5% of patients with idiopathic membranous GN, typically in those who were seronegative for the PLA2R autoantibody (<15% cases) (45). Nevertheless, up to 20% of patients with idiopathic membranous GN do not have detectable autoantibodies to PLA2R or THSD7A, suggesting the possibility that unidentified autoantibodies targeting other auto-antigens may be contributing (47, 157).

The rate of disease recurrence in patients with idiopathic membranous GN following kidney transplantation is between 30 and 50%, with the disparate detection rates reported in the studies influenced by the characteristics of the cohort (e.g., those with high titres of circulating anti-PLA2R autoantibody have a greater risk of recurrent disease), follow-up period and dissimilar biopsy practices (Table 1) (4, 158). Even though the circulating levels of anti-PLA2R autoantibody tend to decline post-transplant (adsorption into the allograft or the effect of immunosuppression), there is a direct relationship between the titer level and risk of disease recurrence post-transplant. The positive predictive value of pre-transplant anti-PLA2R antibodies for disease recurrence is 83%, but the risk of recurrence in those with idiopathic membranous GN not attributed to anti-PLA2R antibody remains unknown (45, 154). Nevertheless, the diagnostic threshold of anti-PLA2R antibody in defining the risk of disease recurrence remains poorly defined. The utility of monitoring anti-PLA2R antibody post-transplant remains unclear, but should be considered in those with high pre-transplant circulating levels of anti-PLA2R antibody, in those with early disease recurrence (to predict disease progression), to determine response to treatment and to differentiate disease recurrence from de novo membranous GN or other causes of proteinuria (4, 159). The prognostic significance of other biomarkers (antibody to other auto-antigens) shown in Table 2 remains unknown. Figures 3A–C show the light microscopy and ultrastructural features of a kidney transplant recipient who had developed early recurrence of idiopathic membranous GN within a month post-transplant. The transplant allograft biopsy showed features of early membranous GN with a few small subepithelial deposits.

Figure 3

The treatment of disease recurrence is largely extrapolated from treatment in the general population and typically includes a combination of anti-proteinuric agents, corticosteroids, alkylating agents, CNI, and rituximab. Given that kidney transplant recipients are likely to be maintained on corticosteroids and CNI, most clinicians would advocate continuing (or changing from mTOR inhibitor-based regimen to) CNI and consider the addition of anti-CD20 antibodies rather than introducing alkylating agents to avoid over-immunosuppression resulting in severe infective complications. Rituximab is an effective treatment for native and recurrent membranous GN in the allograft, with up to 80% achieving complete or partial remission with the use of rituximab for early disease recurrence post-transplant (160–163). A personalized approach of prescribing rituximab only to patients with positive anti-PLA2R antibody-associated idiopathic membranous GN in the native kidneys has been suggested (164, 165), but a similar approach has not been advocated for disease recurrence. The decision and timing of initiating specific treatment, in addition to anti-proteinuric treatment for patients with recurrent idiopathic membranous GN remains unknown, as many patients may have subclinical histological recurrence (particularly those with pre-transplant circulating anti-PLA2R antibody) or the proteinuria may be attributed to other concurrent diseases (e.g., transplant glomerulopathy). A single case of complete clinical remission with bortezomib has been described for rituximab-resistant recurrent membranous GN post-transplant, suggesting that depletion of plasma cells (in addition to B cells) may be needed in refractory cases (166). There is currently insufficient information as to the pre-emptive use of rituximab for patients with idiopathic membranous GN and high pre-transplant levels of anti-PLA2R antibody, but this (or early initiation post-transplant) can be considered in those with detectable high levels of anti-PLA2R antibody with prior allograft failure from recurrent membranous GN or have persistent high or increasing levels of circulating anti-PLA2R antibody post-transplant with early histological recurrence. The higher relative risk of allograft failure (up to 50% at 10-years of follow-up) following disease recurrence is a point of concern but must be taken into context the varying rates of disease recurrence, potential ascertainment bias of attributing chronic allograft failure from recurrent disease and the competing risk of other causes of allograft failure and death with a functioning graft (5, 167); and more detailed analysis of these cases to identify potentially modifiable factors that may explain those at risk of allograft failure following disease recurrence are required (e.g., ineffective treatment or delayed institution of treatment). A practical approach post-transplant in patients with idiopathic membranous GN is shown in Figure 4 and Table 3.

Figure 4

Secondary GN

In contrast to ESKD attributed to primary GN, patients with secondary GN subtypes attributed to systemic diseases [such as atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), anti-glomerular basement membrane (GBM) disease, and crescentic GN (e.g., from systemic vasculitis)] may experience GN recurrence after kidney transplantation, but these relapses often occur later post-transplant and infrequently lead to allograft failure (8). In patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis, the relapse rate (often extra-renal complications) has been reported at 0.02 per patient-years, with no consistent association demonstrated between ANCA subtypes or disease severity prior to transplantation and disease recurrence occurring post-transplant (168–170). The incidence and outcome of patients with recurrent lupus nephritis post-kidney transplantation are unclear, with the majority of the reports from single-center and registry studies. The reported incidence of recurrent lupus nephritis varies between 0 and 44% (171), with patients who had experienced recurrent lupus nephritis at a greater risk of allograft failure and mortality (172–175). However, this association remains inconsistent (176). In patients with anti-GBM disease, disease recurrence after kidney transplant is <5% in the era of modern immunosuppression, and allograft failure from disease recurrence exceedingly rare (177, 178). Prior to the availability of the C5-inhibitor eculizumab (Soliris^®), the risk of disease recurrence following transplantation of patients with aHUS was up to 80%, with a substantial proportion of patients losing their allografts from recurrent disease within the first year post-transplant and therefore, kidney transplantation was considered a contraindication for patients with aHUS (179). With prophylactic use of eculizumab, kidney transplantation appeared safe with excellent allograft outcome, even in those with pathogenic mutations known to be associated with a high risk of disease recurrence (180–182). There have been reports of successful live donor kidney transplantation without the use of prophylactic eculizumab but this is generally not recommended or undertaken with extreme caution in patients with certain genetic mutations (e.g., membrane-associated complement regulator membrane cofactor protein mutation) and frequent post-transplant monitoring for disease recurrence (183, 184).

Presumed or Advanced GN

In patients with ESKD where the underlying etiology of the cause of ESKD is uncertain because a biopsy was not undertaken (but with clinical suspicion) or were non-diagnostic with non-specific histological features of interstitial fibrosis and glomerulosclerosis, the incidence of allograft failure attributed to GN is extremely low. Data from the ANZDATA registry showed that 5% of death censored allograft failure of kidney transplant recipients with presumed/advanced GN as cause of ESKD was attributed to GN, compared to over 30% in those with high-risk primary GN subtypes. In this study, almost 90% of the allograft failures from GN were attributed to FSGS, membranous GN and IgA nephropathy, but it is unknown whether these GNs represent recurrent or de novo GN (185). Similar findings have been corroborated in a large Canadian population cohort study where the incidence of post-transplant biopsy-proven GN was diagnosed in 5.7% (9 of 159 patients) of patients with presumed GN (cumulative probability of 11.8% at 15 years post-transplant), with 8 of 9 post-transplant GN cases attributed to FSGS and IgA nephropathy (9).

De novo GN

The true prevalence of de novo GN in kidney transplant recipients remains unknown, but is associated with significantly reduced allograft survival compared to those without de novo glomerular disease. The incidence of de novo GN after kidney transplant varies between 4 and 20%, with FSGS, IgA nephropathy, membranous GN, and MPGN being the most common de novo GN subtypes. There are difficulties in identifying and confirming the presence of de novo GN post-transplant because the cause of native ESKD is often uncertain (kidney biopsies were often not undertaken or were non-diagnostic), the presence of GN in the donor kidney may not be known (particularly in the absence of pre-implantation biopsy), variations in allograft biopsy practices and differences in the histopathological evaluation of allograft biopsies where immunofluorescence and electron microscopy of biopsies may not be routinely performed (8, 186). In a Canadian cohort study, the incidence of de novo GN occurred in 3.4 and 3.6% of those with primary ESKD from GN and those with ESKD from non-GN causes, corresponding to cumulative incidences of 9.6 and 10.5% at 15 years, respectively. In patients whose ESKD was attributed to non-GN causes and had developed de novo GN, over 95% of cases were FSGS (the most common form of de novo GN, 11 of 26 [42%] cases), IgA nephropathy (7 of 26 [27%]), membranous GN (4 of 26 [15%]), and MPGN (3 of 26 [12%]) (9). In this study, the risk of allograft failure was over 7-times greater among recipients who have developed de novo GN, compared to those without disease.

Table 4 shows the subtypes of de novo GN that have been reported, outlining the differences in clinical and histological characteristics of de novo vs. native (or recurrent) GN, as well as potential treatment options and outcomes. The presentations of those with de novo GN are similar to those with primary GN subtypes, ranging from asymptomatic urinary or biochemical abnormalities to overt symptoms and signs of GN with nephrotic syndrome and renal dysfunction. As way of an example, there are several risk factors that may predispose to the development of de novo FSGS, particularly those associated with a reduction in nephron mass (resulting in compensatory hyperfiltration of remaining nephrons such as diabetes, hypertension, BK viral infection, CNI therapy, and rejection) or the introduction of sirolimus (through the effects on podocyte integrity) (96, 186, 225–227). Consequently, it is often difficult to differentiate secondary forms of FSGS (developing post-transplant) from “actual” de novo non-collapsing GN and may to some extent explain why most cases of de novo FSGS tend to occur later post-transplant (compared to the recurrence of primary FSGS). Irrespective of the nature of de novo FSGS, the long-term allograft outcome is relatively poor, particularly in the presence of interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy with 5-year allograft survival of <50% after diagnosis (191, 228). Given the heterogeneity of the disease process, the treatment of de novo FSGS predominantly revolves around adequate anti-proteinuric treatment and the removal of the offending agents/factors where possible, but more aggressive therapy (similar to disease recurrence) may be considered, although there are no data to support this approach. Re-transplantation following allograft failure from de novo FSGS can be considered, but clinicians should attempt to establish and exclude or avoid potential causative factors that had resulted in the development of de novo FSGS.

The incidence of de novo IgA nephropathy is likely to be underestimated, with asymptomatic IgA deposition not infrequently found (detected incidentally in protocol or indication biopsies or potentially donor-derived asymptomatic disease detected on pre-implantation biopsies) (186, 187). However, presentation with macroscopic hematuria is unusual. The prognosis of those with de novo IgA nephropathy is usually relatively benign with treatment predominantly focuses on anti-proteinuric and/or anti-hypertensive therapy (188). Patients who have developed crescentic de novo IgA nephropathy tend to have a poorer prognosis (22), but the efficacy of more aggressive treatment with steroids and alkylating agent remains unknown. There is insufficient data to determine whether the clinical course of those with recurrent or de novo IgA nephropathy is dissimilar, but re-transplantation of patients with either disease is possible. De novo membranous GN and MPGN are much less common, and the reported cases primarily related to secondary causes including viral infections, rejection, autoimmune disease, CNI and thrombotic microangiopathy (115, 193, 229). The onset of de novo membranous GN or MPGN tend to occur later post-transplant (compared to recurrent disease), with symptoms ranging from asymptomatic detection of mild proteinuria and incidental biopsy findings to nephrotic range proteinuria and rapidly progressive GN (with acute allograft deterioration), but these are often indistinguishable compared to the timing, presentations, and clinical course of those with recurrent diseases (50). For membranous GN, the pattern of Ig staining or glomerular staining for PLA2R may help to differentiate de novo from recurrent disease. In patients with recurrent disease, IgG1 staining in capillary loop deposits was dominant/co-dominant (n = 7 cases), whereas, IgG4 staining in capillary loop deposits was dominant/co-dominant (n = 2 cases) in de novo disease (195). In another small study of 24 patients with recurrent (n = 12) or de novo membranous GN (n = 12), glomerular staining for PLA2R was more common in those with recurrent disease (83% cases, sensitivity and specificity of 83% [95%CI 51–97%] and 92% [95%CI 60–100%], respectively) compared to de novo disease (17%), and suggest that injury to the podocytes occurring post-transplantation triggering the release of podocyte antigens may induce the formation of auto-antibodies and deposition of subepithelial immune complexes (193, 196). These findings will need to be validated in larger cohorts. Nevertheless, in all patients with de novo membranous GN and MPGN, a careful histological examination for potential secondary causes or contributing factors should be undertaken, which will have clinical implication when considering treatment options and future re-transplantation potential for these patients.

Clinicians should be aware of the need to exclude secondary causes in recipients who have developed de novo GN, which is critical when considering treatment options and re-transplant potential (following allograft failure). Nonetheless, the systematic approach to the investigations and subsequent management of kidney transplant recipients with de novo GN is similar to that of patients presenting with GN without a kidney transplant. However, the data informing the clinical and pathological differences between recurrent compared to de novo GN remains limited and therefore the current understanding of the epidemiology, pathogenesis and outcomes of de novo GN is likely to evolve with the availability of future studies.

Conclusion

Despite the advances in the understanding of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and classification of primary and recurrent GN after kidney transplantation, considerable uncertainty remains in the approach and treatment of post-transplant GN recurrence (230). It is therefore imperative to consider the establishment of a global GN registry, focusing on data collection on the clinical characteristics, histological features, treatment, and outcome of patients who have developed post-transplant GN, particularly those with high risk GN subtypes. The Post-TrANsplant GlOmerular Disease (TANGO) study, an observational, multicenter cohort study was initiated in 2017 by researchers across Europe, North American, and South America, with the goal of collecting patient-level data regarding the risk factor, trajectory of disease activity, and responses to treatment; to develop a bio-repository of human specimens including blood, cell, and tissue samples; and the opportunity to undertake collaborative studies and clinical intervention trials to improve the management and clinical outcomes of these patients (231). Even though the clinical care of patients with recurrent or de novo GN remains challenging, it is an exciting time for the integration of translational GN-related research to novel developments in the understanding and treatment of GN, with the ultimate goal of establishing personalized treatment by effectively tailoring specific treatment strategies to patients with the various types of recurrent or de novo GN.

Disclosure

WL was supported by a Clinical Research Fellowship from the Raine Foundation (University of Western Australia and Health Department of Western Australia) and Jacquot Research Foundation (Royal Australasian College of Physicians). GW was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Career Development Fellowship.

References

• 1.

  Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. 40th Report, Chapter 1: Incidence of End Stage Kidney Disease.Adelaide, SA: Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (2018).

  • Google Scholar

• 2.

  United States Renal Data System. USRDS annual data report: Epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. Chapter 1: Incidence, Prevalence, Patient Characteristics, and Treatment Modalities.Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (2018).

  • Google Scholar

• 3.

  ByrneCCaskeyFCastledineCDavenportADawnayAFraserSet al. UK renal registry: 20th annual report of the renal association. Nephron. (2018) 139(Suppl. 1):490958. 10.1159/000490958

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4.

  CosioFGCattranDC. Recent advances in our understanding of recurrent primary glomerulonephritis after kidney transplantation. Kidney Int. (2017) 91:304–14. 10.1016/j.kint.2016.08.030

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5.

  AllenPJChadbanSJCraigJCLimWHAllenRDMClaytonPAet al. Recurrent glomerulonephritis after kidney transplantation: risk factors and allograft outcomes. Kidney Int. (2017) 92:461–9. 10.1016/j.kint.2017.03.015

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6.

  O'ShaughnessyMMLiuSMontez-RathMELenihanCRLafayetteRAWinkelmayerWC. Kidney transplantation outcomes across GN Subtypes in the United States. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2017) 28:632–44. 10.1681/ASN.2016020126

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7.

  O'ShaughnessyMMMontez-RathMELafayetteRAWinkelmayerWC. Patient characteristics and outcomes by GN subtype in ESRD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2015) 10:1170–8. 10.2215/CJN.11261114

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8.

  GolgertWAAppelGBHariharanS. Recurrent glomerulonephritis after renal transplantation: an unsolved problem. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2008) 3:800–7. 10.2215/CJN.04050907

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9.

  ChailimpamontreeWDmitrienkoSLiGBalshawRMagilAShapiroRJet al. Probability, predictors, and prognosis of posttransplantation glomerulonephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2009) 20:843–51. 10.1681/ASN.2008050454

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10.

  ChoyBYChanTMLaiKN. Recurrent glomerulonephritis after kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant. (2006) 6:2535–42. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01502.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11.

  AnJNLeeJPOhYJOhYKHaJWChaeDWet al. Incidence of post-transplant glomerulonephritis and its impact on graft outcome. Kidney Res Clin Pract. (2012) 31:219–26. 10.1016/j.krcp.2012.09.004

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12.

  El-ZoghbyZMStegallMDLagerDJKremersWKAmerHGloorJMet al. Identifying specific causes of kidney allograft loss. Am J Transplant. (2009) 9:527–35. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02519.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13.

  BrigantiEMRussGRMcNeilJJAtkinsRCChadbanSJ. Risk of renal allograft loss from recurrent glomerulonephritis. N Engl J Med. (2002) 347:103–9. 10.1056/NEJMoa013036

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14.

  HariharanSAdamsMBBrennanDCDavisCLFirstMRJohnsonCPet al. Recurrent and de novo glomerular disease after renal transplantation: a report from Renal Allograft Disease Registry (RADR). Transplantation. (1999) 68:635–41. 10.1097/00007890-199909150-00007

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15.

  BerthouxFEl DeebSMariatCDiconneELaurentBThibaudinL. Antithymocyte globulin (ATG) induction therapy and disease recurrence in renal transplant recipients with primary IgA nephropathy. Transplantation. (2008) 85:1505–7. 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181705ad4

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16.

  LeeaphornNGargNKhankinEVCardarelliFPavlakisM. Recurrence of IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation in steroid continuation versus early steroid-withdrawal regimens: a retrospective analysis of the UNOS/OPTN database. Transpl Int. (2018) 31:175–86. 10.1111/tri.13075

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17.

  MoroniGLonghiSQuagliniSGallelliBBanfiGMontagninoGet al. The long-term outcome of renal transplantation of IgA nephropathy and the impact of recurrence on graft survival. Nephrol Dial Transpl. (2013) 28:1305–14. 10.1093/ndt/gfs472

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18.

  PippiasMStelVSAresté-FosalbaNCouchoudCFernandez-FresnedoGFinnePet al. Long-term kidney transplant outcomes in primary glomerulonephritis: analysis from the ERA-EDTA registry. Transplantation. (2016) 100:1955–62. 10.1097/TP.0000000000000962

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19.

  McDonaldSPRussGR. Recurrence of IgA nephropathy among renal allograft recipients from living donors is greater among those with zero HLA mismatches. Transplantation. (2006) 82:759–62. 10.1097/01.tp.0000230131.66971.45

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20.

  ClaytonPMcDonaldSChadbanS. Steroids and recurrent IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation. Am J Transpl. (2011) 11:1645–9. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03667.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21.

  AndresdottirMBHaasnootGWPersijnGGClaasFH. HLA-B8, DR3: a new risk factor for graft failure after renal transplantation in patients with underlying immunoglobulin A nephropathy. Clin Transplant. (2009) 23:660–5. 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2009.01059.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22.

  KowalewskaJYuanSSustento-ReodicaNNicosiaRFSmithKDDavisCLet al. IgA nephropathy with crescents in kidney transplant recipients. Am J Kidney Dis. (2005) 45:167–75. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2004.09.030

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23.

  AvasareRSRosenstielPEZakyZSTsapepasDSAppelGBMarkowitzGSet al. Predicting post-transplant recurrence of iga nephropathy: the importance of crescents. Am J Nephrol. (2017) 45:99–106. 10.1159/000453081

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24.

  WangAYLaiFMYuAWLamPKChowKMChoiPCet al. Recurrent IgA nephropathy in renal transplant allografts. Am J Kidney Dis. (2001) 38:588–96. 10.1053/ajkd.2001.26885

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25.

  NijimSVujjiniVAlasfarSLuoXOrandiBDelpCet al. Recurrent IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. (2016) 48:2689–94. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2016.08.011

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26.

  BerthelotLRobertTVuibletVTabaryTBraconnierADraméMet al. Recurrent IgA nephropathy is predicted by altered glycosylated IgA, autoantibodies and soluble CD89 complexes. Kidney Int. (2015) 88:815–22. 10.1038/ki.2015.158

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27.

  RobertTBerthelotLCambierARondeauEMonteiroRC. Molecular insights into the pathogenesis of IgA nephropathy. Trends Mol Med. (2015) 21:762–75. 10.1016/j.molmed.2015.10.003

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28.

  PlaczekWJYanagawaHMakitaYRenfrowMBJulianBARizkDVet al. Serum galactose-deficient-IgA1 and IgG autoantibodies correlate in patients with IgA nephropathy. PLoS ONE. (2018) 13:e0190967. 10.1371/journal.pone.0190967

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29.

  ZhaoYFZhuLLiuLJShiSFLvJCZhangH. Pathogenic role of glycan-specific IgG antibodies in IgA nephropathy. BMC Nephrol. (2017) 18:301. 10.1186/s12882-017-0722-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30.

  BerthouxFSuzukiHThibaudinLYanagawaHMaillardNMariatCet al. Autoantibodies targeting galactose-deficient IgA1 associate with progression of IgA nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2012) 23:1579–87. 10.1681/ASN.2012010053

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31.

  SuzukiHFanRZhangZBrownRHallSJulianBAet al. Aberrantly glycosylated IgA1 in IgA nephropathy patients is recognized by IgG antibodies with restricted heterogeneity. J Clin Invest. (2009) 119:1668–77. 10.1172/JCI38468

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32.

  WyldMLChadbanSJ. Recurrent IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. (2016) 100:1827–32. 10.1097/TP.0000000000001093

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33.

  GarnierASDuveauADemiselleJCrouéASubraJFSayeghJet al. Early post-transplant serum IgA level is associated with IgA nephropathy recurrence after kidney transplantation. PLoS ONE. (2018) 13:e0196101. 10.1371/journal.pone.0196101

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34.

  BerthouxFSuzukiHMoheyHMaillardNMariatCNovakJet al. Prognostic value of serum biomarkers of autoimmunity for recurrence of IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2017) 28:1943–50. 10.1681/ASN.2016060670

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35.

  Martin-PenagosLBenito-HernándezAMartínJGómez-RománJSan SegundoDLópez-HoyosMet al. APRIL serum levels relate to recurrence of IgA nephropathy. Transplantation. (2018) 102:S10. 10.1097/01.tp.0000542547.90273.0b

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36.

  LeeSKinDKimJJeonH. Identification of urinary biomarkers for recurrence of IgA nephropathy after kidney transplantation using proteomic methods. Transplantation. (2018) 102:S580. 10.1097/01.tp.0000543458.26810.ce

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37.

  WeiCEl HindiSLiJFornoniAGoesNSageshimaJet al. Circulating urokinase receptor as a cause of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Nat Med. (2011) 17:952–60. 10.1038/nm.2411

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38.

  HuangJLiuGZhangYMCuiZWangFLiuXJet al. Urinary soluble urokinase receptor levels are elevated and pathogenic in patients with primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. BMC Med. (2014) 12:81. 10.1186/1741-7015-12-81

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39.

  DelvilleMSigdelTKWeiCLiJHsiehSCFornoniAet al. A circulating antibody panel for pretransplant prediction of FSGS recurrence after kidney transplantation. Sci Transl Med. (2014) 6:256ra136. 10.1126/scitranslmed.3008538

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40.

  Lopez-HellinJCantarellCJimenoLSanchez-FructuosoAPuig-GayNGuiradoLet al. A form of apolipoprotein a-I is found specifically in relapses of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis following transplantation. Am J Transplant. (2013) 13:493–500. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04338.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41.

  Puig-GayNJacobs-CachaCSellarèsJGuiradoLGonzález RonceroFJiménezCet al. Apolipoprotein A-Ib as a biomarker of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis recurrence after kidney transplantation: diagnostic performance and assessment of its prognostic value - a multi-centre cohort study. Transpl Int. (2019) 32:313–22. 10.1111/tri.13372

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42.

  PérezVIbernónMLópezDPastorMCNavarroMNavarro-MuñozMet al. Urinary peptide profiling to differentiate between minimal change disease and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. PLoS ONE. (2014) 9:e87731. 10.1371/journal.pone.0087731

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43.

  McCarthyETSharmaMSavinVJ. Circulating permeability factors in idiopathic nephrotic syndrome and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2010) 5:2115–21. 10.2215/CJN.03800609

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44.

  QuintanaLFBlascoMSerasMPérezNSLópez-HoyosMVillarroelPet al. Antiphospholipase A2 receptor antibody levels predict the risk of posttransplantation recurrence of membranous nephropathy. Transplantation. (2015) 99:1709–14. 10.1097/TP.0000000000000630

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45.

  TomasNMBeckLHJrMeyer-SchwesingerCSeitz-PolskiBMaHZahnerGet al. Thrombospondin type-1 domain-containing 7A in idiopathic membranous nephropathy. N Engl J Med. (2014) 371:2277–87. 10.1056/NEJMoa1409354

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46.

  HerwigJSkuzaSSachsWSachsMFaillaAVRuneGet al. Thrombospondin type 1 domain-containing 7A localizes to the slit diaphragm and stabilizes membrane dynamics of fully differentiated podocytes. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2019) 30:824–39. 10.1681/ASN.2018090941

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47.

  MurtasCBruschiMCandianoGMoroniGMagistroniRMagnanoAet al. Coexistence of different circulating anti-podocyte antibodies in membranous nephropathy. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2012) 7:1394–400. 10.2215/CJN.02170312

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48.

  AlasfarSCarter-MonroeNRosenbergAZMontgomeryRAAlachkarN. Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis recurrence after kidney transplantation: using the new classification. BMC Nephrol. (2016) 17:7. 10.1186/s12882-015-0219-x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49.

  LorenzECSethiSLeungNDispenzieriAFervenzaFCCosioFG. Recurrent membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis after kidney transplantation. Kidney Int. (2010) 77:721–8. 10.1038/ki.2010.1

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50.

  PonticelliCGlassockRJ. Posttransplant recurrence of primary glomerulonephritis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2010) 5:2363–72. 10.2215/CJN.06720810

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51.

  NafarMSamavatS. Biomarkers in IgA nephropathy. In: PatelVBPreedyVR editors. Biomarkers in Kidney Disease.Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media (2015). p. 1–29.

  • Google Scholar

• 52.

  ChandrakantanARatanapanichkichPSaidMBarkerCVJulianBA. Recurrent IgA nephropathy after renal transplantation despite immunosuppressive regimens with mycophenolate mofetil. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2005) 20:1214–21. 10.1093/ndt/gfh773

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53.

  ZagkotsisGVourlakouCParaskevopoulosAApostolouT. Recurrence of crescentic IgA nephropathy after renal transplantation. CEN Case Rep. (2018) 7:268–73. 10.1007/s13730-018-0341-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54.

  TangZJiSMChenDRWenJQChenJSLiuZHet al. Recurrent or de novo IgA nephropathy with crescent formation after renal transplantation. Ren Fail. (2008) 30:611–6. 10.1080/08860220802134516

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55.

  LafayetteRACanettaPARovinBHAppelGBNovakJNathKAet al. A Randomized, controlled trial of rituximab in IgA nephropathy with proteinuria and renal dysfunction. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2017) 28:1306–13. 10.1681/ASN.2016060640

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56.

  CourtneyAEMcNameePTNelsonWEMaxwellAP. Does angiotensin blockade influence graft outcome in renal transplant recipients with IgA nephropathy?Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2006) 21:3550–4. 10.1093/ndt/gfl506

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57.

  HottaKFukasawaYAkimotoMTanabeTSasakiHFukuzawaNet al. Tonsillectomy ameliorates histological damage of recurrent immunoglobulin A nephropathy after kidney transplantation. Nephrology. (2013) 18:808–12. 10.1111/nep.12151

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58.

  KennokiTIshidaHYamaguchiYTanabeK. Proteinuria-reducing effects of tonsillectomy alone in IgA nephropathy recurring after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. (2009) 88:935–41. 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181b75374

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59.

  FrancisATrnkaPMcTaggartSJ. Long-term outcome of kidney transplantation in recipients with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2016) 11:2041–6. 10.2215/CJN.03060316

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60.

  BertelliRGinevriFCaridiGDagninoMSandriniSDi DucaMet al. Recurrence of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis after renal transplantation in patients with mutations of podocin. Am J Kidney Dis. (2003) 41:1314–21. 10.1016/S0272-6386(03)00364-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61.

  FreedmanBIPastanSOIsraniAKSchladtDJulianBAGautreauxMDet al. APOL1 genotype and kidney transplantation outcomes from deceased african american donors. Transplantation. (2016) 100:194–202. 10.1097/TP.0000000000000969

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62.

  LeeBTKumarVWilliamsTAAbdiRBernhardyADyerCet al. The APOL1 genotype of African American kidney transplant recipients does not impact 5-year allograft survival. Am J Transplant. (2012) 12:1924–8. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04033.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63.

  JungraithmayrTCHoferKCochatPCherninGCortinaGFargueSet al. Screening for NPHS2 mutations may help predict FSGS recurrence after transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 22:579–85. 10.1681/ASN.2010010029

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64.

  MachucaEHummelANevoFDantalJMartinezFAl-SabbanEet al. Clinical and epidemiological assessment of steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome associated with the NPHS2 R229Q variant. Kidney Int. (2009) 75:727–35. 10.1038/ki.2008.650

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65.

  HofstraJMLainezSvan KuijkWHSchootsJBaltissenMPHoefslootLHet al. New TRPC6 gain-of-function mutation in a non-consanguineous Dutch family with late-onset focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2013) 28:1830–8. 10.1093/ndt/gfs572

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66.

  ConlonPJLynnKWinnMPQuarlesLDBembeMLPericak-VanceMet al. Spectrum of disease in familial focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis. Kidney Int. (1999) 56:1863–71. 10.1046/j.1523-1755.1999.00727.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67.

  WeberSGribouvalOEsquivelELMorinièreVTêteMJLegendreCet al. NPHS2 mutation analysis shows genetic heterogeneity of steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome and low post-transplant recurrence. Kidney Int. (2004) 66:571–9. 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00776.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68.

  GbadegesinRALavinPJHallGBartkowiakBHomstadAJiangRet al. Inverted formin 2 mutations with variable expression in patients with sporadic and hereditary focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis. Kidney Int. (2012) 81:94–9. 10.1038/ki.2011.297

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69.

  BüscherAKBeckBBMelkAHoefeleJKranzBBamborschkeDet al. Rapid response to cyclosporin A and favorable renal outcome in nongenetic versus genetic steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2016) 11:245–53. 10.2215/CJN.07370715

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70.

  LeporiNZandLSethiSFernandez-JuarezGFervenzaFC. Clinical and pathological phenotype of genetic causes of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in adults. Clin Kidney J. (2018) 11:179–90. 10.1093/ckj/sfx143

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71.

  RoodIMDeegensJKWetzelsJF. Genetic causes of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis: implications for clinical practice. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2012) 27:882–90. 10.1093/ndt/gfr771

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72.

  SantínSBullichGTazón-VegaBGarcía-MasetRGiménezISilvaIet al. Clinical utility of genetic testing in children and adults with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 6:1139–48. 10.2215/CJN.05260610

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73.

  SantínSTazón-VegaBSilvaICoboMÁGiménezIRuízPet al. Clinical value of NPHS2 analysis in early- and adult-onset steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 6:344–54. 10.2215/CJN.03770410

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74.

  PintoJLacerdaGCameronJSTurnerDRBewickMOggCS. Recurrence of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in renal allografts. Transplantation. (1981) 32:83–9. 10.1097/00007890-198108000-00001

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75.

  GipsonDSTrachtmanHKaskelFJGreeneTHRadevaMKGassmanJJet al. Clinical trial of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in children and young adults. Kidney Int. (2011) 80:868–78. 10.1038/ki.2011.195

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76.

  TrautmannABodriaMOzaltinFGheisariAMelkAAzocarMet al. Spectrum of steroid-resistant and congenital nephrotic syndrome in children: the PodoNet registry cohort. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2015) 10:592–600. 10.2215/CJN.06260614

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77.

  WiggerMSchaibleJMuscheitesJKundtGHaffnerDFischerDC. Fetuin-A serum concentrations in healthy children. Ann Clin Biochem. (2009) 46(Pt 6):511–3. 10.1258/acb.2009.009037

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78.

  WeiCTrachtmanHLiJDongCFriedmanALGassmanJJet al. Circulating suPAR in two cohorts of primary FSGS. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2012) 23:2051–9. 10.1681/ASN.2012030302

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79.

  Franco PalaciosCRLieskeJCWadeiHMRuleADFervenzaFCVoskoboevNet al. Urine but not serum soluble urokinase receptor (suPAR) may identify cases of recurrent FSGS in kidney transplant candidates. Transplantation. (2013) 96:394–9. 10.1097/TP.0b013e3182977ab1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80.

  MaasRJHWetzelsJFMDeegensJKJ. Serum-soluble urokinase receptor concentration in primary FSGS. Kidney Int. (2012) 81:1043–4. 10.1038/ki.2012.32

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81.

  BockMEPriceHEGallonLLangmanCB. Serum soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor levels and idiopathic FSGS in children: a single-center report. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2013) 8:1304–11. 10.2215/CJN.07680712

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82.

  BackesYvan der SluijsKFMackieDPTackeFKochATenhunenJJet al. Usefulness of suPAR as a biological marker in patients with systemic inflammation or infection: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med. (2012) 38:1418–28. 10.1007/s00134-012-2613-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83.

  Eugen-OlsenJAndersenOLinnebergALadelundSHansenTWLangkildeAet al. Circulating soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor predicts cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and mortality in the general population. J Intern Med. (2010) 268:296–308. 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2010.02252.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84.

  SinhaABajpaiJSainiSBhatiaDGuptaAPuraswaniMet al. Serum-soluble urokinase receptor levels do not distinguish focal segmental glomerulosclerosis from other causes of nephrotic syndrome in children. Kidney Int. (2014) 85:649–58. 10.1038/ki.2013.546

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85.

  HalleckFStaeckONeumayerHBuddeKDmytroK. suPAR in transplant patients with FSGS recurrence. Abstract#1407. Transplantation. (2014) 98:97. 10.1097/00007890-201407151-00299

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86.

  CravediPKoppJBRemuzziG. Recent progress in the pathophysiology and treatment of FSGS recurrence. Am J Transplant. (2013) 13:266–74. 10.1111/ajt.12045

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87.

  StraatmannCKallashMKillackeyMIoremberFAvilesDBamgbolaOet al. Success with plasmapheresis treatment for recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in pediatric renal transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant. (2014) 18:29–34. 10.1111/petr.12185

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88.

  TranMHChanCPaschWCarpenterPIchiiHFosterC. Treatment of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis recurrence in the renal allograft: a report of two cases. Case Rep Nephrol Dial. (2016) 6:53–60. 10.1159/000445428

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 89.

  SchwartzJWintersJLPadmanabhanABalogunRADelaneyMLinenbergerMLet al. Guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis in clinical practice-evidence-based approach from the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: the sixth special issue. J Clin Apher. (2013) 28:145–284. 10.1002/jca.21276

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90.

  PescovitzMDBookBKSidnerRA. Resolution of recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis proteinuria after rituximab treatment. N Engl J Med. (2006) 354:1961–3. 10.1056/NEJMc055495

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91.

  FornoniASageshimaJWeiCMerscher-GomezSAguillon-PradaRJaureguiANet al. Rituximab targets podocytes in recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Sci Transl Med. (2011) 3:85ra46. 10.1126/scitranslmed.3002231

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92.

  BenzKBüttnerMDittrichKCampeanVDötschJAmannK. Characterisation of renal immune cell infiltrates in children with nephrotic syndrome. Pediatr Nephrol. (2010) 25:1291–8. 10.1007/s00467-010-1507-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93.

  YooTHPedigoCEGuzmanJCorrea-MedinaMWeiCVillarrealRet al. Sphingomyelinase-like phosphodiesterase 3b expression levels determine podocyte injury phenotypes in glomerular disease. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2015) 26:133–47. 10.1681/ASN.2013111213

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94.

  KangHGHaISCheongHI. Recurrence and treatment after renal transplantation in children with FSGS. Biomed Res Int. (2016) 2016:6832971. 10.1155/2016/6832971

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95.

  TejaniATButtKTrachtmanHSuthanthiranMRosenthalCJKhawarMR. Cyclosporine A induced remission of relapsing nephrotic syndrome in children. Kidney Int. (1988) 33:729–34. 10.1038/ki.1988.59

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96.

  LetavernierEBrunevalPMandetCDuong Van HuyenJPPéraldiMNHelalIet al. High sirolimus levels may induce focal segmental glomerulosclerosis de novo. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2007) 2:326–33. 10.2215/CJN.03751106

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97.

  HicksonLJGeraMAmerHIqbalCWMooreTBMillinerDSet al. Kidney transplantation for primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis: outcomes and response to therapy for recurrence. Transplantation. (2009) 87:1232–9. 10.1097/TP.0b013e31819f12be

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98.

  GonzalezEEttengerRRianthavornPTsaiEMalekzadehM. Preemptive plasmapheresis and recurrence of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in pediatric renal transplantation. Pediatr Transplant. (2011) 15:495–501. 10.1111/j.1399-3046.2011.01478.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99.

  GohhRYYangoAFMorrisseyPEMonacoAPGautamASharmaMet al. Preemptive plasmapheresis and recurrence of FSGS in high-risk renal transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. (2005) 5:2907–12. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2005.01112.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 100.

  YuCCFornoniAWeinsAHakroushSMaiguelDSageshimaJet al. Abatacept in B7–1-positive proteinuric kidney disease. N Engl J Med. (2013) 369:2416–23. 10.1056/NEJMoa1304572

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101.

  KristensenTIvarsenPPovlsenJV. Unsuccessful treatment with abatacept in recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis after kidney transplantation. Case Rep Nephrol Dial. (2017) 7:1–5. 10.1159/000454947

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102.

  DelvilleMBayeEDurrbachAAudardVKofmanTBraunLet al. B7–1 Blockade Does not improve post-transplant nephrotic syndrome caused by recurrent FSGS. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2016) 27:2520–7. 10.1681/ASN.2015091002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 103.

  Kienzl-WagnerKRosalesAScheidlSGinerTBösmüllerCRudnickiMet al. Successful management of recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Am J Transplant. (2018) 18:2818–22. 10.1111/ajt.14998

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104.

  AllardLKwonTKridSBacchettaJGarnierANovoRet al. Treatment by immunoadsorption for recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis after paediatric kidney transplantation: a multicentre French cohort. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2018) 33:954–63. 10.1093/ndt/gfx214

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105.

  GrellierJDel BelloAMilongoDGuilbeau-FrugierCRostaingLKamarN. Belatacept in recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis after kidney transplantation. Transpl Int. (2015) 28:1109–10. 10.1111/tri.12574

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106.

  BernardJBruelAAllain-LaunayEDantalJRousseyG. Ofatumumab in post-transplantation recurrence of a pediatric steroid-resistant idiopathic nephrotic syndrome. Pediatr Transplant. (2018) 22:e13175. 10.1111/petr.13175

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107.

  SolomonSZolotnitskayaADel RioM. Ofatumumab in post-transplantation recurrence of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in a child. Pediatr Transplant. (2019) 23:e13413. 10.1111/petr.13413

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108.

  AlachkarNCarter-MonroeNReiserJ. Abatacept in B7–1-positive proteinuric kidney disease. N Engl J Med. (2014) 370:1263–4. 10.1056/NEJMc1400502

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109.

  GarinEHReiserJCara-FuentesGWeiCMatarDWangHet al. Case series: CTLA4-IgG1 therapy in minimal change disease and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Pediatr Nephrol. (2015) 30:469–77. 10.1007/s00467-014-2957-6

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110.

  VerghesePSRheaultMNJacksonSMatasAJChinnakotlaSChaversB. The effect of peri-transplant plasmapheresis in the prevention of recurrent FSGS. Pediatr Transplant. (2018) 22:e13154. 10.1111/petr.13154

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111.

  CanaudGZuberJSberroRRoyaleVAnglicheauDSnanoudjRet al. Intensive and prolonged treatment of focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis recurrence in adult kidney transplant recipients: a pilot study. Am J Transplant. (2009) 9:1081–6. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02580.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112.

  StaeckOSlowinskiTLiekerIWuKRudolphBSchmidtDet al. Recurrent primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis managed with intensified plasma exchange and concomitant monitoring of soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor-mediated podocyte beta3-integrin activation. Transplantation. (2015) 99:2593–7. 10.1097/TP.0000000000000914

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113.

  GreenHRahamimovRRozen-ZviBPertzovBTobarALichtenbergSet al. Recurrent membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis type I after kidney transplantation: a 17-year single-center experience. Transplantation. (2015) 99:1172–7. 10.1097/TP.0000000000000459

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114.

  AndresdottirMBAssmannKJHoitsmaAJKoeneRAWetzelsJF. Recurrence of type I membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis after renal transplantation: analysis of the incidence, risk factors, and impact on graft survival. Transplantation. (1997) 63:1628–33. 10.1097/00007890-199706150-00016

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 115.

  SethiSFervenzaFC. Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis–a new look at an old entity. N Engl J Med. (2012) 366:1119–31. 10.1056/NEJMra1108178

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 116.

  SethiSFervenzaFC. Standardized classification and reporting of glomerulonephritis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2019) 34:193–9. 10.1093/ndt/gfy220

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117.

  SethiSHaasMMarkowitzGSD'AgatiVDRennkeHGJennetteJCet al. Mayo clinic/renal pathology society consensus report on pathologic classification, diagnosis, and reporting of GN. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2016) 27:1278–87. 10.1681/ASN.2015060612

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 118.

  SethiSFervenzaFC. Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis: pathogenetic heterogeneity and proposal for a new classification. Semin Nephrol. (2011) 31:341–8. 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2011.06.005

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 119.

  ZandLLorenzECCosioFGFervenzaFCNasrSHGandhiMJet al. Clinical findings, pathology, and outcomes of C3GN after kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2014) 25:1110–7. 10.1681/ASN.2013070715

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 120.

  Medjeral-ThomasNRO'ShaughnessyMMO'ReganJATraynorCFlanaganMWongLet al. C3 glomerulopathy: clinicopathologic features and predictors of outcome. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2014) 9:46–53. 10.2215/CJN.04700513

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 121.

  SmithRJAlexanderJBarlowPNBottoMCassavantTLCookHTet al. New approaches to the treatment of dense deposit disease. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2007) 18:2447–56. 10.1681/ASN.2007030356

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 122.

  FakhouriFFrémeaux-BacchiVNoëlLHCookHTPickeringMC. C3 glomerulopathy: a new classification. Nat Rev Nephrol. (2010) 6:494–9. 10.1038/nrneph.2010.85

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123.

  PickeringMCD'AgatiVDNesterCMSmithRJHaasMAppelGBet al. C3 glomerulopathy: consensus report. Kidney Int. (2013) 84:1079–89. 10.1038/ki.2013.377

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 124.

  SethiSFervenzaFCZhangYNasrSHLeungNVranaJet al. Proliferative glomerulonephritis secondary to dysfunction of the alternative pathway of complement. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 6:1009–17. 10.2215/CJN.07110810

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125.

  SethiSFervenzaFCZhangYZandLVranaJANasrSHet al. C3 glomerulonephritis: clinicopathological findings, complement abnormalities, glomerular proteomic profile, treatment, and follow-up. Kidney Int. (2012) 82:465–73. 10.1038/ki.2012.212

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126.

  SethiSNesterCMSmithRJ. Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis and C3 glomerulopathy: resolving the confusion. Kidney Int. (2012) 81:434–41. 10.1038/ki.2011.399

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 127.

  ServaisANoëlLHRoumeninaLTLe QuintrecMNgoSDragon-DureyMAet al. Acquired and genetic complement abnormalities play a critical role in dense deposit disease and other C3 glomerulopathies. Kidney Int. (2012) 82:454–64. 10.1038/ki.2012.63

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128.

  ServaisAFrémeaux-BacchiVLequintrecMSalomonRBlouinJKnebelmannBet al. Primary glomerulonephritis with isolated C3 deposits: a new entity which shares common genetic risk factors with haemolytic uraemic syndrome. J Med Genet. (2007) 44:193–9. 10.1136/jmg.2006.045328

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129.

  OhiHYasugiT. Occurrence of C3 nephritic factor and C4 nephritic factor in membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (MPGN). Clin Exp Immunol. (1994) 95:316–21. 10.1111/j.1365-2249.1994.tb06530.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130.

  SethiSNasrSHDe VrieseASFervenzaFC. C4d as a diagnostic tool in proliferative GN. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2015) 26:2852–9. 10.1681/ASN.2014040406

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131.

  NasrSHSethiSCornellLDFidlerMEBoelkinsMFervenzaFCet al. Proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits recurs in the allograft. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 6:122–32. 10.2215/CJN.05750710

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 132.

  NasrSHMarkowitzGSStokesMBSeshanSVValderramaEAppelGBet al. Proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits: a distinct entity mimicking immune-complex glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. (2004) 65:85–96. 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00365.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133.

  SumidaKUbaraYMaruiYNakamuraMTakaichiKTomikawaSet al. Recurrent proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits of IgG2lambda subtype in a transplanted kidney: a case report. Am J Kidney Dis. (2013) 62:587–90. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.01.013

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134.

  CzarneckiPGLagerDJLeungNDispenzieriACosioFGFervenzaFC. Long-term outcome of kidney transplantation in patients with fibrillary glomerulonephritis or monoclonal gammopathy with fibrillary deposits. Kidney Int. (2009) 75:420–7. 10.1038/ki.2008.577

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135.

  NasrSHValeriAMCornellLDFidlerMESethiSD'AgatiVDet al. Renal monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease: a report of 64 patients from a single institution. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2012) 7:231–9. 10.2215/CJN.08640811

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 136.

  LeungNBridouxFHutchisonCANasrSHCockwellPFermandJPet al. Monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance: when MGUS is no longer undetermined or insignificant. Blood. (2012) 120:4292–5. 10.1182/blood-2012-07-445304

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137.

  LeungNGertzMA. The spectrum of monoclonal gammopathies affecting the kidney. Leuk Lymphoma. (2012) 53:1656–7. 10.3109/10428194.2012.673229

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 138.

  BridouxFLeungNHutchisonCATouchardGSethiSFermandJPet al. Diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance. Kidney Int. (2015) 87:698–711. 10.1038/ki.2014.408

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139.

  WelteTArnoldFKappesJSeidlMHäffnerKBergmannCet al. Treating C3 glomerulopathy with eculizumab. BMC Nephrol. (2018) 19:7. 10.1186/s12882-017-0802-4

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140.

  MuczynskiKA. Plasmapheresis maintained renal function in an allograft with recurrent membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis type I. Am J Nephrol. (1995) 15:446–9. 10.1159/000168882

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141.

  FarooquiMAlsaadKAloudahNAlhamdanH. Treatment-resistant recurrent membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis in renal allograft responding to rituximab: case report. Transpl Proc. (2015) 47:823–6. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.02.003

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142.

  LienYHScottK. Long-term cyclophosphamide treatment for recurrent type I membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis after transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis. (2000) 35:539–43. 10.1016/S0272-6386(00)70211-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 143.

  DantalJBaatardRHourmantMCantarovichDBuzelinFSoulillouJP. Recurrent nephrotic syndrome following renal transplantation in patients with focal glomerulosclerosis. A one-center study of plasma exchange effects. Transplantation. (1991) 52:827–31. 10.1097/00007890-199111000-00014

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 144.

  CochatPKassirAColonSGlastreCTourniaireBParchouxBet al. Recurrent nephrotic syndrome after transplantation: early treatment with plasmaphaeresis and cyclophosphamide. Pediatr Nephrol. (1993) 7:50–4. 10.1007/BF00861567

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 145.

  LebretonCBacchettaJDijoudFBessenayLFremeaux-BacchiVSellier-LeclercAL. C3 glomerulopathy and eculizumab: a report on four paediatric cases. Pediatr Nephrol. (2017) 32:1023–8. 10.1007/s00467-017-3619-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 146.

  SpartàGGaspertANeuhausTJWeitzMMohebbiNOdermattUet al. Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis and C3 glomerulopathy in children: change in treatment modality? A report of a case series. Clin Kidney J. (2018) 11:479–90. 10.1093/ckj/sfy006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 147.

  McCaughanJAO'RourkeDMCourtneyAE. Recurrent dense deposit disease after renal transplantation: an emerging role for complementary therapies. Am J Transplant. (2012) 12:1046–51. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03923.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 148.

  Pérez-SáezMJToledoKNavarroMDLopez-AndreuMRedondoMDOrtegaRet al. Recurrent membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis after second renal graft treated with plasmapheresis and rituximab. Transpl Proc. (2011) 43:4005–9. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.09.079

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 149.

  RabascoCCaveroTRománERojas-RiveraJOleaTEspinosaMet al. Effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil in C3 glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. (2015) 88:1153–60. 10.1038/ki.2015.227

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 150.

  HoxhaEThieleIZahnerGPanzerUHarendzaSStahlRA. Phospholipase A2 receptor autoantibodies and clinical outcome in patients with primary membranous nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2014) 25:1357–66. 10.1681/ASN.2013040430

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 151.

  HofstraJMWetzelsJF. Phospholipase A2 receptor antibodies in membranous nephropathy: unresolved issues. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2014) 25:1137–9. 10.1681/ASN.2014010091

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 152.

  GuptaGFattahHAyalonRKiddJGehrTQuintanaLFet al. Pre-transplant phospholipase A2 receptor autoantibody concentration is associated with clinically significant recurrence of membranous nephropathy post-kidney transplantation. Clin Transplant. (2016) 30:461–9. 10.1111/ctr.12711

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 153.

  LeonJPérez-SáezMJBatalIBeckLHRennkeHGCanaudGet al. Membranous nephropathy post-transplantation: an update of the pathophysiology and management. Transplantation. (2019). 10.1097/TP.0000000000002758. [Epub ahead of print].

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 154.

  DebiecHLefeuFKemperMJNiaudetPDeschênesGRemuzziGet al. Early-childhood membranous nephropathy due to cationic bovine serum albumin. N Engl J Med. (2011) 364:2101–10. 10.1056/NEJMoa1013792

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 155.

  LiWZhaoYFuP. Diagnostic test accuracy of serum anti-PLA2R autoantibodies and glomerular PLA2R antigen for diagnosing idiopathic membranous nephropathy: an updated meta-analysis. Front Med. (2018) 5:1. 10.3389/fmed.2018.00101

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 156.

  DebiecHRoncoP. PLA2R autoantibodies and PLA2R glomerular deposits in membranous nephropathy. N Engl J Med. (2011) 364:689–90. 10.1056/NEJMc1011678

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 157.

  CattranDCBrenchleyPE. Membranous nephropathy: integrating basic science into improved clinical management. Kidney Int. (2017) 91:566–74. 10.1016/j.kint.2016.09.048

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 158.

  PasseriniPMalvicaSTripodiFCeruttiRMessaP. Membranous nephropathy (MN) recurrence after renal transplantation. Front Immunol. (2019) 10:1326. 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01326

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 159.

  DebiecHMartinLJouanneauCDautinGMesnardLRondeauEet al. Autoantibodies specific for the phospholipase A2 receptor in recurrent and de novo membranous nephropathy. Am J Transplant. (2011) 11:2144–52. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03643.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 160.

  El-ZoghbyZMGrandeJPFraileMGNorbySMFervenzaFCCosioFG. Recurrent idiopathic membranous nephropathy: early diagnosis by protocol biopsies and treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Am J Transplant. (2009) 9:2800–7. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02851.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 161.

  RuggenentiPChiurchiuCBruseganVAbbateMPernaAFilippiCet al. Rituximab in idiopathic membranous nephropathy: a one-year prospective study. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2003) 14:1851–7. 10.1097/01.ASN.0000071511.35221.B3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 162.

  FervenzaFCAbrahamRSEricksonSBIrazabalMVEirinASpecksUet al. Rituximab therapy in idiopathic membranous nephropathy: a 2-year study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2010) 5:2188–98. 10.2215/CJN.05080610

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 163.

  DahanKDebiecHPlaisierECachanadoMRousseauAWakselmanLet al. Rituximab for severe membranous nephropathy: a 6-month trial with extended follow-up. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2017) 28:348–58. 10.1681/ASN.2016040449

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 164.

  RuggenentiPDebiecHRuggieroBChiancaAPelléTGaspariFet al. Anti-phospholipase A2 receptor antibody titer predicts post-rituximab outcome of membranous nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2015) 26:2545–58. 10.1681/ASN.2014070640

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 165.

  DahanKGillionVJohanetCDebiecHRoncoP. The role of PLA2R antibody in treatment of membranous nephropathy. Kidney Int Rep. (2018) 3:498–501. 10.1016/j.ekir.2017.10.013

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 166.

  BarbariAChehadiRKfoury AssoufHKamelGJaafarMAbdallahAet al. Bortezomib as a novel approach to early recurrent membranous glomerulonephritis after kidney transplant refractory to combined conventional rituximab therapy. Exp Clin Transplant. (2017) 15:350–4. 10.6002/ect.2016.0350

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 167.

  GrupperACornellLDFervenzaFCBeckLHJrLorenzECosioFG. Recurrent membranous nephropathy after kidney transplantation: treatment and long-term implications. Transplantation. (2016) 100:2710–6. 10.1097/TP.0000000000001056

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 168.

  GeethaDEirinATrueKValentina IrazabalMSpecksUSeoPet al. Renal transplantation in antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis: a multicenter experience. Transplantation. (2011) 91:1370–5. 10.1097/TP.0b013e31821ab9aa

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 169.

  GeraMGriffinMDSpecksULeungNStegallMDFervenzaFC. Recurrence of ANCA-associated vasculitis following renal transplantation in the modern era of immunosupression. Kidney Int. (2007) 71:1296–301. 10.1038/sj.ki.5002244

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 170.

  ElmedhemAAduDSavageCO. Relapse rate and outcome of ANCA-associated small vessel vasculitis after transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2003) 18:1001–4. 10.1093/ndt/gfg087

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 171.

  NybergGBlohméIPerssonHOlaussonMSvalanderC. Recurrence of SLE in transplanted kidneys: a follow-up transplant biopsy study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (1992) 7:1116–23.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar

• 172.

  ContrerasGMattiazziAGuerraGOrtegaLMTozmanECLiHet al. Recurrence of lupus nephritis after kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2010) 21:1200–7. 10.1681/ASN.2009101093

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 173.

  GoralSYnaresCShappellSBSnyderSFeurerIDKazanciogluRet al. Recurrent lupus nephritis in renal transplant recipients revisited: it is not rare. Transplantation. (2003) 75:651–6. 10.1097/01.TP.0000053750.59630.83

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 174.

  BunnapradistSChungPPengAHongAChungPLeeBet al. Outcomes of renal transplantation for recipients with lupus nephritis: analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Transplantation. (2006) 82:612–8. 10.1097/01.tp.0000235740.56573.c6

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 175.

  ZhangLLeeGLiuXPascoeEMBadveSVBoudvilleNCet al. Long-term outcomes of end-stage kidney disease for patients with lupus nephritis. Kidney Int. (2016) 89:1337–45. 10.1016/j.kint.2016.02.014

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 176.

  MoroniGTantardiniFGallelliBQuagliniSBanfiGPoliFet al. The long-term prognosis of renal transplantation in patients with lupus nephritis. Am J Kidney Dis. (2005) 45:903–11. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2005.01.038

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 177.

  SauterMSchmidHAndersHJHellerFWeissMSitterT. Loss of a renal graft due to recurrence of anti-GBM disease despite rituximab therapy. Clin Transplant. (2009) 23:132–6. 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2008.00912.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 178.

  TangWMcDonaldSPHawleyCMBadveSVBoudvilleNCBrownFGet al. Anti-glomerular basement membrane antibody disease is an uncommon cause of end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int. (2013) 83:503–10. 10.1038/ki.2012.375

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 179.

  Le QuintrecMZuberJMoulinBKamarNJablonskiMLionetAet al. Complement genes strongly predict recurrence and graft outcome in adult renal transplant recipients with atypical hemolytic and uremic syndrome. Am J Transplant. (2013) 13:663–75. 10.1111/ajt.12077

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 180.

  FakhouriFHourmantMCampistolJMCatalandSREspinosaMGaberAOet al. Terminal complement inhibitor eculizumab in adult patients with atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: a single-arm, open-label trial. Am J Kidney Dis. (2016) 68:84–93. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.12.034

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 181.

  AlasfarSAlachkarN. Atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome post-kidney transplantation: two case reports and review of the literature. Front Med. (2014) 1:52. 10.3389/fmed.2014.00052

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 182.

  Sellier-LeclercALFremeaux-BacchiVDragon-DureyMAMacherMANiaudetPGuestGet al. Differential impact of complement mutations on clinical characteristics in atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2007) 18:2392–400. 10.1681/ASN.2006080811

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 183.

  DuineveldCVerhaveJCBergerSPvan de KarNCAJWetzelsJFM. Living donor kidney transplantation in atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: a case series. Am J Kidney Dis. (2017) 70:770–7. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2017.06.024

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 184.

  CruzadoJMdeCórdoba SRMelilliEBestardORamaISánchez-CorralPet al. Successful renal transplantation in a patient with atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome carrying mutations in both factor I and MCP. Am J Transplant. (2009) 9:1477–83. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02647.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 185.

  LimWHWongGMcDonaldSPChakeraALuxtonGIsbelNMet al. Long-term outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with end-stage kidney disease attributed to presumed/advanced glomerulonephritis or unknown cause. Sci Rep. (2018) 8:9021. 10.1038/s41598-018-27151-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 186.

  PonticelliCMoroniGGlassockRJ. de novo glomerular diseases after renal transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2014) 9:1479–87. 10.2215/CJN.12571213

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 187.

  SuzukiKHondaKTanabeKTomaHNiheiHYamaguchiY. Incidence of latent mesangial IgA deposition in renal allograft donors in Japan. Kidney Int. (2003) 63:2286–94. 10.1046/j.1523-1755.63.6s.2.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 188.

  ShabakaAPerez-FloresICortesJASanchez-FructuosoAI. de novo IgA nephropathy in a renal allograft. Exp Clin Transplant. (2019) 17:550–3. 10.6002/ect.2016.0266

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 189.

  TanawattanacharoenSFalkRJJennetteJCKoppJB. Parvovirus B19 DNA in kidney tissue of patients with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Am J Kidney Dis. (2000) 35:1166–74. 10.1016/S0272-6386(00)70055-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 190.

  ShimizuAHigoSFujitaEMiiAKanekoT. Focal segmental glomerulosclerosis after renal transplantation. Clin Transplant. (2011) 25(Suppl. 23):6–14. 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2011.01452.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 191.

  CosioFGFrankelWLPelletierRPPesaventoTEHenryMLFergusonRM. Focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in renal allografts with chronic nephropathy: implications for graft survival. Am J Kidney Dis. (1999) 34:731–8. 10.1016/S0272-6386(99)70400-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 192.

  PatelRDVanikarAVNigamLAKanodiaKVSutharKSPatelHV. de novo focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in renal allograft-histological presentation and clinical correlation: single centre experience. J Clin Diagn Res. (2017) 11:EC39–42. 10.7860/JCDR/2017/25502.9728

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 193.

  PonticelliCGlassockRJ. de novo membranous nephropathy (MN) in kidney allografts. A peculiar form of alloimmune disease?Transpl Int. (2012) 25:1205–10. 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2012.01548.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 194.

  SchwarzAKrausePHOffermannGKellerF. Impact of de novo membranous glomerulonephritis on the clinical course after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. (1994) 58:650–4. 10.1097/00007890-199409000-00002

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 195.

  KearneyNPodolakJMatsumuraLHoughtonDTroxellM. Patterns of IgG subclass deposits in membranous glomerulonephritis in renal allografts. Transpl Proc. (2011) 43:3743–6. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.10.042

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 196.

  LarsenCPWalkerPD. Phospholipase A2 receptor (PLA2R) staining is useful in the determination of de novo versus recurrent membranous glomerulopathy. Transplantation. (2013) 95:1259–62. 10.1097/TP.0b013e31828a947b

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 197.

  MongaGMazzuccoGBasoloBQuarantaSMottaMSegoloniGet al. Membranous glomerulonephritis (MGN) in transplanted kidneys: morphologic investigation on 256 renal allografts. Mod Pathol. (1993) 6:249–58.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar

• 198.

  DokeTSatoWTakahashiKHayashiHKoideSSasakiHet al. Post-transplant membranous nephropathy associated with chronic active antibody-mediated rejection and Hepatitis C infection after deceased donor renal transplantation. Intern Med. (2016) 55:375–80. 10.2169/internalmedicine.55.5468

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 199.

  PoduvalRDJosephsonMAJavaidB. Treatment of de novo and recurrent membranous nephropathy in renal transplant patients. Semin Nephrol. (2003) 23:392–9. 10.1016/S0270-9295(03)00057-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 200.

  RothDCiroccoRZuckerKRuizPVicianaABurkeGet al. de novo membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis in hepatitis C virus-infected renal allograft recipients. Transplantation. (1995) 59:1676–82. 10.1097/00007890-199506270-00006

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 201.

  AbbasFEl KossiMJinJKSharmaAHalawaA. de novo glomerular diseases after renal transplantation: How is it different from recurrent glomerular diseases?World J Transplant. (2017) 7:285–300. 10.5500/wjt.v7.i6.285

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 202.

  NahmJHSongSHKimYSCheongHILimBJKimBSet al. de novo C3 glomerulonephritis in a renal allograft. Ultrastruct Pathol. (2016) 40:112–5. 10.3109/01913123.2016.1154634

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 203.

  ZafarmandAABaranowska-DacaELyPDTsaoCCChoiYJSukiWNet al. de novo minimal change disease associated with reversible post-transplant nephrotic syndrome. A report of five cases and review of literature. Clin Transplant. (2002) 16:350–61. 10.1034/j.1399-0012.2002.02023.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 204.

  MarkowitzGSStemmerCLCrokerBPD'AgatiVD. de novo minimal change disease. Am J Kidney Dis. (1998) 32:508–13. 10.1053/ajkd.1998.v32.pm9740171

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 205.

  MainraRMulayABellRKarpinskiJHoarSKnollGet al. Sirolimus use and de novo minimal change nephropathy following renal transplantation. Transplantation. (2005) 80:1816. 10.1097/01.tp.0000181385.68835.a0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 206.

  MoudgilAShidbanHNastCCBaggaAAswadSGrahamSLet al. Parvovirus B19 infection-related complications in renal transplant recipients: treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin. Transplantation. (1997) 64:1847–50. 10.1097/00007890-199712270-00037

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 207.

  TomlinsonLBoriskinYMcPheeIHolwillSRiceP. Acute cytomegalovirus infection complicated by collapsing glomerulopathy. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2003) 18:187–9. 10.1093/ndt/18.1.187

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 208.

  MeehanSMPascualMWilliamsWWTolkoff-RubinNDelmonicoFLCosimiABet al. de novo collapsing glomerulopathy in renal allografts. Transplantation. (1998) 65:1192–7. 10.1097/00007890-199805150-00009

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 209.

  SwaminathanSLagerDJQianXStegallMDLarsonTSGriffinMD. Collapsing and non-collapsing focal segmental glomerulosclerosis in kidney transplants. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2006) 21:2607–14. 10.1093/ndt/gfl225

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 210.

  AlachkarNGuptaGMontgomeryRA. Angiotensin antibodies and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. N Engl J Med. (2013) 368:971–3. 10.1056/NEJMc1207233

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 211.

  IsaacJHerraraGAShihabFS. de novo fibrillary glomerulopathy in the renal allograft of a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus. Nephron. (2001) 87:365–8. 10.1159/000045944

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 212.

  SamaniegoMNadasdyGMLaszikZNadasdyT. Outcome of renal transplantation in fibrillary glomerulonephritis. Clin Nephrol. (2001) 55:159–66.

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • Google Scholar

• 213.

  NasrSHValeriAMCornellLDFidlerMESethiSLeungNet al. Fibrillary glomerulonephritis: a report of 66 cases from a single institution. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 6:775–84. 10.2215/CJN.08300910

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 214.

  RaoKVHafnerGPCraryGSAndersonWRCrossonJT. de novo immunotactoid glomerulopathy of the renal allograft: possible association with cytomegalovirus infection. Am J Kidney Dis. (1994) 24:97–103. 10.1016/S0272-6386(12)80167-3

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 215.

  SathyanSKhanFNRangaKV. A case of recurrent immunotactoid glomerulopathy in an allograft treated with rituximab. Transpl Proc. (2009) 41:3953–5. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2009.03.100

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 216.

  CarlesXRostaingLModestoAOrfilaCCisterneJMDelisleMBet al. Successful treatment of recurrence of immunotactoid glomerulopathy in a kidney allograft recipient. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2000) 15:897–900. 10.1093/ndt/15.6.897

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 217.

  ByrneMCBudisavljevicMNFanZSelfSEPlothDW. Renal transplant in patients with Alport's syndrome. Am J Kidney Dis. (2002) 39:769–75. 10.1053/ajkd.2002.31997

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 218.

  GumberMRKuteVBGoplaniKRVanikarAVShahPRPatelHVet al. Outcome of renal transplantation in Alport's syndrome: a single-center experience. Transpl Proc. (2012) 44:261–3. 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.11.035

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 219.

  TemmeJKramerAJagerKJLangeKPetersFMüllerGAet al. Outcomes of male patients with Alport syndrome undergoing renal replacement therapy. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. (2012) 7:1969–76. 10.2215/CJN.02190312

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 220.

  GillionVDahanKCosynsJPHilbertPJadoulMGoffinEet al. Genotype and outcome after kidney transplantation in alport syndrome. Kidney Int Rep. (2018) 3:652–60. 10.1016/j.ekir.2018.01.008

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 221.

  SagmeisterMSWeissMEichhornPHabichtAHabersetzerRFischerederMet al. Case report: de novo ANCA-associated vasculitis after kidney transplantation treated with rituximab and plasma exchange. BMC Nephrol. (2018) 19:270. 10.1186/s12882-018-1086-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 222.

  TabataHHondaKMoriyamaTItabashiMTanedaSTakeiTet al. Two cases of ANCA-associated vasculitis in post-transplant kidney: relapse and de novo. Clin Transplant. (2009) 23(Suppl. 20):49–53. 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2009.01010.x

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 223.

  HaruyamaNTsuchimotoAMasutaniKNoguchiHSuehiroTKitadaHet al. de novo myeloperoxidase-antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (MPO-ANCA)-associated glomerulonephritis 31 years after living-donor kidney transplantation. CEN Case Rep. (2015) 4:14–9. 10.1007/s13730-014-0131-4

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 224.

  AsifAToralCDiegoJMillerJRothD. de novo ANCA-associated vasculitis occurring 14 years after kidney transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis. (2000) 35:E10. 10.1016/S0272-6386(00)70222-8

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 225.

  LiRMBrantonMHTanawattanacharoenSFalkRAJennetteJCKoppJB. Molecular identification of SV40 infection in human subjects and possible association with kidney disease. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2002) 13:2320–30. 10.1097/01.ASN.0000028249.06596.CF

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 226.

  OlyaeiAJde MattosAMBennettWM. Nephrotoxicity of immunosuppressive drugs: new insight and preventive strategies. Curr Opin Crit Care. (2001) 7:384–9. 10.1097/00075198-200112000-00003

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 227.

  LetavernierEBrunevalPVandermeerschSPerezJMandetCBelairMFet al. Sirolimus interacts with pathways essential for podocyte integrity. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2009) 24:630–8. 10.1093/ndt/gfn574

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 228.

  GuptaRSharmaAMahantaPJAgarwalSKDindaAK. Focal and segmental glomerulosclerosis in renal allograft recipients: a clinico-pathologic study of 37 cases. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transplant. (2013) 24:8–14. 10.4103/1319-2442.106231

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 229.

  HammoudHHaemJLaurentBAlamartineEDiabNDefilippisJPet al. Glomerular disease during HCV infection in renal transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (1996) 11(Suppl. 4): 54–5. 10.1093/ndt/11.supp4.54

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 230.

  de FijterJW. Recurrence of glomerulonephritis: an underestimated and unmet medical need. Kidney Int. (2017) 92:294–6. 10.1016/j.kint.2017.04.007

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 231.

  UffingAPérez-SáezMJLa MannaGComaiGFischmanCFaroukSet al. A large, international study on post-transplant glomerular diseases: the TANGO project. BMC Nephrol. (2018) 19:229. 10.1186/s12882-018-1025-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar