ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Med., 17 February 2021

Sec. Nephrology

Volume 8 - 2021 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.547849

PCR Array Technology in Biopsy Samples Identifies Up-Regulated mTOR Pathway Genes as Potential Rejection Biomarkers After Kidney Transplantation

  • 1. Department of Legal and Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Biomedical Research Institute (IMIB), University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

  • 2. Department of Immunology, University Clinical Hospital Virgen de la Arrixaca-Biomedical Research Institute of Murcia (IMIB), Murcia, Spain

  • 3. Departamento de Ciencias Sociosanitarias, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain

  • 4. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red (CIBER) Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Murcia, Spain

  • 5. Instituto Murciano de Investigacion Biomédica-Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain

  • 6. Department of Nephrology, University Clinical Hospital Virgen de la Arrixaca-Biomedical Research Institute of Murcia (IMIB), Murcia, Spain

  • 7. Department of Pathology Services, University Clinical Hospital Virgen de la Arrixaca-Biomedical Research Institute of Murcia (IMIB), Murcia, Spain

Article metrics

View details

16

Citations

3,6k

Views

1,8k

Downloads

Abstract

Background: Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is the major cause of kidney transplant rejection. The donor-specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody (DSA) response to a renal allograft is not fully understood yet. mTOR complex has been described in the accommodation or rejection of transplants and integrates responses from a wide variety of signals. The aim of this study was to analyze the expression of the mTOR pathway genes in a large cohort of kidney transplant patients to determine its possible influence on the transplant outcome.

Methods: A total of 269 kidney transplant patients monitored for DSA were studied. The patients were divided into two groups, one with recipients that had transplant rejection (+DSA/+AMR) and a second group of recipients without rejection (+DSA/–AMR and –DSA/–AMR, controls). Total RNA was extracted from kidney biopsies and reverse transcribed to cDNA. Human mTOR-PCR array technology was used to determine the expression of 84 mTOR pathway genes. STRING and REVIGO software were used to simulate gene to gene interaction and to assign a molecular function.

Results: The studied groups showed a different expression of the mTOR pathway related genes. Recipients that had transplant rejection showed an over-expressed transcript (≥5-fold) of AKT1S1, DDIT4, EIF4E, HRAS, IGF1, INS, IRS1, PIK3CD, PIK3CG, PRKAG3, PRKCB (>12-fold), PRKCG, RPS6KA2, TELO2, ULK1, and VEGFC, compared with patients that did not have rejection. AKT1S1 transcripts were more expressed in +DSA/–AMR biopsies compared with +DSA/+AMR. The main molecular functions of up-regulated gene products were phosphotransferase activity, insulin-like grown factor receptor and ribonucleoside phosphate binding. The group of patients with transplant rejection also showed an under-expressed transcript (≥5-fold) of VEGFA (>15-fold), RPS6, and RHOA compared with the group without rejection. The molecular function of down-regulated gene products such as protein kinase activity and carbohydrate derivative binding proteins was also analyzed.

Conclusions: We have found a higher number of over-expressed mTOR pathway genes than under-expressed ones in biopsies from rejected kidney transplants (+DSA/+AMR) with respect to controls. In addition to this, the molecular function of both types of transcripts (over/under expressed) is different. Therefore, further studies are needed to determine if variations in gene expression profiles can act as predictors of graft loss, and a better understanding of the mechanisms of action of the involved proteins would be necessary.

Introduction

Humoral rejection in renal transplantation is usually caused by the presence of preformed antibodies in the recipient against human leukocyte antigens (HLA) of the donor (1, 2), referred to as donor-specific antibodies (DSAs). Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is the major cause of kidney transplant rejection (35). The donor-specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody (DSA) response to a renal allograft is not fully understood (6). Some patients with DSAs develop chronic or acute AMR and eventually reject their allografts, while others do not with biopsies showing normal histopathology (710). Therefore, the influence of HLA matching and preformed DSAs in kidney transplantation remains unclear (1114).

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a conserved large serine/threonine protein kinase and a member of the phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K) related kinase family (15, 16). The mTOR forms two structurally and functionally distinct complexes, called rapamycin-sensitive complex 1 mammalian target 1 (mTORC1) and rapamycin-insensitive complex 2 mammalian target 2 (mTORC2). mTORC1 consists of mTOR, raptor, GβL, and DEPTOR, while mTORC2 consists of mTOR, RICTOR, GβL, PRR5, and SIN1. mTORC1 combines signals from various growth factors, nutrients and energy supply to promote cell growth and regulates multiple biosynthetic cellular processes (protein synthesis, cell cycle progression, cell growth, and proliferation) (1722). mTORC1 mainly regulates cell growth and metabolism, while mTORC2 controls cell proliferation and survival in particular (17, 20, 22). Nowadays, some mTORC2 regulators have been identified, and although more of them are yet to be discovered, new mechanisms of selectively inhibiting mTORC2 are emerging (23).

Studies involving selective gene regulation of mTOR complexes (mTORC1 and mTORC2) in renal cell populations and/or inhibition of pharmacological mTOR revealed important roles of mTOR in homeostasis of podocytes and tubular transport (24, 25). There have also been important advances in understanding the function of mTOR in kidney injury, polycystic kidney disease and glomerular diseases, including diabetic nephropathy (2629).

Since mTOR plays a role in the regulation of immune cells metabolism, function, and reactivity (3032) it has an influence on kidney transplant rejection, glomerulonephritis, and their treatment (19, 33). Both innate and adaptive immune cells (T and B lymphocytes) reside in the kidney and can promote acute and chronic renal disease (3436), but their dependence on mTOR activity remains unexplored.

An area of interest is the potentially beneficial impact of mTOR inhibition in patients who have performed DSA at the time of transplant (23), because mTOR complex has been described in accommodation or rejection phenomena (37, 38) with non-definite conclusions about these important points (23). The analysis of gene expression of mTOR pathway in kidney biopsies of human transplant could be a biomarker to prevent or anticipate an eventual kidney rejection (39). A study in transplant recipients identified a complex signaling network triggered by HLA II antibody in vascular endothelial cells and indicated that combined ERK and mTORC2 inhibitors may be required to achieve optimal efficacy in controlling HLA II antibody-mediated AMR (40). In addition, several clinical studies of mTORi in heart transplant recipients demonstrated a significant reduction in the progression of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection with any mTOR inhibitor regimen, at the expense of higher rates of drug toxicity. Combining an mTOR inhibitor with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) may also prevent calcineurin inhibitor-induced nephrotoxicity, but this benefit is offset by an increased risk of acute cellular rejection (ACR). Overall mortality rates were not affected by the use of an mTOR inhibitor. These findings in heart transplant may help to design more effective maintenance immunosuppression regimens (4145).

Therefore, our aim was to explore the relationship between mTOR pathway gene expression and histological and immunological changes in a large cohort of kidney transplant patients to determine if there are differences in the mTOR pathway genes between patients that had kidney rejection (+DSA/+AMR) and patients without rejection (+DSA/–AMR and –DSA) to determine its possible influence on the transplant outcome.

Methods

Patient Enrollment and Data Acquisition

A total of 269 adult sequential kidney transplant (KT) patients were recruited at the University Clinic Hospital Virgen de la Arrixaca (Spain) during the period 2015–2019. The clinical, sociodemographic, biochemical data of kidney biopsy of transplant patients were studied. Mean age of total cohort of KT recipients was 46.0 ± 13.2 years (mean ± SD) of which 63% (n = 170) were men and 37% (n = 99) were women (Table 1). According to data from the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT), 59% of kidney recipients are men and 41% are women (46). Transplants were performed using unrelated cadaveric donors.

Table 1

Total of transplantations269
Age recipient (mean ± SD)
 Recipient46.0 ± 13.2
 Donor51.0 ± 17.5
Gender, n (%)
 Male170 (63)
 Female99 (37)
Transplantation indications, n (%)
 Glomerulonephritis92 (34.2)
 Polycystic kidney disease55 (20.3)
 Type I diabetes mellitus32 (11.9)
 Chronic obstructive pyelonephritis23 (8.4)
 Unknown renal insufficiency16 (6.1)
 Lupic nephritis10 (3.6)
 Reflux nephropathy6 (2.4)
 Others35 (13.1)
Transplantation outcome
With rejection
 +DSA/+AMR14 (5.2)
Without rejection
 +DSA/–AMR2 (0.7)
 –DSA/–AMR253 (94.1)

Demographic data and main kidney transplantation indications.

N, number of individuals with a particular disease; AMR, antibody-mediated rejection; DSA, donor specific antibodies. The mean values were analyzed (mean value ± SD) in all cases.

Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and creatinine were analyzed in all transplant patients considering normal values in accordance with the National Kidney Foundation: creatinine 0.7–1.2 mg/dl and eGFR >90 ml/min/1.73m2 (47). Our cohort of patients showed the following values before the transplant: creatinine (mg/dl; 2.9 ± 2.1; mean ± SD) and an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73m2 for more than 3 months, which suggests a chronic kidney disease.

Only patients whose kidney graft functioned for at least 1-month post-transplantation and had DSA Luminex determinations for detection of anti-HLA antibodies (T and B cells) screening before transplantation were included in this study. Allograft loss was presumed if patients required dialysis.

Before participating in our study, all patients gave their informed consent to be included as a subject in the investigation. The research was carried out in compliance with the Helsinki Agreement, and the protocol was approved by the HCUVA Ethics Committee (PI15/01370).

Indications for Kidney Transplant

All of the patients in this study had end-stage kidney disease and were transplanted. As shown in Table 1, the main indication for KTs in our cohort (n = 269) was glomerulonephritis (n = 92; 34.2%), followed by polycystic kidney disease (n = 55; 20.3%), type I diabetes (n = 32; 11.9%), chronic obstructive pyelonephritis (n = 23; 8.4%), unknown renal insufficiency (n = 16; 6.1), lupic nephritis (n = 10; 3.6%), reflux nephropathy (n = 6; 2.4%). The rest of pathologies were included as others indications (n = 35; 13.1%).

Immunosuppressive Treatment

All enrolled recipients had similar triple immunosuppressive therapy, consisting of oral tacrolimus (Program, Astellas, Ireland), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; CellCept, Roche, Switzerland), and prednisolone (Dacortin, Merck, Spain) as previously published (4850).

The starting dose for the Tacrolimus (FK) based protocol was 0.10–0.15 mg/kg/day and the dose was adjusted to maintain an FK level in whole blood between 8 and 12 ng/ml during the first month post-transplant, between 7 and 10 ng/ml during months 2 and 3 post-transplant and between 5 and 8 ng/ml, thereafter. The starting dose for MMF was 2,000 mg/day, and reduced to 1,000–1,500 mg/day during the first month post-transplant, based on white blood cells count.

Methylprednisolone was administered intravenously at doses of 500, 250, and 125 mg/day on the day of transplantation, days 1–2 and days 3–4 after the operation, respectively. Oral prednisolone treatment started on day 5 after the operation with a dose of 20 mg/day, and then tapered to 5–10 mg/day within 2–3 months after transplant. No rapamycin was administered in this group of patients.

Kidney Rejection Diagnosis

Allograft acute cellular rejection (ACR) was defined as an increase in serum creatinine of at least 20% above baseline serum creatinine and confirmed by biopsy. Protocol biopsies were classically not performed in our clinical hospital. The indication for biopsy was increased creatinine values and/or presence of DSA antibodies in routine evaluation. In the case of patients with DSA+/AMR+ (n = 14), the mean age was 45.3 ± 19.2, gender was distributed in 9 males and 5 females, and indications pre-transplant were 6 patients with glomerulonephritis, 3 patients with polycystic kidney disease, 2 patients with diabetes type I, 1 patient with chronic obstructive pyelonephritis, 1 patient with lupic nephritis and one more with reflux nephropathy. The two patients with DSA+/AMR– (n = 2) had a mean age of 41.7 ± 21.4, gender was distributed in 1 male and 1 female, and indications pre-transplant were 1 patient with glomerulonephritis and the other one with polycystic kidney disease.

Specimens were evaluated by light microscopy and immunofluorescence staining with a marker of classical complement activation (C4d) and classified according to Banff classification as updated in 2017 (51). The diagnosis of acute antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) requires the presence of distinguishable histopathological findings, a positive C4d staining in peritubular capillaries, and the simultaneous presence of DSA (52). For the renal transplant, a consensus agreement was reached, indicating that a diagnosis of AMR requires the simultaneous presence of DSA, distinguishable histopathological findings and deposition of C4d in peritubular capillaries. Six patients were diagnosed in the first 3-month after kidney transplant, three patients were diagnosed between months 3 and 6, three patients between months 6 and 12, and two patients were diagnosed after the 12th month. Mean serum creatinine at the time of renal biopsy was 3.9 ± 3.7 mg/dL. Proteinuria was 2.97 ± 4.21 g/day. Of the 14 AMR biopsied specimens, 4 presented intimal arteritis. Interstitial inflammation was present in 12 biopsies, tubulitis in 10, glomerulitis in 9, and peritubular capillarity is in 11.

Mild acute cellular rejection (Banff grade I) was treated with pulse steroids (500 mg methylprednisolone boluses) and increased maintenance immunosuppression. All other ACR were treated with anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG).

Acute rejection episodes were further classified as steroid-sensitive rejections (ACR Banff grade I) or steroid-insensitive rejections, ACR Banff grade II and III, and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). AMR was also treated with pulse steroids and intravenous immunoglobulin (0.25 g/kg) and the last session 1 g/kg (maximum 140 g) divided in two doses associated with plasmapheresis (3 sessions a day, every 5 days). Afterwards, we administered 500 mg anti-CD20 (Rituximab, Roche pharmaceuticals) intravenously. Anti-AMR treatment was also administered in two patients receiving anti-proteasome inhibitor Bortezomic (Velcade®, formerly PS-341). No correlation was observed between acute T-cell mediated rejection (TCMR) and pre- and post-transplant DSA (data not shown).

Determination of the Causes of Kidney Graft Loss

In the cases of sudden death, the major causes of kidney graft failure have been examined in total patients and obtained from medical death certificates and/or medico-legal autopsy to determine the cause and circumstances of death.

DSAs Luminex anti-HLA Antibody Screening

DSAs Luminex anti-HLA antibody test was performed in serum collected every 3 months from all the patients in this study while on the waiting list. The time points for dynamic testing post-transplantation were established and serum samples were obtained at week 2, at months 1, 3, 6, and 12 and then annually for 3 years, and when clinically indicated. All serum samples were analyzed and tested for anti-DSA using microbeads solid phase luminex-based SAB (OneLambda, CA).

Antibody screening by multiplex Luminex was performed in all samples (LABScreen® Mix and SAB kits, OL, CA). Color-coded microspheres, coated with the major HLA class I and II antigens, were incubated with the serum for 30 min at room temperature in the dark. After three washes the samples were incubated with 100 μL of 1:100 phycoerythrin-conjugated goat anti-human IgG (One Lambda). Finally, after two washes, the fluorescent signal intensity for each microsphere was measured using LABScan® 100 Flow analyzer (Luminex, Austin, TX). The cut-off for positive samples was the Normalized Background (NBG) ratio as recommended by the manufacturer and it was obtained with HLA Fusion® software 4.0 (One Lambda).

The reporter fluorescence intensity of each bead was expressed as median fluorescence intensity (MFI) levels which is directly proportional to the amount of antibody bound to the microspheres. MFI levels higher than 1,000–1,500 are usually considered positive, as commonly accepted (53, 54). De novo DSA (dnDSA) was considered positive if new IgG antibodies not present at the time of transplantation were detected and the normalized intensity via single antigen bead was 1,500 MFI. We also tested to what extent prozone might have masked the presence of allo-antibodies prior to transplant and post-transplant for DTT or EDTA treatment and also tested neat and 1:8 and 1:16 titer in parallel and all results were similar.

Isolation of RNA and cDNA Synthesis

Total RNA was extracted and isolated from kidney biopsies after tissue homogenization (Trizol; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) and then purified by RNeasy®MinElute™ Purification Kit (Qiagen, Dusseldorf, Germany). Genomic DNA (gDNA) was removed by treatment with DNase I (Sigma Aldrich), according to the manufacturer's instructions and reverse transcribed to cDNA using a RT2 First Strand Kit (SABiosciences, Qiagen) and stored at −20°C.

The absence of contaminating gDNA was demonstrated by the absence of a product in wells using “no RT” control samples, which included all components of the cDNA synthesis reaction, except for reverse transcripts. The quality and concentration of RNA was assessed by spectrophotometry (NanoDrop 2000/2000c Thermofisher Scientific). RNA integrity was assessed by electrophoresis of the denaturing agarose gel. For each RNA sample thick bright bands of 28s and 18s ribosomal RNA were observed, indicating that the RNA integrity was appropriate. The concentration of extracted RNA ranged from 369 to 612 ng/μL, with OD260/280 ratios ranging from 1.8 to 2.1, in accordance with experimental requirements.

Gene Expression of mTOR Pathway

The expression of a total of 84 key genes involved in the human mTOR pathway (RT2 Profiler™ PCR Array Human mTOR Signaling, Qiagen, Germany, Cod. PAHS098Z) was analyzed in kidney biopsies according to the manufacturer's protocol. Gene expression assays analyzed are listed in Table 2, which shows the access code to the GenBank (47) and UniGene (48) data bases and were used according to the manufacturer's instructions in triplicates.

Table 2

N°Gene symbolGene nameDatabases*
GenBankUniGene
1AKT1V-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene homolog 1NM_005163Hs.525622
2AKT1S1AKT1 substrate 1 (proline-rich)NM_032375Hs.515542
3AKT2V-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene homolog 2NM_001626Hs.631535
4AKT3VAKT homolog 3 (protein kinase B, gamma)NM_005465Hs.498292
5CAB39Calcium binding protein 39NM_016289Hs.632536
6CAB39LCalcium binding protein 39-likeNM_030925Hs.87159
7CDC42Cell division cycle 42 (GTP binding protein, 25 kDa)NM_001791Hs.690198
8CHUKConserved helix-loop-helix ubiquitous kinaseNM_001278Hs.198998
9DDIT4DNA-damage-inducible transcript 4NM_019058Hs.523012
10DDIT4LDNA-damage-inducible transcript 4-likeNM_145244Hs.480378
11DEPTORDEP domain containing MTOR-interacting proteinNM_022783Hs.112981
12EIF4BEukaryotic translation initiation factor 4BNM_001417Hs.648394
13EIF4EEukaryotic translation initiation factor 4ENM_001968Hs.249718
14EIF4EBP1Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E binding protein 1NM_004095Hs.411641
15EIF4EBP2Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E binding protein 2NM_004096Hs.730236
16FKBP1AFK506 binding protein 1A, 12 kDaNM_000801Hs.471933
17FKBP8FK506 binding protein 8, 38 kDaNM_012181Hs.173464
18GSK3BGlycogen synthase kinase 3 betaNM_002093Hs.445733
19HIF1AHypoxia inducible factor 1, alpha subunit (basic helix-loop-helix transcription factor)NM_001530Hs.597216
20HRASV-Ha-ras Harvey rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologNM_005343Hs.37003
21HSPA4Heat shock 70 kDa protein 4NM_002154Hs.90093
22IGF1Insulin-like growth factor 1 (somatomedin C)NM_000618Hs.160562
23IGFBP3IGF binding protein 3NM_000598Hs.450230
24IKBKBInhibitor of kappa light polypeptide gene enhancer in B-cells, kinase betaNM_001556Hs.597664
25ILKIntegrin-linked kinaseNM_004517Hs.5158
26INSInsulinNM_000207Hs.654579
27INSRInsulin receptorNM_000208Hs.465744
28IRS1Insulin receptor substrate 1NM_005544Hs.471508
29MAPK1Mitogen-activated protein kinase 1NM_002745Hs.431850
30MAPK3Mitogen-activated protein kinase 3NM_002746Hs.861
31MAPKAP1Mitogen-activated protein kinase associated protein 1NM_024117Hs.495138
32MLST8MTOR associated protein, LST8 homolog (S. cerevisiae)NM_022372Hs.29203
33MTORMechanistic target of rapamycin (serine/threonine kinase)NM_004958Hs.338207
34MYO1CMyosin ICNM_033375Hs.286226
35PDPK13-phosphoinositide dependent protein kinase-1NM_002613Hs.459691
36PIK3C3Phosphoinositide-3-kinase, class 3NM_002647Hs.464971
37PIK3CAPhosphoinositide-3-kinase, catalytic, alpha polypeptideNM_006218Hs.553498
38PIK3CBPhosphoinositide-3-kinase, catalytic, beta polypeptideNM_006219Hs.239818
39PIK3CDPhosphoinositide-3-kinase, catalytic, delta polypeptideNM_005026Hs.518451
40PIK3CGPhosphoinositide-3-kinase, catalytic, gamma polypeptideNM_002649Hs.32942
41PLD1Phospholipase D1, phosphatidylcholine-specificNM_002662Hs.382865
42PLD2Phospholipase D2NM_002663Hs.104519
43PPP2CAProtein phosphatase 2, catalytic subunit, alpha isozymeNM_002715Hs.483408
44PPP2R2BProtein phosphatase 2, regulatory subunit B, betaNM_181678Hs.655213
45PPP2R4Protein phosphatase 2A activator, regulatory subunit 4NM_021131Hs.400740
46PRKAA1Protein kinase, AMP-activated, alpha 1 catalytic subunitNM_006251Hs.43322
47PRKAA2Protein kinase, AMP-activated, alpha 2 catalytic subunitNM_006252Hs.437039
48PRKAB1Protein kinase, AMP-activated, beta 1 non-catalytic subunitNM_006253Hs.715515
49PRKAB2Protein kinase, AMP-activated, beta 2 non-catalytic subunitNM_005399Hs.50732
50PRKAG1PRK, AMP-activated, gamma 1 non-catalytic subunitNM_002733Hs.530862
51PRKAG2PRK, AMP-activated, gamma 2 non-catalytic subunitNM_016203Hs.647072
52PRKAG3PRK, AMP-activated, gamma 3 non-catalytic subunitNM_017431Hs.591634
53PRKCAProtein kinase C, alphaNM_002737Hs.531704
54PRKCBProtein kinase C, betaNM_002738Hs.460355
55PRKCEProtein kinase C, épsilonNM_005400Hs.580351
56PRKCGProtein kinase C, gammaNM_002739Hs.631564
57PTENPhosphatase and tensinhomologNM_000314Hs.500466
58RHEBRas homolog enriched in brainNM_005614Hs.283521
59RHOARas homolog gene family, member ANM_001664Hs.247077
60RICTORRPTOR independent companion of MTOR, complex 2NM_152756Hs.407926
61RPS6Ribosomal protein S6NM_001010Hs.408073
62RPS6KA1Ribosomal protein S6 kinase, 90 kDa, polypeptide 1NM_002953Hs.149957
63RPS6KA2Ribosomal protein S6 kinase, 90 kDa, polypeptide 2NM_021135Hs.655277
64RPS6KA5Ribosomal protein S6 kinase, 90 kDa, polypeptide 5NM_004755Hs.510225
65RPS6KB1Ribosomal protein S6 kinase, 70 kDa, polypeptide 1NM_003161Hs.463642
66RPS6KB2Ribosomal protein S6 kinase, 70 kDa, polypeptide 2NM_003952Hs.534345
67RPTORRegulatory associated protein of MTOR, complex 1NM_020761Hs.133044
68RRAGARas-related GTP binding ANM_006570Hs.432330
69RRAGBRas-related GTP binding BNM_006064Hs.50282
70RRAGCRas-related GTP binding CNM_022157Hs.532461
71RRAGDRas-related GTP binding DNM_021244Hs.31712
72SGK1Serum/glucocorticoid regulated kinase 1NM_005627Hs.510078
73STK11Serine/threonine kinase 11NM_000455Hs.515005
74STRADBSTE20-related kinase adaptor betaNM_018571Hs.652338
75TELO2TEL2, telomere maintenance 2, homolog (S. cerevisiae)NM_016111Hs.271044
76TP53Tumor protein p53NM_000546Hs.654481
77TSC1Tuberous sclerosis 1NM_000368Hs.370854
78TSC2Tuberous sclerosis 2NM_000548Hs.90303
79ULK1Unc-51-like kinase 1 (C. elegans)NM_003565Hs.47061
80ULK2Unc-51-like kinase 2 (C. elegans)NM_014683Hs.168762
81VEGFAVascular endothelial growth factor ANM_003376Hs.73793
82VEGFBVascular endothelial growth factor BNM_003377Hs.78781
83VEGFCVascular endothelial growth factor CNM_005429Hs.435215
84YWHAQTyrosine 3-monooxygenase/tryptophan 5-monooxygenase activation protein, theta polypeptideNM_006826Hs.74405

Summary of 84 human mTOR pathway related genes analyzed by qPCR array in the kidney biopsies.

*

Access code to the GenBank (46) and UniGene (47) databases are showed.

The cDNA template was applied to the quantitative reaction mixture in real time after sufficient dilution, and equal quantities of reaction liquid were applied to each well of the PCR array, containing gene-specific primers. PCR amplification was performed using real-time PCR detection (ABI StepOneplus™, Applied Biosystems, USA) under the following conditions; denaturing at 95°C for 10 min, 40 amplification cycles of denaturation at 95°C for 10 s, and annealing and extension at 60°C for 1 min, followed by acquisition of fluorescence signal. The mean Ct values were calculated from technical triplicates.

Data was analyzed using the comparative ΔΔCt method and expressed as fold-changes (40) in the target gene normalized to the mean of endogenous control genes (ACTB, B2M, GAPDH, HPRT, and RPLP0) in kidney biopsies with and without rejection. In addition to this, human genomic DNA contamination (HGDC), three RTC (Reverse Transcription Control) and three positive PCR Control (PPC) were also used according to the manufacturer's protocol. A gene was considered over or under expressed when there was fivefold (≥5-fold) difference between +DSA/+AMR patients and patients with kidney transplant showing +DSA/–AMR and –DSA samples (40).

Gene expression was analyzed in recipients who presented DSAs (+DSA) and showed anomalous biopsy histopathology and developed AMR (+AMR; n = 14) or presented de novo DSA (+DSA) without AMR development (+DSA/–AMR; n = 2). Biopsies from other recipients that did not have rejection were also analyzed as controls (–AMR; n = 253) (Table 1).

Genetic Relations and Molecular Functions

STRING software (version 10.5) (55) was used to study the different gene to gene relationships in the two groups of compared biopsies (rejection vs. without rejection; Figures 1, 2). The thickness of the edges of the network represents the strength of the interaction. The required interaction score was set at “the highest confidence” (0.900). Known interactions were obtained from curated or experimentally determined databases and shown with different color lines (blue and purple, respectively). Green circles represented up-regulated genes and red circles represented down-regulated genes (red circles). The most intense colored represents up- or down- expressed transcript (≥5-fold).

Figure 1

Figure 2

REVIGO software (56) was used to assign a molecular function of up- or down-expressed transcript (≥5-fold). The parameters were as follows: allowed similarity = Small (0.5); Homo sapiens database; and Simrel as semantic similarity measure (Figure 3). KEGG mTOR pathway genes were used to locate genes expressed differently (Figure 4).

Figure 3

Figure 4

Statistical Analysis

Demographic data and results were collected in a database (Microsoft Access 2.0; Microsoft Corporation, Seattle, WA) and the analysis was performed using SPSS 23.0 (SPSS software Inc., Chicago, IL). All results were expressed as the mean ± SD or as a percentage. Demographic, clinical, immunological features, and post-transplant anti-HLA antibodies status were compared using Pearson χ2-test or Fisher's exact test for categorical data and Student t-test or Mann Whitney U-test for continuous data, as appropriate. A two-sided P-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. The statistical power to detect differential expression of each of the analyzed genes was performed, obtaining a total statistical power of 0.8 (80%) (57).

Results

Up-Regulated mTOR Genes in Rejection Kidney Biopsies

The genetic expression of the mTOR pathway in renal biopsies of +DSA/+AMR, +DSA/–AMR, and –DSA/–AMR kidney biopsies were analyzed (Table 3, Figures 1, 2, 3A).

Table 3

GenesAverage CtAverage Delta Ct2[-Avg.(Delta(Ct))]Fold-change*p-value*Fold regulation*
ControlGroup 1ControlGroup 1ControlGroup 1
AKT135.6737.862.1496181.1406150.2253720.4535662.01250.185232.0125
AKT1S138.9539.895.4302493.1695540.0231920.111144.79220.1911134.7922
AKT232.1537.3−1.3721640.5795722.5885850.6691620.25850.107187−3.8684
AKT334.6538.161.1259711.4392490.4581930.3687590.80480.574766−1.2425
CAB3936.3938.452.8644341.7315760.1373150.3011232.19290.2443152.1929
CAB39L36.4238.092.9012631.3670990.1338540.387672.89620.4950932.8962
CDC4235.1736.821.6487620.1018590.3189140.9318322.92190.3725822.9219
CHUK36.4337.992.9070951.2709740.1333140.414383.10830.4462433.1083
DDIT438.9439.465.4216032.7440330.0233310.1492676.39780.3899816.3978
DDIT4L36.6739.113.1468422.3927570.1129030.1904181.68660.8996781.6866
DEPTOR35.4237.291.8961340.5753230.2686620.6711362.49810.9736312.4981
EIF4B34.1536.630.624149−0.090310.6488021.0645991.64090.6928431.6409
EIF4E37.4238.363.9020911.6426770.0668890.3202624.7880.310734.788
EIF4EBP136.9139.483.392832.7656330.0952040.1470491.54460.7214891.5446
EIF4EBP232.8938.08−0.626051.3585191.5433340.3899820.25270.005744−3.9574
FKBP1A36.9438.523.4159451.7969890.0936910.2877753.07150.3585263.0715
FKBP835.4238.671.9036971.9468340.2672580.2593850.97050.644696−1.0304
GSK3B36.4337.722.9070911.0013070.1333150.4995473.74710.3942093.7471
HIF1A35.9337.722.4050510.9996990.1888020.5001042.64880.5205892.6488
HRAS37.9538.664.4286641.9436060.0464340.2599665.59860.3610745.5986
HSPA435.6937.362.1699120.646590.2222240.6387892.87450.3603422.8745
IGF138.438.594.8763771.8675250.0340460.2740438.04920.2776818.0492
IGFBP334.1437.430.6214370.7117640.6500230.6105730.93930.609412−1.0646
IKBKB35.438.451.8757041.7326410.2724940.3009011.10420.6964161.1042
ILK35.1738.31.6459541.5824630.3195350.3339111.0450.7900861.045
INS4039.826.4789973.1049620.0112110.11622910.36780.1587310.3678
INSR34.1438.460.6229751.7421130.6493310.2989320.46040.645888−2.1722
IRS138.739.485.1808842.7587970.0275680.1477475.35950.3696365.3595
MAPK134.8938.231.3666511.5125920.387790.3504810.90380.623096−1.1065
MAPK335.6737.942.1468671.2232890.2258020.4283051.89680.5760471.8968
MAPKAP134.437.640.881350.9195790.5428590.5286630.97380.594507−1.0269
MLST836.9238.33.3969661.5830560.0949320.3337743.51590.4266193.5159
MTOR36.6738.073.1459641.3535670.1129720.3913233.46390.529553.4639
MYO1C33.1536.99−0.3687580.2713791.2912410.8285270.64170.996003−1.5585
PDPK134.8938.541.3709371.8211820.386640.2829890.73190.597437−1.3663
PIK3C335.6438.592.1221821.876550.2296990.2723341.18560.5046341.1856
PIK3CA36.6739.633.1499262.907280.1126620.1332971.18320.9279411.1832
PIK3CB35.1838.681.6580211.9654290.3168740.2560630.80810.982749−1.2375
PIK3CD38.939.245.3781862.5223820.0240440.1740557.23910.4868317.2391
PIK3CG39.2239.035.7026132.316580.0192020.20074310.45440.13262110.4544
PLD136.9538.523.424521.8040470.0931360.286373.07480.1384453.0748
PLD236.9238.733.4003982.0154330.0947060.247342.61170.9735472.6117
PPP2CA34.8937.791.367471.0735460.387570.475151.2260.5404271.226
PPP2R2B37.4238.753.8990452.0294520.067030.2449483.65430.4890873.6543
PPP2R435.438.591.8791661.8718190.2718410.2732291.00510.8081261.0051
PRKAA134.6437.931.1160911.2166050.4613420.4302940.93270.566996−1.0722
PRKAA234.3939.330.8698142.6071120.5472170.1641270.29990.017273−3.3341
PRKAB134.4137.790.8877771.0759840.5404460.4743470.87770.745967−1.1393
PRKAB236.1839.112.6562252.3948320.1586340.1901441.19860.5240631.1986
PRKAG135.8938.752.3725892.0276520.1930990.2452541.27010.9075421.2701
PRKAG235.4138.371.8932781.6548110.2691950.3175791.17970.5304211.1797
PRKAG339.2539.545.7312232.8234250.0188250.1412757.50470.3846547.5047
PRKCA33.8937.490.3665990.7756460.7756090.5841270.75310.867045−1.3278
PRKCB36.936.553.38099−0.1665960.0959891.12240711.69310.28523511.6931
PRKCE36.6838.233.158591.5091980.1119880.3513063.1370.3495583.137
PRKCG39.2339.775.7095593.0484380.019110.1208736.32520.2309536.3252
PTEN34.1538.320.6254541.6036460.6482160.3290440.50760.850737−1.97
RHEB36.6738.813.1466092.0934220.1129210.2343242.07510.4613282.0751
RHOA30.936.78−2.6245790.0623836.1670450.9576810.15530.926912−6.4396
RICTOR37.238.433.6790591.7152910.0780720.3045413.90080.1252643.9008
RPS629.1535.8−4.373158−0.92278320.7229641.8957680.09150.012523−10.9312
RPS6KA136.4138.282.8872781.5593790.1351580.3392972.51040.4261152.5104
RPS6KA237.9138.354.3844951.6297680.0478780.323146.74930.0919086.7493
RPS6KA537.1739.183.6484582.4571750.0797450.1821032.28360.4775132.2836
RPS6KB135.9237.222.4009540.4985290.1893390.7078283.73840.5976093.7384
RPS6KB237.4338.963.9082672.2380240.0666030.2119773.18270.5375353.1827
RPTOR38.239.334.6743282.6165940.0391640.1630524.16330.4041834.1633
RRAGA35.9138.292.391361.572280.1906030.3362771.76430.3213761.7643
RRAGB35.6538.732.1281292.0124340.2287540.2478551.08350.8166541.0835
RRAGC35.4237.641.8989190.9248120.2681440.5267491.96440.3578531.9644
RRAGD37.4338.933.9080382.2158520.0666140.2152593.23150.3540613.2315
SGK134.937.81.3746091.0767480.3856570.4740961.22930.5653131.2293
STK1137.9539.744.4329713.0180550.0462960.1234452.66640.2198612.6664
STRADB33.1538.24−0.3741371.5207691.2960640.34850.26890.31349−3.719
TELO238.9239.675.3991772.9522390.0236970.1292075.45260.2945165.4526
TP5337.1938.973.6703692.2505940.0785430.2101382.67540.0678462.6754
TSC134.8937.711.3662150.9951820.3879080.5016721.29330.6167521.2933
TSC237.1739.333.6534782.6085250.0794680.1639672.06330.4878852.0633
ULK137.738.664.18211.940910.0550890.2604524.72790.4388054.7279
ULK237.739.034.17492.3142150.0553640.2010723.63180.4702813.6318
VEGFA30.1537.3−3.3720390.5781210.3534470.6698360.06470.002013−15.4567
VEGFB35.1638.811.634322.0946310.3221220.2341280.72680.763379−1.3758
VEGFC38.9738.755.453712.0327220.0228180.24439410.71080.48977210.7108
YWHAQ31.8936.55−1.632133−0.1654423.0997111.121510.36180.144955−2.7639
ACTB33.1436.89−0.378310.1727071.2998180.8871770.68250.458808−1.4651
B2M31.1536.29−2.367976−0.4258565.1621631.3433690.26020.573033−3.8427
GAPDH33.936.550.37831−0.1727070.7693381.1271711.46510.1662271.4651
HPRT136.9338.813.4065082.0882950.0943060.2351582.49360.2812972.4936
RPLP032.936.05−0.620491−0.6661781.5373981.5868631.03220.6051541.0322
HGDC39.4738.445.9524661.7267170.0161480.30213918.71010.24923618.7101
RTC25.8827.96−7.63915−8.760246199.3486433.6075722.17510.8607722.1751
RTC25.8827.82−7.637846−8.902247199.168543478.4574262.40230.6894592.4023
RTC25.8827.88−7.643027−8.834321199.885125456.452532.28360.8050912.2836
PPC23.1422.89−10.382546−13.8305441334.92819314568.2886310.91320.30384810.9132
PPC23.1523.1−10.373234−13.6141011326.33939112538.709699.45360.3155179.4536
PPC23.3923.25−10.128558−13.4695521119.43704611343.2930310.1330.33525810.133

Genetic expression of the mTOR pathway in renal biopsies of recipients without rejection used as controls and biopsies from rejected transplants.

Avg, Average; HGDC, Human genomic DNA contamination; RTC, Reverse Transcription Control; PPC, positive PCR control. Endogenous control genes (ACTB, B2M, GAPDH, HPRT and RPLP0). Control group without rejection (–DSA/–AMR and +DSA/–AMR). Group 1, Rejection renal biopsies (Group 1; +DSA/+AMR).

*

Rejection renal biopsies comparing to control group. Bold values are considered as statistically significant.

No statistically significant differences were observed in mTOR pathway gene expression in recipients with no rejection with or without DSA (–DSA/–AMR and +DSA/–AMR; data not shown). Therefore, these biopsies were used as controls and were compared with biopsies from rejected transplants (+DSA/+AMR). A confounder analysis on gene expression levels of mTOR genes and months post-transplantation also resulted in a p-value of 0.46, demonstrating post-transplantation time was not a factor driving gene expression values.

A higher number of over-expressed genes of mTOR pathway were found in biopsies from rejected kidney transplants from +DSA/+AMR patients. In the analyzed biopsies, differential expression of the mTOR pathway related genes was detected. As shown in Figure 1, the AKT1S1, DDIT4, EIF4E, HRAS, IGF1, INS, IRS1, PIK3CD, PIK3CG, PRKAG3, PRKCB, PRKCG, RPS6KA2, RPTOR, TELO2, ULK1, VEGFC were over-expressed (≥5-fold) in +DSA/+AMR patients compared with patients with kidney transplant showing +DSA/–AMR and –DSA samples.

However, the following genes did not show significant differences with respect to the controls INS, PIK3CG, PIK3CD, PRKCG, PRKCB, VEGFC despite being over-expressed. Up-regulated mTOR pathway genes are showed in Figure 4.

Interaction Pathway Up-Regulated mTOR Genes in Rejection Kidney Biopsies

In order to find out the relationships between up-regulated genes an interaction study of all the genes analyzed was carried out. KMEANS clustering algorithm was applied to cluster proteins in the network (k = 2). Two main clusters were obtained, a major cluster (green circles) with up-regulated genes and a second minor cluster of down-regulated genes (red circles) (Figures 1, 4). The relationships between the over-expressed genes are shown in Figure 2. The main molecular functions of up-regulated genes (dark green circles) were mainly phosphotransferase activity, insulin-like grown factor receptor and ribonucleoside phosphate binding (Figure 3).

The gene encoding the PRKCB protein is a calcium-activated, phospholipid- and diacylglycerol (DAG)-dependent serine/threonine-protein kinase that is involved in various cellular processes such as B-cell receptor (BCR) signalosome control, oxidative stress-induced apoptosis, androgen-dependent transcription control, insulin signaling, and endothelial cell proliferation.

The PIK3CG gene encodes aphosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K) which finally generates PIP3 which plays a key role activating signaling cascades involved in cell growth, survival, proliferation, motility, and morphology. It links G-protein coupled receptor activation to PIP3 production, involved in immune, inflammatory, and allergic responses. The VEGFC gene encodes a vascular endothelial growth factor C involved in angiogenesis, and endothelial cell growth, stimulating cells proliferation, and migration and also has effects on the permeability of blood vessels. It participates in the maintenance of the differentiated lymphatic endothelial in adults and binds to and activates the KDR/VEGFR2 and FLT4/VEGFR3 receptors. Finally, INS gene encodes a protein that reduces blood glucose concentration. It enhances the permeability of cells toward monosaccharides, amino acids and fatty acids. It accelerates glycolysis, the process of pentose phosphates and the synthesis of glycogen in the kidney. Up-regulated mTOR pathway genes are showed in Figure 5.

Figure 5

Down-Regulated mTOR Genes in Rejection Kidney Biopsies

The following mTOR pathway genes were down-regulated (≥5-fold) in +DSA/+AMR relative to kidney transplants without rejection (Table 3, Figures 1, 2, 3B). As shown in Figure 2, a total of 9 genes were under-expressed; AKT2, EIF4EBP2, INSR, PRKAA2, RHOA, RPS6, STRADB, VEGFA, and YWHAQ. Of all these genes, the VEGFA was most down-regulated one (>15-fold) and the RPS6 (>10-fold) and RHOA (≥6.5-fold).

With respect to the statistical significance compared to controls after correction, the EIF4EBP2; P < 0.005, VEGFA; P = 0.002, PRKAA2, P = 0.017, RPS6; P = 0.012 were significantly down regulated in +AMR biopsies compared with control group. This fact could indicate that the major event is the combination of DSA presence and AMR development. DSA that did not produce AMR development could not influence mTOR gene expression. Down-regulated mTOR genes pathway are shown in Figure 4.

Interaction Pathway Down-Regulated mTOR Genes in Rejection Kidney Biopsies

In the red cluster, a total of nine down-regulated genes were found. The relationships between the down-regulated genes are shown in Figure 3B. The biological activities that mainly decrease are those related to the proteins encoded by the VEGFA and RPS6 genes (dark red circles). The molecular function of down-regulated gene products (≥5-fold) was also analyzed, and they were mainly protein kinases and carbohydrate derivative binding proteins (Figure 4). The gene that encodes the VEGFA protein is a growth factor active in angiogenesis, vasculogenesis and endothelial cell growth. It induces endothelial cell proliferation, promotes cell migration, inhibits apoptosis, and induces permeabilization of blood vessels. The RPS6 encodes a serine/threonine-protein kinase that is necessary for the mitogenic or stress-induced phosphorylation of the transcription factors CREB1 and ATF1 and for the regulation of the RELA, STAT3, and ETV1/ER81 transcription factors, and that contributes to the activation of the gene by histone phosphorylation and to the regulation of inflammatory genes. A classification of mTOR complex as a function of differential expression between patients with rejection (+DSA/+AMR) and without rejection (+DSA/–AMR and –DSA/–AMR, controls) is shown in Table 4. Finally, cellular processes regulated by mTOR signaling and differential expression genes between patients with rejection (+DSA/+AMR) and without rejection (+ DSA/–AMR and –DSA, controls) are shown in Table 5.

Table 4

mTOR complexesUp-regulatedModerately up-regulatedDown-regulatedModerately down-regulated
mTORC1 ComplexRPTORMLST8, MTOR
mTORC2 ComplexMAPKAP1, MLST8, MTOR, RICTOR
mTOR upstream regulators
mTORC1 Positive RegulationIGF1,INS, RPS6KA2AKT1, AKT2, AKT3, HRAS, IKBKB, IRS1, MAPK1, MAPK3, PDPK1, PIK3C3, PIK3CA, PIK3CB, PIK3CD, PIK3CG, PLD1, PLD2, RHEB, RPS6KA1, RPS6KA5, RRAGA, RRAGB, RRAGC, RRAG, TELO2INSR
mTORC2 Positive RegulationRPS6KA2AKT1, AKT2, AKT3, MAPK1, MAPK, PDPK1, PIK3C3, PIK3CA, PIK3CB, PIK3CD, PIK3CG, RHEB, RPS6KA1, RPS6KA5.
mTORC1 Negative RegulationAKT1S1, DDIT4, IGFBP3, PRKAG3,CAB39, CAB39L, DDIT4L, DEPTOR, FKBP1A, FKBP, PRKAA1, PRKAB1, PRKAB2, PRKAG1, PRKAG2, PTEN, STK11, TP53 (p53), TSC1, TSC2PRKAA2 STRADB YWHAQ
mTORC2 Positive Regulation:DDIT4, PRKAG3CAB39, CAB39L, DDIT4L, DEPTOR, PRKAA1, PRKAB1, PRKAB2, PRKAG1, PRKAG2, STK11, TSC1, TSC2.PRKAA2 STRADB
mTOR downstream effectors
mTORC1 Positive RegulationEIF4E, VEGFC.CHUK, EIF4B, HIF1A, IKBKB, RPS6KB1, RPS6KB2, TP53 (p53), VEGFBRPS6, VEGFA
mTORC2 Positive RegulationPRKCB, PRKCGAKT1, CDC42, GSK3B, HSPA4, ILK, MYO1C, PRKCA, PRKCE, RPS6KB1, SGK1RHOA
mTORC1 Negative RegulationPPP2CA, ULK1EIF4EBP1, EIF4EBP2, PPP2R2B, PTPA, TP53 (p53), ULK2.

Classification of mTOR complex as a function of differential expression between patients with rejection (+DSA/+AMR) and without rejection (+DSA/–AMR and –DSA/–AMR).

Table 5

Cellular processes regulated by mTOR signalingUp-regulatedModerately up-regulatedDown-regulatedModerately down-regulated
Amino acid responsePIK3C3, RRAGA, RRAGB, RRAGC, RRAGD
AngiogenesisDDIT4, VEGFCCHUK, DDIT4L, HIF1A, IKBKB, VEGFBVEGFA
AutophagyULK1PIK3C3, ULK2
Cytoskeletal OrganizationPRKCBCDC42, PRKCA, PRKCE, PRKCGRHOA
Growth factor responseHRAS, IGF1, IGFBP3, RPS6KA2MAPK1, MAPK3, RPS6KA1, RPS6KA5
Energy stressPRKAG3PRKAA1, PRKAB1, PRKAB2, PRKAG1, PRKAG2PRKAA2
Insulin signalingINSAKT1, AKT3, IRS1, PDPK1, PIK3CA, PIK3CB, PIK3CD, PIK3CG, TP53AKT2, INSR
Lipid metabolismPLD1, PLD2
TranslationEIF4E, PPP2CA, RPS6KA2EIF4B, EIF4EBP1, EIF4EBP2, PPP2R2B, PTPA, RPS6KA1, RPS6KA5, RPS6KB1, RPS6KB2.RPS6

Cellular processes regulated by mTOR signaling and differential expression genes between patients with rejection (+DSA/+AMR) and without rejection (+DSA/–AMR and –DSA/–AMR).

Discussion

In this study, we have analyzed the relationship between mTOR pathway gene expression and histological and immunological changes in humoral rejection biopsies in a large cohort of kidney recipients undergoing transplantation in order to determine if there are differences in the gene expression of the mTOR pathways between +DSA/+AMR and control recipients (–DSA/–AMR, +DSA/–AMR) and its possible influence on transplant outcome.

Genomic quantification of the overall inflammatory burden in the kidney graft seems to be important to determine the suitability of an invasive biopsy. Our results show that several particular gene expressions were increased in biopsies of +DSA/+AMR. Particularly, a higher number of over-expressed genes with mTORC1+ regulation and a number of under-expressed genes with mTORC2+ regulation in biopsies from +DSA/+AMR patients were found.

In this regard, EIF4EBP1 could have an influence on the regulation of protein translation by growth factors and other stimuli that signal through the MAP kinase and mTORC1 pathways. VEGF-A, which has been described to stimulate endothelial cell mitogenesis and cell migration, is also vasodilator and increases microvascular permeability promoting angiogenesis. PRKAA2 is activated in response to cellular metabolic stresses and RPS6 is implicated in cell size regulation and cell proliferation, and similar characteristics occurs in a situation of allograft rejection. The imbalance of gene expression in very important proteins of the mTOR pathway, showed in this study in biopsies, could inhibit mTORC2 activation promoting mTORC1, leading to fibrosis, proliferation and rejection in +DSA/+AMR patients. Thus, a higher number of over-expressed genes with mTORC1+ regulation and a number of under-expressed genes with mTORC2+ regulation in biopsies from +DSA/+AMR patients were found.

Rapamycin's mammalian target (mTOR) is a highly conserved serine/threonine protein kinase and there is much evidence that the mTOR signaling pathway plays a significant role in disease pathogenesis (20, 22, 58). However, changes in RNA levels of the PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathway have not been reported in pathology literature to date. Nevertheless, understanding the burden of inflammation, rejection or accommodation in a graft is critical for the optimization of therapy, following response to chosen interventions and as a means to predict risk stratification for progressive chronic injury and graft loss

Our tested array includes members of the mTORC1 and mTORC2 complexes as well as upstream regulators of many mTOR responses, and downstream genes from the many cellular processes regulated by mTOR complex activation. As a high number of over-expressed genes with mTORC1+ regulation and a number of under-expressed genes with mTORC2+ regulation in biopsies from +DSA/+AMR patients were found, pointing to an important role of particular gene expression of mTOR pathways in kidney rejection. The differential expression of multiple genes in the mTOR signaling pathway in AMR may be an important molecular mechanism that may lead to histological changes suffered by the recipient (59).

However, due to the various components involved in the PI3K-signaling pathway, we are currently unable to study all the components involved in the signal transduction pathway at protein level simultaneously. In this sense, it should be taken into account that when a protein is discovered to be abnormally active it could be due to co-relationships between components involved in the signal transduction pathway. Nevertheless, the PI3K-AKT Signaling PCR Array detects expression of 84 genes in the signaling pathway to obtain a detailed understanding of the molecular profile. The mTOR signaling pathway plays a significant role in immune and inflammatory reactions according to experimental findings (21), It indicates that the increased expression of inflammatory cytokines may be the result of abnormal mTOR activation. In this sense, our group has published the important role of inflammatory cytokines in kidney and liver transplant outcome (4, 48, 60, 61). Logically, a cytokine analysis and real-time correlation analysis would actually prove the association of up-regulated expression of some of mTOR pathway genes. This would pave the way to better management of the rejection episodic kidneys and these analyses will be performed in our following study.

The first generation of mTOR inhibitors do not seem to repress a negative feedback loop that results in the phosphorylation and activation of AKT, whose expression is altered in our study and only inhibits the mTORC1 pathway. These inhibitors may be important in the interpretation of the results of our study, although they are not widely used today. On the other hand, the second generation of mTOR inhibitors are known as ATP-competitive mTOR kinase inhibitors, they inhibit the kinase-dependent functions of mTORC1 and mTORC2 and thus block the feedback activation of PI3K/signaling. AKT, unlike the previous ones that only target mTORC1. Thus, the most important advantage of these second-generation inhibitors is the decrease in phosphorylation of AKT on the blockade of mTORC2 and, also, a better inhibition on mTORC1. Our data does not seem to be affected by this situation due to the same reason mentioned above. Several so-called dual mTOR/PI3K inhibitors (TPdI) have also been developed and are in early-stage preclinical trials and show promising results. Its development has benefited from previous studies with selective PI3K inhibitors. The activity of these small molecules from rapalog activity differs in the way that it blocks both the mTORC1-dependent phosphorylation of S6K1 and the mTORC2-dependent phosphorylation of the AKT Ser473 residue. These inhibitors target PI3K isoforms (p110α, β, and γ) together with the ATP binding sites of mTORC1 and mTORC2 by blocking PI3K/AKT signaling, which may be interesting to study and compare in our future studies more diversified.

Moreover, as there are no important differences in mTOR pathway gene expression in kidney recipients without DSA and with DSA, independently of AMR development, this could indicate that the major event is the particular combination of the DSA presence and AMR development and that the DSAs not producing AMR development could not influence mTOR gene expression. We must study in the future several aspects of the DSA determination as IgG subclasses, complement fixation as C1q or C3d, between others. On the other hand, mTOR pathway expressed genes extracted from peripheral blood rather than from the biopsies would be more appropriate and easier to obtain, unfortunately, we could not determine them in peripheral blood (data not shown).

One of the limitations of our study was the number of patients with kidney rejection in a total of 269 adult sequential kidney transplant (KT) patients recruited during 10 years and analyzed retrospectively. In spite of this, the expression of 84 mTOR pathway genes determined by human mTOR-PCR array technology allowed to analyzed and discriminated effectively the cases of rejection.

Other subject to discuss is whether the mTOR activation was different in various renal diseases and whether mTOR activation could predict relapse with rejection in the baseline renal biopsies of donors in the non-rejection group. This point has been revised in our present study and no special confounding factors have been found (data not shown).

Finally, these findings show the important role of mTOR pathways genes in biopsies with AMR but it is also necessary to quantify inflammation from biopsy tissue, thus providing an important tool for clinical correlation and outcome analysis of kidney transplants. Further research is needed to determine if particular gene expression profiles can prevent graft failure, which highlights the need to develop a more complete understanding of the mechanisms of allograft protection or injury.

Statements

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are publicly available. This data can be found here: 10.6084/m9.figshare.14020901, 10.6084/m9.figshare.14020898.

Ethics statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Institutional Review Board and Ethics Committee of the University Clinical Hospital Virgen Arrixaca-Biomedical Research Institute of Murcia (IMIB), Murcia, Spain and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

MM participated in designing the assays, supervising the data generation, analyzing the data, and writing the manuscript. IL, MB, and AP participated in data analysis for gene expression assays and contributed in writing the manuscript. HM-B and RA participated in tissue processing contributed in manuscript writing. VJ-C, AMr, and AMi participated in tissue processing. MM-Q and CB contributed in gene expression data generation, organization, and manuscript writing. SL and JP-M provided the study samples, participated in discussions in data analysis strategies, and manuscript writing. CB and JG were part of the study design and contributed in tissue processing and supervision HLA antibodies optimization, data analysis, and manuscript writing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Funding

Our work was possible thanks to the support from Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. Grant Nos. PI15/01370 and P19/01194 and co-funding of the European Union with European Fund of Regional Development (FEDER) with the principle of A manner to build Europe.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  • 1.

    LoupyALefaucheurCVernereyDPruggerCVan HuyenJPDMooneyNet al. Complement-binding anti-HLA antibodies and kidney-allograft survival. N Engl J Med. (2013) 369:121526. 10.1056/NEJMoa1302506

  • 2.

    WiebeCGibsonIWBlydt-HansenTDKarpinskiMHoJStorsleyLJet al. Evolution and clinical pathologic correlations of de novo donor-specific HLA antibody post kidney transplant. Am J Transplant. (2012) 12:115767. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04013.x

  • 3.

    MuroMLlorenteSMarínLMoya-QuilesMRGonzalez-SorianoMJPrietoAet al. Acute vascular rejection mediated by HLA antibodies in a cadaveric kidney recipient: discrepancies between flow PRA, ELISA and CDC vs. luminex screening. Nephrol Dial Transplant. (2005) 20:2236. 10.1093/ndt/gfh527

  • 4.

    MuroMMoya-QuilesMRMrowiecA. Humoral response in liver allograft transplantation: a review of the role of anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies. Curr Protein Pept Sci. (2016) 17:77684. 10.2174/1389203717666160226145101

  • 5.

    BoschALlorenteSDiazJASalgadoGLópezMBoixFet al. Low median fluorescence intensity could be a nonsafety concept of immunologic risk evaluation in patients with shared molecular eplets in kidney transplantation. Hum Immunol. (2012) 73:5225. 10.1016/j.humimm.2012.02.020

  • 6.

    Kissmeyer-NielsenFOlsenSPetersenVPFjeldborgO. Hyperacute rejection of kidney allografts, associated with pre-existing humoral antibodies against donor cells. Lancet. (1966) 2:6625. 10.1016/S0140-6736(66)92829-7

  • 7.

    Boix-GinerFMillanOSan SegundoDMuñoz-CachoPManceboELlorenteSet al. High frequency of central memory regulatory T cells allows detection of liver recipients at risk of early acute rejection within the first month after transplantation. Int Immunol. (2016) 28:5564. 10.1093/intimm/dxv048

  • 8.

    BoixFMillanOSegundoDSManceboERimolaAFabregaEet al. High expression of CD38, CD69, CD95, and CD154 biomarkers in cultured peripheral T lymphocytes correlates with an increased risk of acute rejection in liver allograft recipients. Immunobiology. (2016) 221:595603. 10.1016/j.imbio.2016.01.008

  • 9.

    BoixFMrowiecAMuroM. Cytokine expression profile as predictive surrogate biomarkers for clinical events in the field of solid organ transplantation. Curr Protein Pept Sci. (2017) 18:2409. 10.2174/1389203717666160902130001

  • 10.

    MuroMBoschALópez-HernándezRBoixFLópezMCampilloJAet al. Donor Specific Antibody (DSA) Mediated Humoral Rejection and Biological Implications of B Cells in Human Solid Organ Transplantation. (2012). Available online at: https://accedacris.ulpgc.es/handle/10553/54697 (accessed March 21, 2020).

  • 11.

    CaiJTerasakiPI. Humoral theory of transplantation: mechanism, prevention, and treatment. Hum Immunol. (2005) 66:33442. 10.1016/j.humimm.2005.01.021

  • 12.

    TerasakiPI. Humoral theory of transplantation. Am J Transplant. (2003) 3:66573. 10.1034/j.1600-6143.2003.00135.x

  • 13.

    EineckeGSisBReeveJMengelMCampbellPMHidalgoLGet al. Antibody-mediated microcirculation injury is the major cause of late kidney transplant failure. Am J Transplant. (2009) 9:252031. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02799.x

  • 14.

    EverlyMJRebellatoLMHaischCEOzawaMParkerKBrileyKPet al. Incidence and impact of de novo donor-specific alloantibody in primary renal allografts. Transplantation. (2013) 95:4107. 10.1097/TP.0b013e31827d62e3

  • 15.

    AbrahamRT. PI 3-kinase related kinases: “Big” players in stress-induced signaling pathways. DNA Repair. (2004) 3:8837. 10.1016/j.dnarep.2004.04.002

  • 16.

    EngelmanJALuoJCantleyLC. The evolution of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinases as regulators of growth and metabolism. Nat Rev Genet. (2006) 7:60619. 10.1038/nrg1879

  • 17.

    LoewithRJacintoEWullschlegerSLorbergACrespoJLBonenfantDet al. Two TOR complexes, only one of which is rapamycin sensitive, have distinct roles in cell growth control. Mol Cell. (2002) 10:45768. 10.1016/S1097-2765(02)00636-6

  • 18.

    WongKKEngelmanJACantleyLC. Targeting the PI3K signaling pathway in cancer. Curr Opin Genet Dev. (2010) 20:8790. 10.1016/j.gde.2009.11.002

  • 19.

    LoYCLeeCFPowellJD. Insight into the role of mTOR and metabolism in T cells reveals new potential approaches to preventing graft rejection. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. (2014) 19:36371. 10.1097/MOT.0000000000000098

  • 20.

    MengX-FYuJ-TSongJ-HChiSTanL. Role of the mTOR signaling pathway in epilepsy. J Neurol Sci. (2013) 332:415. 10.1016/j.jns.2013.05.029

  • 21.

    WeichhartTSäemannMD. The multiple facets of mTOR in immunity. Trends Immunol. (2009) 30:21826. 10.1016/j.it.2009.02.002

  • 22.

    YasinSAAliAMTataMPickerSRAndersonGWLatimer-BowmanEet al. mTOR-dependent abnormalities in autophagy characterize human malformations of cortical development: evidence from focal cortical dysplasia and tuberous sclerosis. Acta Neuropathol. (2013) 126:20718. 10.1007/s00401-013-1135-4

  • 23.

    GrimbertPThaunatO. mTOR inhibitors and risk of chronic antibody-mediated rejection after kidney transplantation: where are we now?Transpl Int. (2017) 30:64757. 10.1111/tri.12975

  • 24.

    GrahammerFHaenischNSteinhardtFSanderLRoerdenMArnoldFet al. MTORC1 maintains renal tubular homeostasis and is essential in response to ischemic stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2014) 111:E281726. 10.1073/pnas.1402352111

  • 25.

    VelagapudiCBhandariBSAbboud-WernerSSimoneSAbboudHEHabibSL. The tuberin/mTOR pathway promotes apoptosis of tubular epithelial cells in diabetes. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2011) 22:26273. 10.1681/ASN.2010040352

  • 26.

    GödelMHartlebenBHerbachNLiuSZschiedrichSLuSet al. Role of mTOR in podocyte function and diabetic nephropathy in humans and mice. J Clin Invest. (2011) 121:2197209. 10.1172/JCI44774

  • 27.

    WeideTHuberTB. Implications of autophagy for glomerular aging and disease. Cell Tissue Res. (2011) 343:46773. 10.1007/s00441-010-1115-0

  • 28.

    ShillingfordJMMurciaNSLarsonCHLowSHHedgepethRBrownNet al. The mTOR pathway is regulated by polycystin-1, and its inhibition reverses renal cystogenesis in polycystic kidney disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2006) 103:546671. 10.1073/pnas.0509694103

  • 29.

    KajiwaraMMasudaS. Role of mTOR inhibitors in kidney disease. Int J Mol Sci. (2016) 17:975. 10.3390/ijms17060975

  • 30.

    WeichhartTHengstschlägerM. Regulation of Innate Immune Cell Function by mTOR. (2015). Available online at: https://www.nature.com/articles/nri3901 (accessed March 22, 2020).

  • 31.

    PowellJDPollizziKNHeikampEBHortonMR. Regulation of immune responses by mTOR. Annu Rev Immunol. (2012) 30:3968. 10.1146/annurev-immunol-020711-075024

  • 32.

    ThomsonAWTurnquistHRRaimondiG. Immunoregulatory functions of mTOR inhibition. Nat Rev Immunol. (2009) 9:32437. 10.1038/nri2546

  • 33.

    FantusDThomsonAW. Evolving perspectives of mTOR complexes in immunity and transplantation. Am J Transplant. (2015) 15:891902. 10.1111/ajt.13151

  • 34.

    ParkCOKupperTS. The emerging role of resident memory T cells in protective immunity and inflammatory disease. Nat Med. (2015) 21:68897. 10.1038/nm.3883

  • 35.

    RogersNMFerenbachDAIsenbergJSThomsonAWHughesJ. Dendritic cells and macrophages i. The kidney: a spectrum of good and evil. Nat Rev Nephrol. (2014) 10:62543. 10.1038/nrneph.2014.170

  • 36.

    TurnerJEPaustHJSteinmetzOMPanzerU. The Th17 immune response in renal inflammation. Kidney Int. (2012) 77:10705. 10.1038/ki.2010.102

  • 37.

    ParkSLeeJ-GJangJYRyuJ-HKimDJChangSJet al. Induction of accommodation by anti-complement component 5 antibody-based immunosuppression in ABO-incompatible heart transplantation. Transplantation. (2019) 103:e24855. 10.1097/TP.0000000000002808

  • 38.

    SalamaADDelikourasAPuseyCDCookHTBhangalGLechlerRIet al. Transplant accommodation in highly sensitized patients: a potential role for Bcl-xL and alloantibody. Am J Transplant. (2001) 1:2609. 10.1034/j.1600-6143.2001.001003260.x

  • 39.

    FlechnerSM. mTOR inhibition & clinical transplantation: kidney. Transplantation. (2018) 102:S178. 10.1097/TP.0000000000001692

  • 40.

    DalmanMRDeeterANimishakaviGDuanZH. Fold-change and p-value cutoffs significantly alter microarray interpretations. BMC Bioinformat. (2012) 13(Suppl. 2):S11. 10.1186/1471-2105-13-S2-S11

  • 41.

    EisenHJHasniSFWangD. The return of the mTOR inhibitors: getting it right in patients after cardiac transplantation. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2018) 71:6513. 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.12.033

  • 42.

    SciarrettaSForteMFratiGSadoshimaJ. New insights into the role of mTOR signaling in the cardiovascular system. Circ Res. (2018) 122:489505. 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.311147

  • 43.

    AslehRAlnsasraHLermanABriasoulisAPereiraNLEdwardsBSet al. Effects of mTOR inhibitor–related proteinuria on progression of cardiac allograft vasculopathy and outcomes among heart transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. (2020) 111. 10.1111/ajt.16155

  • 44.

    JinY-PValenzuelaNMZhangXRozengurtEReedEF. HLA class II–triggered signaling cascades cause endothelial cell proliferation and migration: relevance to antibody-mediated transplant rejection. J Immunol. (2018) 200:237290. 10.4049/jimmunol.1701259

  • 45.

    JenningsDLLangeNShulloMLatifFRestainoSTopkaraVKet al. Outcomes associated with mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors in heart transplant recipients: a meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. (2018) 265:716. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.03.111

  • 46.

    Organización Nacional de Transplantes (2017). Available online at: https://www.ont.es/infesp/memorias/memoriarenal2017_paracolgar.pdf (accessed October 18, 2020).

  • 47.

    Kidney Basics. National Kidney Foundation. Available online at: https://www.kidney.org/kidney-basics (accessed March 31, 2020).

  • 48.

    BoixFLlorenteSEguíaJGonzalez-MartinezGAlfaroRGaliánJAet al. In vitro intracellular IFNγ, IL-17, and IL-10 producing T cells correlates with the occurrence of post-transplant opportunistic infection in liver and kidney recipients. World J Transplant. (2018) 8:2337. 10.5500/wjt.v8.i1.23

  • 49.

    BoixFTrujilloCMuroM. Cell-mediated immunity (CMI) as the instrument to assess the response against the allograft: present and future. Curr Protein Pept Sci. (2018) 19:1092106. 10.2174/1389203719666180730164542

  • 50.

    LegazIBoixFLópezMAlfaroRGaliánJALlorenteSet al. Influence of preformed antibodies in liver transplantation. J Clin Med. (2020) 9:708. 10.3390/jcm9030708

  • 51.

    HaasMLoupyALefaucheurCRoufosseCGlotzDSeronDet al. The banff 2017 kidney meeting report: revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell–mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next-generation clinical trials. Am J Transplant. (2018) 18:293307. 10.1111/ajt.14625

  • 52.

    CohenDColvinRBDahaMRDrachenbergCBHaasMNickeleitVet al. Pros and cons for C4d as a biomarker. Kidney Int. (2012) 81:62839. 10.1038/ki.2011.497

  • 53.

    MuroMGonzález-SorianoMJSalgadoGLópezRBoixFLópezMet al. Specific “intra-allele” and “intra-broad antigen” human leukocyte antigen alloantibodies in kidney graft transplantation. Hum Immunol. (2010) 71:85760. 10.1016/j.humimm.2010.05.018

  • 54.

    GaliánJAMrowiecAMuroM. Molecular targets on B-cells to prevent and treat antibody-mediated rejection in organ transplantation. Present and future. Expert Opin Ther Targets. (2016) 20:85967. 10.1517/14728222.2016.1135904

  • 55.

    STRING: Functional Protein Association Networks. Available online at: https://string-db.org/ (accessed March 31, 2020).

  • 56.

    REVIGO Summarizes and Visualizes Long Lists of Gene Ontology Terms. Available online at: https://revigo.irb.hr/ (accessed March 31, 2020).

  • 57.

    LeongómezJD. Análisis de Poder Estadístico y Cálculo de Tamaño de Muestra en R: Guía Práctica. Zenodo (2020).

  • 58.

    LeeJYParkA-KLeeE-SParkW-YParkS-HChoiJWet al. miRNA expression analysis in cortical dysplasia: regulation of mTOR and LIS1 pathway. Epilepsy Res. (2014) 108:43341. 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2014.01.005

  • 59.

    Le MoineAGoldmanMAbramowiczD. Multiple pathways to allograft rejection. Transplantation. (2002) 73:137381. 10.1097/00007890-200205150-00001

  • 60.

    MillánORafael-ValdiviaLSan SegundoDBoixFCastro-PaneteMJLópez-HoyosMet al. Should IFN-γ, IL-17, and IL-2 be considered predictive biomarkers of acute rejection in liver and kidney transplant? Results of a multicentric study. Clin Immunol. (2014) 154:14154. 10.1016/j.clim.2014.07.007

  • 61.

    Ruiz-LafuenteNMuroMMinguelaAParradoA. The transcriptional response of mouse spleen B cells to IL-4: comparison to the response of human peripheral blood B cells. Biochem Biophys Rep. (2018) 16:5661. 10.1016/j.bbrep.2018.09.007

Summary

Keywords

mTOR, Gene expression, medico-legal autopsy, antibody-mediated rejection, PCR array

Citation

Legaz I, Bernardo MV, Alfaro R, Martínez-Banaclocha H, Galián JA, Jimenez-Coll V, Boix F, Mrowiec A, Salmeron D, Botella C, Parrado A, Moya-Quiles MR, Minguela A, Llorente S, Peña-Moral J and Muro M (2021) PCR Array Technology in Biopsy Samples Identifies Up-Regulated mTOR Pathway Genes as Potential Rejection Biomarkers After Kidney Transplantation. Front. Med. 8:547849. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.547849

Received

31 March 2020

Accepted

27 January 2021

Published

17 February 2021

Volume

8 - 2021

Edited by

Narinder K. Mehra, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India

Reviewed by

Sunil K. Arora, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), India; Gurvinder Kaur, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Manuel Muro

This article was submitted to Nephrology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Medicine

†These authors have contributed equally to this work and the order is arbitrary

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics