Download PDF
CC BY-NC 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2013; 40(02): 141-153
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2013.40.2.141
Continuing Medical Education

Composite Tissue Allotransplantation Immunology

Seok Chan Eun
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

INTRODUCTION

Composite tissue allotransplantation (CTA) is an option recently introduced for major reconstruction of tissue defects. Since announcements of successful hand, larynx, knee, muscle, nerve, abdominal wall and, most recently, partial face transplantation, CTA has become one of the techniques used by plastic and reconstructive surgeons [[1]]. Clinical success in CTA is the culmination of progress in two disparate surgical disciplines: replantation and organ transplantation, a close collaboration between plastic and transplant surgeons. This joining of reconstructive and transplant surgery forces the movement of hand and facial tissue allotransplantation into the clinical arena [[2]]. Translation to the clinical field has shown that CTA is a viable treatment option for those who have lost extremities and suffered large tissue defects [[3] [4] [5]].

As with other allografts, CTA can undergo immune-mediated rejection. When compared with solid organ transplants, composite tissue allografts are histologically heterogeneous, composed of different tissue types (e.g., skin, muscle, bone, bone marrow, lymph nodes, nerve, and tendon), and express different immunogenicity of transplanted elements [[6]]. Currently, the most important issue for routine application of CTA to clinical practice is the need for lifelong immunosuppression [[7]]. The immunosuppression medications used to prevent tissue rejection in CTA are the same as those used in tens of thousands of solid organ transplant recipients. The toxicity of chronic, nonspecific immunosuppression remains a major limitation to the widespread availability of CTA and is associated with opportunistic infections, nephrotoxicity, end-organ damage, and an increased rate of malignancy [[6]]. Because composite tissue allograft transplantations are not life-saving procedures, much attention has been devoted to the issue of minimizing or withdrawing immunosuppression, and this would represent a significant step forward in this field [[8]]. Over the past five to six decades, advances in the field of transplant immunology have transformed solid organ transplantation into standard care, with excellent short term results in kidney, heart, lung, liver, and pancreas transplantation. The science of CTA is rooted in progressive thinking and the innovative solutions of plastic surgeons. Development of a tolerance regimen or new less toxic immunosuppressive protocols is essential for future acceptance of CTA [[9]]. With cautious optimism and healthy critiques, the science of CTA promises a bright future. This paper reviews key terminology, drug combinations, mechanisms of immunosuppression, the risks associated with CTA, and immune tolerance protocols.



Publication History

Received: 03 January 2013

Accepted: 09 January 2013

Article published online:
01 May 2022

© 2013. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Tai C, Goldenberg M, Schuster KM. et al. Composite tissue allotransplantation. J Invest Surg 2003; 16: 193-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cendales LC, Xu H, Bacher J. et al. Composite tissue allotransplantation: development of a preclinical model in nonhuman primates. Transplantation 2005; 80: 1447-1454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Dubernard JM, Owen E, Herzberg G. et al. Human hand allograft: report on first 6 months. Lancet 1999; 353: 1315-1320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Petit F, Minns AB, Dubernard JM. et al. Composite tissue allotransplantation and reconstructive surgery: first clinical applications. Ann Surg 2003; 237: 19-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Devauchelle B, Badet L, Lengele B. et al. First human face allograft: early report. Lancet 2006; 368: 203-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lanzetta M, Petruzzo P, Margreiter R. et al. The International Registry on Hand and Composite Tissue Transplantation. Transplantation 2005; 79: 1210-1214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Lechler RI, Sykes M, Thomson AW. et al. Organ transplantation--how much of the promise has been realized?. Nat Med 2005; 11: 605-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Calne RY. Prope tolerance: the future of organ transplantation from the laboratory to the clinic. Int Immunopharmacol 2005; 5: 163-167
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Siemionow M, Klimczak A. Basics of immune responses in transplantation in preparation for application of composite tissue allografts in plastic and reconstructive surgery: part I. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121: 4e-12e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Womer KL, Stone JR, Murphy B. et al. Indirect allorecognition of donor class I and II major histocompatibility complex peptides promotes the development of transplant vasculopathy. J Am Soc Nephrol 2001; 12: 2500-2506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Womer KL, Sayegh MH, Auchincloss Jr H. Involvement of the direct and indirect pathways of allorecognition in tolerance induction. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2001; 356: 639-647
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ensminger SM, Spriewald BM, Witzke O. et al. Indirect allorecognition can play an important role in the development of transplant arteriosclerosis. Transplantation 2002; 73: 279-286
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lee RS, Yamada K, Houser SL. et al. Indirect allorecognition promotes the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 308-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rogers NJ, Lechler RI. Allorecognition. Am J Transplant 2001; 1: 97-102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Cendales LC, Kirk AD, Moresi JM. et al. Composite tissue allotransplantation: classification of clinical acute skin rejection. Transplantation 2005; 80: 1676-1680
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Racusen LC, Halloran PF, Solez K. Banff 2003 meeting report: new diagnostic insights and standards. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 1562-1566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Lee WP, Yaremchuk MJ, Pan YC. et al. Relative antigenicity of components of a vascularized limb allograft. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991; 87: 401-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Buttemeyer R, Jones NF, Min Z. et al. Rejection of the component tissues of limb allografts in rats immunosuppressed with FK-506 and cyclosporine. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996; 97: 139-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Rocha PN, Plumb TJ, Crowley SD. et al. Effector mechanisms in transplant rejection. Immunol Rev 2003; 196: 51-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Aw MM. Transplant immunology. J Pediatr Surg 2003; 38: 1275-1280
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Hancock WW, Gao W, Shemmeri N. et al. Immunopathogenesis of accelerated allograft rejection in sensitized recipients: humoral and nonhumoral mechanisms. Transplantation 2002; 73: 1392-1397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Monaco AP. Prospects and strategies for clinical tolerance. Transplant Proc 2004; 36: 227-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kanitakis J, Jullien D, Petruzzo P. et al. Clinicopathologic features of graft rejection of the first human hand allograft. Transplantation 2003; 76: 688-693
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Petruzzo P, Badet L, Gazarian A. et al. Bilateral hand transplantation: six years after the first case. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1718-1724
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Williams JM, Holzknecht ZE, Plummer TB. et al. Acute vascular rejection and accommodation: divergent outcomes of the humoral response to organ transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 78: 1471-1478
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Moll S, Pascual M. Humoral rejection of organ allografts. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 2611-2618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Womer KL, Vella JP, Sayegh MH. Chronic allograft dysfunction: mechanisms and new approaches to therapy. Semin Nephrol 2000; 20: 126-147
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Tullius SG, Tilney NL. Both alloantigen-dependent and -independent factors influence chronic allograft rejection. Transplantation 1995; 59: 313-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Joosten SA, Sijpkens YW, van Kooten C. et al. Chronic renal allograft rejection: pathophysiologic considerations. Kidney Int 2005; 68: 1-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Womer KL, Lee RS, Madsen JC. et al. Tolerance and chronic rejection. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2001; 356: 727-738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Takada M, Nadeau KC, Hancock WW. et al. Effects of explosive brain death on cytokine activation of peripheral organs in the rat. Transplantation 1998; 65: 1533-1542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Singer P, Shapiro H, Cohen J. Brain death and organ damage: the modulating effects of nutrition. Transplantation 2005; 80: 1363-1368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Kuecuek O, Mantouvalou L, Klemz R. et al. Significant reduction of proinflammatory cytokines by treatment of the brain-dead donor. Transplant Proc 2005; 37: 387-388
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Takada M, Nadeau KC, Shaw GD. et al. The cytokine-adhesion molecule cascade in ischemia/reperfusion injury of the rat kidney: inhibition by a soluble P-selectin ligand. J Clin Invest 1997; 99: 2682-2690
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Ozer K, Oke R, Gurunluoglu R. et al. Induction of tolerance to hind limb allografts in rats receiving cyclosporine A and antilymphocyte serum: effect of duration of the treatment. Transplantation 2003; 75: 31-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Kirk AD, Hale DA, Mannon RB. et al. Results from a human renal allograft tolerance trial evaluating the humanized CD52-specific monoclonal antibody alemtuzumab (CAMPATH-1H). Transplantation 2003; 76: 120-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Siemionow M, Klimczak A. Tolerance and future directions for composite tissue allograft transplants: part II. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 123: 7e-17e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Gerber DA, Bonham CA, Thomson AW. Immunosuppressive agents: recent developments in molecular action and clinical application. Transplant Proc 1998; 30: 1573-1579
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Gorantla VS, Barker JH, Jones Jr JW. et al. Immunosuppressive agents in transplantation: mechanisms of action and current anti-rejection strategies. Microsurgery 2000; 20: 420-429
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Allison AC, Eugui EM. Mycophenolate mofetil and its mechanisms of action. Immunopharmacology 2000; 47: 85-118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Saunders RN, Metcalfe MS, Nicholson ML. Rapamycin in transplantation: a review of the evidence. Kidney Int 2001; 59: 3-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Goggins WC, Fisher RA, Dattilo JB. et al. Analysis of functional renal allograft tolerance with single-dose rapamycin based induction immunosuppression. Transplantation 1997; 63: 310-314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Buell JF, Gross TG, Woodle ES. Malignancy after transplantation. Transplantation 2005; 80: S254-S264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Shapiro R, Basu A, Tan H. et al. Kidney transplantation under minimal immunosuppression after pretransplant lymphoid depletion with Thymoglobulin or Campath. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 200: 505-515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Engl T, Makarevic J, Relja B. et al. Mycophenolate mofetil modulates adhesion receptors of the beta1 integrin family on tumor cells: impact on tumor recurrence and malignancy. BMC Cancer 2005; 5: 4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Cherikh WS, Kauffman HM, McBride MA. et al. Association of the type of induction immunosuppression with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder, graft survival, and patient survival after primary kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2003; 76: 1289-1293
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Starzl TE, Murase N, Abu-Elmagd K. et al. Tolerogenic immunosuppression for organ transplantation. Lancet 2003; 361: 1502-1510
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Jones NF. Concerns about human hand transplantation in the 21st century. J Hand Surg Am 2002; 27: 771-787
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Thaunat O, Badet L, El-Jaafari A. et al. Composite tissue allograft extends a helping hand to transplant immunologists. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 2238-2242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Petruzzo P, Revillard JP, Kanitakis J. et al. First human double hand transplantation: efficacy of a conventional immunosuppressive protocol. Clin Transplant 2003; 17: 455-460
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Sayegh MH, Turka LA. The role of T-cell costimulatory activation pathways in transplant rejection. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 1813-1821
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Noel PJ, Boise LH, Green JM. et al. CD28 costimulation prevents cell death during primary T cell activation. J Immunol 1996; 157: 636-642
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Zheng XX, Sanchez-Fueyo A, Domenig C. et al. The balance of deletion and regulation in allograft tolerance. Immunol Rev 2003; 196: 75-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Papiernik M, de Moraes ML, Pontoux C. et al. Regulatory CD4 T cells: expression of IL-2R alpha chain, resistance to clonal deletion and IL-2 dependency. Int Immunol 1998; 10: 371-378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Larsen CP, Knechtle SJ, Adams A. et al. A new look at blockade of T-cell costimulation: a therapeutic strategy for long-term maintenance immunosuppression. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 876-883
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Wood K, Sachs DH. Chimerism and transplantation tolerance: cause and effect. Immunol Today 1996; 17: 584-587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Sachs DH. Mixed chimerism as an approach to transplantation tolerance. Clin Immunol 2000; 95: S63-S68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Monaco AP. Antilymphocyte serum, donor bone marrow and tolerance to allografts: the journey is the reward. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 67-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Wekerle T, Sykes M. Mixed chimerism and transplantation tolerance. Annu Rev Med 2001; 52: 353-370
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Starzl TE, Demetris AJ, Trucco M. et al. Cell migration and chimerism after whole-organ transplantation: the basis of graft acceptance. Hepatology 1993; 17: 1127-1152
    Google Scholar
  • 61 Starzl TE, Demetris AJ, Murase N. et al. The lost chord: microchimerism and allograft survival. Immunol Today 1996; 17: 577-584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Starzl TE, Demetris AJ. Transplantation tolerance, microchimerism, and the two-way paradigm. Theor Med Bioeth 1998; 19: 441-455
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Kanitakis J, Jullien D, Claudy A. et al. Microchimerism in a human hand allograft. Lancet 1999; 354: 1820-1821
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Yu X, Carpenter P, Anasetti C. Advances in transplantation tolerance. Lancet 2001; 357: 1959-1963
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Siemionow M, Ortak T, Izycki D. et al. Induction of tolerance in composite-tissue allografts. Transplantation 2002; 74: 1211-1217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Jonuleit H, Schmitt E, Kakirman H. et al. Infectious tolerance: human CD25(+) regulatory T cells convey suppressor activity to conventional CD4(+) T helper cells. J Exp Med 2002; 196: 255-260
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Raulet DH, Vance RE. Self-tolerance of natural killer cells. Nat Rev Immunol 2006; 6: 520-531
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Sprent J, Kishimoto H. The thymus and negative selection. Immunol Rev 2002; 185: 126-135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Kyewski B, Derbinski J. Self-representation in the thymus: an extended view. Nat Rev Immunol 2004; 4: 688-698
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Anderson G, Partington KM, Jenkinson EJ. Differential effects of peptide diversity and stromal cell type in positive and negative selection in the thymus. J Immunol 1998; 161: 6599-6603
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Li L, Boussiotis VA. Physiologic regulation of central and peripheral T cell tolerance: lessons for therapeutic applications. J Mol Med (Berl) 2006; 84: 887-899
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Siemionow M, Izycki D, Ozer K. et al. Role of thymus in operational tolerance induction in limb allograft transplant model. Transplantation 2006; 81: 1568-1576
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Belz GT, Behrens GM, Smith CM. et al. The CD8alpha(+) dendritic cell is responsible for inducing peripheral self-tolerance to tissue-associated antigens. J Exp Med 2002; 196: 1099-1104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Coulson MT, Jablonski P, Howden BO. et al. Beyond operational tolerance: effect of ischemic injury on development of chronic damage in renal grafts. Transplantation 2005; 80: 353-361
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Calne R, Friend P, Moffatt S. et al. Prope tolerance, perioperative campath 1H, and low-dose cyclosporin monotherapy in renal allograft recipients. Lancet 1998; 351: 1701-1702
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Zhong R, Tucker J, Grant D. et al. Long-term survival and functional tolerance of baboon to monkey kidney and liver transplantation: a preliminary report. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 762
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Martinez-Llordella M, Puig-Pey I, Orlando G. et al. Multiparameter immune profiling of operational tolerance in liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 309-319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Grohmann U, Bianchi R, Orabona C. et al. Functional plasticity of dendritic cell subsets as mediated by CD40 versus B7 activation. J Immunol 2003; 171: 2581-2587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Belz GT, Heath WR, Carbone FR. The role of dendritic cell subsets in selection between tolerance and immunity. Immunol Cell Biol 2002; 80: 463-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Adorini L, Giarratana N, Penna G. Pharmacological induction of tolerogenic dendritic cells and regulatory T cells. Semin Immunol 2004; 16: 127-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Taner T, Hackstein H, Wang Z. et al. Rapamycin-treated, alloantigen-pulsed host dendritic cells induce ag-specific T cell regulation and prolong graft survival. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 228-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Ciancio G, Miller J, Garcia-Morales RO. et al. Six-year clinical effect of donor bone marrow infusions in renal transplant patients. Transplantation 2001; 71: 827-835
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Kreisel D, Petrowsky H, Krasinskas AM. et al. The role of passenger leukocyte genotype in rejection and acceptance of rat liver allografts. Transplantation 2002; 73: 1501-1507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Ko S, Deiwick A, Jager MD. et al. The functional relevance of passenger leukocytes and microchimerism for heart allograft acceptance in the rat. Nat Med 1999; 5: 1292-1297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Sakaguchi S. Regulatory T cells: key controllers of immunologic self-tolerance. Cell 2000; 101: 455-458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Sakaguchi S, Sakaguchi N, Asano M. et al. Immunologic self-tolerance maintained by activated T cells expressing IL-2 receptor alpha-chains (CD25): breakdown of a single mechanism of self-tolerance causes various autoimmune diseases. J Immunol 1995; 155: 1151-1164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Jonuleit H, Adema G, Schmitt E. Immune regulation by regulatory T cells: implications for transplantation. Transpl Immunol 2003; 11: 267-276
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar