Marian C. Clahsen‐van Groningen

The Banff Classification of Allograft Pathology is an international consensus classification for the reporting of biopsies from solid organ transplants. Since its initial conception in 1991 for renal transplants, it has undergone review every 2 years, with attendant updated publications. The rapid expansion of knowledge in the field has led to numerous revisions of the classification. The resultant dispersal of relevant content makes it difficult for novices and experienced pathologists to faithfully apply the classification in routine diagnostic work and in clinical trials. This review shall provide a complete and simple illustrated reference guide of the Banff Classification of Kidney Allograft Pathology based on all publications including the 2017 update. It is intended as a concise desktop reference for pathologists and clinicians, providing definitions, Banff Lesion Scores and Banff Diagnostic Categories. An online website reference guide hosted by the Banff Foundation for Allograft Pathology (www.banfffoundation.org) is being developed, which will be updated with future refinement of the Banff Classification from 2019 onward.

The XVI-th Banff Meeting for Allograft Pathology was held at Banff, Alberta, Canada, from 19th to 23rd September 2022, as a joint meeting with the Canadian Society of Transplantation. To mark the 30th anniversary of the first Banff Classification, premeeting discussions were held on the past, present, and future of the Banff Classification. This report is a summary of the meeting highlights that were most important in terms of their effect on the Classification, including discussions around microvascular inflammation and biopsy-based transcript analysis for diagnosis. In a postmeeting survey, agreement was reached on the delineation of the following phenotypes: (1) "Probable antibody-mediated rejection (AMR)," which represents donor-specific antibodies (DSA)-positive cases with some histologic features of AMR but below current thresholds for a definitive AMR diagnosis; and (2) "Microvascular inflammation, DSA-negative and C4d-negative," a phenotype of unclear cause requiring further study, which represents cases with microvascular inflammation not explained by DSA. Although biopsy-based transcript diagnostics are considered promising and remain an integral part of the Banff Classification (limited to diagnosis of AMR), further work needs to be done to agree on the exact classifiers, thresholds, and clinical context of use.

This meeting report from the XV Banff conference describes the creation of a multiorgan transplant gene panel by the Banff Molecular Diagnostics Working Group (MDWG). This Banff Human Organ Transplant (B-HOT) panel is the culmination of previous work by the MDWG to identify a broadly useful gene panel based on whole transcriptome technology. A data-driven process distilled a gene list from peer-reviewed comprehensive microarray studies that discovered and validated their use in kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplant biopsies. These were supplemented by genes that define relevant cellular pathways and cell types plus 12 reference genes used for normalization. The 770 gene B-HOT panel includes the most pertinent genes related to rejection, tolerance, viral infections, and innate and adaptive immune responses. This commercially available panel uses the NanoString platform, which can quantitate transcripts from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples. The B-HOT panel will facilitate multicenter collaborative clinical research using archival samples and permit the development of an open source large database of standardized analyses, thereby expediting clinical validation studies. The MDWG believes that a pathogenesis and pathway based molecular approach will be valuable for investigators and promote therapeutic decision-making and clinical trials.

Patients expressing the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A5 gene require a higher tacrolimus dose to achieve therapeutic exposure compared with nonexpressers. This randomized‐controlled study investigated whether adaptation of the tacrolimus starting dose according to CYP3A5 genotype increases the proportion of kidney transplant recipients being within the target tacrolimus predose concentration range (10–15 ng/mL) at first steady‐state. Two hundred forty living‐donor, renal transplant recipients were assigned to either receive a standard, body‐weight‐based or a CYP3A5 genotype‐based tacrolimus starting dose. At day 3, no difference in the proportion of patients having a tacrolimus exposure within the target range was observed between the standard‐dose and genotype‐based groups: 37.4% versus 35.6%, respectively; p = 0.79. The proportion of patients with a subtherapeutic (i.e. <10 ng/mL) or a supratherapeutic (i.e. >15 ng/mL) Tac predose concentration in the two groups was also not significantly different. The incidence of acute rejection was comparable between both groups (p = 0.82). Pharmacogenetic adaptation of the tacrolimus starting dose does not increase the number of patients having therapeutic tacrolimus exposure early after transplantation and does not lead to improved clinical outcome in a low immunological risk population. Patients expressing the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A5 gene require a higher tacrolimus dose to achieve therapeutic exposure compared with nonexpressers. This randomized‐controlled study investigated whether adaptation of the tacrolimus starting dose according to CYP3A5 genotype increases the proportion of kidney transplant recipients being within the target tacrolimus predose concentration range (10–15 ng/mL) at first steady‐state. Two hundred forty living‐donor, renal transplant recipients were assigned to either receive a standard, body‐weight‐based or a CYP3A5 genotype‐based tacrolimus starting dose. At day 3, no difference in the proportion of patients having a tacrolimus exposure within the target range was observed between the standard‐dose and genotype‐based groups: 37.4% versus 35.6%, respectively; p = 0.79. The proportion of patients with a subtherapeutic (i.e. <10 ng/mL) or a supratherapeutic (i.e. >15 ng/mL) Tac predose concentration in the two groups was also not significantly different. The incidence of acute rejection was comparable between both groups (p = 0.82). Pharmacogenetic adaptation of the tacrolimus starting dose does not increase the number of patients having therapeutic tacrolimus exposure early after transplantation and does not lead to improved clinical outcome in a low immunological risk population.