Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2026
High Throughput Sequential ELISA for Validation of Biomarkers of Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease
Published on: October 31, 2012
Ex Vivo Test of Complement Dysregulation in Atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome Kidney Transplant patients: A Pilot
Caroline Duineveld1, Romy N Bouwmeester2, Lambertus P W J van den Heuvel2
1Department of Nephrology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Research Institute, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Introduction:
In 2014, a complement assay, which evaluates C5b-9 deposition on endothelial cells, was proposed as a biomarker for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS). Early diagnosis and/or prediction of aHUS (relapse) is pivotal in aHUS kidney transplant recipients who do not receive eculizumab prophylaxis.
Methods:
In this pilot study, serum samples of transplanted patients with aHUS in remission without eculizumab and patients with other primary kidney diseases (controls) were blinded and evaluated in the complement assay.
Results:
We included 13 patients with aHUS (4 males, 9 females) of median age of 54 years (range: 35-69) and median of 5.9 years (range: 0.25-14.1) after transplantation; and 13 controls (7 males, 6 females) of median age of 42 years (range: 27-60) and median of 5.8 years (range: 1.6-11.7) after transplantation. There were no significant differences in C5b-9 deposits between patients with aHUS and controls on resting cells (median of 136% [range: 93%-382%] and 121% [range: 75%-200%], respectively) and activated cells (median of 196% [range: 99%-388%] and 170% [range: 113%-260%], respectively). Three patients with aHUS and 4 controls showed elevated C5b-9 deposits on resting cells, which should correspond to active aHUS. None of these patients had laboratory signs of thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA). During follow-up (15.8 months, range: 6-21), estimated glomerular filtration rate remained stable in all. In 5 patients with aHUS with a genetic variant, no increase in C5b-9 deposits was found on activated endothelial cells, which contrasts with the literature suggesting that the test should identify carriers of a genetic variant.
Conclusion:
Our data question the routine use of the ex vivo complement assay in kidney transplant patients. Future studies should evaluate the test characteristics of assay in kidney transplant patients.
