Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Rethinking the multiple roles of B cells in organ transplantation

Coelho, Verônicaa,b; Saitovitch, Davidb,c; Kalil, Jorgea,b; Silva, Hernandez Mourab,d

Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation: February 2013 - Volume 18 - Issue 1 - p 13–21
doi: 10.1097/MOT.0b013e32835c8043
MECHANISMS OF REJECTION: Edited by Maria Hernandez-Fuentes

Purpose of review To discuss the B-cell diverse functions in organ transplantation, highlighting the emerging debate on the role of regulatory B cells (Bregs). We underscore the need to re-examine and integrate data on B-cell functional activities, aiming to discriminate their regulatory (REG) and inflammatory (INFLAMMA) functions and to translate this knowledge for the development of novel immunomodulatory therapeutic strategies and to rethink the current ones.

Recent findings Data from both experimental models and clinical trials point that B cells of various phenotypes have immunoregulatory activity and play an important role in controlling graft inflammation. Data on the state of operational tolerance, in kidney transplantation, suggest the relevance of preserving a healthy B-cell compartment – in numbers and in the Breg capacity to activate the CD40/STAT3 signalling pathway – for achieving and maintaining homeostasis. Moreover, autoantibodies also comprise transplant immunobiology and it seems that not all alloantibodies are deleterious.

Summary The role of B cells, in organ transplantation, can no longer be taken as mere generators of plasma cells, which produce alloantibodies deleterious to the graft. B cells also seem to integrate a complex immunoregulatory network in organ transplantation, with Bregs of various phenotypes and possibly also antibodies. The functional discrimination of REG/INFLAMMA B-cell roles needs to be considered in the clinical setting.

aLaboratory of Immunology, Heart Institute (InCor), University of São Paulo Medical School

bInstitute for Investigation in Immunology, iii, National Institute of Science and Technology (INCT), São Paulo, São Paulo

cDivision of Nephrology, São Lucas Hospital, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

dKimmel Center for Biology and Medicine at the Skirball Institute, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA

Correspondence to Verônica Coelho, MD, PhD, Laboratório de Imunologia, Instituto do Coração, Av Dr Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 44, bloco II, 9 andar, Cerqueira César, São Paulo, SP 05403-000, Brazil. Tel: +55 11 2661 5905; fax: +55 11 2661 5953; e-mail:

Back to Top | Article Outline


What are really the multiple roles of B cells in organ transplantation? In this review or point of view, we discuss the need to re-examine, integrate and discriminate B-cell multifunctionality in organ transplantation, involving both regulatory (REG) and inflammatory (INFLAMMA) activities, highlighting the emerging debate on the role of regulatory B cells (Bregs).

Back to Top | Article Outline


Our understanding of B-cell functions in organ transplantation is actually moving in the same direction as several other topics in immunology are today. That is, realizing that no single immune molecule or cell type has a fixed intrinsic functional activity, although some may, indeed, have a predominant functional profile in several pathological and physiologic contexts. We may cite several examples, such as IFN-γ, which is considered a dominant inflammatory cytokine and yet it seems to play a role in immunotolerance, as several protocols to induce immune tolerance are, in fact, ineffective in IFN-γ-deficient mice [1]. Dendritic cells may induce both effector/proinflammatory [2] and tolerogenic immune responses [2], and regulatory T cells (Treg) and Th17 T cells may have a plastic functional phenotype and transit in both directions [3]. These are examples of immunologic plasticity, which is most likely influenced by multiple factors such as the microenvironment and its metabolic, immunologic and tissue-specific factors, and also by the neuroimmune cross-talking capacity to sense cues of homeostatic disturbance in a particular physio/pathologic context [4].

Box 1

Box 1

Similar examples may be pointed in transplantation, such as T-cell alloreactivity, which despite being critical for triggering allograft rejection [5], may also induce immunoregulation, as reported by several groups [6–9] including ours [10]. It seems that the scientific community is now more focussed on investigating the REG and INFLAMMA components/mechanisms of any given physiologic and pathological immune phenomenon, understanding that the functional immunologic outcome is dependent on how inflammation is fine-tuned. It depends on the REG/INFLAMMA balance, locally and systemically.

During the past decades, the focus of B-cell research in clinical transplant immunology has been mostly directed to avoid the production of donor-specific alloantibodies (DSAs). However, B cells are more than mere antibody factories. B cells have all the apparatus to present antigen to T cells [11], they express high levels of class II MHC and costimulatory molecules, they secrete various cytokines [12–16], can prime T cells and initiate or regulate an effector immune response. Like T cells, B cells also have multiple functional activities.

Indeed, the importance of B cells in cellular immune responses has been highlighted, ever since experiments using B-cell-deficient mice exhibited significant impact on the immune system's function. It was shown that B cells are, in fact, crucial for CD4+ T-cell expansion, cytokine secretion [17], for the establishment of T-cell memory [18] and, more recently, that they are also present in the thymus and may have a role in T-cell ontogeny [19]. Additionally, the observation that mice devoid of B cells have a worse progression of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis [20–22] indicates their important role in regulating pathological autoimmunity.

Back to Top | Article Outline


The inflammatory role of B cells in organ transplantation has been consistently associated with anti-HLA alloantibodies and DSAs, but also with antibodies of other specificities [23,24]. Nevertheless, despite consistent data on the deleterious role of DSAs [25–27], especially for de-novo antibodies detected after transplantation [28–30], the debate regarding alloantibodies not associated to poor graft outcome remains [31–33]. This raises the discussion about the need for a finer view of alloantibody function, because not all alloantibodies seem to be deleterious, even DSAs. Accordingly, it was recently reported that the detection of multiple IgG subclasses was higher in liver chronic rejection and that recipients with IgG3 DSAs presented higher risk of graft loss, whilst those presenting normal graft function had mostly IgG1 DSAs [32]. The mechanisms underlying these observations await elucidation.

Autoantibodies also comprise the immunobiology of organ transplantation. This is in accordance with the observations that transplantation-induced allostimulation modifies autoreactivity both at the cellular [34] and antibody levels [35–37]. The detection of autoantibodies directed to a variety of molecules such as alpha-tubulin [38▪,39], vimentin [40,41], or angiontensin receptor [42] in kidney transplantation, nucleolin in kidney and heart transplantation [43▪], as well as type V collagen in lung transplantation [44] has been associated to rejection and poor graft outcome. Additionally, antibody-mediated chronic kidney rejection was associated with the detection of a broad array of autoantibodies, suggesting a B-cell dysregulation [45]. Some of these autoantibodies exhibit deleterious effects on the graft by various mechanisms, such as activation of the angiotensin II receptor signalling pathway [42] and inhibition or induction of endothelial cell apoptosis [43▪]. On the other hand, autoantibodies also comprise the physiologic repertoire [46,47] and may play a beneficial role in keeping the biologic REG/INFLAMMA balance [48,49].

Back to Top | Article Outline


Beyond inducing antibody production, allotransplantation induces several impacts on the B-cell compartment; many associated with an unfavourable graft outcome. One example is the uncontrolled mobilization and activation of B cells [50,51], associated with increased risk of DSAs development and graft loss, suggesting that overactivation of B cells may drive an inflammatory outcome.

Another interesting emerging issue regarding the role of B cells in transplantation is the formation of the so-called tertiary lymphoid tissue (TLT) within the graft [52▪▪], mostly in chronic rejection [53,54▪▪], and their putative role in keeping long-term alloantibody production and continued graft damage. Most investigators highlight an inflammatory role for B cells in this context, probably because this intragraft lymphoid organization is mainly observed during rejection [53]. Recently, in a murine model of skin transplantation, the authors claim that B-cell tolerance is actually broken in the intragraft TLT, as they detected more autoantibodies within the graft than in the blood [54▪▪]. These are interesting data, but it is not clear whether these antibodies were in fact produced within the graft or if they are in fact deleterious. Additionally, we cannot exclude that Bregs can also comprise this intragraft TLT and play a beneficial role in the graft outcome.

B cells have been underscored as important players in transplant immune responses, as recently reviewed [55–59]. For example, B cells participate in the control of graft versus host disease, in which animals without circulating B cells develop a more severe disease [60]. In experimental models, mice displaying MHC-II-deficient B cells exhibit increased cardiac allograft survival compared with wildtype mice [61], whilst no difference was observed in skin allograft [61]. Moreover, it was recently shown that different B-cell populations can exhibit different functions in transplantation, also depending on the intensity of the allogeneic response [62▪▪]. Animals partially depleted of B cells, using an anti-CD20 antibody, presented accelerated skin allograft rejection, across minor antigen disparities, suggesting a role for B cells in controlling inflammation [62▪▪]. In contrast, in a model of chronic renal allograft rejection, a broader depletion of various B-cell subpopulations, using an anti-CD19 antibody, actually increased allograft survival [62▪▪]. These data indicate a dual role for B cells in transplantation, exhibiting both regulatory and inflammatory functional activities.

Back to Top | Article Outline


The capacity of B cells to regulate effector immune responses has been much attributed to Bregs [14]. Recently, Breg phenotypes and their working mechanisms have been much debated [11,63,64]. Nevertheless, it has been consistently observed that Bregs play an important role in controlling effector immune responses and autoimmune diseases [22,65–67], mostly by IL-10 secretion and direct contact with CD4+ T cells [65,66]. In humans, a Breg subpopulation, called B10 cells, has been characterized by the CD19+CD24HICD27+ phenotype and an IL-10 dependent capacity to suppress monocyte proinflammatory cytokines [68▪▪]. Another Breg subpopulation displaying the CD19+CD24HICD38HI phenotype exerts immunoregulation also mediated by IL-10, requiring CD80/CD86 costimulation and the activation of the CD40/STAT3 signalling pathway [69▪▪].

Additional Breg phenotypes have been reported in the transplantation models, such as B cells bearing high expression of the inhibitory Fc-gamma receptor IIB, in cardiac allograft tolerance [70▪▪], or TIM-1 (T cell Ig domain and mucin domain), in islet allograft transplantation [71▪]. In the latter, the stimulation with a low-affinity anti-TIM-1 antibody prolonged allograft survival in an IL-4/IL-10 dependent manner [71▪]. In both models, adoptively transferred total B cells or TIM1+ Bregs prolonged allograft survival in relation to untreated animals, suggesting the capacity to induce infectious tolerance [72,73]. Thus, B cells also play a regulatory role in the context of transplantation.

In line with this idea, observations on operational tolerance (stable graft function after immunosuppression withdrawal for more than 1 year [35,74–77]) have brought additional elements supporting the B-cell regulatory function in allotransplantation. Taken that operational tolerance individuals have managed to control graft inflammation, the operational tolerance differential immunologic profile may help identify relevant immunoregulatory checkpoints in human transplantation tolerance.

On the basis of the data from several research groups, there is a current belief that B cells play a relevant role in operational tolerance. Several immunologic features have been proposed for a B-cell gene signature in operational tolerance kidney transplant recipients in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells: higher transcript expression of immunoglobulin light chains (IGKV4-1, IGLLA and IGKV1D-13) [78], CD20 [78], genes related to B-cell proliferation and cell cycle [35]; higher numbers of circulating total, naive and transitional B cells [35,78,79]; increased IL-10 expression in transitional B cells [78] (phenotypically similar to human Bregs [69▪▪]) and B cell increased expression of the inhibitory Fc-gamma receptor IIB [35].

However, there are some yet unclear and contradictory interpretations on the B-cell data in operational tolerance. For example, no immunoregulatory function has been reported for the IGKV4-1, IGLLA and IGKV1D-13 genes [78]. Additionally, there is a contradictory interpretation regarding the increase in circulating B cells in operational tolerance [35,78,79]. As operational tolerance individuals have B-cell numbers similar to healthy individuals, but higher than recipients with chronic rejection, we interpret that rather than having increased mobilization of B cells, operational tolerance individuals seem to preserve a healthy profile of the B-cell compartment [35,78–80▪].

We have emphasized this distinct interpretation regarding the B-cell compartment in operational tolerance in a recent work [80▪]. We confirmed that operational tolerance individuals exhibit preservation in the numbers of circulating B cells, particularly the CD19+CD24HICD38HIBregs, in contrast to individuals with chronic rejection. Further comprising the operational tolerance B-cell profile, operational tolerance's Bregs display a conserved capacity to activate the CD40/STAT3 signalling pathway (pathway important for IL-10 production, as described by Blair et al.[69▪▪]) and preserved B-cell repertoire diversity [80▪].

In addition to the above-mentioned operational tolerance B-cell profile, microRNAs (miRNAs) also appear to integrate this complex network. The emerging role of miRNAs in immunoregulation is quite unexplored in organ transplantation. MicroRNAs are noncoding sequences of RNA bearing important roles in gene-expression regulation [81]. It was recently observed that operational tolerance's circulating B cells have preserved expression of the miR-142-3p miRNA, whilst individuals with stable graft function under conventional immunosuppression and those with chronic rejection have decreased expression [82▪▪]. Taken that this specific miRNA is involved in the regulation of several genes associated with the proposed operational tolerance B-cell signature [35,74,78], this miRNA and possibly others are likely to integrate the immunotolerance network in human organ transplantation.

Recent data from our group and others support the view that the differential expression of some important immune molecules, including miRNAs, together with the preservation of the B-cell compartment and the upregulation of some specific pathways may be relevant immunologic checkpoints in achieving/maintaining this homeostatic state. Understanding how operational tolerance individuals manage to keep a healthy B-cell profile and what operating mechanisms disturb the REG/INFLAMMA B-cell compartment balance, in chronic rejection, may help the design of novel therapeutic strategies to favour allograft tolerance.

Back to Top | Article Outline


Considering the primary idea that B cells were essentially proinflammatory players in clinical transplantation, several therapeutic strategies have been put forth to control B-cell activity. One strategy is the use of the chimeric anti-CD20 antibody (rituximab) to deplete B cells in patients with DSAs [83–85]. The CD20 molecule is a B-cell marker expressed during B-cell ontogeny – from pre-B to memory B cells (though a lower expression) – but not expressed by pro-B cells or by plasma cells [58,86]. Overall, the real benefits of the anti-CD20 antibody therapy in human transplantation remain controversial [58]. It shows limited effect in the desensitization of patients with DSAs, maybe because it does not affect plasma cells. Indeed, rituximab inhibits naive B-cell proliferation, in vitro, but has little effect on memory B cells [87▪▪], which could sustain DSA production and deleterious effect on graft outcome.

Recently, rituximab was used as induction therapy, in a double-blinded prospective clinical trial, to prevent the activation and generation of antibody-producing cells [88]. Although well tolerated, the use of rituximab plus corticosteroids, as induction therapy, showed no real benefit in a 6-month follow-up [88]. A more striking result comes from the aborted clinical trial comparing the use of rituximab and daclizumab (an anti-CD25 monoclonal antibody), again as induction therapy in kidney transplantation. The rituximab-treated group showed higher prevalence of acute cellular rejection (83 versus 14%) in the first 3 months after transplantation [89]. The use of corticosteroids may have contributed to preventing cell-mediated rejection in the first trial. However, these latter data emphasize the B-cell role in downregulating graft inflammation and indicate that the indiscriminate deletion of B cells in transplantation may be deleterious.

There seems to be a general understanding today that developing strategies to help reshape recipients’ B-cell repertoire may be valid to control alloantibody-producing cells and to induce Bregs, favouring transplantation tolerance. But what are really efficient strategies to favour the B-cell regulatory activity (Fig. 1)? No direct answer is possible yet. However, a broader REG/INFLAMMA view on both basic research and clinical studies may bring relevant information and help the transplantation community to rethink and develop novel strategies.



In the search for new strategies to solve the problem of circulating alloantibodies, the use of the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, has recently been tested [90,91,92▪]. The proteasome inhibition in plasma cells induces the activation of the unfolded protein response, leading to apoptosis [93,94]. The use of bortezomib together with plasmapheresis has been shown to dramatically reduce the circulating plasma cell numbers and alloantibodies in renal transplantation [91,95,96▪]. However, the incomplete elimination of alloantibodies has been attributed to remaining circulating memory B cells that escape bortezomib's action.

Long after the use in several animal models [97], the humanized version of the anti-CD52 antibody, alemtuzumab, has been attempted as a broader immunoregulatory therapeutic strategy, as CD52 is expressed on T and B cells, monocytes and dendritic cells [98,99]. As CD52 is expressed from the pro-B to the short-lived plasma cell stages [58], alemtuzumab provides a high spectrum depletion of circulating B cells and, potentially, a broad reconstruction of the B-cell repertoire. The benefits of alemtuzumab as induction therapy dates from 14 years ago, when it was reported to induce a state ‘near’ to tolerance in kidney transplantation, allowing significant immunosuppressant reduction [100,101]. One of the largest prospective trials to evaluate alemtuzumab's efficacy showed a marked reduction of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection in the first 3 years after transplantation, compared to anti-CD25 antibody (basiliximab), whilst no difference was found with rabbit antithymocyte globulin [102▪▪].

It is worth revisiting these data in the light of today's new knowledge on immunoregulatory mechanisms. Alemtuzumab's beneficial effect can be reinterpreted based on two recent works showing that the induction therapy, in transplanted individuals, promoted a reshaping of the B-cell repertoire, decreasing the numbers of memory B cells and increasing naive B cells and CD19+CD24HICD38HI Bregs [103▪▪,104▪▪]. Thus, alemtuzumab seems to induce a more tolerogenic B-cell repertoire in the first few years after treatment. However, it remains important to evaluate the long-term impact of alemtuzumab's therapy and which other combinatory therapies could help to induce and maintain a predominant regulatory B-cell repertoire.

Nevertheless, an important side-effect of alemtuzumab therapy is the significant increase in circulating BAFF [105], a B-cell survival signal with a central role in the differentiation of transitional B cells to mature B cells [106,107]. BAFF-receptor knockout mice display reduced numbers of mature B cells and an accumulation of transitional B cells [106–108], whereas animals with high levels of circulating BAFF present B-cell compartment expansion and develop pathological autoimmunity [106–108]. So, changes in BAFF circulating levels may have an impact on the availability of peripheral mature B cells and on the numbers of activated memory and plasma cells. Accordingly, the effects of increased circulating BAFF could well be the cause of the increased frequency of antibody-mediated rejection in alemtuzumab-treated individuals [109▪].

So, to improve the alemtuzumab's beneficial effects in organ transplantation it may be important to control the levels of circulating BAFF following treatment, such as by using the anti-BAFF monoclonal antibody (belimumab) [110]. It was recently reported that the combinatory therapy with anti-BAFF and rapamycin induce allograft tolerance in a model of islet transplantation, by reducing IFN-γ production, increasing IL-10 and the percentages of circulating Tregs [111▪▪]. Although it is well known that rapamycin induces Tregs [112], BAFF neutralization in this combinatory therapy seems to potentiate this effect. The expansion of Tregs is in concordance with another report on the expansion of CD4+FOXP3+ T cells in BAFF-transgenic mice, by a B-cell-dependent mechanism [113], indicating a dual functional role for BAFF in transplantation. The reshaping of the B-cell repertoire towards a predominant REG profile seems to require, on one hand, the control of alloreactive memory B cells and alloantibody-producing plasma cells, and, on the other hand, the induction/preservation of the Breg repertoire in addition to controlling BAFF circulating levels.

Bringing additional complexity to B-cell function in organ transplantation, we should remember that B cells are in constant interaction with both the graft and other immune cell types, some of which may also be relevant checkpoints in the immunoregulatory pathways to transplantation tolerance, such as Tregs and dendritic cells. Thus, quantitative and qualitative alterations in one cell population may functionally affect the others. This may be illustrated by the data showing that mice deficient for the important Treg transcription factor, FOXP3, may also present B-cell developmental defects [114]. Moreover, we reported that operational tolerance individuals are able to keep normal numbers of Foxp3 Tregs [77] and Bregs [80▪], whereas chronic rejection individuals have significantly lower numbers of both. These observations suggest that the inability of chronic rejection individuals to keep the healthy profile of the regulatory T and the B cell compartments may involve a T–B cell cross-talking process. Therefore, it is possible that the beneficial or deleterious outcome of the B-cell multifunctionality is the result of various systemic and intragraft interactions with other cell types.

Back to Top | Article Outline


A significant emergent knowledge regarding B cells in organ transplantation is that B cells can also act as beneficial players. They can help to control graft inflammation and could contribute to building regulatory friendly pathways leading to operational tolerance.

Considering the B-cell regulatory function in organ transplantation, we should question the paradigm of depleting B cells as the central strategy for controlling antibody-mediated rejection. It may, indeed, be inappropriate because it may also deplete B cells displaying regulatory activity and this may have a negative impact on the graft outcome.

The scientific community faces, now, the challenge to better understand and discriminate the different B-cell subpopulation functions, specially the various Breg phenotypes, in addition to building an integrative analysis of Treg/Breg and other cell type interactions for globally evaluating the balance between the REG/INFLAMMA players in transplant immunobiology. This approach may help to develop the strategies to induce and preserve regulatory B and T cells, favouring the control of the INFLAMMA T/B cell activity that can lead to allograft rejection.

Back to Top | Article Outline


The authors thank the other participants of the Brazilian Multicenter Study on Operational Tolerance: Francine Lemos, Irene Noronha, Sandra M Monteiro, Cristina Castro, Daísa S. R. David, Florencia Maria Barbé-Tuana, Fabiana Agena. The authors also thank Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP; 07/59290-7) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq; iii/INCT, 573879-2008-7) for financially supporting our studies related to this review.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Back to Top | Article Outline


Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as:

  • ▪ of special interest
  • ▪▪ of outstanding interest

Additional references related to this topic can also be found in the Current World Literature section in this issue (pp. 113–114).

Back to Top | Article Outline


1. Kweon MN, Fujihashi K, VanCott JL, et al. Lack of orally induced systemic unresponsiveness in IFN-gamma knockout mice. J Immunol 1998; 160:1687–1693.
2. Lechler R, Ng WF, Steinman RM. Dendritic cells in transplantation – friend or foe? Immunity 2001; 14:357–368.
3. Zhou L, Chong MM, Littman DR. Plasticity of CD4+ T cell lineage differentiation. Immunity 2009; 30:646–655.
4. Olofsson PS, Rosas-Ballina M, Levine YA, Tracey KJ. Rethinking inflammation: neural circuits in the regulation of immunity. Immunol Rev 2012; 248:188–204.
5. Rogers NJ, Lechler RI. Allorecognition. Am J Transplant 2001; 1:97–102.
6. Tsang JY, Tanriver Y, Jiang S, et al. Indefinite mouse heart allograft survival in recipient treated with CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells with indirect allospecificity and short term immunosuppression. Transpl Immunol 2009; 21:203–209.
7. Tsang JY, Tanriver Y, Jiang S, et al. Conferring indirect allospecificity on CD4+CD25+ Tregs by TCR gene transfer favors transplantation tolerance in mice. J Clin Investig 2008; 118:3619–3628.
8. Otto C, Rohde AC, Timmermann W, et al. Acceptance of small bowel allografts by indirect allorecognition of donor class II MHC allopeptides. Transplant Proc 2001; 33:431–432.
9. Gasser M, Lenhard SM, Otto C, et al. Modulation of the immune response with major histocompatability class II peptides via the indirect pathway of allorecognition after kidney and small bowel transplantation. Transplant Proc 2002; 34:2244–2245.
10. Spadafora-Ferreira M, Caldas C, Fae KC, et al. CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ indirect alloreactive T cells from renal transplant patients suppress both the direct and indirect pathways of allorecognition. Scand J Immunol 2007; 66:352–361.
11. Lund FE, Randall TD. Effector and regulatory B cells: modulators of CD4+ T cell immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 2010; 10:236–247.
12. Swain SL, Dutton RW. Consequences of the direct interaction of helper T cells with B cells presenting antigen. Immunol Rev 1987; 99:263–280.
13. Pierce SK, Morris JF, Grusby MJ, et al. Antigen-presenting function of B lymphocytes. Immunol Rev 1988; 106:149–180.
14. Mizoguchi A, Bhan AK. A case for regulatory B cells. J Immunol 2006; 176:705–710.
15. Harris DP, Haynes L, Sayles PC, et al. Reciprocal regulation of polarized cytokine production by effector B and T cells. Nat Immunol 2000; 1:475–482.
16. Harris DP, Goodrich S, Gerth AJ, et al. Regulation of IFN-gamma production by B effector 1 cells: essential roles for T-bet and the IFN-gamma receptor. J Immunol 2005; 174:6781–6790.
17. Crawford A, Macleod M, Schumacher T, et al. Primary T cell expansion and differentiation in vivo requires antigen presentation by B cells. J Immunol 2006; 176:3498–3506.
18. Linton PJ, Harbertson J, Bradley LM. A critical role for B cells in the development of memory CD4 cells. J Immunol 2000; 165:5558–5565.
19. Hashimoto Y, Montecino-Rodriguez E, Leathers H, et al. B-cell development in the thymus is limited by inhibitory signals from the thymic microenvironment. Blood 2002; 100:3504–3511.
20. Wolf SD, Dittel BN, Hardardottir F, Janeway CA Jr. Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis induction in genetically B cell-deficient mice. J Exp Med 1996; 184:2271–2278.
21. Mann MK, Maresz K, Shriver LP, et al. B cell regulation of CD4+CD25+ T regulatory cells and IL-10 via B7 is essential for recovery from experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J Immunol 2007; 178:3447–3456.
22. Fillatreau S, Sweenie CH, McGeachy MJ, et al. B cells regulate autoimmunity by provision of IL-10. Nat Immunol 2002; 3:944–950.
23. Sun Q, Liu Z, Yin G, et al. Detectable circulating antiendothelial cell antibodies in renal allograft recipients with C4d-positive acute rejection: a report of three cases. Transplantation 2005; 79:1759–1762.
24. Sun Q, Liu Z, Chen J, et al. Circulating antiendothelial cell antibodies are associated with poor outcome in renal allograft recipients with acute rejection. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2008; 3:1479–1486.
25. Dunn TB, Noreen H, Gillingham K, et al. Revisiting traditional risk factors for rejection and graft loss after kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011; 11:2132–2143.
26. Stastny P, Ring S, Lu C, et al. Role of immunoglobulin (Ig)-G and IgM antibodies against donor human leukocyte antigens in organ transplant recipients. Hum Immunol 2009; 70:600–604.
27. Graff RJ, Xiao H, Schnitzler MA, et al. The role of positive flow cytometry crossmatch in late renal allograft loss. Hum Immunol 2009; 70:502–505.
28. Sun Q, Cheng Z, Cheng D, et al. De novo development of circulating antiendothelial cell antibodies rather than preexisting antibodies is associated with posttransplant allograft rejection. Kidney Int 2011; 79:655–662.
29. Wiebe C, Gibson IW, Blydt-Hansen TD, et al. Evolution and clinical pathologic correlations of de novo donor-specific HLA antibody post kidney transplant. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:1157–1167.
30. Kokko KE, Colvin RB. Below the waterline – the danger of de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:1077–1078.
31. Jindra PT, Zhang X, Mulder A, et al. Anti-HLA antibodies can induce endothelial cell survival or proliferation depending on their concentration. Transplantation 2006; 82 (1 Suppl.):S33–S35.
32. Kaneku H, O’Leary JG, Taniguchi M, et al. Donor-specific human leukocyte antigen antibodies of the immunoglobulin G3 subclass are associated with chronic rejection and graft loss after liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2012; 18:984–992.
33. Thiyagarajan UM, Bagul A, Frost J, et al. Role of human leukocyte antigen, donor-specific antibodies, and their impact in renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2012; 44:1231–1235.
34. Portugal K, Dozmorov I, Sidorov I, et al. Renal transplant patients show variations in their self-reactive repertoires: a serial study. Int Immunol 2001; 13:747–755.
35. Pallier A, Hillion S, Danger R, et al. Patients with drug-free long-term graft function display increased numbers of peripheral B cells with a memory and inhibitory phenotype. Kidney Int 2010; 78:503–513.
36. Hagedorn PH, Burton CM, Carlsen J, et al. Chronic rejection of a lung transplant is characterized by a profile of specific autoantibodies. Immunology 2010; 130:427–435.
37. Wilkes DS. Autoantibody formation in human and rat studies of chronic rejection and primary graft dysfunction. Semin Immunol 2012; 24:131–135.
38▪. Nath DS, Tiriveedhi V, Basha HI, et al. A role for antibodies to human leukocyte antigens, collagen-V, and K-alpha1-tubulin in antibody-mediated rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Transplantation 2011; 91:1036–1043.

The authors reveal the presence of autoantibodies in individuals with antibody-mediated rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. It also describe the possible mechanisms associated with autoantibodies development.

39. Goers TA, Ramachandran S, Aloush A, et al. De novo production of K-alpha1 tubulin-specific antibodies: role in chronic lung allograft rejection. J Immunol 2008; 180:4487–4494.
40. Azimzadeh AM, Pfeiffer S, Wu GS, et al. Humoral immunity to vimentin is associated with cardiac allograft injury in nonhuman primates. Am J Transplant 2005; 5:2349–2359.
41. Jonker M, Danskine A, Haanstra K, et al. The autoimmune response to vimentin after renal transplantation in nonhuman primates is immunosuppression dependent. Transplantation 2005; 80:385–393.
42. Dragun D, Muller DN, Brasen JH, et al. Angiotensin II type 1-receptor activating antibodies in renal-allograft rejection. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:558–569.
43▪. Qin Z, Lavingia B, Zou Y, Stastny P. Antibodies against nucleolin in recipients of organ transplants. Transplantation 2011; 92:829–835.

This study demonstrates a good association between the development of antinucleolin antibodies and rejection of kidney allografts and with coronary artery disease in heart transplant recipients.

44. Iwata T, Philipovskiy A, Fisher AJ, et al. Antitype V collagen humoral immunity in lung transplant primary graft dysfunction. J Immunol 2008; 181:5738–5747.
45. Porcheray F, DeVito J, Yeap BY, et al. Chronic humoral rejection of human kidney allografts associates with broad autoantibody responses. Transplantation 2010; 89:1239–1246.
46. Quintana FJ, Merbl Y, Sahar E, et al. Antigen-chip technology for accessing global information about the state of the body. Lupus 2006; 15:428–430.
47. Merbl Y, Zucker-Toledano M, Quintana FJ, Cohen IR. Newborn humans manifest autoantibodies to defined self molecules detected by antigen microarray informatics. J Clin Investig 2007; 117:712–718.
48. Cohen IR. Real and artificial immune systems: computing the state of the body. Nat Rev Immunol 2007; 7:569–574.
49. Cohen IR. Biomarkers, self-antigens and the immunological homunculus. J Autoimmun 2007; 29:246–249.
50. Zarkhin V, Chalasani G, Sarwal MM. The yin and yang of B cells in graft rejection and tolerance. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2010; 24:67–78.
51. Thibault-Espitia A, Foucher Y, Danger R, et al. BAFF and BAFF-R levels are associated with risk of long-term kidney graft dysfunction and development of donor-specific antibodies. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:2754–2762.
52▪▪. Thaunat O. Pathophysiologic significance of B-cell clusters in chronically rejected grafts. Transplantation 2011; 92:121–126.

This review raises the importance of the tertiary lymphoid tissues to allograft rejection.

53. Thaunat O, Patey N, Caligiuri G, et al. Chronic rejection triggers the development of an aggressive intragraft immune response through recapitulation of lymphoid organogenesis. J Immunol 2010; 185:717–728.
54▪▪. Thaunat O, Graff-Dubois S, Fabien N, et al. A stepwise breakdown of B-cell tolerance occurs within renal allografts during chronic rejection. Kidney Int 2012; 81:207–219.

In this study, the authors demonstrate that the intragraft microenvironment plays a key role in the breakdown of tolerance and development of autoreactive B cells and antibodies.

55. Redfield RR 3rd, Rodriguez E, Parsons R, et al. Essential role for B cells in transplantation tolerance. Curr Opin Immunol 2011; 23:685–691.
56. Newell KA, Phippard D, Turka LA. Regulatory cells and cell signatures in clinical transplantation tolerance. Curr Opin Immunol 2011; 23:655–659.
57. Kwun J, Bulut P, Kim E, et al. The role of B cells in solid organ transplantation. Semin Immunol 2012; 24:96–108.
58. Clatworthy MR. Targeting B cells and antibody in transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011; 11:1359–1367.
59. Chong AS, Sciammas R. Matchmaking the B-cell signature of tolerance to regulatory B cells. Am J Transplant 2011; 11:2555–2560.
60. Rowe V, Banovic T, MacDonald KP, et al. Host B cells produce IL-10 following TBI and attenuate acute GVHD after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Blood 2006; 108:2485–2492.
61. Noorchashm H, Reed AJ, Rostami SY, et al. B cell-mediated antigen presentation is required for the pathogenesis of acute cardiac allograft rejection. J Immunol 2006; 177:7715–7722.
62▪▪. DiLillo DJ, Griffiths R, Seshan SV, et al. B lymphocytes differentially influence acute and chronic allograft rejection in mice. J Immunol 2011; 186:2643–2654.

This study shows in different transplantation models how B cells can contribute for the induction or regulation of immune responses against the allograft.

63. Mauri C, Blair PA. Regulatory B cells in autoimmunity: developments and controversies. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2010; 6:636–643.
64. Mauri C, Bosma A. Immune regulatory function of B cells. Annu Rev Immunol 2012; 30:221–241.
65. Mizoguchi A, Mizoguchi E, Takedatsu H, et al. Chronic intestinal inflammatory condition generates IL-10-producing regulatory B cell subset characterized by CD1d upregulation. Immunity 2002; 16:219–230.
66. Mauri C, Gray D, Mushtaq N, Londei M. Prevention of arthritis by interleukin 10-producing B cells. J Exp Med 2003; 197:489–501.
67. Yanaba K, Bouaziz JD, Haas KM, et al. A regulatory B cell subset with a unique CD1dhiCD5+ phenotype controls T cell-dependent inflammatory responses. Immunity 2008; 28:639–650.
68▪▪. Iwata Y, Matsushita T, Horikawa M, et al. Characterization of a rare IL-10-competent B-cell subset in humans that parallels mouse regulatory B10 cells. Blood 2011; 117:530–541.

In this study, the authors reveal a Breg subpopulation in humans with the capacity to suppress cytokine production by monocytes. This study highlights how IL-10 is important for B-cell regulatory activity and reinforces the information that Bregs indeed exists in humans.

69▪▪. Blair PA, Norena LY, Flores-Borja F, et al. CD19+CD24hiCD38hi B cells exhibit regulatory capacity in healthy individuals but are functionally impaired in systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Immunity 2010; 32:129–140.

This study was the first to demonstrate the existence of regulatory B cells in humans and how they can be associated in the control autoimmunity.

70▪▪. Le Texier L, Thebault P, Lavault A, et al. Long-term allograft tolerance is characterized by the accumulation of B cells exhibiting an inhibited profile. Am J Transplant 2011; 11:429–438.

This study clearly demonstrates in a model of allograft tolerance that B cells are enriched in a regulatory phenotype and these are capable of transferring allograft tolerance.

71▪. Ding Q, Yeung M, Camirand G, et al. Regulatory B cells are identified by expression of TIM-1 and can be induced through TIM-1 ligation to promote tolerance in mice. J Clin Investig 2011; 121:3645–3656.

Here, the authors highlight that Bregs expressing IL-10 are enriched in the TIM-1+ population and these cells can prolong allograft survival.

72. Cobbold S, Waldmann H. Infectious tolerance. Curr Opin Immunol 1998; 10:518–524.
73. Waldmann H, Adams E, Fairchild P, Cobbold S. Infectious tolerance and the long-term acceptance of transplanted tissue. Immunol Rev 2006; 212:301–313.
74. Brouard S, Mansfield E, Braud C, et al. Identification of a peripheral blood transcriptional biomarker panel associated with operational renal allograft tolerance. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007; 104:15448–15453.
75. Ashton-Chess J, Giral M, Soulillou JP, Brouard S. Using biomarkers of tolerance and rejection to identify high- and low-risk patients following kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2009; 87 (9 Suppl.):S95–S99.
76. Moraes-Vieira PM, Takenaka MC, Silva HM, et al. GATA3 and a dominant regulatory gene expression profile discriminate operational tolerance in human transplantation. Clin Immunol 2012; 142:117–126.
77. Moraes-Vieira PM, Silva HM, Takenaka MC, et al. Differential monocyte STAT6 activation and CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ T cells in kidney operational tolerance transplanted individuals. Hum Immunol 2010; 71:442–450.
78. Newell KA, Asare A, Kirk AD, et al. Identification of a B cell signature associated with renal transplant tolerance in humans. J Clin Invest 2010; 120:1836–1847.
79. Sagoo P, Perucha E, Sawitzki B, et al. Development of a cross-platform biomarker signature to detect renal transplant tolerance in humans. J Clin Invest 2010; 120:1848–1861.
80▪. Silva HM, Takenaka MC, Moraes-Vieira PM, et al. Preserving the B-cell compartment favors operational tolerance in human renal transplantation. Mol Med 2012; 18:733–743.

This study highlights that the maintenance of the B-cell compartment homeostasis can help the establishment of allograft tolerance in humans.

81. Guo H, Ingolia NT, Weissman JS, Bartel DP. Mammalian microRNAs predominantly act to decrease target mRNA levels. Nature 2010; 466:835–840.
82▪▪. Danger R, Pallier A, Giral M, et al. Upregulation of miR-142-3p in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of operationally tolerant patients with a renal transplant. J Am Soc Nephrol 2012; 23:597–606.

In this study, the authors state the importance of miR-142-3p microRNA in the control of B-cell gene signature found in patients with long-term allograft tolerance and how this microRNA can contribute to the maintenance of tolerance in these individuals.

83. Becker YT, Samaniego-Picota M, Sollinger HW. The emerging role of rituximab in organ transplantation. Transpl Int 2006; 19:621–628.
84. Venetz JP, Pascual M. New treatments for acute humoral rejection of kidney allografts. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2007; 16:625–633.
85. Fehr T, Rusi B, Fischer A, et al. Rituximab and intravenous immunoglobulin treatment of chronic antibody-mediated kidney allograft rejection. Transplantation 2009; 87:1837–1841.
86. Uckun FM. Regulation of human B-cell ontogeny. Blood 1990; 76:1908–1923.
87▪▪. Kamburova EG, Koenen HJ, Boon L, et al. In vitro effects of rituximab on the proliferation, activation and differentiation of human B cells. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:341–350.

This work shows in vitro that rituximab has little effect in the proliferation of memory B cells. This raises an explanation for the possible adverse effects observed in transplantation using rituximab.

88. Tyden G, Genberg H, Tollemar J, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, study of single-dose rituximab as induction in renal transplantation. Transplantation 2009; 87:1325–1329.
89. Clatworthy MR, Watson CJ, Plotnek G, et al. B-cell-depleting induction therapy and acute cellular rejection. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:2683–2685.
90. Trivedi HL, Terasaki PI, Feroz A, et al. Abrogation of anti-HLA antibodies via proteasome inhibition. Transplantation 2009; 87:1555–1561.
91. Walsh RC, Everly JJ, Brailey P, et al. Proteasome inhibitor-based primary therapy for antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection. Transplantation 2010; 89:277–284.
92▪. Walsh RC, Alloway RR, Girnita AL, Woodle ES. Proteasome inhibitor-based therapy for antibody-mediated rejection. Kidney Int 2012; 81:1067–1074.

This review summarizes the importance of bortezomib in the control of antibody-mediated rejection.

93. Obeng EA, Carlson LM, Gutman DM, et al. Proteasome inhibitors induce a terminal unfolded protein response in multiple myeloma cells. Blood 2006; 107:4907–4916.
94. Meister S, Schubert U, Neubert K, et al. Extensive immunoglobulin production sensitizes myeloma cells for proteasome inhibition. Cancer Res 2007; 67:1783–1792.
95. Everly MJ, Everly JJ, Susskind B, et al. Bortezomib provides effective therapy for antibody- and cell-mediated acute rejection. Transplantation 2008; 86:1754–1761.
96▪. Morrow WR, Frazier EA, Mahle WT, et al. Rapid reduction in donor-specific antihuman leukocyte antigen antibodies and reversal of antibody-mediated rejection with bortezomib in pediatric heart transplant patients. Transplantation 2012; 93:319–324.

This work demonstrates how bortezomib can reduce antibody-mediated rejection.

97. Hale G, Swirsky DM, Hayhoe FG, Waldmann H. Effects of monoclonal antilymphocyte antibodies in vivo in monkeys and humans. Mol Biol Med 1983; 1:321–334.
98. Hale G, Xia MQ, Tighe HP, et al. The CAMPATH-1 antigen (CDw52). Tissue Antigens 1990; 35:118–127.
99. Buggins AG, Mufti GJ, Salisbury J, et al. Peripheral blood but not tissue dendritic cells express CD52 and are depleted by treatment with alemtuzumab. Blood 2002; 100:1715–1720.
100. 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.
101. Calne R, Moffatt SD, Friend PJ, et al. Campath IH allows low-dose cyclosporine monotherapy in 31 cadaveric renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 1999; 68:1613–1616.
102▪▪. Hanaway MJ, Woodle ES, Mulgaonkar S, et al. Alemtuzumab induction in renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:1909–1919.

A big prospective study demonstrating the efficacy and benefits of the usage of alemtuzumab as induction therapy.

103▪▪. Heidt S, Hester J, Shankar S, et al. B cell repopulation after alemtuzumab induction-transient increase in transitional B cells and long-term dominance of naive B cells. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:1784–1792.

This study shows that alemtuzumab can increase the number of circulating Bregs in humans, raising the possibility to its use in future tolerance-inducing protocols.

104▪▪. Cherukuri A, Salama AD, Carter C, et al. An analysis of lymphocyte phenotype after steroid avoidance with either alemtuzumab or basiliximab induction in renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:919–931.

The authors of this study suggest that the use of alemtuzumab as induction therapy promote higher numbers of B cells including naïve, transitional and regulatory subsets. This reinforces the possible use of this drug in tolerance-inducing protocols.

105. Bloom D, Chang Z, Pauly K, et al. BAFF is increased in renal transplant patients following treatment with alemtuzumab. Am J Transplant 2009; 9:1835–1845.
106. Mackay F, Schneider P, Rennert P, Browning J. BAFF AND APRIL: a tutorial on B cell survival. Annu Rev Immunol 2003; 21:231–264.
107. Mackay F, Schneider P. Cracking the BAFF code. Nat Rev Immunol 2009; 9:491–502.
108. Mackay F, Browning JL. BAFF: a fundamental survival factor for B cells. Nat Rev Immunol 2002; 2:465–475.
109▪. LaMattina JC, Mezrich JD, Hofmann RM, et al. Alemtuzumab as compared to alternative contemporary induction regimens. Transpl Int 2012; 25:518–526.

This study highlights the development of antibody-mediated rejection after the use of alemtuzumab.

110. Belimumab: anti-BLyS monoclonal antibody; Benlysta; BmAb; LymphoStat-B. Drugs R D 2010; 10:55–65.
111▪▪. Parsons RF, Yu M, Vivek K, et al. Murine islet allograft tolerance upon blockade of the B-lymphocyte stimulator, BLyS/BAFF. Transplantation 2012; 93:676–685.

The authors exhibit that the blockade of Blys can induce allograft tolerance raising other B-cell-related mechanism in the regulation of allograft tolerance.

112. Battaglia M, Stabilini A, Migliavacca B, et al. Rapamycin promotes expansion of functional CD4+CD25+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells of both healthy subjects and type 1 diabetic patients. J Immunol 2006; 177:8338–8347.
113. Walters S, Webster KE, Sutherland A, et al. Increased CD4+Foxp3+ T cells in BAFF-transgenic mice suppress T cell effector responses. J Immunol 2009; 182:793–801.
114. Riewaldt J, Duber S, Boernert M, et al. Severe developmental B lymphopoietic defects in Foxp3-deficient mice are refractory to adoptive regulatory T cell therapy. Front Immunol 2012; 3:141.

alloantibodies; autoantibodies; B cells; regulatory B cells; reshaping the B-cell compartment; transplantation tolerance

© 2013 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.