Logo
J Inflamm Dis

Image Credit:J Inflamm Dis

Early Detection of Kidney Graft Dysfunction by FoxP3 and CD25 Transcripts

Author(s):
Bita ZareBita ZareBita Zare ORCID1, Zeinab KarimiZeinab KarimiZeinab Karimi ORCID2, Afsoon AfshariAfsoon AfshariAfsoon Afshari ORCID2, Jamshid RoozbehJamshid RoozbehJamshid Roozbeh ORCID2, Ramin YaghobiRamin YaghobiRamin Yaghobi ORCID3, Abbas Behzad- BehbahaniAbbas Behzad- BehbahaniAbbas Behzad- Behbahani ORCID4, Sahar JanfeshanSahar JanfeshanSahar Janfeshan ORCID2,*
1Department of Biology, Zarghan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zarghan, Iran
2Nephro-Urology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
3Shiraz Transplant Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
4Diagnostic Laboratory Sciences and Technology Research Center, School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Journal of Inflammatory Diseases:Vol. 29, issue 1; e158798
Published online:May 05, 2025
Article type:Research Article
Received:Dec 15, 2024
Accepted:Apr 13, 2025
How to Cite:Bita Zare, Zeinab Karimi, Afsoon Afshari, Jamshid Roozbeh, Ramin Yaghobi, et al. Early Detection of Kidney Graft Dysfunction by FoxP3 and CD25 Transcripts.J Inflamm Dis.2025;29(1):e158798.https://doi.org/10.69107/jid-158798.

Abstract

Background:

Kidney transplantation (KTx) is the most effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. Early detection of at-risk patients, before the need for biopsy, through monitoring the transcript or protein levels of certain immune factors is crucial for improving clinical outcomes.

Objectives:

This cross-sectional study, conducted between 2019 and 2020 at Abu Ali Sina Hospital, aimed to evaluate the expression levels of three critical Treg markers, including forkhead box P3 (FOXP3), CD25, and interleukin-2 (IL-2), to assess the immune tolerance induced by Tregs for the early detection of kidney graft dysfunction.

Methods:

The study enrolled 39 kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) who were categorized as stable graft recipients (SGR; n = 21) or non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR; n = 18) without any viral infection. A healthy control group (n = 15) was included. Expression levels of FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 were measured in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) collected during the first week post-transplantation using real-time PCR and analyzed via the Livak (2-ΔΔCt) method. The Mann-Whitney test assessed differences between SGR and non-SGR groups, while potential biases were minimized through careful participant selection, blinding during measurements, and consideration of measurement bias.

Results:

Expression levels of FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 were higher in KTRs compared to controls. Specifically, CD25 expression was significantly higher in the non-SGR group compared to the SGR group (P = 0.001), while FOXP3 showed a non-significant increase (P = 0.475). The IL-2 expression level exhibited a non-significant decrease (P = 0.374) in the non-SGR group compared to the SGR group.

Conclusions:

Our findings indicate that increased FOXP3 and CD25 expression levels in PBMCs imply a larger Treg population and may aid in the early detection of at-risk kidney graft recipients prior to biopsy. However, the findings are limited by the small sample size of recipients and the reliance on flow cytometry for detecting the Treg population and associated markers.

1. Background

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have limited treatment options, and kidney transplantation (KTx) is typically considered the final resort (1, 2). The recipient's immune response determines the success of KTx and the likelihood of post-transplantation complications, which is reduced by immunosuppressive therapy (1-5). Detecting and confirming kidney allograft complications is conventionally done through the invasive method of biopsy (6, 7). However, a new approach that measures immunological mediator expression in recipients' peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) early post-transplantation may help detect kidney graft dysfunction in the future. This method has the potential to decrease the need for biopsy, enhance the processes involved in immunosuppressive treatment, and improve graft survival.

Regulatory T-cells (Tregs) are a subset of T-cells with a CD4 + CD25 + forkhead box P3 (FOXP3) + phenotype, constituting approximately 5% to 10% of CD4 + T-cells. They naturally derive from the thymus and mediate self and peripheral tolerance. They suppress effector T-cell responses to establish allograft tolerance in recipients (8-10). The FOXP3, a significant hallmark of Tregs, is the essential component that converts non-Treg cells to Tregs and supports the Treg suppressive function via different mechanisms (11, 12). Interleukin-2 (IL-2) plays a critical role in supporting the function, maintaining the stability, and promoting the survival of CD4 + CD25 + FOXP3 + regulatory T-cells, which are vital for the proper functioning of the immune system (9). The activity of IL-2 is mediated via the high-affinity and heterotrimeric IL-2 receptor (IL2R) to exert its immunomodulatory functions. The IL-2R consists of IL-2Rα (CD25), IL-2Rβ (CD122), and IL-2Rγ (CD132) chain subunits (13). The high constitutive expression of CD25 is another hallmark of regulatory T-cells and sensitizes them to the low amount of IL-2 in the environment (11, 12). FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 are components of the JAK/STAT signaling pathway in Tregs. These regulatory cells can bind to secreted IL-2 through CD25 and activate the pathway, inducing FOXP3 expression and promoting immune tolerance (9, 11-14).

2. Objectives

The objective of this investigation is to assess the immune tolerance induced by Tregs for the early detection of kidney graft dysfunction. This is achieved through quantifying the expression levels of FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 early post-transplantation in PBMCs of kidney allograft recipients.

3. Methods

3.1. Patients

The population studied in this research consisted of 39 adults (aged 18 - 76 years) who had undergone KTx and received allografts from cadaver donors between 2019 and 2020 at Abu Ali Sina Hospital. In establishing the exclusion criteria, patients with a history of previous kidney transplants or those who underwent multi-organ transplants, such as kidney-pancreas transplants, were excluded to avoid confounding variables. Additionally, individuals unable to commit to the one-year follow-up period were also excluded, ensuring a more consistent assessment of post-transplantation outcomes.

Blood samples were collected from kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) during the first week after transplantation, and various tests were conducted over a period of six months. Recipients were categorized into two groups: Stable graft recipients (SGR) and non-SGR, based on a combination of laboratory tests [creatinine (Cr), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), proteinuria], clinical status in the first week, and biopsy results (based on Banff score) conducted one year post-KTx. The non-SGR group exhibited biopsy-proven complications, such as T-cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR), mixed rejection, acute tubular injury, glomerulitis, and renal failure. In contrast, recipients in the SGR group had well-functioning grafts and no biopsy history. The study population included 21 individuals in the SGR group and 18 individuals in the non-SGR group. Additionally, a healthy control group of 15 individuals was included. All included recipients tested negative for HCV, HBV, HIV, and COVID-19 prior to transplantation.

In adherence to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, the research was carried out and received approval from the Ethical Committee of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (IR.SUMS.REC.1399.1317).

3.2. Immunosuppressant Regimen

All patients enrolled in the study received the same immunosuppressive regimen during the first week post-KTx. As a potent induction therapy, they were treated with thymoglobulin or anti-thymocyte globulin (rabbit). The administration of thymoglobulin began prior to surgery and continued for 3 - 5 days post-KTx, with a total dose of 4 - 6 mg/dL/kg. The immunosuppressive maintenance regimen included an antimetabolite (mycophenolate mofetil or mycophenolic acid), a type of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) such as tacrolimus, and a corticosteroid (prednisolone).

Patients were given tacrolimus tablets at a dose of 2 mg every 12 hours. The total tacrolimus dose was measured daily, and the optimal range was 8 - 10 ng/mL. Patients were given mycophenolate mofetil tablets with a total dose of 1 g/day. Additionally, recipients received prednisolone with a dose of 1000 mg in the operating room, followed by a dose of 25 mg in the first week. It should be noted that none of the patients from either group received antibody induction therapy.

3.3. Biochemical Blood Test

The assessment of the recipient's clinical status necessitates the evaluation of various biochemical markers in the bloodstream, including Cr, BUN, uric acid, albumin (ALB), alanine transferase (ALT), aspartate transferase (AST), and alkaline phosphatase (ALP). To analyze the significance of these markers, measurements were conducted in both the SGR and non-stable graft recipient (non-SGR) groups at various time points, including pre-KTx, as well as 1, 3, 5, and 7 days post-KTx. The results are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.Demographic and Biochemical Characteristics of Recipients in Stable Graft Recipients and Non-stable Graft Recipient Groups a,b
Patients IndicesTotal Patients (n = 39)Allograft ToleranceP-Value
SGR (n = 21)Non-SGR (n = 18)
Recipient age (y); range (mean ± SD)20 - 68 (38.77 ± 17.58)20 - 68 (35.33 ± 16.43)20 - 68 (42.77 ± 18.48)-
Recipient gender; No. (%)-
Female8 (20.52)5 (23.81)3 (16.67)
Male31 (79.48)16 (76.19)15 (83.33)
Recipient blood group; %-
A+33.323.844.4
B+12.89.516.7
AB+2.64.80
O+48.757.138.9
O-2.64.80
The mean of Cr (mg/dL)
Cr05.85 ± 2.826.02 ± 3.015.57 ± 2.580.671
Cr15.63 ± 1.745.71 ± 1.875.53 ± 1.610.748
Cr33.68 ± 1.773.10 ± 1.424.36 ± 1.920.028
Cr52.78 ± 1.881.99 ± 1.023.71 ± 2.220.006
Cr72.36 ± 1.591.65 ± 0.693.20 ± 1.930.004
The mean of BUN (mg/dL)
BUN036.07 ± 14.3334.00 ± 13.8538.64 ± 14.920.331
BUN135.17 ± 11.3932.57 ± 11.4038.22 ± 10.910.123
BUN341.48 ± 13.5237.19 ± 11.8146.50 ± 13.980.033
BUN540.61 ± 20.1931.66 ± 13.8251.05 ± 21.730.003
BUN739.74 ± 18.4231.42 ± 11.9149.44 ± 20.170.003
The mean of uric acid (mg/dL)
Uric acid15.32 ± 1.465.26 ± 1.765.4 ± 1.000.827
Uric acid35.36 ± 1.964.65 ± 2.045.65 ± 1.910.291
Uric acid55.17 ± 2.014.56 ± 1.925.63 ± 2.000.168
Uric acid75.63 ± 2.345.13 ± 1.285.90 ± 2.750.376
The mean of ALB (g/dL)
ALB13.58 ± 0.43.64 ± .403.48 ± .390.321
ALB33.42 ± 0.463.36 ± .623.45 ± .390.773
ALB53.44 ± 0.413.60 ± .553.34 ± .280.296
ALB73.54 ± 0.363.65 ± .403.48 ± .330.412
The mean of AST (U/L)
AST124.26 ± 12.1827.20 ± 11.8718.75 ± 11.460.117
AST320.22 ± 11.1821.25 ± 3.2019.92 ± 12.670.729
AST525.40 ± 26.4727.50 ± 28.6124.00 ± 26.630.816
AST722.84 ± 17.6926.20 ± 15.7320.75 ± 19.540.593
The mean of ALT (U/L)
ALT131.50 ± 26.5829.46 ± 18.1035.28 ± 39.450.722
ALT325.61 ± 15.1429.66 ± 9.5522.58 ± 18.080.259
ALT571.40 ± 117.5254.80 ± 42.8579.70 ± 142.960.622
ALT745.57 ± 62.0166.71 ± 84.6424.42 ± 11.220.236
The mean of ALP (U/L)
ALP1224.36 ± 110.97234.78 ± 126.42206.12 ± 81.630.526
ALP3236 ± 186.53209.50 ± 54.07243.06 ± 209.420.586
ALP5182.61 ± 72.07197.00 ± 100.34175.41 ± 57.280.641
ALP7189.40 ± 97.11228.66 ± 126.25163.22 ± 67.930.283

Demographic and Biochemical Characteristics of Recipients in Stable Graft Recipients and Non-stable Graft Recipient Groups a,b

3.4. RNA Extraction and cDNA Synthesis

Blood samples from recipients and controls were collected and treated with EDTA, mixed with Ficoll, and centrifuged to extract the white layer (buffy coat). The buffy coat was then washed with ammonium chloride and stored in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at -80°C. Total RNA was extracted from each recipient's buffy coat using Trizol reagent (YTzol, Tehran, Iran), and the concentration and purity of the RNA were determined using NanoDrop spectrophotometry (Thermo Scientific, USA) at 260/280 nm. The extracted RNA was then converted to cDNA using the AddScript cDNA synthesis kit (addbio, Korea) and stored at -20°C until it was used for real-time PCR.

3.5. Real-Time PCR

The fold changes (FCs) of FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 genes were evaluated through SYBR Green real-time PCR. The reactions were duplicated using the optical 96-well plate applied biosystems (Foster City, California, USA) step one plus system. Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) was used as the internal control gene to normalize the data. The PCR amplification mix consisted of a PCR master mix (including hot-start Taq DNA polymerase, SYBR green I dye, dNTPs mixture, protein stabilizers, and enhancers), forward and reverse primers (10 pmol), and cDNA. All real-time PCR tests were repeated three times to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the results. The reverse and forward primer sequences and real-time PCR conditions are detailed in Table 2.

Table 2.Conditions for Real-Time PCR Reaction of Forkhead Box P3, Interleukin-2, CD25, and Glyceraldehyde 3-Phosphate Dehydrogenase Transcripts
NCBI Reference Sequence mRNA (NM) and PrimersPrimer Sequences (5' - 3')PCR Product Length (bp)Thermocycling ProgramPCR Mix
FOXP3 (001114377.2)12395°C/10 min, 40 cycles at 95°C/15 sec, 60°C/35 secSYBR green master mix (10 μL; 2x concentration), primers: 0.8 μL/10 p mole, nuclease-free deps water: 6.4 µL, template cDNA: 2µL
ForwardCCC AGA GTT CCT CCA CAA CA
ReverseTCA TTG AGT GTC CGC TGC TT
IL-2 (000586.4)105
ForwardAAC TCA CCA GGA TGC TCA CA
ReverseGCA CTT CCT CCA GAG GTT TGA
CD25 (001308242.2)128
ForwardAAT GCA AGA GAG GTT TCC GC
ReverseTTT CGT TGT GTT CCG AGT GG
GAPDH (001256799.3)119
ForwardGGA CTC ATG ACC ACA GTC CA
ReverseCCA GTA GAG GCA GGG ATG AT

Conditions for Real-Time PCR Reaction of Forkhead Box P3, Interleukin-2, CD25, and Glyceraldehyde 3-Phosphate Dehydrogenase Transcripts

3.6. Statistical Analysis

Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 22 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). To calculate the expression level of each studied gene, the Livak (2-ΔΔCt) method was used. Nonparametric tests, such as the Mann-Whitney test, were performed to analyze the difference in expression levels between the SGR and non-SGR groups. The independent samples t-test was used to compare the Cr and BUN levels between these groups. For the intragroup comparison of Cr and BUN levels on different days, the paired samples t-test was used. A statistically significant result was considered when P < 0.05. The area under the curve (AUC) value of fold change for studied genes was determined for both the SGR and non-SGR groups, and the specificity and sensitivity of each were reported.

4. Results

4.1. Demographic and Biochemical Characteristics of Recipients

The mean age of all recipients was 38.77 ± 17.58 years, with 35.33 ± 16.43 years for the SGR group and 42.77 ± 18.48 years for the non-SGR group. Most recipients were male (79.48%), with a mean age of 38.74 years. The most common blood group among SGR recipients was O+ (57.1%), while the most abundant blood group in the non-SGR group was A+ (44.4%), as shown in Table 1.

4.2. The Creatinine Levels in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Trends and Comparisons

In this study, Cr levels in the blood of KTRs were measured pre-transplantation, as well as on the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th days post-transplantation. The results showed a decreasing trend in the mean Cr levels for both the SGR and non-SGR groups throughout the first week post-KTx. However, Cr levels in the SGR group were significantly lower compared to the non-SGR group on the 3rd (SGR: 3.10 ± 1.42, non-SGR: 4.36 ± 1.92, P = 0.028), 5th (SGR: 1.99 ± 1.02, non-SGR: 3.71 ± 2.22, P = 0.006), and 7th (SGR: 1.65 ± 0.69, non-SGR: 3.20 ± 1.93, P = 0.004) days post-KTx (Figure 1A).

A, Comparison of creatinine (Cr) and B, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels between stable graft recipients (SGR) and non-SGR recipients from pre-kidney transplantation (KTx) to 7 days post-KTx
Figure 1.

A, Comparison of creatinine (Cr) and B, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels between stable graft recipients (SGR) and non-SGR recipients from pre-kidney transplantation (KTx) to 7 days post-KTx

Additionally, BUN levels were assessed in all KTx patients before and after transplantation at multiple time points (1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th days post-KTx). The mean BUN levels showed a declining trend in the SGR group but an increasing trend in the non-SGR group from pre-KTx to the first week post-KTx. Comparisons of BUN levels between the SGR and non-SGR groups revealed significantly lower BUN levels in the SGR group on the 3rd (SGR: 37.19 ± 11.81, non-SGR: 46.50 ± 13.98, P = 0.03), 5th (SGR: 31.66 ± 13.82, non-SGR: 51.05 ± 21.73, P = 0.003), and 7th (SGR: 31.42 ± 11.91, non-SGR: 49.44 ± 20.17, P = 0.003) days post-KTx (Figure 1B).

Analysis of non-SGR KTRs revealed a positive correlation between Cr and BUN levels at two different time points post-KTx. On the 3rd day post-KTx, the correlation was observed to be R = 0.39, P = 0.009, while on the 7th day post-KTx, the correlation strengthened, yielding R = 0.65 and P = 0.0004 (Figure 2A and B).

Correlation between creatinine (Cr) and BUN levels in the non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR) group. A, on the 3rd day post-kidney transplantation (KTx) (R = 0.39, P = 0.009); B, on the 7th day post-KTx (R = 0.65, P = 0.0004)
Figure 2.

Correlation between creatinine (Cr) and BUN levels in the non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR) group. A, on the 3rd day post-kidney transplantation (KTx) (R = 0.39, P = 0.009); B, on the 7th day post-KTx (R = 0.65, P = 0.0004)

4.3. Outcomes of Non-stable Kidney Graft Recipients

Out of the 18 recipients in the non-SGR group, 14 (77.77%) underwent biopsy within a year following the transplant. The biopsy was conducted based on the results of serologic tests and the clinical status of the recipients. The biopsy results showed that 8 of 18 recipients (44.44%) in the non-SGR group experienced rejection of their kidney grafts. Of these, 7 (38.88%) were primarily affected by TCMR, with grades IA (1), IIA (1), IB (4), and IIB (1), and 1 (5.55%) was affected by ABMR. Five of the 8 rejected recipients (27.77%) showed signs of mixed rejection in their biopsy results. Acute tubular injury, ranging from mild to severe, was detected in 13 of 18 recipients (72.22%). One recipient's kidney graft failed, leading to hemodialysis and nephrectomy. Out of the 18 recipients in the non-SGR group, 4 (22.22%) did not undergo biopsy in the year after the transplant, but their kidney complications were still confirmed through laboratory tests and clinical correlation.

4.4. Expression Levels of Forkhead Box P3, CD25, and Interleukin-2 in Kidney Transplant Recipients

The results showed that all studied genes were up-regulated in all KTRs compared to the healthy control group. The data indicated a non-significant increase in FOXP3 expression (P = 0.475) and a significant increase in CD25 expression (P = 0.001) in the non-SGR group compared to the SGR group (Figure 3A and B). To further analyze CD25 expression, the non-SGR group was divided into rejected and non-rejected subgroups. CD25 expression level increased significantly in both subgroups (rejected, P = 0.03; non-rejected, P = 0.01) compared to the SGR group (Figure 4). Although the non-rejected subgroup had a higher CD25 expression level than the rejected subgroup, the difference was not statistically significant. The IL-2 expression level showed a non-significant decrease (P = 0.374) in the non-SGR group compared to the SGR group (Figure 3C).

Comparison of forkhead box P3 (FOXP3), CD25, and interleukin-2 (IL-2) fold changes (FCs) between non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR) and SGR recipients with significance levels (P) of ≥ 0.05, 0.001, and ≥ 0.05, respectively
Figure 3.

Comparison of forkhead box P3 (FOXP3), CD25, and interleukin-2 (IL-2) fold changes (FCs) between non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR) and SGR recipients with significance levels (P) of ≥ 0.05, 0.001, and ≥ 0.05, respectively

Comparison of CD25 fold change between stable graft recipients (SGR) group, rejected (P = 0.03), and non-rejected (P = 0.01) subgroups
Figure 4.

Comparison of CD25 fold change between stable graft recipients (SGR) group, rejected (P = 0.03), and non-rejected (P = 0.01) subgroups

The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of the Treg markers is a powerful tool for evaluating the accuracy of a diagnostic test. In the case of non-SGR and SGR patients, the ability of FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 to differentiate between the two groups was determined by the AUC value (Figure 5). In addition to the AUC value, other essential parameters, such as sensitivity, specificity, cut-off value, and P-value, were also calculated and summarized in Table 3. Out of the three markers, CD25 was found to have the highest AUC (0.8), sensitivity (81.25%), and specificity (94.12%) for discriminating between non-SGR and SGR patients, making it a potentially valuable tool for future studies in this field.

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of Treg markers fold change for non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR) versus SGR group: A, forkhead box P3 (FOXP3) with 50% sensitivity and 60% specificity; B, CD25 with 81.25% sensitivity and 94.12% specificity; C, interleukin-2 (IL-2) with 66.67% sensitivity and 58.33% specificity
Figure 5.

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of Treg markers fold change for non-stable graft recipients (non-SGR) versus SGR group: A, forkhead box P3 (FOXP3) with 50% sensitivity and 60% specificity; B, CD25 with 81.25% sensitivity and 94.12% specificity; C, interleukin-2 (IL-2) with 66.67% sensitivity and 58.33% specificity

Table 3.Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Parameters for Forkhead Box P3, CD25, and Interleukin-2 Fold Change Comparison in Non-stable Graft Recipients vs Stable Graft Recipients Groups
Treg MarkersAUCStandard Error95% CIP-ValueSensitivity (95% CI)SpecificityCut-off
FOXP30.590.120.34 - 0.840.4550 (21.52 - 78.48)60 (35.75 - 80.18)> 1.235
CD250.800.090.63 - 0.980.00281.25 (56.99 - 93.41)94.12 (73.02 - 99.7)> 184.7
IL-20.590.100.38 - 0.810.3666.67 (43.75 - 83.72)58.33 (31.95 - 80.67)< 6.315

Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Parameters for Forkhead Box P3, CD25, and Interleukin-2 Fold Change Comparison in Non-stable Graft Recipients vs Stable Graft Recipients Groups

5. Discussion

Early post-transplant immune monitoring is an imperative aspect of KTx as it facilitates the detection of high-risk patients for rejection or other graft complications (3, 15-17). Our results showed higher expression levels of FOXP3 in the non-SGR group, which is consistent with some previous research. Studies have shown higher expression levels of FOXP3 in PBMCs and urine cells in acute rejected KTRs, suggesting its effectiveness in diagnosing rejection episodes and correlating with rejection severity (1, 14). Unlike our results, a prospective study in PBMCs of KTRs showed an up-regulation of the FOXP3 gene in recipients without acute rejection compared to those with acute rejection (18). These discrepancies highlight the need for further research to fully understand the role of FOXP3 in KTx.

In the current study, the non-SGR group showed a lower expression level of IL-2, although previous research by Karahan et al. reported up-regulation of IL-2 leading to rejection in some KTRs (19). The higher expression level of CD25 in our research, in the non-SGR group compared to the SGR group, is confirmed by a study that reported higher expression levels of FOXP3 and CD25 in the urinary cells of kidney recipients with acute rejection compared to those with chronic allograft nephropathy and stable grafts (20).

The immunosuppressive regimen (induction therapy and maintenance treatment) is an influential factor in modifying the expression pattern of immune genes such as FOXP3, CD25, and IL-2 (21-23). For instance, thymoglobulin is a purified polyclonal immunoglobulin used as induction therapy to prevent and treat acute rejection post-KTx (22). In vitro studies showed this immunosuppressive drug promoted immune tolerance and Treg proliferation in PBMC cultures by converting CD4 + CD25- into CD4 + CD25 + T-cells and up-regulating FOXP3 and Th2 cytokines [glucocorticoid-induced TNF receptor (GITR), cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4)] (22-24). Another study clarified that thymoglobulin pre-treatment can influence immunosuppression and transplant tolerance by increasing the expression of some immune genes such as CTLA-4, OX40, FOXP3, CD25, IFN-γ, IL-10, and IL-2 in CD4 + cells (25).

Calcineurin inhibitors, including cyclosporine and tacrolimus, are maintenance immunosuppressive drugs received by KTRs. The CNIs actively interfere with T-cell activation and function, including the function of Tregs (26). Calcineurin activates the IL-2 gene transcription by dephosphorylating the nuclear factor of activated T-cells (NFAT) and inducing its translocation into the nucleus. The CNIs bind to calcineurin to block NFAT translocation and T effector function, which leads to a reduction in IL-2 transcription (27-29). However, one major side effect of CNIs is decreased in Treg frequency and depletion of immune tolerance in transplanted patients. This may be due to Tregs' reliance on IL-2 and nuclear NFAT for their function, survival, and FOXP3 expression (21, 23, 30).

Given thymoglobulin's role in promoting Treg proliferation and supporting transplant tolerance, the elevated expression levels of FOXP3 and the CD25 receptor as Treg markers observed in this study may be attributable to this effect. Additionally, thymoglobulin reduces the effector T-cell population (22), the main source of IL-2 (13), which may lead to lower IL-2 expression. However, the effect of thymoglobulin on IL-2 expression is complex.It requires further research, as previous studies have shown results with up-regulation of IL-2 in CD4 + T-cells under the influence of thymoglobulin (19, 22). Additionally, the use of CNIs leads to a reduction of IL-2 expression in T-cell lymphocytes (28, 29) by reducing the Treg population size and depleting the immune tolerance responses (21, 23, 30). These changes might result in a reduction in the expression levels of FOXP3 and CD25 receptors.

Our research suggests that higher levels of FOXP3 and CD25 expression in the non-SGR group may be due to a temporary increase in Tregs induced by thymoglobulin, which has a greater impact on Treg proliferation than CNIs. The lower expression of IL-2 in the non-SGR group may be due to the inhibitory effect of CNIs on IL-2 transcription and thymoglobulin's role in depleting the T effector cells. The high CD25 expression compensated for the low IL-2 level, improving FOXP3 signaling in Tregs, enhancing their function, and improving immune tolerance in non-SGR recipients.

Our study was constrained by the number of recipients and the use of flow cytometry to detect the Treg population and markers.

Consequently, the increased suppressive function of Tregs in the first week post-KTx is indicated by higher levels of FOXP3 and CD25 expression in PBMCs of non-SGR compared to SGR groups of KTRs. Therefore, these factors may have the potential for early detection of kidney graft dysfunction before biopsy.

Footnotes

References

  • 1.
    Barabadi M, Shahbaz SK, Foroughi F, Hosseinzadeh M, Nafar M, Yekaninejad MS, et al. High Expression of FOXP3 mRNA in Blood and Urine as a Predictive Marker in Kidney Transplantation. Prog Transplant. 2018;28(2):134-41. [PubMed ID: 29798728]. https://doi.org/10.1177/1526924818765812.
  • 2.
    Pakfetrat M, Malekmakan L, Jafari N, Sayadi M. Survival Rate of Renal Transplant and Factors Affecting Renal Transplant Failure. Exp Clin Transplant. 2022;20(3):265-72. [PubMed ID: 35037612]. https://doi.org/10.6002/ect.2021.0430.
  • 3.
    Eikmans M, Gielis EM, Ledeganck KJ, Yang J, Abramowicz D, Claas FFJ. Non-invasive Biomarkers of Acute Rejection in Kidney Transplantation: Novel Targets and Strategies. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:358. [PubMed ID: 30671435]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6331461]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2018.00358.
  • 4.
    Roozbeh J, Malekmakan L, Monavarian M, Daneshian A, Karimi Z. Survival of Kidney Retransplant Compared With First Kidney Transplant: A Report From Southern Iran. Exp Clin Transplant. 2018;16(4):386-90. [PubMed ID: 27855590]. https://doi.org/10.6002/ect.2016.0130.
  • 5.
    Yaghobi R, Afshari A, Roozbeh J. Host and viral RNA dysregulation during BK polyomavirus infection in kidney transplant recipients. Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2023;14(4). e1769. [PubMed ID: 36470265]. https://doi.org/10.1002/wrna.1769.
  • 6.
    Roufosse C, Simmonds N, Clahsen-van Groningen M, Haas M, Henriksen KJ, Horsfield C, et al. A 2018 Reference Guide to the Banff Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology. Transplantation. 2018;102(11):1795-814. [PubMed ID: 30028786]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7597974]. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000002366.
  • 7.
    Jeong HJ. Diagnosis of renal transplant rejection: Banff classification and beyond. Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2020;39(1):17-31. [PubMed ID: 32164120]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7105630]. https://doi.org/10.23876/j.krcp.20.003.
  • 8.
    Krajewska M, Koscielska-Kasprzak K, Kaminska D, Zabinska M, Myszka-Kozlowska M, Gomulkiewicz A, et al. Kidney Transplant Outcome Is Associated with Regulatory T Cell Population and Gene Expression Early after Transplantation. J Immunol Res. 2019;2019:7452019. [PubMed ID: 30729139]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6341262]. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7452019.
  • 9.
    Li Y, Liu X, Wang W, Wang S, Zhang J, Jiang S, et al. Low-dose IL-2 expands CD4(+) regulatory T cells with a suppressive function in vitro via the STAT5-dependent pathway in patients with chronic kidney diseases. Ren Fail. 2018;40(1):280-8. [PubMed ID: 29619880]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6014482]. https://doi.org/10.1080/0886022X.2018.1456462.
  • 10.
    Mederacke YS, Vondran FW, Kollrich S, Schulde E, Schmitt R, Manns MP, et al. Transient increase of activated regulatory T cells early after kidney transplantation. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):1021. [PubMed ID: 30705299]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6355855]. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-37218-x.
  • 11.
    Attias M, Al-Aubodah T, Piccirillo CA. Mechanisms of human FoxP3(+) T(reg) cell development and function in health and disease. Clin Exp Immunol. 2019;197(1):36-51. [PubMed ID: 30864147]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6591147]. https://doi.org/10.1111/cei.13290.
  • 12.
    Cortes-Hernandez A, Alvarez-Salazar E, Arteaga-Cruz S, Alberu-Gomez J, Soldevila G. Ex vivo expansion of regulatory T cells from long-term Belatacept-treated kidney transplant patients restores their phenotype and suppressive function but not their FOXP3 TSDR demethylation status. Cell Immunol. 2020;348:104044. [PubMed ID: 32005344]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellimm.2020.104044.
  • 13.
    Ross SH, Cantrell DA. Signaling and Function of Interleukin-2 in T Lymphocytes. Annu Rev Immunol. 2018;36:411-33. [PubMed ID: 29677473]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6472684]. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-immunol-042617-053352.
  • 14.
    Abd Elaziz MM, Bakry S, M. Abd ElAal AE, Rashed L, Hesham D. Validation of Urinary PD-1 and FOXP3 mRNA in a Cohort of Egyptian Renal Allograft Recipients. Ann Transplant. 2016;21:17-24. [PubMed ID: 26753722]. https://doi.org/10.12659/aot.895226.
  • 15.
    Safa K, Magee CN, Azzi J. A critical review of biomarkers in kidney transplantation. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2017;26(6):509-15. [PubMed ID: 28857783]. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNH.0000000000000361.
  • 16.
    Townamchai N, Eiam-Ong S. Biomarkers in kidney transplantation: From bench to bedside. World J Nephrol. 2015;4(5):487-91. [PubMed ID: 26558185]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC4635368]. https://doi.org/10.5527/wjn.v4.i5.487.
  • 17.
    Mischak H, Delles C, Vlahou A, Vanholder R. Proteomic biomarkers in kidney disease: issues in development and implementation. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2015;11(4):221-32. [PubMed ID: 25643662]. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2014.247.
  • 18.
    Viklicky O, Krystufkova E, Brabcova I, Sekerkova A, Wohlfahrt P, Hribova P, et al. B-cell-related biomarkers of tolerance are up-regulated in rejection-free kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation. 2013;95(1):148-54. [PubMed ID: 23222918]. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0b013e3182789a24.
  • 19.
    Karahan HI, Soyoz M, Pehlivan M, Tatar E, Uslu A, Cerci Gurbuz B, et al. Assessment of Interleukin 2 Cytokine Expression Levels After Renal Transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2019;51(4):1074-7. [PubMed ID: 31101173]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2019.02.008.
  • 20.
    Muthukumar T, Dadhania D, Ding R, Snopkowski C, Naqvi R, Lee JB, et al. Messenger RNA for FOXP3 in the urine of renal-allograft recipients. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(22):2342-51. [PubMed ID: 16319383]. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa051907.
  • 21.
    Whitehouse G, Gray E, Mastoridis S, Merritt E, Kodela E, Yang JHM, et al. IL-2 therapy restores regulatory T-cell dysfunction induced by calcineurin inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(27):7083-8. [PubMed ID: 28584086]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC5502598]. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1620835114.
  • 22.
    Thiyagarajan UM, Ponnuswamy A, Bagul A. Thymoglobulin and its use in renal transplantation: A review. Am J Nephrol. 2013;37(6):586-601. [PubMed ID: 23774740]. https://doi.org/10.1159/000351643.
  • 23.
    Li Y, Shi Y, Huang Z, Bai Y, Niu Q, Cai B, et al. CNI induced Th17/Treg imbalance and susceptibility to renal dysfunction in renal transplantation. Int Immunopharmacol. 2011;11(12):2033-8. [PubMed ID: 21911083]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intimp.2011.08.015.
  • 24.
    Lopez M, Clarkson MR, Albin M, Sayegh MH, Najafian N. A novel mechanism of action for anti-thymocyte globulin: Induction of CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;17(10):2844-53. [PubMed ID: 16914538]. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2006050422.
  • 25.
    Liu Z, Fang Y, Wang X, Wang P, Yun P, Xu H. Upregulation of molecules associated with T-regulatory function by thymoglobulin pretreatment of human CD4+ cells. Transplantation. 2008;86(10):1419-26. [PubMed ID: 19034013]. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0b013e318187c2e5.
  • 26.
    van Kooten C. Counteracting dysfunction of regulatory T cells in organ transplantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114(27):6883-4. [PubMed ID: 28642347]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC5502658]. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708493114.
  • 27.
    Sharif A, Shabir S, Chand S, Cockwell P, Ball S, Borrows R. Meta-analysis of calcineurin-inhibitor-sparing regimens in kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;22(11):2107-18. [PubMed ID: 21949096]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC3280000]. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2010111160.
  • 28.
    Bremer S, Vethe NT, Bergan S. Monitoring calcineurin inhibitors response based on NFAT-regulated gene expression. In: Bremer S, Vethe NT, Bergan S, editors. Personalized Immunosuppression in Transplantation. Netherlands: Elsevier; 2016. p. 259-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-800885-0.00011-4.
  • 29.
    Morris P, Knechtle SJ. Kidney transplantation: Principles and practice. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2008.
  • 30.
    Lee SK, Park MJ, Jhun JY, Beak JA, Choi JW, Rye JY, et al. Combination Treatment With Metformin and Tacrolimus Improves Systemic Immune Cellular Homeostasis by Modulating Treg and Th17 Imbalance. Front Immunol. 2020;11:581728. [PubMed ID: 33488583]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7821164]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.581728.
comments

Leave a comment here


Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Purchasing Reprints

  • Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here (   https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.
Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles