Skip to content

Add your earlier progress to your account?

From before you signed in, this browser has:

Which plan do you want to keep?

You answered the plan questions before signing in. These answers differ from the plan saved on your account.

SettingSaved planNew answers

Study progress is waiting to be saved

Transplantation and Tumor Immunology

About 13 min · 7 sections · 3 self-checks

On this page

The histocompatibility laboratory receives transplant work as typing specimens, antibody screens, crossmatch requests, and chimerism specimens. A transplanted allograft expresses HLA and other antigens that can activate recipient lymphocytes and antibodies. A tumor arises from self tissue, so malignant cells become immune targets through new, abnormally expressed, or infection-derived antigens. In both settings, the laboratory measures the antigens, antibodies, cells, and molecular markers involved in immune recognition.

The histocompatibility barrier

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) proteins present peptides to T lymphocytes. Class I molecules, encoded by HLA-A, HLA-B, and HLA-C, pair with β2-microglobulin and appear on nearly all nucleated cells. They present peptides to CD8-positive T cells. Class II molecules, encoded by HLA-DR, HLA-DQ, and HLA-DP, are expressed mainly by dendritic cells, monocytes and macrophages, and B lymphocytes. They present peptides to CD4-positive T cells. Inflammatory signals can induce class II expression in other cells.1

The HLA genes lie close together on chromosome 6 and are usually inherited as a haplotype. A child receives one haplotype from each parent. Ignoring recombination, any two full siblings therefore have about a 25% chance of sharing both haplotypes, a 50% chance of sharing one, and a 25% chance of sharing neither. HLA is one of the most polymorphic regions in the human genome, so unrelated donor-recipient pairs commonly differ at several loci.1,2

HLA haplotype inheritanceHLA haplotype inheritanceEach child inherits one haplotype from each parent.Parent 1 haplotypesabParent 2haplotypescda + cReference siblingBoth sharedb + cOne shareda + dOne sharedb + dNeither sharedFull siblings: 25% both • 50% one • 25% neitherSimplified inheritance without recombination.Each letter names a haplotype with multiple HLA loci.Compatibility requires more than inheritanceMolecular HLA typingDefine donor and recipient alleles.HLA antibody assessmentAssess donor-specific antibodies and clinical history.Crossmatch and program reviewApply the transplant program's organ-specific criteria.
Sibling HLA-haplotype probabilities followed by the compatibility tests used for donor selection.

HLA allele names record increasing sequence detail. In HLA-DRB1*13:01:01:02, the first field is the allele group, the second distinguishes the encoded HLA protein, the third records a synonymous coding difference, and the fourth records a noncoding difference. An expression suffix records how the allele is expressed. The suffix N, as in HLA-A*24:09N, identifies a null allele whose product is unexpressed. The w in an antigen name such as HLA-Cw7 distinguishes the HLA-C antigen from complement components. Current allele names use HLA-C without w.2

Other antigen systems also affect compatibility. Minor histocompatibility antigens are polymorphic non-HLA peptides presented by HLA molecules and can sustain graft-versus-host and graft-versus-leukemia responses after an HLA-matched hematopoietic transplant. A and B blood group antigens on vascular endothelium can bind preformed anti-A or anti-B and cause rapid vascular injury. Stress-inducible MICA is a polymorphic, class I-related molecule that can activate natural killer (NK) cells, CD8-positive T cells, and γδ T cells through the activating receptor NKG2D that each expresses. Killer-cell immunoglobulin-like receptor interactions with HLA shape NK-cell alloreactivity in selected hematopoietic transplant platforms. The effect of these NK-cell interactions depends on the donor, recipient, and transplant protocol.1,3

An autograft is tissue transferred within one person. A syngeneic graft is transferred between genetically identical people, an allograft between genetically different people of the same species, and a xenograft between species. Histocompatibility laboratories focus mainly on allografts. Detailed graft consequences, cellular-therapy processing, and transfusion support are covered in Transplantation Immunology and Laboratory Support.

Allorecognition and graft injury

Recipient T cells can encounter donor HLA through three routes.4

Route Antigen-presenting cell What the recipient T cell recognizes Main significance
Direct Donor Intact donor HLA-peptide complex Strong early response to donor cells carried in the graft
Indirect Recipient Donor-derived peptide presented by recipient HLA Supports alloantibody production and chronic graft injury
Semi-direct Recipient Intact donor HLA-peptide complex acquired from a donor cell Extends direct-type recognition through recipient antigen-presenting cells

The mixed lymphocyte reaction is the historical laboratory model of direct allorecognition. Experimental systems can show alloreactive precursor frequencies of 1% to 10%. Conventional mixed lymphocyte reactions are slow, difficult to standardize, and weak predictors of clinical compatibility. Molecular HLA typing and antibody-based compatibility testing provide more specific donor assessment for current clinical practice. Direct, indirect, and semi-direct recognition can lead to CD8-mediated cytotoxicity, cytokine-driven inflammation, alloantibody formation, complement activation, and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. Their relative contributions vary with the graft, timing, donor-recipient pair, and immunosuppression.3,4

Injury pattern Typical setting Principal immune finding
Hyperacute rejection Solid organ, minutes to hours after reperfusion Preformed anti-ABO or donor-specific HLA antibody activates complement and coagulation in graft vessels
Acute T-cell-mediated rejection Solid organ, commonly days to months Recipient T cells and macrophages injure donor cells and tissue
Antibody-mediated rejection Solid organ, early or late Donor-specific antibody is interpreted with organ-specific evidence of tissue injury and antibody interaction with endothelium
Chronic graft injury Solid organ, months to years Progressive vascular and interstitial injury has immune and nonimmune contributors; chronic active antibody-mediated rejection follows organ-specific criteria

1,3,5

Accelerated rejection is a historical label for early injury in a sensitized recipient. Current organ-specific criteria classify the cellular, antibody, and tissue findings that produce this early injury. Hyperacute rejection has become uncommon because of ABO matching, HLA antibody screening, and pretransplant crossmatching.1,3

C4d deposition can support antibody-mediated rejection in selected organs and phenotypes. In kidney allografts, the Banff criteria (the international allograft biopsy classification) recognize C4d-positive and C4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection. Other organs use their own criteria. Tissue findings, donor-specific antibody, molecular evidence where validated, and graft function are interpreted together. 6

In graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), mature donor T lymphocytes attack recipient tissue after an allogeneic hematopoietic transplant. Skin, gastrointestinal tract, and liver are common targets. The same donor immune response can attack residual malignant cells and produce a graft-versus-leukemia effect. T-cell depletion can reduce GVHD, with transplant-specific effects on graft failure, infection, relapse, and graft-versus-leukemia activity. NIH categories use clinical phenotype: classic acute, late acute, classic chronic, and overlap chronic GVHD. Classic chronic and overlap chronic GVHD require chronic features. Acute features can occur before or after day 100. 7

Transplant immunosuppression may combine corticosteroids, antimetabolites, calcineurin inhibitors, mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors, and lymphocyte-directed antibody agents. These drugs can cause cytopenias, kidney or liver injury, metabolic changes, and increased susceptibility to infection. Tacrolimus, cyclosporine, sirolimus, and everolimus commonly require therapeutic drug monitoring. Target ranges depend on the specimen, method, transplant protocol, time since transplant, and interacting drugs. 1,3

HLA typing

The required typing resolution depends on the transplant. Current National Marrow Donor Program guidance begins an allogeneic hematopoietic donor search with high-resolution patient typing at HLA-A, HLA-B, HLA-C, HLA-DRB1, HLA-DQB1, and HLA-DPB1, together with HLA antibody testing and family typing. Solid-organ programs apply organ-specific locus, antibody, and allocation requirements. 8

Method Test principle Useful feature Important limit
Complement-dependent cytotoxicity serologic typing HLA-specific antibody binds viable lymphocytes; added complement kills reactive cells, and a vital dye identifies cell death Provides an antigen-level phenotype and demonstrates the historical basis of HLA typing Requires viable separated cells and well-characterized antibody reagents; resolution is limited
PCR with sequence-specific primers (PCR-SSP) Amplification occurs when a primer pair matches the target HLA sequence Rapid targeted typing from extracted DNA Many parallel reactions may be required, and the result resolves only the alleles covered by the primer panel
PCR with sequence-specific oligonucleotide probes (PCR-SSO or PCR-SSOP) Amplified HLA DNA hybridizes to a panel of sequence-specific probes Tests many allele groups in a standardized array or bead format Probe patterns can leave ambiguous allele combinations
Sanger sequence-based typing Amplified HLA regions are sequenced by the Sanger method Directly reads the covered nucleotide sequence Phase and unsequenced regions can leave ambiguity
Next-generation sequencing Many amplified HLA regions or whole genes are sequenced in parallel Can provide high-resolution, phased typing across long regions Coverage, phasing, analysis software, and the reference database determine the reported resolution

3,9

In complement-dependent cytotoxicity serologic typing, T and B cells can be used to detect class I antigens. Purified B cells are used for class II because resting T cells lack class II expression. Panels need multiple antisera to distinguish private epitopes found on one antigen from public epitopes shared by several antigens. Grade the full cell-death pattern under the laboratory's validated scoring rules, because historical numeric scales remain method-specific.

Every method requires validated controls, current sequence references, resolution rules, and a documented approach to ambiguous or novel results. The IPD-IMGT/HLA Database supplies the official sequences assigned by the WHO Nomenclature Committee.2,9

HLA antibody assessment and crossmatching

Pregnancy, transfusion, and transplantation can stimulate HLA alloantibodies. Testing addresses four related questions:

  1. Screening determines whether any HLA antibody is detectable.
  2. Identification establishes which HLA antigens or shared epitopes react.
  3. Donor specificity determines whether antibody is directed against HLA carried by a proposed donor.
  4. Cell binding tests whether patient antibody binds donor lymphocytes in a physical crossmatch.

Historical panel-reactive antibody testing used complement-dependent cytotoxicity against a cell panel. The percentage of panel cells killed was reported as percent panel-reactive antibody, or %PRA. Adding anti-human globulin could increase detection of weakly complement-fixing IgG. Current solid-phase assays bind purified HLA molecules to beads. Screening beads detect broad reactivity, phenotype beads narrow the pattern, and single-antigen beads assign specificities. Single-antigen bead signal is semiquantitative and method-dependent. Denatured antigen, shared epitopes, antigen density, complement interference, serum inhibitors, and platform settings can make the fluorescence signal a poor indicator of clinical risk. Interpret the pattern with controls, dilution or pretreatment studies when indicated, the patient's sensitization history, and donor HLA.10

The US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) calculated panel-reactive antibody (cPRA) estimates the percentage of deceased donors expected to express one or more antigens that a transplant program has entered as unacceptable for a candidate. The calculation uses the candidate's unacceptable antigens and the OPTN population-frequency model, which accounts for population relationships among HLA phenotypes that multiplying independent antigen frequencies would miss. A higher value indicates a smaller expected compatible donor pool. The histocompatibility laboratory reports cPRA with the underlying antibody and crossmatch findings. The transplant program integrates those results with donor HLA and its organ-specific protocol.11

In a complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch, recipient serum is incubated with donor T and B lymphocytes, followed by complement and a viability dye. Cell death indicates complement-fixing antibody bound to donor cells. A flow-cytometric crossmatch uses fluorescent anti-human IgG to detect recipient antibody bound to donor T or B cells and is generally more sensitive. The significance of a positive result depends on the organ type, the antibody class and specificity, complement activity, the treatment protocol, and local acceptance rules.3,10

After a solid-organ transplant, serial single-antigen bead testing can detect a new or changing donor-specific antibody. Donor-specific antibody is associated with increased antibody-mediated rejection risk and reduced long-term graft survival, with substantial variation among patients. Its significance depends on graft function, histology, timing, and other organ-specific evidence. After an allogeneic hematopoietic transplant, chimerism testing commonly amplifies informative short tandem repeat loci from donor, recipient, and post-transplant specimens. Capillary electrophoresis estimates donor and recipient fractions. Lineage, disease, conditioning, time since transplant, and minimal residual disease findings guide interpretation of a changing donor fraction, so report each chimerism result together with the previous results.12

Tumor antigens

Malignant cells can display targets that distinguish them from most normal adult cells. 13

Antigen category Basis Examples
Mutation-derived neoantigen A somatic sequence change creates a new peptide Mutant TP53-derived peptide; a junction-spanning peptide from a BCR::ABL1 fusion
Viral antigen An oncogenic virus expresses proteins in the malignant cell Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) proteins in selected lymphomas; human papillomavirus (HPV) proteins in cervical and other HPV-associated cancers
Cancer-testis antigen A protein normally restricted mainly to germ cells is expressed by a tumor MAGE family proteins
Differentiation or developmental antigen A lineage or developmental protein persists or reappears in malignant tissue Melan A/MART-1 in melanoma; carcinoembryonic antigen in selected carcinomas
Overexpressed self antigen A normal protein is produced at increased density HER2 in selected breast and other cancers

13

Tumor markers include proteins, genomic changes, and other substances produced by tumor cells or by the body in response to cancer. Selected markers, interpreted with other findings, support diagnosis, prognosis, treatment selection, response assessment, and detection of recurrence. Analyte-specific tumor-marker measurement and interference are covered in Chemistry. Malignant-cell morphology, immunophenotyping, and molecular classification are covered in Hematology. The antigen categories above explain how an immune response can recognize malignant tissue. 14

Infectious agent Associated cancers or lymphoproliferative disorders
Epstein-Barr virus Selected lymphomas, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders, and nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Hepatitis B and C viruses Hepatocellular carcinoma after chronic infection
Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus, or HHV-8 Kaposi sarcoma, primary effusion lymphoma, and multicentric Castleman disease
High-risk human papillomaviruses Cervical, anal, penile, vulvar, vaginal, and many oropharyngeal cancers
Human T-lymphotropic virus type 1 Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma
Merkel cell polyomavirus Merkel cell carcinoma

15

The proportion of virus-positive tumors varies across these categories. Laboratory evidence may include viral nucleic acid, viral protein, in-situ hybridization, serology, or another validated tumor-specific method.15

Immune control and tumor escape

The Burnet-Thomas immune-surveillance hypothesis proposes that immunity detects and eliminates some transformed cells before a tumor becomes clinically evident. Increased malignancy in transplant immunosuppression and inborn errors of immunity supports this protective role. Dendritic cells can cross-present tumor antigen and prime CD8-positive cytotoxic T lymphocytes. CD4-positive Th1 cells supply costimulation and cytokines such as IL-2 and IFN-γ. NK-cell activity reflects a balance of inhibitory and activating signals. Reduced HLA class I can remove an inhibitory NK-cell signal and also reduce recognition by CD8-positive T cells. Stress ligands can add NK-cell activation. NK cells and cytotoxic T cells kill through perforin and granzymes. Antibody can also support complement activation or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against an accessible tumor antigen. 1

The cancer immunoediting model describes three outcomes of prolonged tumor-immune interaction.

Phase Immune-tumor relationship
Elimination Innate and adaptive responses destroy susceptible transformed cells
Equilibrium Immune pressure contains surviving cells and selects variants that can persist
Escape Resistant or suppressive tumor populations expand and become clinically apparent

16

Escape mechanisms include loss of tumor antigen, reduced HLA class I expression, defective antigen processing, glycan masking, resistance to apoptosis, recruitment of regulatory T cells or suppressive myeloid cells, and secretion of inhibitory cytokines such as TGF-β and IL-10. A tumor can also express checkpoint ligands. PD-1 is an inhibitory receptor on T cells, and PD-L1 or PD-L2 binding reduces effector activity. CTLA-4 is another inhibitory receptor on T cells and competes with CD28 for CD80 and CD86. Checkpoint-ligand expression can therefore weaken tumor-directed T-cell function.16,17

Practice

Check yourself 1 of 3

Ignoring recombination in the usual full-sibling HLA inheritance model, what is the chance that two siblings share both parental haplotypes?

Incorrect. That is the chance of sharing exactly one haplotype: 2 × (1/2 × 1/2).

Correct. The two siblings have a one-half chance of sharing the paternal haplotype and a one-half chance of sharing the maternal one: 1/2 × 1/2 = 1/4.

Incorrect. That is the chance of sharing at least one haplotype (25% + 50%). Sharing both is 25%.

Review this section

Check yourself 2 of 3

Which direction of immune attack defines graft-versus-host disease after an allogeneic hematopoietic transplant?

Incorrect. Recipient immunity attacking donor tissue is the host-versus-graft direction of rejection.

Incorrect. Recipient cells attacking recipient self-antigens is autoimmunity. In graft-versus-host disease, donor cells attack the recipient.

Correct. Mature donor T lymphocytes attack recipient tissue, commonly skin, gastrointestinal tract, and liver. The same donor response can attack residual malignant cells as a graft-versus-leukemia effect.

Review this section

Check yourself 3 of 3

What does a flow-cytometric donor lymphocyte crossmatch directly assess?

Incorrect. Molecular HLA typing determines sequence. The crossmatch detects whether recipient antibody binds donor cells.

Correct. Fluorescent anti-human IgG detects recipient antibody bound to donor T or B lymphocytes, and the flow method is generally more sensitive than complement-dependent cytotoxicity.

Incorrect. Single-antigen beads assign specificity against purified HLA molecules. The crossmatch tests binding to the donor's own lymphocytes.

Review this section

References
  1. Abbas AK, Lichtman AH, Pillai S, Henrickson S. Cellular and Molecular Immunology. 11th ed. Elsevier; 2025. Elsevier. Back to text
  2. Marsh SGE, Osoegawa K, Bodmer WF, et al. Nomenclature for factors of the HLA system, 2026. HLA. 2026;107(3):e70595. doi:10.1111/tan.70595 Back to text
  3. Spierings E, Madrigal JA, Fleischhauer K. Histocompatibility. In: Sureda A, Corbacioglu S, Greco R, Kröger N, Carreras E, eds. The EBMT Handbook: Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapies. 8th ed. Springer; 2024. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-44080-9_9 Back to text
  4. Siu JHY, Surendrakumar V, Richards JA, Pettigrew GJ. T cell allorecognition pathways in solid organ transplantation. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2548. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.02548 Back to text
  5. Naik RH, Ali S, Hassanein M, Shawar SH. Acute renal transplantation rejection. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2026. Updated February 9, 2023. Accessed September 7, 2026. Back to text
  6. Naesens M, Roufosse C, Haas M, et al. The Banff 2022 Kidney Meeting Report: reappraisal of microvascular inflammation and the role of biopsy-based transcript diagnostics. Am J Transplant. 2024;24(3):338-349. doi:10.1016/j.ajt.2023.10.016 Back to text
  7. Jagasia MH, Greinix HT, Arora M, et al. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on criteria for clinical trials in chronic graft-versus-host disease: I. The 2014 Diagnosis and Staging Working Group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015;21(3):389-401.e1. doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.12.001 Back to text
  8. National Marrow Donor Program. Donor selection guidelines: a 2025 update. July 2025. Accessed August 29, 2026. Back to text
  9. American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics. 2025 ASHI standards for accredited laboratories. Approved by CMS January 27, 2026. Accessed August 29, 2026. Back to text
  10. Kongtim P, Vittayawacharin P, Zou J, et al. ASTCT consensus recommendations on testing and treatment of patients with donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies. Transplant Cell Ther. 2024;30(12):1139-1154. doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2024.09.005 Back to text
  11. Health Resources and Services Administration; Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. Calculated panel reactive antibody calculator. Reviewed December 2025. Accessed August 29, 2026. Back to text
  12. Bader P, Kreyenberg H, Bacigalupo A. Documentation of engraftment and chimerism after HCT. In: Sureda A, Corbacioglu S, Greco R, Kröger N, Carreras E, eds. The EBMT Handbook: Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapies. 8th ed. Springer; 2024. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-44080-9_21 Back to text
  13. Paston SJ, Brentville VA, Symonds P, Durrant LG. Cancer vaccines, adjuvants, and delivery systems. Front Immunol. 2021;12:627932. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.627932 Back to text
  14. National Cancer Institute. Tumor markers. Accessed August 29, 2026. Back to text
  15. National Cancer Institute. Infectious agents. Accessed August 29, 2026. Back to text
  16. Mittal D, Gubin MM, Schreiber RD, Smyth MJ. New insights into cancer immunoediting and its three component phases: elimination, equilibrium and escape. Curr Opin Immunol. 2014;27:16-25. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2014.01.004 Back to text
  17. National Cancer Institute. Immune checkpoint inhibitors. Reviewed April 7, 2022. Accessed August 29, 2026. Back to text

End of Transplantation and Tumor Immunology

Back to top ↑

Saved lessonsReview and reuse

Enlarged figure