Candice Roufosse et al
Read the full manuscript on SSRN
Abstract
The XVI-th Banff Meeting for Allograft pathology was held in Banff Canada, from 19th-23rd September 2022, as a joint meeting with the Canadian Society of Transplantation. In addition to a key focus on microvascular inflammation and biopsy-based transcript analysis in the Banff Classification, further sessions were devoted to other aspects of transplant pathology, in particular T cell-mediated rejection, activity and chronicity indices, digital pathology, xenotransplantation, clinical trials, and surrogate endpoints. Although the output of these sessions has not led to any changes in the Classification, the key role of Banff Working Groups in phrasing unanswered questions and coordinating and disseminating results of investigations addressing these unanswered questions was emphasized. This paper summarises the key Banff Meeting 2022 sessions not covered in the Banff Kidney Meeting 2022 Report, and also provides an update on other Banff Working Group activities.
Join the conversation by providing your comment(s) on the:
Clinical feasibility and utility of the classification
Areas of improvement for clarity and reduction of ambiguity
Inaccuracies and inconsistency
Evidence and knowledge gaps
The comment period will be open until June 30, 2023. All comments will be reviewed and considered by the Banff meeting report author groups prior to finalizing the manuscripts and submission for formal peer review.
How to comment:
Click on the comment box and you will be prompted to create an account
Once your account is created, you will return to the article, please enter your comment and click publish
Make sure to follow the post for updates on new comments and replies
The Banff 2022 Kidney Meeting Work Plan is nicely formulated. I offer the following comments for consideration:
Page 6: Chronic active TCMR (caTCMR)
It is stated that i-IFTA be considered along with the Ti score to avoid giving too much weight to very small areas of scarred cortex,
Suggestion: also add ci and ct scores because these are the real scores that measure extent of scarring
@Bertrand - Thank you very much for your remarks, much appreciated
Also a very nice summary. I have two (very) minor remarks:
- Page 11, Banff classification for clinical trials, histological endpoints. In the sentence: “A minimal set of variables, including clinical information, is needed is to come to robust final diagnoses”. The second “is” seems to be a mistake.
- Table S1 : « Results to date », it seems that there is an unneeded space just before « Provided recommendations ». The text is not aligned with the other statements.