Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 May 29.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Transplant. 2023 Nov 4;24(3):350–361. doi: 10.1016/j.ajt.2023.10.031

Table 6.

Updated Banff recommendations on best practice for pathology and molecular endpoints in clinical trials.

A. Banff recommendations for use of the Banff classification in clinical trials
• The primary effort should focus on applying the most recent Banff classification in clinical trials
• Exact criteria used for inclusion in the trial, highlighting any deviations from the current official Banff Classification, should be clearly outlined in the study protocol and reporting
• The inclusion of biopsy-based transcript diagnostics, or not, in clinical trials should be stated in the trial protocol and in the reporting
• Open reporting of and public access to the granular study data (including individual Banff Lesions Scores) to allow for retrospective reassessment of study results is recommended
B. Banff recommendations on best practices for pathology endpoints in clinical trials
• Pathologists to participate in the design and choice of endpoints
• Panel of (central) pathologists (3 optimal to avoid a tie)
• Sufficient clinical information to (central) pathologists for correct diagnosis, including detailed information on DSA status for AMR diagnosis
• Adjudication mechanism (how discordance between pathologists is addressed)
• Whole slide digital images for centralized slide review
• Auditable assessments (scoring that can be reviewed and audited externally)
• Granular scoring and reporting of all Banff lesions, not only final Banff Diagnostic Category (consider using detailed phenotyping and lesion scoring for secondary endpoints)
• Quantitate changes (use of continuous scores and percentages rather than semiquantitative scoring)
• Centralized processing of ancillary testing, eg, immunohistochemistry (C4d; immunoglobulins and complement) and electron microscopy
C. Banff recommendations on best practices for molecular endpoints in clinical trials
• Molecular evaluation of kidney transplant biopsies can be considered for clinical trials, if available
• Large reference data sets should be well-annotated
• High reproducibility/replication of assays is required before use in clinical trials
• Pathogenesis-based transcript strategy appears useful and can be completed by classifier approaches (no single gene test is specific)
• Centralized testing advantageous for multicenter trials
• Proper methodological approaches are needed (for assay performance, data analysis, ...). This adds statistical power, potentially reducing sample size and costs
• Quality assurance is mandatory (interlaboratory, interplatform, and interassay reproducibility; development of standardized positive and negative controls and quantitative diagnostic reference standard)