Objective: To determine the role of urine cytology for ‘decoy cells’ as a screening tool for polyomavirus type BK (BKV) infection in renal transplant recipients. Study Design: This was a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing renal transplantation between 2006 and 2010. Results: A total of 442 patients underwent urine cytology for decoy cells, 27.8% underwent 1 examination only and 72.2% more than one. Of the 1,713 examinations reviewed, 426 (24.9%) were positive and 785 (45.8%) were negative for ‘decoy’ cells, 380 (22.2%) showed degenerated tubular cells and 122 (7.1%) were unsatisfactory for analysis. Urine cytology was found to have a specificity of 68.5%, a sensitivity of 84.6%, a positive predictive value of 21.2%, a negative predictive value of 97.8% and an overall accuracy of 69.9%. The incidence of polyomavirus nephropathy among the patients investigated was 11.8%. Of the 442 patients, 32 (7.2%) had graft loss, which was attributed to BKV nephropathy in 2 (6.2% of the 32). Conclusions: Urine cytology is an effective screening method for monitoring renal transplant patients, with high sensitivity and a high negative predictive value, and can therefore be used routinely in the follow-up of renal transplant patients.

Keywords:
Polyomavirus, Kidney transplantation, Cell biology
1.
Coleman DV, Mackenzie EF, Gardner SD, Poulding JM, Amer B, Russell WJ: Human polyomavirus (BK) infection and ureteric stenosis in renal allograft recipients. J Clin Pathol 1978;31: 338–334.
2.
Mengel M, Marwedel M, Radermacher J, et al: Incidence of polyomavirus-nephropathy in renal allografts: influence of modern immunosuppressive drugs. Nephrol Dial Transplantation 2003;18:1190–1196.
3.
Buehrig CK, Lager DJ, Stegall MD, et al: Influence of surveillance renal allograft biopsy on diagnosis and prognosis of polyomavirus-associated nephropathy. Kidney Int 2003;64:665–673.
4.
Knowles WA, Pipkin P, Andrews N, et al: Population-based study of antibody to the human polyomaviruses BKV and JCV and the simian polyomavirus SV40. J Med Virol 2003;71:115–123.
5.
Vanchiere JA, Nicome RK, Greer JM, Demmler GJ, Butel JS: Frequent detection of polyomaviruses in stool samples from hospitalized children. J Infect Dis 2005;192:658–664.
6.
Reploeg MD, Storch GA, Clifford DB: BK virus: a clinical review. Clin Infect Dis 2001;33:191–202.
7.
Bohl DL, Brennan DC: BK virus nephropathy and kidney transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:S36–S46.
8.
Smith SR, Butterfly DW, Alexander BD, Greenberg A: Viral infections after renal transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis 2001;37:659–676.
9.
Hariharan S: BK virus nephritis after renal transplantation. Kidney Int 2006;69:655–662.
10.
Hirsch HH: BK virus: opportunity makes a pathogen. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:354–360.
11.
Scantlebury V, Shapiro R, Randhawa P, Weck K, Vats A: Cidofovir: a method of treatment for BK virus-associated transplant nephropathy. Graft 2002;5:S82–S87.
12.
Drachenberg CB, Hirsch HH, Ramos E, Papadimitriou JC: Polyomavirus disease in renal transplantation. Review of pathological findings and diagnostic methods. Hum Pathol 2005;36:1245–1255.
13.
Koss LG: On decoy cells. Acta Cytol 2005;49:233–234.
14.
Drachenberg CB, Papadimitriou JC: Polyomavirus-associated nephropathy: update in diagnosis. Transpl Infect Dis 2006;8:68–75.
15.
Fogazzi GB, Cantú M, Saglimbeni L: ‘Decoy cells’ in the urine due to polyomavirus BK infection: easily seen by phase-contrast microscopy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001;16:1496–1498.
16.
Montagner JM, Michelon TF, Schroeder RB, et al: Poliomavírus um patógeno emergente para receptores de transplantes. Einstein 2007;5:184–189.
17.
Smith JM, Dharnidharka VR, Talley L, Martz K, Mcdonald RA: BK virus nephropathy in pediatric renal transplant recipients: an analysis of the North American Pediatric Renal Trials and Collaborative Studies (NAPRTCS) Registry. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:1037–1042.
18.
Prince O, Savic S, Dickenmann M, et al: Risk factors for polyomavirus nephropathy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009;24:1024–1033.
19.
Hirsch HH, Knowles W, Dickenmann M, et al: Prospective study of polyomavirus type BK replication and nephropathy in renal transplant recipients. N Engl J Med 2002;347:488–496.
20.
Ramos E, Drachenberg CB, Papadimitriou JC, et al: Clinical course of polyomavirus nephropathy in 67 renal transplant patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2002;13:2145–2151.
21.
Ginevri F, De Santis R, Comoli P, et al: Polyomavirus BK infection in pediatric kidney-allograft recipients: a single-center analysis of incidence, risk factors, and novel therapeutic approaches. Transplantation 2003;75:1266–1270.
22.
Sachdeva MS, Nada R, Jha V, Sakhuja V, Joshi K: The high incidence of BK polyoma virus infection among renal transplant recipients in India. Transplantation 2004;77:429–431.
23.
Trofe J, Gaber LW, Stratta RJ, et al: Polyomavirus in kidney and kidney – pancreas transplant recipients. Transpl Infect Dis 2003;5:21–28.
24.
Rahamimov R, Lustig S, Tovar A, et al: BK polyomavirus nephropathy in kidney transplant recipient: the role of new immunosuppressive agents. Transplant Proc 2003;35:604–605.
25.
Li RM, Mannon RB, Kleiner D et al: BK virus and SV40 co-infection in polyomavirus nephropathy. Transplantation 2002;74:1497–1504.
26.
Maiza H, Fontaniere B, Dijoud F, Pouteil-Noble C: Graft dysfunction and polyomavirus infection in renal allograft recipients. Transplant Proc 2002;34:809–811.
27.
Kang YN, Han SM, Park KK, Jeon DS, Kim HC: BK virus infection in renal allograft recipients. Transplant Proc 2003;35:275–277.
28.
Namba Y, Moriyama T, Kyo M et al: Prevalence, characteristics and outcome of BK virus nephropathy in Japanese renal transplant patients: analysis in protocol and episode biopsies. Clin Transplant 2005;19:97–101.
29.
Basse G, Mengelle C, Kamar N, et al: Prospective evaluation of BK virus DNAemia in renal transplant patients and their transplant outcome. Transplant Proc 2007;39:84–87.
30.
Mischitelli M, Bellizzi A, Anzivino E, et al: Complications post renal transplantation: literature focus on BK virus nephropathy and diagnostic tools actually available. Virol J 2008;5:38.
31.
Djamali A, Samaniego M, Muth B, et al: Medical care of kidney transplant recipients after the first posttransplant year. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2006;1:623–640.
32.
Thamboo TP, Jeffery KJM, Friend PJ, Turner GD, Roberts IS: Urine cytology screening for polyomavirus infection following renal transplantation: the Oxford experience. J Clin Pathol 2007;60:927–930.
33.
Boldorini R, Brustia M, Veggiani C, Barco D, Andorno S, Monga G: Periodic assessment of urine and serum by cytology and molecular biology as a diagnostic tool for BK virus nephropathy in renal transplant patients. Acta Cytol 2005;49:235–43.
34.
Giraldi C, Noto A, Tenuta R, et al: Prospective study of BKV nephropathy in 117 renal transplant recipients. New Microbiol 2007;30:127–130.
35.
Maia TM, Silva SF, Silva SL, Holanda MC, Nascimento JM, Ferreira MV: Polyomavirus-infected decoy cells in cytocentrifuged urine cytology specimens from renal transplant recipients. Acta Cytol 2011;55:445–448.
36.
Viscount HB, Eid AJ, Espy MJ, et al: Polyomavirus polymerase chain reaction as a surrogate marker of polyomavirus-associated nephropathy. Transplantation 2007;84:340–345.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.