Now accepting Telehealth appointments. Schedule a virtual visit.

Is lymphocyte immunization a clinically valuable treatment?

Is lymphocyte immunization a clinically valuable treatment?

Electron microscopic image of a human lymphocyte. Image source: Public domain image via Wikimedia Commons

The term “lymphocyte immunization” is rarely heard since 2002, when the _Food and Drug Administration (FDA) _prohibited this treatment in the U.S. outside of clinical trials. Up to that point, immunomodulation of the maternal immune response to paternal antigens on the trophoblast via active immunization with partner-lymphocytes was common practice.

The hypothesis behind this treatment was that stimulation of a hypo-reactive maternal immune system by paternal antigens on lymphocytes will, in a subsequent pregnancy, lead to improved immune-recognition of the implanting embryo and, therefore, in the maternal immune system to better induction of what now is recognized as tolerance pathways. The expectation was that such treatment would improve implantation and reduce the risk of miscarriages.

Because of the _FDA _edict, lymphocyte immunization is since 2002 no longer available as clinical treatment in the U.S.A. However, a considerable number of U.S. patients still travel to receive such treatments, with Mexico being the primary destination. Lymphocyte immunizations are, however, also available in many other countries, including in Europe. A first serious formal claim for the treatment’s efficacy was, indeed, made by British investigators.

The treatment was originally primarily only given to patients with repeated pregnancy losses. When first proposed, these treatments were only reserved for women with confirmed hypo-reactivity toward the male partners’ antigens, usually diagnosed in vitro with specific lymphocyte mixing tests. Over time, criteria for utilization were expanded and lymphocyte immunization became almost a standard treatment for all patients with repeat pregnancy loss and, increasingly, was also considered treatment for the so-called implantation failure. The latter is, of course, a rather problematic diagnosis because nobody knows how to define implantation failure and, therefore, how to reach such a diagnosis in reproducible fashion. No wonder reported outcomes after lymphocyte immunizations were all over the scale and the procedure remained highly controversial.

CHR never utilized lymphocyte immunization as a treatment for either repeated pregnancy loss or implantation failure. Even before the FDA’s edict, CHR’s Medical Director and Chief Scientist, Norbert Gleicher, MD, urged caution in using paternal lymphocyte immunization for fear of inducing autoimmune reactions in mothers. He proved prescient in that concern. Even among the treatment’s proponents, evidence of autoimmunity is currently considered an absolute contraindication for the treatment. The problem with this approach, as Gleicher pointed out 30 years ago, lies in the fact that so many women with infertility and/or repeated pregnancy loss suffer from subclinical autoimmunity, which will be detected only through appropriate investigations (and even then, not always). To simply rely on a history of autoimmunity does not appear adequate.

Induction of autoimmunity will, of course, have exactly the opposite effects on miscarriage risk as one expects from lymphocyte immunization. Frequently discussed in these pages before, autoimmunity is an almost certain way to create a hyper-active immune system, which does not appropriately induce required tolerance pathways for the products of conception by the maternal immune system. In such cases, lymphocyte immunization can, therefore, actually further increase miscarriage risks. Unsurprisingly, CHR has remained skeptical of the concept and still does not recommend lymphocyte immunization as a treatment.

This is a part of the September 2019 CHR VOICE.

Norbert Gleicher, MD

Norbert Gleicher, MD, FACOG, FACS

Norbert Gleicher, MD, leads CHR’s clinical and research efforts as Medical Director and Chief Scientist. A world-renowned specialist in reproductive endocrinology, Dr. Gleicher has published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers and lectured globally while keeping an active clinical career focused on ovarian aging, immunological issues and other difficult cases of infertility.

Follow on LinkedIn    

Watch his videos on YouTube    

 


We have helped women bring over
17,800 babies into the world.

DISCOVER YOUR TREATMENT OPTIONS

 

You Might Also Enjoy...

IVF after 40 years old

Trying To Get Pregnant After 40 Years Old

For women trying to get pregnant after 40, CHR believes in an urgent and individualized treatment approach. Time is a very important factor with DOR, and the sooner treatment can be started, the higher a woman's pregnancy chances.
Am I a Candidate for Egg Donation?

Am I a Candidate for Egg Donation?

Egg donation is a beneficial treatment that can assist women who can’t conceive with their eggs. Find out what goes into the egg donation process here.

The March/April Voice

Every issue of the VOICE slowly drifts towards more professional subjects, peaking with the literature review, which, primarily addresses physicians and scientists.
IVF in Alabama - What To Do Next?

IVF in Alabama - What To Do Next?

CHR offers the safe transfer of existing frozen embryos into our facility, ensuring continuity of care for patients affected by the suspension of IVF services in Alabama.