Serologic profiling of D variants in donor routine: unveiling the impact on false-negative results and alloimmunization.

Q4 Medicine
Immunohematology Pub Date : 2024-06-24 eCollection Date: 2024-06-01 DOI:10.2478/immunohematology-2024-007
Carine P Arnoni, Tatiane A Vendrame, Flavia S Silva, Nayara M Silva, Afonso Cortez, Flavia Latini, Lilian Castilho
{"title":"Serologic profiling of D variants in donor routine: unveiling the impact on false-negative results and alloimmunization.","authors":"Carine P Arnoni, Tatiane A Vendrame, Flavia S Silva, Nayara M Silva, Afonso Cortez, Flavia Latini, Lilian Castilho","doi":"10.2478/immunohematology-2024-007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The high number of D variants can lead to the unnecessary use of Rh immune globulin, overuse of D- RBC units, and anti-D allommunization. D variant prevalence varies among ethnic groups, and knowledge of the main variants present in a specific population, their behavior in serologic tests, and their impact on clinical practice is crucial to define the best serologic tests for routine use. The present study aimed to explore the serologic profile of D variants and to determine which variants are most associated with false-negative D typing results and alloimmunization. Donor samples were selected in two study periods. During the first period, D typing was performed on a semi-automated instrument in microplates, and weak D tests were conducted in tube or gel tests. In the second period, D typing was carried out using an automated instrument with microplates, and weak D tests were performed in solid phase. Samples from patients typed as D+ with anti-D were also selected. All samples were characterized by molecular testing. A total of 37 <i>RHD</i> variants were identified. Discrepancies and atypical reactivity without anti-D formation were observed in 83.4 percent of the samples, discrepant D typing results between donations were seen in 12.3 percent, and D+ patients with anti-D comprised 4.3 percent. DAR1.2 was the most prevalent variant. Weak D type 38 was responsible for 75 percent of discrepant samples, followed by weak D type 11, predominantly detected by solid phase. Among the D variants related to alloimmunization, DIVa was the most prevalent, which was not recognized by serologic testing; the same was true for DIIIc. The results highlight the importance of selecting tests for donor screening capable of detecting weak D types 38 and 11, especially in populations where these variants are more prevalent. In pre-transfusion testing, it is crucial that D typing reagents demonstrate weak reactivity with DAR variants; having a serologic strategy to recognize DIVa and DIIIc is also valuable.</p>","PeriodicalId":13357,"journal":{"name":"Immunohematology","volume":"40 2","pages":"47-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Immunohematology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/immunohematology-2024-007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The high number of D variants can lead to the unnecessary use of Rh immune globulin, overuse of D- RBC units, and anti-D allommunization. D variant prevalence varies among ethnic groups, and knowledge of the main variants present in a specific population, their behavior in serologic tests, and their impact on clinical practice is crucial to define the best serologic tests for routine use. The present study aimed to explore the serologic profile of D variants and to determine which variants are most associated with false-negative D typing results and alloimmunization. Donor samples were selected in two study periods. During the first period, D typing was performed on a semi-automated instrument in microplates, and weak D tests were conducted in tube or gel tests. In the second period, D typing was carried out using an automated instrument with microplates, and weak D tests were performed in solid phase. Samples from patients typed as D+ with anti-D were also selected. All samples were characterized by molecular testing. A total of 37 RHD variants were identified. Discrepancies and atypical reactivity without anti-D formation were observed in 83.4 percent of the samples, discrepant D typing results between donations were seen in 12.3 percent, and D+ patients with anti-D comprised 4.3 percent. DAR1.2 was the most prevalent variant. Weak D type 38 was responsible for 75 percent of discrepant samples, followed by weak D type 11, predominantly detected by solid phase. Among the D variants related to alloimmunization, DIVa was the most prevalent, which was not recognized by serologic testing; the same was true for DIIIc. The results highlight the importance of selecting tests for donor screening capable of detecting weak D types 38 and 11, especially in populations where these variants are more prevalent. In pre-transfusion testing, it is crucial that D typing reagents demonstrate weak reactivity with DAR variants; having a serologic strategy to recognize DIVa and DIIIc is also valuable.

供体常规 D 变异血清学分析:揭示对假阴性结果和同种免疫的影响。
大量的 D 变异可导致不必要地使用 Rh 免疫球蛋白、过度使用 D- 红细胞单位和抗 D 异体同形。不同种族群体的 D 变异流行率各不相同,因此了解特定人群中存在的主要变异、其在血清学检测中的表现及其对临床实践的影响,对于确定常规使用的最佳血清学检测方法至关重要。本研究旨在探索 D 变体的血清学特征,并确定哪些变体与 D 分型假阴性结果和同种免疫最有关联。捐献者样本在两个研究期间被选取。在第一阶段,D 分型在微孔板半自动化仪器上进行,弱 D 测试在试管或凝胶测试中进行。在第二个研究阶段,使用微孔板自动仪器进行 D 分型,并在固相中进行弱 D 测试。此外,还选取了抗 D 分型为 D+ 的患者样本。所有样本都进行了分子检测。共鉴定出 37 种 RHD 变异。在 83.4% 的样本中观察到了未形成抗-D 的差异和非典型反应性,在 12.3% 的样本中观察到了不同捐赠者之间的 D 分型结果差异,而有抗-D 的 D+ 患者占 4.3%。DAR1.2 是最常见的变异。在不一致的样本中,弱 D 型 38 占 75%,其次是弱 D 型 11,主要通过固相法检测。在与同种免疫相关的 D 变异中,DIVa 最为普遍,但血清学检测无法识别;DIIIc 也是如此。这些结果凸显了选择能检测弱 D 型 38 和 11 的检测方法进行捐献者筛查的重要性,尤其是在这些变异较普遍的人群中。在输血前检测中,D 分型试剂与 DAR 变体的弱反应性至关重要;采用血清学策略识别 DIVa 和 DIIIc 也很有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Immunohematology
Immunohematology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信