SENSITIVITY OF VARIOUS METHODS FOR DETECTING HLA CLASS I ANTIBODIES AND SCREENING FOR ALLOANTIBODIES IN 145 SERA SAMPLES FROM PATIENTS RECEIVING PLATELET TRANSFUSIONS:A COMPARISON OF AHG‑LCT LIFT PIFT MAGNETIC MPHA AND FlowPRA METHODS
S. Saito, M. Ota, Y. Katsuyama, H. Makishima, T. Tamai, K. Takayanagi, H. Asamura, H. Fukushima
{"title":"SENSITIVITY OF VARIOUS METHODS FOR DETECTING HLA CLASS I ANTIBODIES AND SCREENING FOR ALLOANTIBODIES IN 145 SERA SAMPLES FROM PATIENTS RECEIVING PLATELET TRANSFUSIONS:A COMPARISON OF AHG‑LCT LIFT PIFT MAGNETIC MPHA AND FlowPRA METHODS","authors":"S. Saito, M. Ota, Y. Katsuyama, H. Makishima, T. Tamai, K. Takayanagi, H. Asamura, H. Fukushima","doi":"10.3925/JJTC1958.50.753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A total of 15 distinct human sera that did not exhibit reactivity against HPA antibodies but contained HLA-specific antibodies were used for sensitivity analysis of the AHG-LCT, LIFT, PIFT, M-MPHA and FlowPRA methods. The HLA antibody titer of each serum sample was defined as the highest dilution of serum that became positive to each method. 145 sera samples from patients receiving platelet transfusions were also screened to detect HLA antibodies by these methods. Results showed that FlowPRA was the most sensitive for identifying HLA antibodies. Although FCM is generally considered the most sensitive method, our analysis suggests that M-MPHA is as useful as FCM in both sensitivity and screening tests. PIFT sensitivity was slightly less than that of LIFT and M-MPHA. AHG-LCT sensitivity was significantly less than that of the other methods.","PeriodicalId":86521,"journal":{"name":"Nihon Yuketsu Gakkai zasshi = Journal of the Japan Society of Blood Transfusion","volume":"50 1","pages":"753-760"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nihon Yuketsu Gakkai zasshi = Journal of the Japan Society of Blood Transfusion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3925/JJTC1958.50.753","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
A total of 15 distinct human sera that did not exhibit reactivity against HPA antibodies but contained HLA-specific antibodies were used for sensitivity analysis of the AHG-LCT, LIFT, PIFT, M-MPHA and FlowPRA methods. The HLA antibody titer of each serum sample was defined as the highest dilution of serum that became positive to each method. 145 sera samples from patients receiving platelet transfusions were also screened to detect HLA antibodies by these methods. Results showed that FlowPRA was the most sensitive for identifying HLA antibodies. Although FCM is generally considered the most sensitive method, our analysis suggests that M-MPHA is as useful as FCM in both sensitivity and screening tests. PIFT sensitivity was slightly less than that of LIFT and M-MPHA. AHG-LCT sensitivity was significantly less than that of the other methods.