从抗hla抗体MFI的准确评估到补体结合检测。

Clinical transplants Pub Date : 2016-01-01
Guillaume Claisse, Christophe Mariat, Nicolas Maillard
{"title":"从抗hla抗体MFI的准确评估到补体结合检测。","authors":"Guillaume Claisse,&nbsp;Christophe Mariat,&nbsp;Nicolas Maillard","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Single antigen bead (SAB) and complement-binding assays are commonly used to monitor immunization in transplant patients. Like all new diagnostic assays, some considerations have to be appreciated to avoid a biased utilization. By truly decreasing antibody concentration, SAB monitoring in sensitized patients experiencing apheresis offers a good opportunity to explore analytical interference. We explored analytical artifacts by analyzing the role of prozone and saturation effects through a concrete example of a single patient who experienced immunoadsorption. We then assessed, on a larger cohort, the link between an accurate assessment of mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) and the C1q and C3d binding assays. Finally, we compared MFI with the two main available SAB assays. After immunoadsorption, the MFI of some antibodies unexpectedly rose. We showed that this increase was due, in part, to both a prozone effect and a saturation of the beads. Dithiothreitol treatment appeared to be an efficient way to avoid a prozone effect. The analysis of dilution profile was an interesting tool to detect a saturation effect. The comparison of the two main SABs revealed a systematic difference of 3000 MFI. MFI was a strong predictor of C1q and C3d positivity. Complement-positive antibodies had a higher MFI (p<0.01). Despite the great contribution of SAB assays in anti-HLA antibody assessment, the knowledge of analytical interference is necessary to avoid any misleading conclusions. With regard to the interference between MFI and complement-binding assays, their place in risk stratification has to be clarified.</p>","PeriodicalId":77074,"journal":{"name":"Clinical transplants","volume":"32 ","pages":"153-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Accurate Assessment of Anti-HLA Antibody MFI to Complement-Binding Assays.\",\"authors\":\"Guillaume Claisse,&nbsp;Christophe Mariat,&nbsp;Nicolas Maillard\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Single antigen bead (SAB) and complement-binding assays are commonly used to monitor immunization in transplant patients. Like all new diagnostic assays, some considerations have to be appreciated to avoid a biased utilization. By truly decreasing antibody concentration, SAB monitoring in sensitized patients experiencing apheresis offers a good opportunity to explore analytical interference. We explored analytical artifacts by analyzing the role of prozone and saturation effects through a concrete example of a single patient who experienced immunoadsorption. We then assessed, on a larger cohort, the link between an accurate assessment of mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) and the C1q and C3d binding assays. Finally, we compared MFI with the two main available SAB assays. After immunoadsorption, the MFI of some antibodies unexpectedly rose. We showed that this increase was due, in part, to both a prozone effect and a saturation of the beads. Dithiothreitol treatment appeared to be an efficient way to avoid a prozone effect. The analysis of dilution profile was an interesting tool to detect a saturation effect. The comparison of the two main SABs revealed a systematic difference of 3000 MFI. MFI was a strong predictor of C1q and C3d positivity. Complement-positive antibodies had a higher MFI (p<0.01). Despite the great contribution of SAB assays in anti-HLA antibody assessment, the knowledge of analytical interference is necessary to avoid any misleading conclusions. With regard to the interference between MFI and complement-binding assays, their place in risk stratification has to be clarified.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical transplants\",\"volume\":\"32 \",\"pages\":\"153-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical transplants\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical transplants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

单抗原珠(SAB)和补体结合试验通常用于监测移植患者的免疫。像所有新的诊断分析一样,必须注意一些事项,以避免偏颇的使用。通过真正降低抗体浓度,SAB监测在经历单采的致敏患者中为探索分析干扰提供了很好的机会。我们通过一个经历免疫吸附的单个患者的具体例子,通过分析丙酮和饱和效应的作用来探索分析伪影。然后,我们在一个更大的队列中评估了平均荧光强度(MFI)的准确评估与C1q和C3d结合测定之间的联系。最后,我们将MFI与两种主要可用的SAB检测方法进行了比较。免疫吸附后,部分抗体的MFI异常升高。我们发现,这种增加部分是由于prozone效应和珠子的饱和。二硫苏糖醇治疗似乎是避免丙酮效应的有效方法。稀释剖面分析是检测饱和效应的一种有趣的工具。两种主要SABs的比较显示出3000 MFI的系统差异。MFI是C1q和C3d阳性的强预测因子。补体阳性抗体具有较高的MFI (p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Accurate Assessment of Anti-HLA Antibody MFI to Complement-Binding Assays.

Single antigen bead (SAB) and complement-binding assays are commonly used to monitor immunization in transplant patients. Like all new diagnostic assays, some considerations have to be appreciated to avoid a biased utilization. By truly decreasing antibody concentration, SAB monitoring in sensitized patients experiencing apheresis offers a good opportunity to explore analytical interference. We explored analytical artifacts by analyzing the role of prozone and saturation effects through a concrete example of a single patient who experienced immunoadsorption. We then assessed, on a larger cohort, the link between an accurate assessment of mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) and the C1q and C3d binding assays. Finally, we compared MFI with the two main available SAB assays. After immunoadsorption, the MFI of some antibodies unexpectedly rose. We showed that this increase was due, in part, to both a prozone effect and a saturation of the beads. Dithiothreitol treatment appeared to be an efficient way to avoid a prozone effect. The analysis of dilution profile was an interesting tool to detect a saturation effect. The comparison of the two main SABs revealed a systematic difference of 3000 MFI. MFI was a strong predictor of C1q and C3d positivity. Complement-positive antibodies had a higher MFI (p<0.01). Despite the great contribution of SAB assays in anti-HLA antibody assessment, the knowledge of analytical interference is necessary to avoid any misleading conclusions. With regard to the interference between MFI and complement-binding assays, their place in risk stratification has to be clarified.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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