Time points and risk factors for RhD immunizations after the implementation of targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis: A retrospective nationwide cohort study

Evaluation of the clinical effect of a nationwide implementation of targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis in Denmark

BACKGROUND

In 2010, Denmark was the first country to implement a targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis (tRAADP) program, offering fetal RHD genotyping to all nonimmunized D negative pregnant women. The program represented a shift from only postnatal prophylaxis to a combined antenatal and postnatal prophylaxis. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effect of tRAADP in Denmark.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This nationwide registry-based cohort study included all D negative women who gave birth between 2004-2020, identified through the National Medical Birth Register and the Departments of Clinical Immunology in Denmark. The clinical effect of tRAADP was assessed by comparing the incidence of new D immunization between 2004-2009 (non-tRAADP-cohort) and 2011-2018 (tRAADP-cohort).

RESULTS

A total of 282 women were D immunized during pregnancy between 2004-2009 (non-tRAADP-cohort), and 167 between 2011-2018 (tRAADP-cohort). The incidence of new D immunization decreased from 0.46% (95% CI 0.41-0.52) in the non-tRAADP-cohort to 0.22% (95% CI 0.19-0.25) in the tRAADP-cohort. The risk reduction was statistically significant p < 0.001. Notably, in the tRAADP cohort 0.1% (95% CI 0.08-0.12) of new D immunizations occurred before the time of antenatal prophylaxis.

DISCUSSION

tRAADP significantly reduced the incidence of new D immunization by more than half, thus demonstrating the expected effect. However, even with full adherence to the current program, some women with early fetomaternal hemorrhage (FMH) were still at risk. Future studies may evaluate the impact of administering an additional tRAADP dose earlier in the second trimester to prevent this.

Why do RhD negative pregnant women still become anti-D immunized despite prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin?

Maternal allo-anti-D in RhD negative pregnant women may cause mild to severe hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. Although several other antibodies may also destroy red blood cells of the fetus and newborn, preventive measures with anti-D immunoglobulin are only available for D antigen. Targeted antenatal care together with postpartum prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin has significantly reduced the D-alloimmunization risk. Potentially sensitizing events like trauma to the pregnant abdomen, vaginal bleeding, and amniocentesis may lead to fetomaternal hemorrhage and necessitate additional doses. Despite comprehensive programs with these targeted measures, allo-anti-D is still the most common reason for severe hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. Where do we fail then? Here, in this review, I would therefore like to discuss the reasons for D-alloimmunizations hoping that the greater focus will pave the way for further reduction in the number of pregnancy-related allo-anti-Ds.

Low titer group O whole blood and risk of RhD alloimmunization: Rationale for use in Finland

BACKGROUND

Prehospital low-titer group O whole blood (LTOWB) used for patients with life-threatening hemorrhage is often RhD positive. The most important complication following RhD alloimmunization is hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN). Preceding clinical use of RhD positive LTOWB, we estimated the risk of HDFN due to LTOWB prehospital transfusion in the Finnish population.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We collected data on prehospital transfusions in Tampere and Helsinki University Hospital areas. Using the mean of reported alloimmunization rates in trauma studies (24%) and a higher reported rate representing trauma patients of 13-50 years old (42.7%), we estimated the risk of HDFN and extrapolated it to the whole of Finland.

RESULTS

We estimated that in Finland, with the current prehospital transfusion rate we would see 1-3 cases of severe HDFN due to prehospital LTOWB transfusions every 10 years, and fetal death due to HDFN caused by LTOWB transfusion less than once in 100 years.

DISCUSSION

The estimated risk of serious HDFN due to prehospital LTOWB transfusion in the Finnish population is similar to previous estimates. As Finland routinely screens expectant mothers for red blood cell antibodies and as the contemporary treatment of HDFN is very effective, we support the prehospital use of RhD positive LTOWB in all patient groups.

Antenatal RHD screening to guide antenatal anti-D immunoprophylaxis in non-immunized D- pregnant women

In pregnancy, D- pregnant women may be at risk of becoming immunized against D when carrying a D+ fetus, which may eventually lead to hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. Administrating antenatal and postnatal anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis decreases the risk of immunization substantially. Noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping, based on testing cell-free DNA extracted from maternal plasma, offers a reliable tool to predict the fetal RhD phenotype during pregnancy. Used as a screening program, antenatal RHD screening can guide the administration of antenatal prophylaxis in non-immunized D- pregnant women so that unnecessary prophylaxis is avoided in those women who carry a D- fetus. In Europe, antenatal RHD screening programs have been running since 2009, demonstrating high test accuracies and program feasibility. In this review, an overview is provided of current state-of-the-art antenatal RHD screening, which includes discussions on the rationale for its implementation, methodology, detection strategies, and test performance. The performance of antenatal RHD screening in a routine setting is characterized by high accuracy, with a high diagnostic sensitivity of ≥99.9 percent. The result of using antenatal RHD screening is that 97-99 percent of the women who carry a D- fetus avoid unnecessary prophylaxis. As such, this activity contributes to avoiding unnecessary treatment and saves valuable anti-D immunoglobulin, which has a shortage worldwide. The main challenges for a reliable noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping assay are low cell-free DNA levels, the genetics of the Rh blood group system, and choosing an appropriate detection strategy for an admixed population. In many parts of the world, however, the main challenge is to improve the basic care for D- pregnant women.

Noninvasive screening of fetal RHD genotype in Chinese pregnant women with serologic RhD-negative phenotype

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping has been provided to nonimmunized RhD-negative pregnant women to guide anti-D prophylaxis. Among the Chinese, more than 30% of the RhD-negative phenotype is associated with variant RHD alleles, which would limit the accuracy of fetal RHD status prediction; thus, more targeting and proper programs need to be developed.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Fluorescence quantitative polymerase chain reaction PCR (qPCR) or Sanger sequencing on all RHD exons was used to detect maternal RHD genotypes. For pregnant women with RHD*01N.01 or RHD*01N.03 alleles, the presence of RHD exons 5 and 10 in cell-free DNA was determined by qPCR. For pregnant women with the RHD(1227G>A) allele, high-throughput sequencing on exon 9 of the RHD gene and RHCE gene was used to predict fetal RhD phenotype.

RESULTS

Among 65 cases of Chinese pregnant women with the serologic RhD-negative phenotype, three major genotypes were identified: RHD*01N.01/RHD*01N.01 (61.5%), RHD*01N.01/RHD(1227G>A) or RHD*01N.03/RHD(1227G>A) (20%), and RHD*01N.01/RHD*01N.03 (13.8%), along with three cases of minor genotypes (4.6%). For 43 pregnant women with the RHD*01N.01 or RHD*01N.03 alleles, qPCR on maternal cell-free DNA yielded a 98.5% (42/43) accuracy rate and 100% successful prediction rate. High-throughput sequencing was successfully used to predict fetal RhD phenotypes for 13 pregnant women with RHD(1227G>A).

CONCLUSION

On the basis of maternal RHD genotyping, fetal genotyping through qPCR or high-throughput sequencing can improve the accuracy and success rate of prenatal fetal RhD phenotype prediction among Chinese pregnant women. It plays a potential role in guiding anti-D prophylaxis and pregnancy management in Chinese pregnant women.

Following targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, almost half of the pregnant women had undetectable anti-D prophylaxis at delivery

INTRODUCTION

In September 2016, a nationwide targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis program was implemented in Norway. The prophylaxis (anti-D immunoglobulin) aims to cover the whole third trimester and is administered in gestational week 28 to RhD-negative women who carry RhD-positive fetuses. However, in many women, antibody screening at delivery does not detect anti-D immunoglobulin. The goal of this study was to investigate the presumable role of dose and timing of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin administration in non-detectable prophylaxis at the time of delivery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, RhD-negative pregnant women who gave birth at Oslo University Hospital and Akershus University Hospital between January 2017 and December 2019 were analyzed. Women who received antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin (1500 IU at Oslo University Hospital and 1250 IU at Akershus University Hospital) when fetal RHD genotyping at gestational week 24 predicted an RhD-positive fetus were included if an antibody screen at delivery was available. Data from the blood bank, maternity information systems, and electronic patient records were used.

RESULTS

Analysis of the 984 RhD-negative women at the two hospitals revealed that 45.4% had non-detectable anti-D at delivery. A significant difference between the two hospitals was observed: 40.5% at Oslo University Hospital (n = 509) and 50.7% at Akershus University Hospital (n = 475) (p = 0.001). The proportion with non-detectable anti-D increased to 56.0 and 75.3%, respectively (p = 0.008) in the group of women who gave birth 12 weeks after routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. Significantly fewer women had detectable anti-D at delivery when the lower anti-D immunoglobulin dose (1250 IU) was administered antenatally. Multiple logistic regression indicated that the time interval between routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis and delivery, in addition to anti-D dose, were significantly associated with detectable anti-D at delivery (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We do not know which RhD-negative pregnant women, despite antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, are at risk of RhD alloimmunization, when antibody screening is negative at delivery. Administration of antenatal prophylaxis should probably be moved closer to delivery, since the risk of fetomaternal hemorrhage is higher during the last weeks of the third trimester.