Characterization of anti-D monoclonal antibody reagents based on their reactivity with the weak D phenotype

Serologic strategy in detecting RHD altered alleles in Brazilian blood donors

Background

We evaluated different technological approaches and anti-D clones to propose the most appropriate serologic strategy in detecting the largest numbers of D variants in blood donors.

Methods

We selected 101 samples from Brazilian blood donors with different expressions of D in our donor routine. The tests were performed in immediate spin (IS) with eleven commercially available anti-D reagents in a tube and microplate. The D confirmatory tests for the presence of weak D included the indirect antiglobulin test (IAT) in a tube, gel and solid-phase red blood cell adherence (SPRCA). All DNA samples were extracted from peripheral blood and the D variants were classified using different molecular assays.

Results

The RHD variants identified by molecular analysis included weak D types (1, 2, 3, 11 and 38) and partial Ds (DAR1.2, DAR1, DAR3.1, DAU0, DAU2, DAU4, DAU5, DAU6, DMH and DVII). The monoclonal-monoclonal blend RUM-1/MS26 was the best anti-D reagent used in detecting the D antigen in the IS phase in a tube, reacting with 83.2% of the D variants, while the anti-D blend D175 + 415 was the best monoclonal antibody (MoAb) used in a microplate to minimize the need for an IAT, reacting with 83.2% of the D variants. The D confirmatory tests using SPRCA showed a reactivity (3 - 4+) with 100% of the D variant samples tested.

Conclusion

Our results show that, even using sensitive methods and MoAbs to ensure the accurate assignment of the D antigen, at least 17% of our donor samples need a confirmatory D test in order to avoid alloimmunization in D-negative patients.

Anti-D reagents should be chosen accordingly to the prevalence of D variants in the obstetric population

BACKGROUND

Resolving ambiguous results of D antigen typing is crucial for appropriate and rational administration of anti-D immunoprophylaxis and transfusion practice in obstetric population. The aim of the study was to establish selection criteria of anti-D reagents for our population.

METHODS

A total of 12 689 samples from primiparous women in Split-Dalmatia County, Croatia, were typed for RhD antigen during the period of 5 years. Ambiguous results were submitted to additional serologic investigation and genotyping. RHD genotyping was performed by commercial genotyping kits (Ready Gene weak D ^® and Ready gene CDE, Inno-Train, Kronberg, Germany). Relative frequencies and accompanying 95% confidence intervals were used to estimate the prevalence of variants.

RESULTS

The prevalence of D variants was 0.42% (95% CI 0.31; 0.53). The most common partial D variant was D Va (RHD*05.05), with the prevalence of 0.08% (95% CI 0.03; 0.13). All weak D variants were weak D types 1, 2 and 3 (RHD*weak D type 1, RHD*weak D type 2, RHD*weak D type 3). Weak D samples were distinguishable from partial D in routine typing due to the difference in reactivity of partial D samples with clones D7B8 and RUM-1. Cell line RUM-1 gives weak or negative reactions with partial DVa category.

CONCLUSION

The most common partial D variant in our population is DVa. It is recommended to use cell lines which do not strongly agglutinate DVa variant in routine RhD typing. The appropriate choice of reagents will enable the serology methods to recognize the cases in which RHD genotyping is required.

Combining serology and molecular typing of weak D role in improving D typing strategy in Egypt

BACKGROUND

Rh discrepancies are a problem during routine testing because of partial and weak D phenotypes. Some blood units with weak and partial D expression may escape detection by serology. Limitations of serology can be overcome by molecular typing. The objective of study was to compare currently used serologic methods with molecular analysis to determine the potential application of molecular methods to improve D typing strategies and to estimate the frequency of weak D types among the Arab population.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Fifty blood donor and patient samples with discrepant results of D phenotyping were subjected to routine serology to define the D phenotype including monoclonal anti-D immunoglobulin M and indirect antiglobulin test. Commercially available panels of monoclonal anti-D were used for identification of partial D and weak D phenotypes. Genomic DNA was evaluated using allele-specific amplification polymerase chain reaction with sequence-specific primers to define weak D type.

RESULTS

Molecular typing confirmed most of the serology results; three samples that were not clear-cut serologically were identified by molecular typing, two samples as weak D Type 4.2 (DAR), and one sample as weak D Type 4.0. Another two samples identified by serologic panel as weak D were unresolved by molecular typing. A sample with partial D Type II by serology revealed a Weak D Type 4.0 by molecular typing. Results interestingly showed the high frequency of weak D Type 4.2 (DAR) in Egypt.

CONCLUSION

RHD molecular typing can solve discrepancies during routine testing due to partial and weak D phenotypes for better transfusion outcome.