Advanced

Blood group genotype analysis for the quality improvement of reagent test red blood cells

Hult, Annika LU ; Hellberg, Åsa LU ; Wester, E S; Olausson, P; Storry, Jill LU and Olsson, M L (2005) In Vox Sanguinis 88(4). p.265-270
Abstract
Background and Objectives Reagent red blood cells (RBCs) for antibody detection should express certain important antigens as a double dose, that is, the donors must be homozygous for the corresponding alleles. Traditionally, dose is determined by serological typing and known allele frequencies. However, RHD zygosity cannot be predicted serologically owing to the absence of an antithetical antigen, and FY zygosity is confounded by two variant haplotypes, FY*0 and FY*X. Furthermore, lack of reagents hampers our ability to type for some clinically important antigen pairs such as Do(a)/Do(b). Materials and Methods Genomic DNA was isolated from reagent RBC samples. Established, validated methods were used to determine the RHD, FY, and DO... (More)
Background and Objectives Reagent red blood cells (RBCs) for antibody detection should express certain important antigens as a double dose, that is, the donors must be homozygous for the corresponding alleles. Traditionally, dose is determined by serological typing and known allele frequencies. However, RHD zygosity cannot be predicted serologically owing to the absence of an antithetical antigen, and FY zygosity is confounded by two variant haplotypes, FY*0 and FY*X. Furthermore, lack of reagents hampers our ability to type for some clinically important antigen pairs such as Do(a)/Do(b). Materials and Methods Genomic DNA was isolated from reagent RBC samples. Established, validated methods were used to determine the RHD, FY, and DO genotypes. Results Three of 52 D+ samples gave results that differed from the predicted genotype: two presumed (RR1)-R-1 samples and an (RR2)-R-2 sample were shown to be R(1)r" and R(2)r', respectively. Five of 59 samples that were from presumed homozygotes for either FY*A or FY*B were heterozygous, together with either FY*X (three samples) or FY*0 (two samples). Seventy-five samples tested for DO were DO*A/A (n = 14), DO*A/B (n = 39), or DO*B/B (n = 22). Conclusions The results show that serologically determined RhD and Duffy phenotypes of reagent RBCs are unreliable and that antigens we thought were represented as a double dose were single dose. The addition of Dombrock genotyping provides information which is useful in antibody identification. We conclude that selected genotype analyses are a valuable quality assurance measure to ensure that reagent RBCs comply with national and international recommendations for test sensitivity. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
blood group, antibody identification, phenotype, genotype, quality, assurance
in
Vox Sanguinis
volume
88
issue
4
pages
265 - 270
publisher
Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
external identifiers
  • wos:000228974900006
  • pmid:15877648
  • scopus:18944386916
ISSN
1423-0410
DOI
10.1111/j.1423-0410.2005.00623.x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
3d0d7739-d482-4d24-bf75-3c24d807fa02 (old id 240420)
date added to LUP
2007-08-06 14:52:15
date last changed
2017-08-13 04:16:21
@article{3d0d7739-d482-4d24-bf75-3c24d807fa02,
  abstract     = {Background and Objectives Reagent red blood cells (RBCs) for antibody detection should express certain important antigens as a double dose, that is, the donors must be homozygous for the corresponding alleles. Traditionally, dose is determined by serological typing and known allele frequencies. However, RHD zygosity cannot be predicted serologically owing to the absence of an antithetical antigen, and FY zygosity is confounded by two variant haplotypes, FY*0 and FY*X. Furthermore, lack of reagents hampers our ability to type for some clinically important antigen pairs such as Do(a)/Do(b). Materials and Methods Genomic DNA was isolated from reagent RBC samples. Established, validated methods were used to determine the RHD, FY, and DO genotypes. Results Three of 52 D+ samples gave results that differed from the predicted genotype: two presumed (RR1)-R-1 samples and an (RR2)-R-2 sample were shown to be R(1)r" and R(2)r', respectively. Five of 59 samples that were from presumed homozygotes for either FY*A or FY*B were heterozygous, together with either FY*X (three samples) or FY*0 (two samples). Seventy-five samples tested for DO were DO*A/A (n = 14), DO*A/B (n = 39), or DO*B/B (n = 22). Conclusions The results show that serologically determined RhD and Duffy phenotypes of reagent RBCs are unreliable and that antigens we thought were represented as a double dose were single dose. The addition of Dombrock genotyping provides information which is useful in antibody identification. We conclude that selected genotype analyses are a valuable quality assurance measure to ensure that reagent RBCs comply with national and international recommendations for test sensitivity.},
  author       = {Hult, Annika and Hellberg, Åsa and Wester, E S and Olausson, P and Storry, Jill and Olsson, M L},
  issn         = {1423-0410},
  keyword      = {blood group,antibody identification,phenotype,genotype,quality,assurance},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {265--270},
  publisher    = {Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd},
  series       = {Vox Sanguinis},
  title        = {Blood group genotype analysis for the quality improvement of reagent test red blood cells},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1423-0410.2005.00623.x},
  volume       = {88},
  year         = {2005},
}