Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Concordance of two polymerase chain reaction-based blood group genotyping platforms for patients with sickle cell disease.
Sheppard, Chelsea A; Bolen, Nicole L; Meny, Geralyn; Kalvelage, Monica; Ochoa-Garay, Gorka.
Affiliation
  • Sheppard CA; Associate Professor, Gold Standard Laboratory Consulting Group, LLC, and Department of Pathology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
  • Bolen NL; Medical Technologist II, Immunohematology Reference Laboratory, ITxM Diagnostics, Richmond, VA.
  • Meny G; Director, Medical Affairs Diagnostic, Grifols Diagnostic Solutions, San Marcos, TX.
  • Kalvelage M; Chief Operations Officer, LifeShare Blood Center, 8910 Linwood Avenue, Shreveport, LA.
  • Ochoa-Garay G; Scientific Director, Immunohematology Center, Grifols Diagnostic Solutions, San Marcos, TX.
Immunohematology ; 36(4): 123-128, 2020 Dec.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33544616
ABSTRACT

CONCLUSIONS:

In recent years, polymerase chain reaction-based genotyping platforms, which provide a predicted phenotype, have increased in both patient and high-throughput donor testing, especially in situations where serologic methods or reagents are limited. This study looks at the concordance rate between two platforms commercially available in the United States when used for testing samples from patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), a group particularly vulnerable to alloimmunization. DNA extracted from samples from 138 patients with SCD was tested by human erythrocyte antigen (HEA) BeadChip (Immucor, Norcross, GA) and by ID CORE XT (Progenika-Grifols, Barcelona, Spain). Predicted phenotype results were compared, and a concordance rate was calculated. Discrepancies were resolved by Sanger sequencing. All testing was done under an institutional review board-approved protocol. A concordance rate of 99.9 percent was obtained. Sanger sequencing was performed on four samples with discrepancies in the Rh blood group system. Three samples had a similar allelic variant detected by ID CORE XT. Two of the three discrepant samples were correctly identified as V+w, VS- by ID CORE XT but not by HEA BeadChip. The third sample, predicted to have a phenotype of V+, VS+ by sequencing, was called correctly by HEA BeadChip but not by ID CORE XT, which had predicted V+w, VS-. The fourth discrepancy was identified in a sample that ID CORE XT accurately identified as RHCE*ce[712G] and predicted a partial c phenotype. This result was confirmed by Sanger sequencing, whereas HEA BeadChip found no variants and predicted a c+ phenotype. The high concordance rate of the two methods, along with the known limitations of serology, warrant further discussion regarding the practice of serologic confirmation of extended phenotypes. Clinical significance of the identified discrepancies remains to be determined.
Subject(s)
Search on Google
Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Blood Group Antigens / Polymerase Chain Reaction / Genotyping Techniques / Anemia, Sickle Cell Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: Immunohematology Journal subject: ALERGIA E IMUNOLOGIA / HEMATOLOGIA Year: 2020 Type: Article Affiliation country: Vatican City
Search on Google
Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Blood Group Antigens / Polymerase Chain Reaction / Genotyping Techniques / Anemia, Sickle Cell Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: Immunohematology Journal subject: ALERGIA E IMUNOLOGIA / HEMATOLOGIA Year: 2020 Type: Article Affiliation country: Vatican City