Anti-D Antibodies in Pregnant D Variant Antigen Carriers Initially Typed as RhD

Hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn-a perspective of immunohematology

BACKGROUND

Hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn is a public health problem caused by maternal-fetal incompatibility; no prophylaxis is available for most alloantibodies that induce this disease. This study reviews the literature regarding which antibodies are the most common in maternal plasma and which were involved in hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn.

METHOD

Seventy-five studies were included in this review using a systematic search. Two independent authors identified studies of interest from the PubMed and SciELO databases.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four case reports were identified, of which 11 babies evolved to death. From 17 prevalence studies, the alloimmunization rate was 0.17 % with 161 babies receiving intrauterine transfusions and 23 receiving transfusions after birth. From 28 studies with alloimmunized pregnant women (7616 women), 455 babies received intrauterine transfusions and 21 received transfusions after birth.

CONCLUSION

Rh, Kell, and MNS were the commonest blood systems involved. The geographical distribution of studies shows that as these figures vary between continents, more studies should be performed in different countries. Investing in early diagnosis is important to manage the risks and complications of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn.

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.

Misclassification of RhD variants among pregnant women: a systematic review

The D antigen of the Rh blood group is considered clinically significant due to its ability to cause hemolytic transfusion reactions and hemolytic disease in the fetus and newborn. This systematic review discusses the prevalence of RhD variants among pregnant women and the importance of including RhD genotyping for prenatal testing to detect RhD variants and prevent anti-D alloimmunization. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using scientific search engines, including PubMed and MEDLINE databases, with the keywords 'anti-D alloimmunization', 'RhD variant', and 'pregnant women.' The review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed using MedCalc version 20. A significance level of p≤0.05 was considered statistically significant for all two-tailed tests. The meta-analysis included four articles that met the inclusion criteria. The total prevalence of RhD positivity (RhD+) was 61% (95% CI:34%-85%). The prevalence ranged from 22% to 82%, indicating a high degree of heterogeneity between studies (I2=98.71%, p<0.0001). The overall prevalence of D variants was 15% (95% CI, 9%-23%) with a prevalence of 0.05% to 100%, showing a high degree of heterogeneity between studies (I2=99.89%, p<0.0001). Anti-D alloimmunization could occur in pregnant women with some types of RhD variants. All four studies focused on molecular testing of samples showing inconsistent or weak results with at least two anti-D antibodies using serological methods.

Transfusion support for a woman with RHD*09.01.02 and the novel RHD*01W.161 allele in trans

According to recent work group recommendations, individuals with the serologic weak D phenotypes should be RHD genotyped and individuals with molecular weak D types 1, 2, 3, 4.0, or 4.1 should be treated as D+. We report an African American woman with a long-standing history of metrorrhagia, who presented for infertility evaluation. Blood grouping showed AB with a possible subgroup of A, based on mixed-field agglutination, and a serologic weak D phenotype. Results from routine red cell genotyping for the RHD gene was incongruent with the serologic RhCE phenotype. For the surgical procedure, the patient was hence scheduled to receive group AB, D- RBC transfusions. Subsequent molecular analysis identified the ABO*A2.01 and ABO*B.01 alleles for the ABO genotype and the novel RHD allele [NG_007494.1(RHD):c.611T>A] along with an RHD*09.01.02 allele for the RHD genotype. Using a panel of monoclonal anti-D reagents, we showed the novel RHD(I204K) allele to represent a serologic weak D phenotype, despite occurring as a compound heterozygote, designated RHD*weak D type 161 (RHD*01W.161). Individuals with a weak D type 4.2 allele are prone to anti-D immunization, while the immunization potential of novel RHD alleles is difficult to predict. For now, patients should be treated as D- in transfusion and pregnancy management, when they harbor a novel RHD allele along with any weak D allele other than weak D types 1, 2, 3, 4.0, or 4.1. This study exemplifies strategies for how and when a laboratory should proceed from routine genotyping to nucleotide sequencing before any decisions on transfusion practice is made.

Variable reactivity of Rh D antigen and its serological characterization

Background: Variation in the reactivity on Rh D typing may pose challenges in interpretation and ambiguity in further patient management.Materials and Methods: A prospective study was conducted in the department of transfusion medicine for a period of 18 months. Blood grouping was performed by fully automated equipment employing column agglutination technique. All the samples with Rh D negative or discrepant reactions were subjected to weak D testing by the antihuman globulin testing method. Samples that tested positive were categorized as serological weak D type or Variant D and were further phenotyped with Partial D typing set with 6 monoclonal anti D antisera.Results: A total of 82,824 samples were tested for Rh D type during the study period. Of the study population, 65.7% were males. On Rh D type majority were Rh D positive (93%), 6.9% were negative, and the result was discrepant in 0.1% (70) samples. The overall prevalence of variant D was 1.28% (75) of the Rh D negative population and 0.09% of the total study population. The detection rate of variant D phenotype was significantly higher by the Column agglutination technique. Upon testing with Partial D kit, the partial D variant in the majority reacted wil all the 6 antisera and hence we could not rule out DIII(60%), in rest it was inconclusive. In 43% of subjects with Rh D discrepancy 'C' antigen was found in a homozygous state.Conclusion: The introduction of partial D typing kit alone may not help in the absolute characterization of variant D. Extended serological testing and selective integration of molecular testing is the need of the hour.

Maternal red blood cell alloimmunisation Working Party, literature review. RH blood group system: Rare specificities

This report is part of a series reporting the GRADE review performed by the 2018-2020 French Working Party on maternal red blood cell alloimmunisation. This report focusses on the clinical significance in obstetrics, as published in the scientific literature, of the rare RH antibodies, variants and antigens (i.e. excluding conventional RH1 trough RH8 antigens, RH12, RH22 and RH27, which are discussed in other reports of this series). Extremely severe or severe haemolytic disease of the fetus and the newborn (HDFN), leading to death or requiring transfusions, have been reported for: anti-RH1 (-D) associated with DVI, DBT and DIVb phenotypes, RHD*12.04 (DOL4), RHD*03.03 (DIIIc), RHD*D-CE(2-5)-D, RHD*01EL.31 (RHD*148+1T), anti-RH9 (-C^X), anti-RH11 (-E^W), anti-RH17 (-Hr⁰), anti-RH18 (-Hr), anti-RH19 (-hr^S), anti-RH23 (-D^W), anti-RH29 ("total" Rh), anti-RH30 (-Go^a), anti-RH32, anti-RH34 (-Hr^B), anti-RH36 (-Be^a), anti-RH40 (-Tar), anti-RH46 (-Sec), anti-RH48 (-JAL), anti-RH54 (DAK), and antibodies to high prevalence antigens such as those associated with RHCE*02.08.02 (RHCE*C^W-RHD(6-10)), RHCE*03N.01 (RHCE*cEMI). HDFN of moderate, mild or undetailed severity have been reported for: anti-RH1 associated with DHar, DIIIa and DIVa phenotypes, RHD*01EL.08 (RHD*486+1A),RHD*01EL.44 (RHD*D-CE(4-9)-D),RHD*25 (DNB), anti-RH20 (-VS), anti-RH31 (-hr^B), anti-RH37 (-Evans), ani-RH42, anti-RH49 (-STEM), anti-RH51 (-MAR), anti-RH55 (-LOCR), anti-RH58 (-CELO). Positive direct antiglobulin test in the newborn but no clinically significant HDFN has been reported for anti-RH1 (-D) associated with RHD*10.05 (DAU5), RHD*12.02 (DOL2). Because so many specificities are associated with severe HDFN in the RH system, all RH antibodies should be considered as potentially able to cause HDFN, even if none has been reported yet.

A Review of the Literature Organized Into a New Database: RHeference

Hundreds of articles containing heterogeneous data describe D variants or add to the knowledge of known alleles. Data can be difficult to find despite existing online blood group resources and genetic and literature databases. We have developed a modern, elaborate database for D variants, thanks to an extensive literature search with meticulous curation of 387 peer-reviewed articles and 80 abstracts from major conferences and other sources. RHeference contains entries for 710 RHD alleles, 11 RHCE alleles, 30 phenotype descriptions (preventing data loss from historical sources), 35 partly characterized alleles, 3 haplotypes, and 16 miscellaneous entries. The entries include molecular, phenotypic, serological, alloimmunization, haplotype, geographical, and other data, detailed for each source. The main characteristics are summarized for each entry. The sources for all information are included and easily accessible through doi and PMID links. Overall, the database contains more than 10,000 individual pieces of data. We have set up the database architecture based on our previous expertise on database setup and biocuration for other topics, using modern technologies such as the Django framework, BioPython, Bootstrap, and Jquery. This architecture allows an easy access to data and enables simple and complex queries: combining multiple mutations, keywords, or any of the characteristics included in the database. RHeference provides a complement to existing resources and will continue to grow as our knowledge expands and new articles are published. The database url is http://www.rheference.org/.

Racial/ethnic disparities among women receiving intrauterine transfusions for alloimmunization at a single fetal treatment center

Disparities are prevalent in numerous areas of healthcare. We sought to investigate whether there were racial/ethnic disparities among pregnant women with the most severe form of alloimmunization who require intrauterine transfusions (IUT). We reviewed patients who underwent IUT for alloimmunization at a single fetal treatment center between 2015 and 2020. This "IUT cohort" was compared to an "Alloimmunization cohort": patients seen at our institution with a diagnosis of alloimmunization during pregnancy, who did not receive IUT. We collected maternal demographics including self-identified race/ethnicity and primary language, transfusion, and antibody characteristics. The cohorts were compared using unpaired t-tests, Mann-Whitney tests, and Fischer's exact tests, as appropriate. The IUT cohort included 43 patients and the alloimmunization cohort included 1049 patients. Compared to the alloimmunization cohort, there were significantly more patients of Latina descent in the IUT cohort (23.3% vs. 3.4%, p < .0001), and more non-English speakers (18.6% vs. 4.6%, p = .001). Twenty-one percent (9/43) of patients had immigrated to the United States, all of whom had pregnancies or miscarriages in their country of origin. A third of patients had new antibodies identified on serial screens during the current pregnancy. Significantly more women of Latina ethnicity and non-English speakers required IUTs compared to the cohort of women with alloimmunization. Insufficient access to care prior to arriving in the United States and among racial and ethnic minorities in the United States may contribute to these findings. Providers should be cognizant of potential, racial, and ethnic inequalities among women receiving intrauterine transfusions.

Hemolytic Disease of the Fetus and Newborn: Historical and Current State

Hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) is an immune-mediated disorder affecting neonates globally, with a range of clinical presentations from severe and life threatening to mild or even asymptomatic. Historically, HDFN has been responsible for a large proportion of perinatal mortality, and, despite advances in diagnosis and management, this morbidity and mortality has not been eradicated. Blood banking techniques and blood transfusion have contributed to improved prophylaxis and management, drastically improving the outcome of newborns with HDFN over the last century.

Frequency and characterization of RHD variants in serologically D- Surinamese pregnant women and D- newborns

BACKGROUND

Numerous RHD variant genes affect the expression of D on the red blood cell surface. In Suriname, 4.3% of pregnant women were D-, ranging from virtually zero to 7% among ethnic groups. Characterization of RHD variants, which are associated with a variable potential to induce anti-D, is of practical clinical importance especially in case of limited access to preventive measures. Here we report on the occurrence of RHD variant genes in Surinamese serologically D- pregnant women and their D- newborns from different ethnic groups.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The RheSuN study is a cross-sectional cohort study in D- pregnant women and their newborns, who visited hospitals in Paramaribo, Suriname, during routine pregnancy care. The presence of RHD variants was investigated using quantitative polymerase chain reaction targeting RHD Exons 5 and 7 and RH-multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification.

RESULTS

Seven RHD variant genes were detected in 35 of 84 women and four RHD variant genes in 15 of 36 newborns. The RHD*03 N.01 and RHD*08 N.01 variants represented 87% of a total of 62 variant genes. Variants were comparably frequent among ethnicities. In four cases genotyping would have changed anti-D prophylaxis policy: one woman with a RHD*01EL.01 variant, not associated with anti-D formation and three D- newborns with RHD*09.01 and RHD*09.03.01 variants, potentially capable of inducing anti-D.

CONCLUSION

RHD variants at risk for anti-D are common among serologic D- individuals from African descent in Suriname. While genotyping D- women has limited added value, it may be considered in newborns from D- women.

Anti-D-induced severe hemolytic disease of the newborn in an Omani newborn born a rhesus-positive mother

Hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) due to anti-D antibodies is a well-known complication of rhesus (Rh) incompatibility, encountered in D-positive babies born to alloimmunized D-negative mothers who have been sensitized during previous labor or abortion. Here, we report a case of significant hemolytic disease of the newborn due to the presence of anti-D antibodies in an Rh-positive baby born to an Rh-positive mother. The boy presented at day 1 of life with neonatal jaundice and required intensive phototherapy. His hemoglobin (Hb) concentration gradually dropped from 17 g/dL to 6.6 g/dL. The blood bank workup revealed O Rh-positive blood group, with a positive direct antiglobulin test (DAT) and confirmed the presence of anti-D antibodies. His mother was typed as O Rh positive, with a negative DAT and positive anti-D. He required two blood transfusions, and his Hb stabilized at the age of 7 weeks. Anti-D HDFN is a rare complication of Rh-positive and Rh-weak positive pregnancies. The lack of awareness of this phenomenon is often a source of confusion for clinicians. A literature review of similar cases and possible explanations are discussed.

Serological weak D phenotypes: a review and guidance for interpreting the RhD blood type using the RHD genotype

Approximately 0·2-1% of routine RhD blood typings result in a "serological weak D phenotype." For more than 50 years, serological weak D phenotypes have been managed by policies to protect RhD-negative women of child-bearing potential from exposure to weak D antigens. Typically, blood donors with a serological weak D phenotype have been managed as RhD-positive, in contrast to transfusion recipients and pregnant women, who have been managed as RhD-negative. Most serological weak D phenotypes in Caucasians express molecularly defined weak D types 1, 2 or 3 and can be managed safely as RhD-positive, eliminating unnecessary injections of Rh immune globulin and conserving limited supplies of RhD-negative RBCs. If laboratories in the UK, Ireland and other European countries validated the use of potent anti-D reagents to result in weak D types 1, 2 and 3 typing initially as RhD-positive, such laboratory results would not require further testing. When serological weak D phenotypes are detected, laboratories should complete RhD testing by determining RHD genotypes (internally or by referral). Individuals with a serological weak D phenotype should be managed as RhD-positive or RhD-negative, according to their RHD genotype.

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.