A simple diagnostic strategy for RhD typing in discrepant cases in the Indian population

Molecular basis of RhD-negative phenotype in North Indian blood donor population

Background & objectives

RHD gene typing is highly complex due to homology with RHCE genes. Molecular polymorphism of the RHCE and RHD genes have been characterized among various populations, but no studies have been undertaken among Indians. This study was undertaken to assess the genetic basis of RHD-negative phenotype in Indian blood donor population.

Methods

Sample from a total of 200 phenotypically RhD-negative blood donors were analyzed for presence of RHD gene using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). RHD genotyping was done using three primer sets designed for exons 4 and 10 and one set for identification of pseudo (RHDΨ) gene between introns (int) 3 and 4. Amplified PCR products were analyzed by gel-electrophoresis (XY Loper, Uvitech, Cambridge) and confirmed by nucleotide sequencing (ABI 3730 xl 96 capillary system).

Results

No PCR product was found in 195/200 (97.5%) of study samples indicating homozygous gene deletion. Of the 5/200 (2.5%) showing RHD gene polymorphisms, 4/200 (2%) were positive for presence of exon 10 only (RHD-CE-D hybrid). RHDΨ gene was not detected in any of the samples tested. One sample showed presence of all three tested regions and was negative for RHDΨ gene.

Interpretation & conclusions

RHD gene deletion was found to be the most common cause of an RHD-negative phenotype while RHDΨ gene was, reported to be present in up to 39 per cent of various ethnic populations, but was not detected. RHD-CE-D hybrid gene (found in 2.5% individuals) is important for predicting the requirement of Rh prophylaxis during the antenatal period.

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.

Impact of a confirmatory RhD test on the correct serologic typing of blood donors

BACKGROUND

The RHD gene is highly polymorphic, which results in a large number of RhD variant phenotypes. Discrepancies in RhD typing are still a problem in blood banks and increase the risk of alloimmunization. In this study, the RhD typing strategy at a blood bank in Brazil was evaluated.

METHODS

One-hundred and fifty-two samples typed as RhD negative and C or E positive by routine tests (automated system and indirect antiglobulin test using the tube technique) were reevaluated for RhD status by three methods. The method with the best performance was implemented and evaluated for a period of one year (n=4897 samples). Samples that were D positive exclusively in the confirmatory test were submitted to molecular analysis.

RESULTS

The gel test for indirect antiglobulin testing with anti-D immunoglobulin G (clone ESD1) presented the best results. Seventy samples (1.43%) previously typed as RhD negative showed reactivity in the gel test for indirect antiglobulin testing and were reclassified as D positive. D variants that may cause alloimmunization, such as weak D type 2 and partial D(VI), were detected.

CONCLUSION

The confirmatory RhD test using the gel test for indirect antiglobulin testing represents a breakthrough in transfusion safety in this blood center. Our results emphasize the importance of assessing the blood group typing strategy in blood banks.