海报文摘

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 GENETICS & HEREDITY International Journal of Immunogenetics Pub Date : 2022-09-04 DOI:10.1111/iji.12586
{"title":"海报文摘","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/iji.12586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b><span>Anthony Calvert</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Anthony Poles<sup>1</sup>, Matthew Hopkins<sup>1</sup>, Tim Hayes<sup>2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Filton, UK; <sup>2</sup>Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, UK</i></p><p>Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare complication of heparin therapy with mild thrombocytopenia but potentially fatal thrombosis. HIT antibodies target the epitope of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. Laboratory investigations commonly detect antibodies by ELISA. The British Society for Haematology guidelines suggest clinical significant IgG antibodies equate to an OD &gt; 1.0. Studies show an OD ≥ 1.4 corresponds with ≥50% chance of positive serotonin release assay (SRA) (Warkentin et al. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 6(8):1304-12).</p><p>Common practice for a HIT positive patient is repeat testing until a negative result indicates the safe use of Heparin, which is then administered pre-procedure and ceased immediately afterwards. Conditioning includes antibody titre reduction by plasmapheresis, multiple sessions are costly and can delay surgery. PF4/heparin antibodies are detected in 5-22% cardiac surgery patients but only 1%–2% have HIT (Pishko et al. Semin Thromb Hemost 2017; 43(7): 691-698).</p><p>A HIT positive pre-transplant patient was tested after each plasmapheresis using ELISA (Immucor HAT45G) and a platelet activation assay (IQ Products HITAlert) to compare HIT antibody levels with ability to activate platelets. Results showed an OD &gt; 1.4 associated with positive activation, comparable to Warkentin's observations. The advantage of HITAlert is it detects functional antibodies and measures the expression of activation markers by flow cytometry, not radiolabelled serotonin release. The assay is then suitable for use in the routine laboratory environment, but requires freshly isolated (&lt;2 h) ABO O platelets.</p><p>The patient received a successful heart transplant after the first negative activation result, sooner than waiting for negative ELISA results.</p><p><b><span>Carla Rosser</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK</i></p><p>The use of antibody-epitope analysis tools can improve the interpretation of in vitro HLA antibody identification assay data, particularly for identification of false positive reactions. HLA antibody-epitope analysis using HLAMatchmaker was performed on 22 crossmatched sera where donor-specific antibody (DSA) had previously been identified by One Lambda LABScreen™ Single Antigen (LABScreen). These sera were retrospectively tested by Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES) and BAG Healthcare HISTO SPOT® (HISTO SPOT) assays.</p><p>All three HLA antibody identification assays identified DSA in serum that did not cause a positive flow-cytometric crossmatch (FCXM). Antibody-epitope analysis supports the presence of DSA in 12/22 of these sera, indicating a higher sensitivity of the solid phase assays compared to the FCXM. However, antibody-epitope analysis was unable to explain 13% (5/39) of LABScreen DSA, compared to 5% (1/19) by LIFECODES and 0% (0/9) by HISTO SPOT. In this selected sera cohort (i.e. LABScreen DSA positive), 50% of HISTO SPOT, 33% of LIFECODES assays and 8% by LABScreen correctly predicted a negative FCXM result. All three assays demonstrated 100% concordance for sera with a positive FCXM (10/22).</p><p>Disparities between the antibody identification assays, particularly LABScreen and LIFECODES occurred in several samples, where different interpretations of antibody-epitope interactions could explain the antibody reaction pattern. This data illustrates the benefits of verifying antibody assay results where they are being used for clinical risk interpretation. Whilst antibody-epitope analysis is complex and challenging to introduce routinely in a clinical laboratory, it offers the opportunity to develop a better understanding of complex antibody profiles.</p><p><b><span>Rachel Smith</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Fiona Powell<sup>1</sup>, Betia Nouri<sup>1</sup>, Mazen Mabrok<sup>1</sup>, Ambika Camille<sup>1</sup>, Renuka Palanicawander<sup>1</sup>, Eduardo Olavarria<sup>1</sup>, Arthi Anand<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK</i></p><p>Post transplant HLA typing at the H&amp;I laboratory, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust is a new concept driven by the increased numbers of haploidentical transplants being performed and the implementation of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) HLA typing.</p><p>Thirty percent of patients transplanted with a haploidentical donor go on to relapse. Treatment choices differ depending on whether the patient is relapsing with or without HLA loss. NGS HLA typing can help determine if relapse is occurring with HLA loss due to its increased sensitivity. Relapse with HLA loss is defined as the genomic loss or downregulation of the patient's mismatched haplotype in the re-emerging leukaemic cells. This is an attempt by the cancer to evade the graft vs. leukaemic effect (GvL) by donor T cells. Donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI), a common relapse treatment post HPCT is not recommended for those patients experiencing HLA loss due to the increased risk of Graft vs Host Disease without the benefit of the GvL response.</p><p>Here we describe two cases where post transplant HLA typing made a significant impact on treatment choice. Both patients experienced relapse following a haploidentical sibling transplant. NGS HLA typing was performed at the point of relapse diagnosis and these results combined with the post transplant chimerism and cytogeneic testing confirmed that one patient was experiencing HLA loss while the other was not. As a result, the patient experiencing relapse with HLA loss went on to have a second haploidentical transplant while DLI's were considered for the patient relapsing without HLA loss.</p><p><b><span>Anna Barker</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Laura Ford<sup>1</sup>, Stephine Whiteside<sup>1</sup>, Poppy Greenaway<sup>1</sup>, Rebecca Dench<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>Lineage specific chimaerism analysis for engraftment monitoring following stem cell transplantation has greatly increased; by 51% in the past 2 years.</p><p>Sample processing is required within 24 h of the blood samples being taken, hence those received on a Friday must be processed the same day. Extending the time to cell separation beyond 24 h was investigated as part of a review of laboratory workflow, with the aim of reducing pressure on staff time and instrumentation.</p><p>CD3+ and CD15+ cells were isolated from blood using RoboSep™-S (STEMCELL™ Technologies) automated cell separators. Samples from four patients were each processed at three time points (samples 1–3 at 1, 3 and 5 days, sample 4 at 3, 6, and 7 days). Extracted DNA was tested as for routine chimerism using the GenePrint<sup>®</sup> 24 System (Promega). The purity of each isolated cell population was determined using flow cytometry.</p><p>There was no detrimental effect of sample age up to 5 days (in one case 7 days) on purity of the cell population, percentage donor chimaerism (Table 1), and electropherogram peak height (all &gt; 3000 RFU).</p><p>Although it is best to process samples immediately, workload can often exceed instrument capacity and the time available to process the samples. Quality of the results is not affected up to 5 days, which means that samples received late on a Friday can be processed on Monday, reducing pressure on staff time.</p><p><b><span>Eva Santos-nunez</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Katrina Spensley<sup>2</sup>, Corinna Freeman<sup>3</sup>, Michelle Willicombe<sup>2</sup>, Arthi Anand<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>H&amp;I Laboratory Hammersmith Hospital, North West London Pathology hosted by Imperial College NHS Trust, London, UK; <sup>2</sup>West London Renal and Transplant Centre, Imperial College NHS Trust, London, UK; <sup>3</sup>Clinical Transplant Laboratory (Viapath), Guy's Hospital, London, UK</i></p><p><b>Introduction</b>: Using algorithms to calculate molecular mismatches requires HLA typing at high resolution or second field (2F). However, this level of resolution is not always available. To overcome this, computer algorithms to infer second field genotypes can be used.</p><p><b>Aim</b>: To determine the accuracy of using a 2F prediction algorithm, Easy-HLA (https://hla.univ-nantes.fr/recherche/recherche.php) and whether discrepancies in results lead to differences in the molecular mismatch scores of two epitope analysis tools.</p><p><b>Methods</b>: HLA types of 28 renal transplant recipients generated by PCR-SSO (<i>n</i> = 23) and PCR-SSP (<i>n</i> = 5) were uploaded to the “HLA-Upgrade tool” of Easy-HLA. Samples were re-typed by NGS and results compared. HLA eplet mismatch load and PIRCHE II scores were calculated using HLAMatchmaker (www.epitopes.net) and PIRCHE-II algorithm (www.pirche.com).</p><p><b>Results</b>: The accuracy of the estimated 2F alleles per locus was HLA-A (93.5%), HLA-B (95.7%), HLA-C (93.5%), HLA-DRB1 (91.3%), HLA-DQB1 (97.8%) for SSO upgrades (E-SSO), and 80.0%, 80.0%, 80.0%, 60.0% and 40.0% for SSP upgrades (E-SSP). Ethnic accuracy differences were also noted; White (97.5%), Black (94.4%), Asian (91.2%) and Other (90.0%).</p><p>E-SSO concordance using HLA Matchmaker was 96% and 100% for Class I and II respectively, 60% and 40% for E-SSP. Deviations in PIRCHE II scores were seen in 7/23 (30%) of E-SSO samples (range 0–62) and 3/5 (60%) of E-SSP samples (range 0–95).</p><p><b>Conclusion</b>: In summary, it is possible to successfully infer 2F data from intermediate level typing. The accuracy may be improved by using intermediate (SSO) typing results and statistical and population genetics data provided by algorithms such Easy-HLA.</p><p><b><span>Emma Holmes</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Jennifer Gauss<sup>1</sup>, Sue Jordan<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK</i></p><p>Virtual crossmatching is widely used to assess compatibility between a renal transplant recipient and deceased donor to reduce cold ischaemia time. At NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, only patients that are HLA antibody negative and have not been previously transplanted are eligible for a virtual crossmatch. Seven hundred and thirty-five deceased donor crossmatches carried out from 2016 to 2020, from which 494 patients were transplanted, were analysed to determine whether the eligibility criteria could be extended to include HLA antibody positive patients that did not have a donor specific antibody (DSA) directed against the prospective donor. Five hundred and two (68%) HLA antibody negative patients were crossmatched, of which 383 were completed by virtual crossmatch. One hundred and twenty-seven (17%) laboratory crossmatches were performed for HLA antibody positive patients in the absence of DSA. All of these were reported as having a standard immunological risk, in line with the BSHI/BTS guidelines, which indicates that laboratory crossmatching did not provide additional information, beyond HLA antibody testing, that could have altered clinical patient management. One hundred and six (14%) laboratory crossmatches were performed for HLA antibody positive patients in the presence of DSA. All three groups include patients that have previously been transplanted. Analysis of clinical rejection episodes reported to NHSBT-OTDT showed that there were similar rates of acute rejection between the three patient groups. In light of this data, the virtual crossmatch policy has been extended to include sensitised patients in the absence of DSA. HLA antibody testing is used to confirm the patient's antibody profile remains unchanged at the time of transplant.</p><p><b><span>Jennifer Gauss</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Susan Jordan<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHSBT, London, UK</i></p><p>Characterisation of a renal transplant recipient's HLA antibodies is necessary to assess their compatibility with a potential deceased or living donor. Single Antigen Bead (SAB) solid phase assays have simplified antibody analysis, however defining these antibodies by their epitope/eplet targets, rather than by their antigen targets, is considered more clinically relevant. In this case study, we present a 46-year-old, previously transplanted, male renal patient whose serum we tested using the One Lambda Labscreen SAB assay and was found to have antibodies directed at HLA-DP that could not be defined by a DPB1 or DPA1 target alone. Using a combination of the epitope registry and publicly available crystal structures it was determined that DPA1 position 50 (Glutamine,Q or Arginine,R) and DPB1 postion 85–87 (Glutamic Acid-Alanine-Valine (EAV) or Glycine-Proline-Methionine (GPM)) could feasibly constitute a single antibody target. Re-analysis of this patient's SAB profile showed that only the DP antigens that were Q and EAV at the aforementioned positions were positive. HLA-DP typing by NGS showed the patient was Q-GPM. Further HLA antibody testing using Immucor Lifecodes Single Antigen kits and Labscreen Supplementary Class II SAB kits also resulted in DP antibody profiles that could be explained by a Q-EAV epitope target. Absorption of this patient's antibodies only occurred when incubated with a cell carrying Q-EAV DP molecules; no absorption occurred with Q-GPM. Incorporating possible combined alpha-beta chain epitopes into epitope analysis software and listing epitopes, rather than antigens, as unacceptable, will provide a more targeted approach to compatibility assessment in the future.</p><p><b><span>Sejal Morjaria</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Arun Gupta<sup>1</sup>, Delordson M Kallon<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Clinical Transplantation Laboratory, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK</i></p><p>Thymus transplantation is an emerging clinical option for babies born with no thymus, a symptom associated with DiGeorge syndrome (DGS).</p><p>Patient AN (3 months, female), diagnosed with DGS in early 2019, received an unconditioned thymus transplant in July 2019 from an unrelated donor at Great Ormond Street Hospital. No prior donor or recipient HLA typing was performed. Three-month biopsies did not detect thymic epithelium and there was no immune reconstitution after 1 year. Pre-transplant serum tested by Luminex single antigen assay showed no pre-existing donor specific antibodies (DSAs). However, by October 2019 the patient had developed de novo DQ7 DSA &gt; 5000 MFI with signs of rejection.</p><p>Subsequently, the patient's DSA levels decreased and she was considered for a second transplant. Due to the presence of HLA antibodies, the H&amp;I laboratory advised the clinical team to HLA type potential donors. Donor samples were typed by qPCR and a second thymus transplant was undertaken in January 2022 with cyclosporine induction. The patient was monitored weekly for DSA, developing de novo A24 DSA &lt; 2000 MFI after 2 weeks, increasing to &gt;2000 MFI at 3 weeks. Additional de novo DQA1*05 DSAs were detected at month post-transplant (peak DSA &gt; 10,000 MFI).</p><p>AN was treated with rituximab followed by three cycles of plasma exchange with HLA antibody monitoring after each cycle. After three cycles her DSA levels had stabilised around 3000 MFI and the patient continues to be monitored.</p><p>This case highlights the role of the H&amp;I laboratory in facilitating thymus transplants and helping to avoid antibody mediated rejection.</p><p><b><span>Paul Wright</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Marcus Lowe<sup>1</sup>, Robin Kippax<sup>1</sup>, Anna Barker<sup>1</sup>, Alison Logan<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup>, Natalia Diaz Burlinson<sup>1</sup>, Stephen Sheldon<sup>1</sup>, Kay Poulton<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>HLA allele frequency data is beneficial for identifying patients for which it may be challenging to find a suitable unrelated donor, and in routine analysis of genotyping data when scrutinising results. Despite the many advancements in genotyping the HLA gene complex, with next generation sequencing providing higher resolution typing than previously possible, there are few tools and reference materials available with high resolution data. Coding using Python was developed for extracting HLA allele frequency data from the local next generation sequencing services. Data from 11 HLA loci (HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1/3/4/5, -DQA1, -DQB1, -DPA1, -DPB1) were collected from all samples tested using AlloSeq HLA Tx17 next generation sequencing (CareDx, USA) with the MiSeq platform (Illumina, USA) (using the IMGT/HLA v3.43 reference data set) between April and December 2021 (<i>n</i> = 1636). Data for all loci were presented as allele frequency, with the exception of HLA-DRB3/4/5, which were presented as carrier frequency. This data set provides the department with new insights into high resolution HLA allele frequencies, such as the allele frequencies of HLA-DQA1 and -DPA1, and the allele frequencies at third field resolution for various alleles, such as HLA-A*68:01:01 (freq = 0.0122) versus A*68:01:02 (freq = 0.0251) and HLA-B*44:03:01 (freq = 0.0504) versus B*44:03:02 (freq = 0.0067). The next aim of the project is to advance the current data set to allow analysis by patient type (for example, deceased donor or renal transplantation patients) and to develop a data set for assessing HLA linkage disequilibrium frequencies at third field resolution.</p><p><b><span>Kim McShane</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Emma Burrows<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Pritchard<sup>1</sup>, Tracey Rees<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Welsh Transplantation and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Talbot Green, UK</i></p><p>Recent case reports have revealed HNA-3a antibodies are associated with increased antibody-mediated rejection and graft loss in kidney allograft recipients. Ninety-five percent of the UK population is HNA-3a antigen positive.</p><p>Two multi-parous female transfused patients presented with unexplained strong positive deceased donor T and B-cell flow cytometry crossmatch (XM). Further investigation confirmed them as HNA-3b/3b with HNA-3a antibodies. Both partners typed as HNA-3a antigen positive, indicating antibodies were likely to be pregnancy stimulated. Patient 1 was deemed unsuitable for transplantation due to co-morbidities. HNA compatible family donors were investigated for patient two with no success. This patient remains on the deceased donor list, but is expected to be FCXM positive with 95% of offers. Live donor transplantation with antibody removal is under consideration.</p><p>Due to the risk of HNA antibodies being missed by virtual XM, and reported poorer clinical outcomes, we subsequently screened patients awaiting kidney transplant (<i>n</i> = 298) for HNA antibodies using the LABScreen Multi kit, as this kit is currently used in our laboratory for TRALI risk reduction. Samples with a positive HNA-3 result (<i>n</i> = 22, 7.4%) were referred to a reference laboratory for confirmatory testing. Two (0.67%) were confirmed to be positive for HNA-3a antibodies. False positive rate 9%.</p><p>To mitigate the risk to virtual crossmatching, we now HNA antibody screen (once) all kidney transplant patients. Confirmed positives are unsuitable for virtual XM. HNA genotyping as a first line test is being considered to identify the 5% of patients requiring HNA-3 antibody testing.</p><p><b><span>Blanka Zamostna</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Cem Mak<sup>1</sup>, Jasper Taal<sup>1</sup>, Pavel Jiroutek<sup>1</sup>, Doug Bost<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>JETA Molecular, Utrecht, the Netherlands</i></p><p>Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an established cure for haematological disorders. Early, accurate, and sensitive determination of hematopoietic chimerism is crucial for the adjustment of a transplant recipient's treatment. Onventional STR and qPCR methods to detect graft failure after HSCT are limited by their dynamic range of analysis (STR-PCR: 5%−100% and qPCR:0,1%−30%). Digital PCR (dPCR) is a 3rd generation technology and has proved in many studies to combine end point quantification over a wide measurement range (0.01%−90%) with excellent sensitivity, accuracy and reproducibility.</p><p>We have developed and validated a system of 42 dPCR assays and software enabling highly sensitive stem cell engraftment monitoring. Our approach allows for facile quantification of minute amounts of minor components in a mixture, while reducing workflow and analysis burdens. Each assay was validated using at least three independent control DNA mixtures with concentrations ranging from 90% down to 0.05% minor component in the presence of 50ngs input DNA. The results obtained using dPCR were concordant with the values generated using qPCR.</p><p>The use of dPCR allows for sensitive and precise quantification of target DNA and due to its unparalleled sensitivity, this technique represents a particularly useful diagnostic tool in chimerism monitoring. In comparison with the wide used qPCR chimerism analysis, dPCR has been shown to anticipate a relapse significantly earlier and therefore, it may guide timely post-transplantation therapeutic interventions. Compared to NGS methods, this system can deliver 72 answers within one working day, with highly reduced cost per sample and hands on time.</p><p><b><span>Olivia Shaw</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Chloe Martin<sup>1</sup>, Deeya Balgobin<sup>1</sup>, Sarah Blears<sup>1</sup>, Corinna Freeman<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Viapath, London, UK</i></p><p>HNA-3 specific antibody may be implicated in rejection episodes following renal transplantation (Key et.al. J Renal Transplant Sci, 2(2):81–84). HNA-3 is bi-allelic, −3a/−3b, and homozygote individuals may develop antibody to the non-self variant.</p><p>HNA-3 is expressed on a variety of cell types including lymphocytes, leading to positive T and B cell flow crossmatches, and renal endothelial cells, thus a target for rejection.</p><p>Following two local cases of AMR in the face of HNA-3a specific antibody, and cases of positive crossmatches attributable to HNA-3a or -b specific antibody, we have introduced a screening programme for HNA-3 specific antibody using LABScreen Multi (OneLambda).</p><p>Between Jan 2020 and May 2022 7360 tests were performed. One hundred and twenty tests in 80 patients were positive for HNA-3a and 102 tests in 77 patients were positive for HNA-3b. ‘True’ positivity was assigned following HNA typing of patients testing positive on multiple samples. This gave confirmed antibody specificity in 20 patients for HNA-3a and 16 patients for HNA-3b, reflecting 7% of the active waiting list.</p><p>Patients testing ‘true’ positive require a prospective crossmatch prior to transplant regardless of HLA specific antibody status. Since this introduction an additional six prospective crossmatches have been performed, with 50% giving a positive result. To date no transplant has been refused due to HNA specific antibody.</p><p>We report that HNA-3 specific antibody can impact on crossmatch results and routine screening should form part of the immunological risk assessment and guidance given to Clinicians and patients prior to transplant.</p><p><b><span>Jennifer Lord</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Rebecca Dench<sup>1</sup>, Nicola Martin<sup>1</sup>, Paul Wright<sup>1</sup>, Anna Barker<sup>1</sup>, Alison Logan<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>Next generation sequencing (NGS) has become the routine methodology to obtain a high resolution HLA type for optimal donor selection in Haematopoietic Progenitor Cell Transplantation (HPCT). NGS provides sequencing beyond the antigen recognition domain (ARD), making it possible to detect HLA mismatches between the recipient and potential donor that are not detected by other HLA typing techniques.</p><p>A patient with T cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia was referred in 2021 for HPCT work-up and HLA typed by NGS (AlloSeq Tx17, CareDx). Two siblings were screened as potential donors by typing at HLA-B using LABType™ SSO (One Lambda). Sibling A appeared to be HLA matched with the patient at intermediate level resolution, whereas sibling B did not. Sibling A was HLA typed by NGS to ensure they were matched at HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, -DQB1 and -DPB1, which showed sibling A had a novel allele at HLA-B and hence a mismatch with the patient that had not been identified by LABType™ SSO. A single nucleotide polymorphism was observed at position 2798 in exon 5 of HLA-B, which excluded HLA-B*51:01:01, 52:01:01 detected by NGS in the patient. Further typing of both parents demonstrated the novel HLA-B allele was not inherited from either parent and may be a spontaneous point mutation in sibling A.</p><p>This case demonstrates the importance of high-resolution verses intermediate level HLA typing to optimise HPCT donor selection even in the presence of a family study, as HLA matching outside the ARD may improve transplant outcome.</p><p><b><span>Fiona Powell</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Betia Nouri<sup>1</sup>, Mazen Mabrok<sup>1</sup>, Thet Myint<sup>1</sup>, Sarah Blow<sup>2</sup>, Delordson Kallon<sup>2</sup>, Rachel Smith<sup>1</sup>, Arthi Anand<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, North West London Pathology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK; <sup>2</sup>Clinical Transplantation Laboratory, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK</i></p><p>HLA specific mutations in leukemic cells lines may occur as part of leukaemia immune evasion mechanisms. These may be particularly evident in peripheral blood samples taken during blast crisis and may result in altered expression of HLA proteins. The sensitivity of HLA typing by NGS allows for the detection of these mutations and it is therefore recommended that when detected, they are confirmed in non-disease tissue such as buccal or skin plugs or through the HLA typing of relatives.</p><p>Here we describe the case study of an AML patient in which the HLA-A locus exhibited a mutation in exon 1 resulting in a novel null allele (HLA-A*31:01 novel), the other allele being HLA-A*24:02. At the time of detection, the patient was undergoing an unrelated donor search with the initial search being carried out as if the patient were HLA-A*24:02 homozygous.</p><p>Due to lack of related donors available to confirm the mutation an alternative source of DNA was sought. A buccal sample was taken but showed leukemic cell infiltration following NGS typing. An attempt was therefore made to use a skin plug sample as a source of non-diseased cells. The skin plug sample also showed contamination with leukaemia cells, though to a lesser degree. This case study highlights the potential risk of donor searches being initiated with the incorrect HLA type even following confirmation of the type using buccal or skin biopsy samples. It demonstrates that these DNA sources may not always be a reliable source of disease-free tissue.</p><p><b><span>Carla Rosser</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK</i></p><p>HLA antibody identification is routinely performed in our laboratory using One Lambda LABScreen™ Single Antigen (LABScreen) kits. We identified 54 sera, crossmatched against donor lymphocytes, where donor-specific antibody (DSA) has been detected by LABScreen. Of this cohort, DSA was confirmed by Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES) in 40/54 sera. These 40 sera were subsequently tested using Immucor LIFECODES® C3d Detection assay (LIFECODES-C3d) to determine whether assessment of LIFECODES-C3d DSA positivity could improve prediction of flow-cytometric crossmatch (FCXM) outcome in this cohort.</p><p>LIFECODES-C3d positive DSA was detected in 60% of sera (24/40). A trend towards C3d-binding DSA against HLA Class II proteins, particularly HLA-DQ, was identified alongside a higher proportion of non-C3d-binding DSA directed against HLA Class I proteins. When assessing C3d-binding capability of individual DSA in conjunction with FCXM outcome, LIFECODES-C3d positivity was seen in 68% of positive crossmatches and only 17% of negative crossmatches, with negative FCXMs attributed to HLA-DQ and HLA-DP DSA only. It has been suggested that complement-fixing capability is associated only with antibodies with higher mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values but these results indicate that LABScreen MFI value alone could not be used to accurately predict antibody LIFECODES-C3d positivity.</p><p>Our results suggest a role for LIFECODES-C3d assay alongside other antibody identification assays, to enable enhanced prediction and risk stratification with regards to the clinical relevance of DSA, compared to the use of HLA antibody identification assays alone and may be a better indicator of HLA antibody clinical relevance than MFI.</p><p><b><span>Luke Foster</span></b><sup>1</sup>, David Briggs<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Birmingham, UK</i></p><p>In 2019, the UK National Kidney Allocation Scheme changed to allow unacceptable HLA-DPB1 antigens (UA-DPB1) listed with NHSBT-OTDT to be factored into allocation. The impact of transplanting across HLA-DPB1 donor specific antibodies (DSA) remains unclear. There is a risk of denying access to transplantation due to listed UA-DPB1 that may not produce a positive crossmatch and which may not be clinically significant. However, not listing UA-DPB1 may result in an increased risk of reallocation and thus onward shipping of organs if pre-transplant assessments conclude that the donor is incompatible. This in turn can increase cold ischemia time that is associated with worse transplant outcomes. We aimed to assess the impact of our approach not to list UA-DPB1 by reviewing all lymphocyte crossmatches that were performed between 2018 and 2019.</p><p>A total of 537 lymphocyte crossmatches were re-evaluated, considering the DPB1 typing information, DPB antibody history and DSA which impacted upon the decision to proceed to transplant.</p><p>Fifteen crossmatches were positive (2.8%), nine (1.7%) indicating an increased but acceptable risk for transplantation and six (1.1%) constituting a contraindication to transplant. All 15 were performed pre-transplant and there were no positive retrospective crossmatches. Five (0.9%) of the positive crossmatches involved DPB1 sensitisation, one of which proceeded to transplant and four which did not, with reasoning being multifactorial. Our findings support our approach of not listing UA-DPB1, but recommend that listing may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis, particularly for patients with consistently high DPB antibody levels that are likely to produce a positive crossmatch.</p><p><b><span>Selda Goktas</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Franco Tavarozzi<sup>1</sup>, Adam King<sup>1</sup>, Molly Green<sup>1</sup>, Margaret Walker<sup>1</sup>, Momin Shah<sup>1</sup>, Reetinder Grewal<sup>1</sup>, Michael Hoddinott<sup>1</sup>, Sandra Frater<sup>1</sup>, Sharon Vivers<sup>1</sup>, Lisa Walsh<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan, Hampstead, UK</i></p><p>The Anthony Nolan Histocompatibility Laboratory utilises GenDx NGSgo® as its primary method for high resolution HLA typing of 11 loci: HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, -DRB3,4,5, -DQB1, -DQA1, -DPA1, -DPB1, including all exons for HLA-DRB1 and whole gene primers for HLA-DQB1.</p><p>To manage sample throughput, an automated Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) set up was investigated. This involved a collaboration with Hamilton Robotics and the development of customised methods to process samples utilising the Hamilton Microlab STAR liquid handling robot. The aim of this work was to facilitate larger runs and also to increase the flexibility of the current NGS set up, enabling more combinations of HLA loci to be amplified.</p><p>Depending on the number of samples, two automated protocols were developed with Hamilton Robotics (low and high throughput). Low throughput mimics the manual process whereas for higher sample numbers, the high throughput option is more efficient. These options were validated on 16 and 96 samples, respectively.</p><p>Data generated using both the Illumina MiSeq and iSeq instruments was analysed using NGSengine (GenDx). All runs met the predefined minimum acceptance criteria, which included specific metrics such as cluster density, Q30 score and lowest read depth.</p><p>This collaboration demonstrated that running low and high throughput workflows using the Hamilton Microlab STAR, in conjunction with Illumina MiSeq and iSeq sequencers, resulted in acceptable metrics and 100% HLA concordance. Future work will focus on increased run complexity including varying combinations of HLA loci on the same run.</p><p><b><span>Sarah Peacock</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Miriam Manook<sup>1</sup>, Vasilis Kosmoliaptsis<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK</i></p><p>There is a subset of kidney patients difficult to transplant who may be eligible for consideration of modifying their criteria for listing unacceptable mismatches (UMM). A systematic review of records was undertaken to identify patients who had modified criteria applied. This identified 21 patients where listing criteria had been modified with nine transplanted across specificities that had been removed. The average standard cRF was 99.5% (97–100), applying modified criteria reduced the average cRF to 95.4% (67–100). In patients transplanted across modified criteria, in six of these there was one donor specific antibody (DSA) present and in three there were multiple DSA present. In total 14 DSA were crossed with the majority directed against HLA-C. The mean peak MFI crossed was 9157 (2686–21,004) and the mean current MFI crossed was 3800 (614–11,690). The mean follow up time was 562 days (7–1431) with no adverse clinical events for seven of the nine patients transplanted across DSA and at last follow up DSA levels for these patients were MFI &lt; 2000 or absent. One patient, transplanted across multiple DSA, lost their graft after 1 year due to antibody mediated rejection (AMR). Another patient 8 months post-transplant had increased serum creatinine and a biopsy showing Banff 1B acute rejection without features of AMR. Both of these patients had high level (MFI &gt; 5000) DSA present at last follow up. This review demonstrates that for selected patients modified listing criteria can result in successful transplantation but risks of doing so remain.</p><p><b><span>Sarah Dyer</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Emma Burrows<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Pritchard<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Welsh Blood Service, Ely Valley Road, Talbot Green, UK</i></p><p>We use LABScreen® (One Lambda, Inc) Mixed (LSM) kits to screen patients on the kidney transplant waiting list for HLA antibodies; positive samples are then tested using LABScreen® Single Antigen (LSA) kits. All sera are treated with EDTA.</p><p>We identified a male patient, cRF 92% monitored in the laboratory since 2018, that had tested LSM negative with current serum, but had previously been LSA positive for HLA-DQ2 (6 months previously, all five DQ2 beads positive with MFI 4219-17197). All other CII beads are consistently negative. DQ2 is a previous transplant mismatch listed as an unacceptable antigen.</p><p>There are four beads in the CII LSM test that carry DQ2 (Table 2). The ratio of these beads ranged from 0.3 to 1.34 (positive &gt; 1.9). Previous LSM testing gave highest ratios of 2.15–5.</p><p>LSA testing on the current sera confirmed the DQ2 with MFI 3655-20275. Crossmatching against two DQ2 cells yielded positive results with both historic and current serum (auto xm negative). Lifecodes® Lifescreen beads were positive, and Lifecodes Single Antigen assay confirmed DQ2. These results add weight to the fact this is a LSM ‘missed’ antibody.</p><p>To investigate the unexpected negative CII LSM result, further tests were performed on the current serum; dilution testing, DTT treatment, full bead protocol (half-bead utilised routinely), and testing using LSM with IgM conjugate. All tests gave negative results (Table 2).</p><p>This case highlights that LSM screening kits may not detect all clinically relevant antibodies, and the importance of analysing samples alongside historic results.</p><p><b><span>Nikita Sinha</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Stephen Weston<sup>1</sup>, Paul Dunn<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, UK</i></p><p>It has been well established that anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are the main cause of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). There is anecdotal evidence, however, that non-HLA antibodies might be involved in AMR episodes after solid organ transplantation with an increasing number of patients presenting with pathological features of AMR in the absence of anti-HLA DSA. The aim of this study is to establish the role of non-HLA antibodies in patients with suspected AMR, with no anti-HLA DSA, following kidney transplantation. To achieve this, serum samples from the study group (<i>n</i> = 23) were screened using LIFECODES® non-HLA antibody kits, which is a multiplex assay that allows the detection of antibodies against 60 non-HLA markers. Pre- and post-transplant serum samples were chosen to establish any changes in non-HLA antibody profiles following transplantation and whether non-HLA antibodies had a role in graft rejection in these patients. Of the 60 non-HLA markers, a significant difference (<i>p</i> &lt; .05) in pre- and post-transplant mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values was seen in 15 markers. Lower MFI values were seen post-transplant for all 15 statistically significant markers. Of these, five markers met the suggested cut-off value to be classed as positive – Actin (9/23), Collagen II (13/23), Collagen III (8/23), HARS (6/23) and LGALS3 (6/23). Lower MFI values post-transplant could be due to the effects of immunosuppressive drugs administered to patients following transplantation. Further research is still required. In particular, larger, collaborative studies could aid in establishing the clinical relevance of non-HLAantibodies in solid organ transplantation.</p><p><b><span>Sarah Peacock</span></b><sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK</i></p><p>This patient is a 33 year old female who had previously received a combined liver, pancreas and jejunum transplant 2013; at that time she was highly sensitised (cRF 100%) due to blood transfusions. This transplant crossed multiple HLA class I and II donor specific antibodies (HLA-DSA) (MFI range 2946–21,999) corresponding to a positive T &amp; B cell lymphocytotoxic crossmatch. Her pancreas failed in 2014 and there were episodes of T cell and antibody mediated rejection of the liver in 2020. Her native kidney failed in 2019 leading to dialysis dependence. The plan was to proceed with direct live kidney donation from her father as it would have been challenging to identify a compatible graft given her sensitisation which is predominately directed against HLA-A (she herself is homozygous HLA-A32). Her live kidney donor (LKD) shared repeat HLA-A3, -DQ6 and -DP2 mismatches with her previous transplant with current HLA antibody screening results show she remained highly sensitised including HLA-DSA against HLA-A3 (MFI:523) that had been seen at this low level from approximately 6 weeks post-transplant. Direct transplantation from her LKD proceeded with a current negative T &amp; B cell lymphocytotoxic crossmatch (historical B cell positive). The HLA mismatch grade was 1.1.1 and overall this transplant conferred intermediate immunological risk with close post-transplant monitoring of both the kidney &amp; liver allograft function recommended. There was delayed graft function which recovered by day 9 and 6 months post-transplant the patient remains well at home with no HLA-DSA and no episodes of rejection.</p><p><b><span>Rhea McArdle</span></b><sup>1,2</sup>, Rebecca Cope<sup>1,2</sup>, Afzal Chaudhry<sup>3,4</sup>, Lisa Sharkey<sup>5</sup>, Sarah Peacock<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Tissue Typing Laboratory, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; <sup>2</sup>Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Division of Medical Education, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; <sup>3</sup>Department of Nephrology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; <sup>4</sup>Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, UK; <sup>5</sup>Department of Gastroenterology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK</i></p><p>Despite recent advances that have improved patient outcomes following intestinal transplantation (ITx), achieving long-term survival and rejection-free survival is still challenging. Understanding the relevance of pre-transplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor specific antibody (DSA) in ITx and the immunomodulatory potential of the liver within the allograft is crucial to providing an accurate assessment of pre-transplant immunological risk, which could influence and improve post-transplant outcomes further. Thus, this was the primary objective of this retrospective study in 95 adult ITx patients transplanted at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust between 2007 and 2019.</p><p>Two novel programs were developed and validated to aid in DSA identification in this dataset. Fifty-four (57%) ITx cases contained a liver, and 28 (29%) harboured pre-transplant DSA. Using the Kaplan-Meier survival method, pre-transplant DSA greater than 500 mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) as identified by Luminex single antigen beads, seemed to negatively affect post-ITx survival and rejection outcomes. Furthermore, liver-inclusive allografts seemed to show resistance to HLA class I DSA. These findings could be clinically important but statistical significance was not achieved via log-rank tests and cox proportional hazard models, indicating a need for future analysis in a larger patient cohort.</p><p>Nevertheless, our data hints towards consistency with other ITx studies where deleterious DSA effects have been demonstrated, and where liver inclusion is protective from HLA class I DSA. This is in line with United Kingdom guidelines for immunological risk. We hope that our publicly available research programs developed will support ease of gaining statistically relevant data in the future.</p><p><b><span>Charlotte A. Cambridge</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Thomas R. Turner<sup>1,2</sup>, Jonathan A.M. Lucas<sup>1</sup>, Gabriel J. Benitez<sup>1</sup>, Neema P. Mayor<sup>1,2</sup>, Steven G.E. Marsh<sup>1,2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute, Royal Free Hospital, UK; <sup>2</sup>UCL Cancer Institute, Royal Free Campus, UK</i></p><p>PacBio Single Molecule Real-Time (SMRT) technology facilitates full-gene sequencing of complex HLA genes. Several barcoding methods are possible, enabling sample and gene multiplexing: barcoded primer (BCP) or barcoded adapter (BCA), including blunt-ended (BCAv1) or overhang (BCAv2) adapters. Here, we compare data quality of the three methods. Twelve BCP, ten BCAv1 and seven BCAv2 libraries were sequenced on the PacBio Sequel, containing ≤96 samples for ≥2 full-length class II genes: HLA-DRB1, -DQB1 and -DPB1. Lima was used to demultiplex and filter subreads by barcode quality score (pre-filtering = barcode quality scores for all potential reads assigned to a barcode; post-filtering = reads meeting selection criteria). We observed higher mean quality scores for BCAv1 versus BCPs at the pre- (62.6 (<i>n</i> = 1092) vs. 51.7 (<i>n</i> = 1229); <i>P</i> = &lt; .0001) and post-filtering (68.6 (<i>n</i> = 848) vs. 65.9 (<i>n</i> = 666), <i>P</i> = &lt; .0001) stages. BCAv2 had higher mean scores versus BCAv1 at the pre-filtering stage (64.2 (<i>n</i> = 706) vs. 61.6 (<i>n</i> = 1249); <i>P</i> = &lt; .0001), implying that raw subreads generated by BCAv2 are of higher quality. BCAs negate the need for barcoded target-specific PCR primers, resulting in improved amplification success for high quality DNA samples (≤98% BCAs vs. ≤88% BCPs), and can reduce cost per sample versus BCPs as multiplexing increases. Overall, BCAs generate high quality sequence data, with BCAv2 outperforming BCAv1 at the pre-filtering stage. This data will inform optimisation of library preparation and analysis workflows, improving efficiency of ultra-high resolution HLA typing on the SMRT platform.</p><p><b><span>Dominic Barker</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Xenia Georgiou<sup>1</sup>, Michael A Cooper<sup>1</sup>, Thomas R Turner<sup>2</sup>, James Robinson<sup>2</sup>, Steven GE Marsh<sup>2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute, Hampstead, UK; <sup>2</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, Hampstead, UK</i></p><p>The IPD-IMGT/HLA Database is the official repository for sequences named by the WHO Nomenclature Committee for Factors of the HLA system. It provides a highly curated dataset of sequences and metadata as a resource to the HLA community. In recent years the advent of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) has increased the volume and complexity of data being submitted to the database. This technology has also been used to further characterise the International HLA and Immunogenetics Workshop (IHIW) cell lines, increasing their HLA typing to ultra-high resolution. These highly characterised cells are widely used as reference material by the HLA community for the development of new HLA typing methods. In response to the growing size and complexity of the database, IPD recently developed a REST API allowing developers to build tools to query the database directly. Using this API, we have developed a new IHIW Cell Query Tool aimed at improving the accessibility of data on these cells. This tool also allows this data to be downloaded in a variety of formats for offline use. The IHIW Cell Query Tool supports the continued study of the IHIW cells and their importance as a resource to the HLA community.</p><p><b><span>Amy De'Ath</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Deborah Pritchard<sup>1</sup>, Tracey Rees<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>UK NEQAS for H&amp;I, Cardiff, UK</i></p><p>Scheme 3 assesses participants’ ability to correctly determine the specificity of HLA antibodies in 10 samples annually. Reporting of antibodies to HLA-DQA and -DPA is optional and not assessed. An analysis of the data submitted for DQA and DPA in 2020–21 and 2021–22 was performed.</p><p>In 2020–21, 45/64 (70%) participants submitted data for DQA antibodies and 24/64 (38%) for DPA antibodies. Three (2%) DQA specificities reached consensus present, 24 (18%) consensus absent, 79 (61%) were reported as negative by all labs and 24 (18%) did not reach consensus. For DPA 0 specificities reached consensus present, eight (11%) consensus absent, 30 (43%) were reported a negative by all labs and 32 (46%) did not reached consensus.</p><p>In 2021-22, 25/65 (38%) participants submitted data for DQA antibodies (9/24 37.5% UK&amp;I) and 19/65 (29%) for DPA antibodies (8/24 33.3% UK&amp;I). Eight (6%) DQA specificities reached consensus present, 23 (18%) consensus absent, 56 (43%) were reported as negative by all labs and 43 (33%) did not reach consensus. For DPA 3 (4%) specificities reached consensus present, 0 consensus absent, 63 (90%) were reported a negative by all labs and 4 (6%) did not reached consensus.</p><p>The DQA/DPA specificities that reached consensus present were DQA1*04:01, 05:01, 05:03, 05:05, 06:01 and DPA1*02:01, 02:02, 04:01.</p><p>In the UK&amp;I 63% laboratories reported considering antibodies to DQA in clinical transplant compatibility assessment whilst 44% consider DPA antibodies. NEQAS encourage all labs to report results for DQA/DPA antibodies with the intention that these antibodies will be assessed in the future.</p><p>Thomas R. Turner<sup>1</sup>, Matilda C. Tierney<sup>2</sup>, Michael A. Cooper<sup>2</sup>, Victor-Randolph N. Boatey<sup>2</sup>, Neema P. Mayor<sup>1</sup>, Steven G.E. Marsh<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK; <sup>2</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute, London, UK</i></p><p>During routine, ultra-high resolution HLA typing in our laboratory, we identified three novel intronic variants in a healthy individual, AN300903, who has Efik (Nigeria) and Ashanti (Ghana) ancestry. Full-gene HLA amplicons were generated using PCR with VeriFi polymerase (PCR Biosystems, UK). A sequencing library was made using PacBio ETPK 2.0 and barcoded adaptors, according to manufacturer's instructions, then ran on a Sequel instrument. Data was analysed using an in-house bioinformatics workflow. The extended HLA typing of AN300903 is: A*36:01:01:01, 02:02:01:01, B*53:01:01:01, C*04:01:01:75, E*01:01:01:01, 01:03:02:01, F*01:01:02:11, 01:03:01:03, G*01:04:04, 01:03:01:02, DRA*01:03, 01:02:02var, DRB3*01:62:01:01, 02:02:01var, DRB1*03:02:01, 11:01:02:03, DQA1*01:02:01:03, 04:01:01:04, DQB1*04:02:01:08, 06:02:01:04, DPA1*02:02:02:04, 03:01:01:05, DPB1*01:01:01:02, 105:01:01var. The novel DPB1 allele is likely a recombinant of a DPB1*105:01:01:03 and a DPB1*16:01:01:02/652:01/653:01/1286:01. All novel alleles will be submitted to the ENA and the IPD-IMGT/HLA Database. No family samples were available, so we used haplostats.org to predict the likely haplotypes of AN300903. With 93.6% certainty it predicted A*36:01∼C*04:01∼B*53:01∼DRB1*11:01∼DQB1*06:02 and A*02:02∼C*04:01∼B*53:01∼DRB1*03:02∼DQB1*04:02. These are the second (0.8% frequency) and 176th (0.07% frequency) most common haplotypes in black Africans, respectively. Based on our observations of allele associations in other samples, it's likely the novel DRA and DRB3 alleles are on the same haplotype. We also confirmed the recently identified DRA*01:03 and DRB3*01:62, observed with DRB1*03:02. Ultra-high resolution HLA typing of AN300903 highlights the under-appreciated non-coding diversity in a young, black, British male on the stem cell register. This potentially reflects further diversity in donors of African ancestry, that is only identifiable with extended, full-length HLA sequencing.</p><p>Laura Ford<sup>1</sup>, Alison Logan<sup>1</sup>, <b><span>Anna Barker</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Julie Johnson<sup>1</sup>, Stephine Whiteside<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Manchester Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>The Transplantation Laboratory provides a service to clinicians which determines percentage donor chimaerism in a patient post bone marrow transplantation using the GenePrint24 STR methodology (Promega). The Laboratory receives ∼4000 of these samples per year and the current method of analysis and reporting was time-consuming and involved numerous manual transcriptions, with a potential risk of error.</p><p>As part of the NHS Long-term Plan, seven Genomic Laboratory Hubs have been generated which will be responsible for coordinating Genetic based work in a particular region of the country. The Laboratory's STR team has been assigned to the North West Genomics Laboratory Hub and as a consequence the turnaround time for reporting the STR chimaerism data may need to be reduced. A new technique to analyse and report STRs that was both robust and quicker to perform was required to meet any shorter turnaround times. As a substitute to expensive commercial software and to improve laboratory efficiency, an inhouse method was developed. A system of Excel spreadsheets was designed, validated and introduced which will automatically calculate percentage donor chimaerism when peak area values from the analysis software Genemapper (Thermofisher) are entered.</p><p>This new method saves 23 min per patient (42 min–19 min) for a set of three samples to be analysed, reported and authorised. This time equates to ∼68 working days a year, which frees up staff time for alternative work. Thus, not only is this new method quicker but also improves patient safety by reducing manual transcriptions and potential errors.</p><p><b><span>Julie Johnson</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Kay Poulton<sup>1</sup>, Lesley Lappin<sup>2</sup>, Paula Ormandy<sup>2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Transplantation Laboratory, Mancheseter Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK; <sup>2</sup>University of Salford, Salford, UK</i></p><p>Accreditation is a procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition that a laboratory is competent to carry out procedures according to specified standards. The rationale being that if these standards are met there is a level of assurance that the service provided is of an acceptable level of quality. Throughout the NHS, laboratories have been encouraged to implement accreditation as a tool with which to demonstrate an acceptable level of service quality. However, evidence to substantiate there is any true benefit of accreditation is lacking.</p><p>The current process for a laboratory to obtain accreditation is time consuming, bureaucratic, and costly, with demands on the laboratory which can delay innovation and improvements to the patient service. In European medical laboratories, an alternative approach has been adopted successfully. This alternative approach uses a Flexible rather than a Fixed scope of Practice which may benefit experienced laboratories, allowing autonomy within their accredited scope to remain patient focused and to adapt to innovation and science in a timely cost-effective manner. This approach has not yet been fully explored within NHS based hospital laboratories.</p><p>This single centre study aims to analyse the implementation of the Flexible scope accreditation using a quasi-experimental design with a mixed methods approach for data collection. Longitudinal data will be collected to evaluate the implementation of the Flexible Scope using a retrospective-prospective study design to validate and verify the overall impact of implementing a Flexible scope on an NHS laboratory service.</p>","PeriodicalId":14003,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Immunogenetics","volume":"49 S1","pages":"10-20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/iji.12586","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Poster Abstract\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/iji.12586\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><b><span>Anthony Calvert</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Anthony Poles<sup>1</sup>, Matthew Hopkins<sup>1</sup>, Tim Hayes<sup>2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Filton, UK; <sup>2</sup>Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, UK</i></p><p>Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare complication of heparin therapy with mild thrombocytopenia but potentially fatal thrombosis. HIT antibodies target the epitope of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. Laboratory investigations commonly detect antibodies by ELISA. The British Society for Haematology guidelines suggest clinical significant IgG antibodies equate to an OD &gt; 1.0. Studies show an OD ≥ 1.4 corresponds with ≥50% chance of positive serotonin release assay (SRA) (Warkentin et al. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 6(8):1304-12).</p><p>Common practice for a HIT positive patient is repeat testing until a negative result indicates the safe use of Heparin, which is then administered pre-procedure and ceased immediately afterwards. Conditioning includes antibody titre reduction by plasmapheresis, multiple sessions are costly and can delay surgery. PF4/heparin antibodies are detected in 5-22% cardiac surgery patients but only 1%–2% have HIT (Pishko et al. Semin Thromb Hemost 2017; 43(7): 691-698).</p><p>A HIT positive pre-transplant patient was tested after each plasmapheresis using ELISA (Immucor HAT45G) and a platelet activation assay (IQ Products HITAlert) to compare HIT antibody levels with ability to activate platelets. Results showed an OD &gt; 1.4 associated with positive activation, comparable to Warkentin's observations. The advantage of HITAlert is it detects functional antibodies and measures the expression of activation markers by flow cytometry, not radiolabelled serotonin release. The assay is then suitable for use in the routine laboratory environment, but requires freshly isolated (&lt;2 h) ABO O platelets.</p><p>The patient received a successful heart transplant after the first negative activation result, sooner than waiting for negative ELISA results.</p><p><b><span>Carla Rosser</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK</i></p><p>The use of antibody-epitope analysis tools can improve the interpretation of in vitro HLA antibody identification assay data, particularly for identification of false positive reactions. HLA antibody-epitope analysis using HLAMatchmaker was performed on 22 crossmatched sera where donor-specific antibody (DSA) had previously been identified by One Lambda LABScreen™ Single Antigen (LABScreen). These sera were retrospectively tested by Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES) and BAG Healthcare HISTO SPOT® (HISTO SPOT) assays.</p><p>All three HLA antibody identification assays identified DSA in serum that did not cause a positive flow-cytometric crossmatch (FCXM). Antibody-epitope analysis supports the presence of DSA in 12/22 of these sera, indicating a higher sensitivity of the solid phase assays compared to the FCXM. However, antibody-epitope analysis was unable to explain 13% (5/39) of LABScreen DSA, compared to 5% (1/19) by LIFECODES and 0% (0/9) by HISTO SPOT. In this selected sera cohort (i.e. LABScreen DSA positive), 50% of HISTO SPOT, 33% of LIFECODES assays and 8% by LABScreen correctly predicted a negative FCXM result. All three assays demonstrated 100% concordance for sera with a positive FCXM (10/22).</p><p>Disparities between the antibody identification assays, particularly LABScreen and LIFECODES occurred in several samples, where different interpretations of antibody-epitope interactions could explain the antibody reaction pattern. This data illustrates the benefits of verifying antibody assay results where they are being used for clinical risk interpretation. Whilst antibody-epitope analysis is complex and challenging to introduce routinely in a clinical laboratory, it offers the opportunity to develop a better understanding of complex antibody profiles.</p><p><b><span>Rachel Smith</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Fiona Powell<sup>1</sup>, Betia Nouri<sup>1</sup>, Mazen Mabrok<sup>1</sup>, Ambika Camille<sup>1</sup>, Renuka Palanicawander<sup>1</sup>, Eduardo Olavarria<sup>1</sup>, Arthi Anand<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK</i></p><p>Post transplant HLA typing at the H&amp;I laboratory, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust is a new concept driven by the increased numbers of haploidentical transplants being performed and the implementation of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) HLA typing.</p><p>Thirty percent of patients transplanted with a haploidentical donor go on to relapse. Treatment choices differ depending on whether the patient is relapsing with or without HLA loss. NGS HLA typing can help determine if relapse is occurring with HLA loss due to its increased sensitivity. Relapse with HLA loss is defined as the genomic loss or downregulation of the patient's mismatched haplotype in the re-emerging leukaemic cells. This is an attempt by the cancer to evade the graft vs. leukaemic effect (GvL) by donor T cells. Donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI), a common relapse treatment post HPCT is not recommended for those patients experiencing HLA loss due to the increased risk of Graft vs Host Disease without the benefit of the GvL response.</p><p>Here we describe two cases where post transplant HLA typing made a significant impact on treatment choice. Both patients experienced relapse following a haploidentical sibling transplant. NGS HLA typing was performed at the point of relapse diagnosis and these results combined with the post transplant chimerism and cytogeneic testing confirmed that one patient was experiencing HLA loss while the other was not. As a result, the patient experiencing relapse with HLA loss went on to have a second haploidentical transplant while DLI's were considered for the patient relapsing without HLA loss.</p><p><b><span>Anna Barker</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Laura Ford<sup>1</sup>, Stephine Whiteside<sup>1</sup>, Poppy Greenaway<sup>1</sup>, Rebecca Dench<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>Lineage specific chimaerism analysis for engraftment monitoring following stem cell transplantation has greatly increased; by 51% in the past 2 years.</p><p>Sample processing is required within 24 h of the blood samples being taken, hence those received on a Friday must be processed the same day. Extending the time to cell separation beyond 24 h was investigated as part of a review of laboratory workflow, with the aim of reducing pressure on staff time and instrumentation.</p><p>CD3+ and CD15+ cells were isolated from blood using RoboSep™-S (STEMCELL™ Technologies) automated cell separators. Samples from four patients were each processed at three time points (samples 1–3 at 1, 3 and 5 days, sample 4 at 3, 6, and 7 days). Extracted DNA was tested as for routine chimerism using the GenePrint<sup>®</sup> 24 System (Promega). The purity of each isolated cell population was determined using flow cytometry.</p><p>There was no detrimental effect of sample age up to 5 days (in one case 7 days) on purity of the cell population, percentage donor chimaerism (Table 1), and electropherogram peak height (all &gt; 3000 RFU).</p><p>Although it is best to process samples immediately, workload can often exceed instrument capacity and the time available to process the samples. Quality of the results is not affected up to 5 days, which means that samples received late on a Friday can be processed on Monday, reducing pressure on staff time.</p><p><b><span>Eva Santos-nunez</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Katrina Spensley<sup>2</sup>, Corinna Freeman<sup>3</sup>, Michelle Willicombe<sup>2</sup>, Arthi Anand<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>H&amp;I Laboratory Hammersmith Hospital, North West London Pathology hosted by Imperial College NHS Trust, London, UK; <sup>2</sup>West London Renal and Transplant Centre, Imperial College NHS Trust, London, UK; <sup>3</sup>Clinical Transplant Laboratory (Viapath), Guy's Hospital, London, UK</i></p><p><b>Introduction</b>: Using algorithms to calculate molecular mismatches requires HLA typing at high resolution or second field (2F). However, this level of resolution is not always available. To overcome this, computer algorithms to infer second field genotypes can be used.</p><p><b>Aim</b>: To determine the accuracy of using a 2F prediction algorithm, Easy-HLA (https://hla.univ-nantes.fr/recherche/recherche.php) and whether discrepancies in results lead to differences in the molecular mismatch scores of two epitope analysis tools.</p><p><b>Methods</b>: HLA types of 28 renal transplant recipients generated by PCR-SSO (<i>n</i> = 23) and PCR-SSP (<i>n</i> = 5) were uploaded to the “HLA-Upgrade tool” of Easy-HLA. Samples were re-typed by NGS and results compared. HLA eplet mismatch load and PIRCHE II scores were calculated using HLAMatchmaker (www.epitopes.net) and PIRCHE-II algorithm (www.pirche.com).</p><p><b>Results</b>: The accuracy of the estimated 2F alleles per locus was HLA-A (93.5%), HLA-B (95.7%), HLA-C (93.5%), HLA-DRB1 (91.3%), HLA-DQB1 (97.8%) for SSO upgrades (E-SSO), and 80.0%, 80.0%, 80.0%, 60.0% and 40.0% for SSP upgrades (E-SSP). Ethnic accuracy differences were also noted; White (97.5%), Black (94.4%), Asian (91.2%) and Other (90.0%).</p><p>E-SSO concordance using HLA Matchmaker was 96% and 100% for Class I and II respectively, 60% and 40% for E-SSP. Deviations in PIRCHE II scores were seen in 7/23 (30%) of E-SSO samples (range 0–62) and 3/5 (60%) of E-SSP samples (range 0–95).</p><p><b>Conclusion</b>: In summary, it is possible to successfully infer 2F data from intermediate level typing. The accuracy may be improved by using intermediate (SSO) typing results and statistical and population genetics data provided by algorithms such Easy-HLA.</p><p><b><span>Emma Holmes</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Jennifer Gauss<sup>1</sup>, Sue Jordan<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK</i></p><p>Virtual crossmatching is widely used to assess compatibility between a renal transplant recipient and deceased donor to reduce cold ischaemia time. At NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, only patients that are HLA antibody negative and have not been previously transplanted are eligible for a virtual crossmatch. Seven hundred and thirty-five deceased donor crossmatches carried out from 2016 to 2020, from which 494 patients were transplanted, were analysed to determine whether the eligibility criteria could be extended to include HLA antibody positive patients that did not have a donor specific antibody (DSA) directed against the prospective donor. Five hundred and two (68%) HLA antibody negative patients were crossmatched, of which 383 were completed by virtual crossmatch. One hundred and twenty-seven (17%) laboratory crossmatches were performed for HLA antibody positive patients in the absence of DSA. All of these were reported as having a standard immunological risk, in line with the BSHI/BTS guidelines, which indicates that laboratory crossmatching did not provide additional information, beyond HLA antibody testing, that could have altered clinical patient management. One hundred and six (14%) laboratory crossmatches were performed for HLA antibody positive patients in the presence of DSA. All three groups include patients that have previously been transplanted. Analysis of clinical rejection episodes reported to NHSBT-OTDT showed that there were similar rates of acute rejection between the three patient groups. In light of this data, the virtual crossmatch policy has been extended to include sensitised patients in the absence of DSA. HLA antibody testing is used to confirm the patient's antibody profile remains unchanged at the time of transplant.</p><p><b><span>Jennifer Gauss</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Susan Jordan<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHSBT, London, UK</i></p><p>Characterisation of a renal transplant recipient's HLA antibodies is necessary to assess their compatibility with a potential deceased or living donor. Single Antigen Bead (SAB) solid phase assays have simplified antibody analysis, however defining these antibodies by their epitope/eplet targets, rather than by their antigen targets, is considered more clinically relevant. In this case study, we present a 46-year-old, previously transplanted, male renal patient whose serum we tested using the One Lambda Labscreen SAB assay and was found to have antibodies directed at HLA-DP that could not be defined by a DPB1 or DPA1 target alone. Using a combination of the epitope registry and publicly available crystal structures it was determined that DPA1 position 50 (Glutamine,Q or Arginine,R) and DPB1 postion 85–87 (Glutamic Acid-Alanine-Valine (EAV) or Glycine-Proline-Methionine (GPM)) could feasibly constitute a single antibody target. Re-analysis of this patient's SAB profile showed that only the DP antigens that were Q and EAV at the aforementioned positions were positive. HLA-DP typing by NGS showed the patient was Q-GPM. Further HLA antibody testing using Immucor Lifecodes Single Antigen kits and Labscreen Supplementary Class II SAB kits also resulted in DP antibody profiles that could be explained by a Q-EAV epitope target. Absorption of this patient's antibodies only occurred when incubated with a cell carrying Q-EAV DP molecules; no absorption occurred with Q-GPM. Incorporating possible combined alpha-beta chain epitopes into epitope analysis software and listing epitopes, rather than antigens, as unacceptable, will provide a more targeted approach to compatibility assessment in the future.</p><p><b><span>Sejal Morjaria</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Arun Gupta<sup>1</sup>, Delordson M Kallon<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Clinical Transplantation Laboratory, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK</i></p><p>Thymus transplantation is an emerging clinical option for babies born with no thymus, a symptom associated with DiGeorge syndrome (DGS).</p><p>Patient AN (3 months, female), diagnosed with DGS in early 2019, received an unconditioned thymus transplant in July 2019 from an unrelated donor at Great Ormond Street Hospital. No prior donor or recipient HLA typing was performed. Three-month biopsies did not detect thymic epithelium and there was no immune reconstitution after 1 year. Pre-transplant serum tested by Luminex single antigen assay showed no pre-existing donor specific antibodies (DSAs). However, by October 2019 the patient had developed de novo DQ7 DSA &gt; 5000 MFI with signs of rejection.</p><p>Subsequently, the patient's DSA levels decreased and she was considered for a second transplant. Due to the presence of HLA antibodies, the H&amp;I laboratory advised the clinical team to HLA type potential donors. Donor samples were typed by qPCR and a second thymus transplant was undertaken in January 2022 with cyclosporine induction. The patient was monitored weekly for DSA, developing de novo A24 DSA &lt; 2000 MFI after 2 weeks, increasing to &gt;2000 MFI at 3 weeks. Additional de novo DQA1*05 DSAs were detected at month post-transplant (peak DSA &gt; 10,000 MFI).</p><p>AN was treated with rituximab followed by three cycles of plasma exchange with HLA antibody monitoring after each cycle. After three cycles her DSA levels had stabilised around 3000 MFI and the patient continues to be monitored.</p><p>This case highlights the role of the H&amp;I laboratory in facilitating thymus transplants and helping to avoid antibody mediated rejection.</p><p><b><span>Paul Wright</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Marcus Lowe<sup>1</sup>, Robin Kippax<sup>1</sup>, Anna Barker<sup>1</sup>, Alison Logan<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup>, Natalia Diaz Burlinson<sup>1</sup>, Stephen Sheldon<sup>1</sup>, Kay Poulton<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>HLA allele frequency data is beneficial for identifying patients for which it may be challenging to find a suitable unrelated donor, and in routine analysis of genotyping data when scrutinising results. Despite the many advancements in genotyping the HLA gene complex, with next generation sequencing providing higher resolution typing than previously possible, there are few tools and reference materials available with high resolution data. Coding using Python was developed for extracting HLA allele frequency data from the local next generation sequencing services. Data from 11 HLA loci (HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1/3/4/5, -DQA1, -DQB1, -DPA1, -DPB1) were collected from all samples tested using AlloSeq HLA Tx17 next generation sequencing (CareDx, USA) with the MiSeq platform (Illumina, USA) (using the IMGT/HLA v3.43 reference data set) between April and December 2021 (<i>n</i> = 1636). Data for all loci were presented as allele frequency, with the exception of HLA-DRB3/4/5, which were presented as carrier frequency. This data set provides the department with new insights into high resolution HLA allele frequencies, such as the allele frequencies of HLA-DQA1 and -DPA1, and the allele frequencies at third field resolution for various alleles, such as HLA-A*68:01:01 (freq = 0.0122) versus A*68:01:02 (freq = 0.0251) and HLA-B*44:03:01 (freq = 0.0504) versus B*44:03:02 (freq = 0.0067). The next aim of the project is to advance the current data set to allow analysis by patient type (for example, deceased donor or renal transplantation patients) and to develop a data set for assessing HLA linkage disequilibrium frequencies at third field resolution.</p><p><b><span>Kim McShane</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Emma Burrows<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Pritchard<sup>1</sup>, Tracey Rees<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Welsh Transplantation and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Talbot Green, UK</i></p><p>Recent case reports have revealed HNA-3a antibodies are associated with increased antibody-mediated rejection and graft loss in kidney allograft recipients. Ninety-five percent of the UK population is HNA-3a antigen positive.</p><p>Two multi-parous female transfused patients presented with unexplained strong positive deceased donor T and B-cell flow cytometry crossmatch (XM). Further investigation confirmed them as HNA-3b/3b with HNA-3a antibodies. Both partners typed as HNA-3a antigen positive, indicating antibodies were likely to be pregnancy stimulated. Patient 1 was deemed unsuitable for transplantation due to co-morbidities. HNA compatible family donors were investigated for patient two with no success. This patient remains on the deceased donor list, but is expected to be FCXM positive with 95% of offers. Live donor transplantation with antibody removal is under consideration.</p><p>Due to the risk of HNA antibodies being missed by virtual XM, and reported poorer clinical outcomes, we subsequently screened patients awaiting kidney transplant (<i>n</i> = 298) for HNA antibodies using the LABScreen Multi kit, as this kit is currently used in our laboratory for TRALI risk reduction. Samples with a positive HNA-3 result (<i>n</i> = 22, 7.4%) were referred to a reference laboratory for confirmatory testing. Two (0.67%) were confirmed to be positive for HNA-3a antibodies. False positive rate 9%.</p><p>To mitigate the risk to virtual crossmatching, we now HNA antibody screen (once) all kidney transplant patients. Confirmed positives are unsuitable for virtual XM. HNA genotyping as a first line test is being considered to identify the 5% of patients requiring HNA-3 antibody testing.</p><p><b><span>Blanka Zamostna</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Cem Mak<sup>1</sup>, Jasper Taal<sup>1</sup>, Pavel Jiroutek<sup>1</sup>, Doug Bost<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>JETA Molecular, Utrecht, the Netherlands</i></p><p>Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an established cure for haematological disorders. Early, accurate, and sensitive determination of hematopoietic chimerism is crucial for the adjustment of a transplant recipient's treatment. Onventional STR and qPCR methods to detect graft failure after HSCT are limited by their dynamic range of analysis (STR-PCR: 5%−100% and qPCR:0,1%−30%). Digital PCR (dPCR) is a 3rd generation technology and has proved in many studies to combine end point quantification over a wide measurement range (0.01%−90%) with excellent sensitivity, accuracy and reproducibility.</p><p>We have developed and validated a system of 42 dPCR assays and software enabling highly sensitive stem cell engraftment monitoring. Our approach allows for facile quantification of minute amounts of minor components in a mixture, while reducing workflow and analysis burdens. Each assay was validated using at least three independent control DNA mixtures with concentrations ranging from 90% down to 0.05% minor component in the presence of 50ngs input DNA. The results obtained using dPCR were concordant with the values generated using qPCR.</p><p>The use of dPCR allows for sensitive and precise quantification of target DNA and due to its unparalleled sensitivity, this technique represents a particularly useful diagnostic tool in chimerism monitoring. In comparison with the wide used qPCR chimerism analysis, dPCR has been shown to anticipate a relapse significantly earlier and therefore, it may guide timely post-transplantation therapeutic interventions. Compared to NGS methods, this system can deliver 72 answers within one working day, with highly reduced cost per sample and hands on time.</p><p><b><span>Olivia Shaw</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Chloe Martin<sup>1</sup>, Deeya Balgobin<sup>1</sup>, Sarah Blears<sup>1</sup>, Corinna Freeman<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Viapath, London, UK</i></p><p>HNA-3 specific antibody may be implicated in rejection episodes following renal transplantation (Key et.al. J Renal Transplant Sci, 2(2):81–84). HNA-3 is bi-allelic, −3a/−3b, and homozygote individuals may develop antibody to the non-self variant.</p><p>HNA-3 is expressed on a variety of cell types including lymphocytes, leading to positive T and B cell flow crossmatches, and renal endothelial cells, thus a target for rejection.</p><p>Following two local cases of AMR in the face of HNA-3a specific antibody, and cases of positive crossmatches attributable to HNA-3a or -b specific antibody, we have introduced a screening programme for HNA-3 specific antibody using LABScreen Multi (OneLambda).</p><p>Between Jan 2020 and May 2022 7360 tests were performed. One hundred and twenty tests in 80 patients were positive for HNA-3a and 102 tests in 77 patients were positive for HNA-3b. ‘True’ positivity was assigned following HNA typing of patients testing positive on multiple samples. This gave confirmed antibody specificity in 20 patients for HNA-3a and 16 patients for HNA-3b, reflecting 7% of the active waiting list.</p><p>Patients testing ‘true’ positive require a prospective crossmatch prior to transplant regardless of HLA specific antibody status. Since this introduction an additional six prospective crossmatches have been performed, with 50% giving a positive result. To date no transplant has been refused due to HNA specific antibody.</p><p>We report that HNA-3 specific antibody can impact on crossmatch results and routine screening should form part of the immunological risk assessment and guidance given to Clinicians and patients prior to transplant.</p><p><b><span>Jennifer Lord</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Rebecca Dench<sup>1</sup>, Nicola Martin<sup>1</sup>, Paul Wright<sup>1</sup>, Anna Barker<sup>1</sup>, Alison Logan<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>Next generation sequencing (NGS) has become the routine methodology to obtain a high resolution HLA type for optimal donor selection in Haematopoietic Progenitor Cell Transplantation (HPCT). NGS provides sequencing beyond the antigen recognition domain (ARD), making it possible to detect HLA mismatches between the recipient and potential donor that are not detected by other HLA typing techniques.</p><p>A patient with T cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia was referred in 2021 for HPCT work-up and HLA typed by NGS (AlloSeq Tx17, CareDx). Two siblings were screened as potential donors by typing at HLA-B using LABType™ SSO (One Lambda). Sibling A appeared to be HLA matched with the patient at intermediate level resolution, whereas sibling B did not. Sibling A was HLA typed by NGS to ensure they were matched at HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, -DQB1 and -DPB1, which showed sibling A had a novel allele at HLA-B and hence a mismatch with the patient that had not been identified by LABType™ SSO. A single nucleotide polymorphism was observed at position 2798 in exon 5 of HLA-B, which excluded HLA-B*51:01:01, 52:01:01 detected by NGS in the patient. Further typing of both parents demonstrated the novel HLA-B allele was not inherited from either parent and may be a spontaneous point mutation in sibling A.</p><p>This case demonstrates the importance of high-resolution verses intermediate level HLA typing to optimise HPCT donor selection even in the presence of a family study, as HLA matching outside the ARD may improve transplant outcome.</p><p><b><span>Fiona Powell</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Betia Nouri<sup>1</sup>, Mazen Mabrok<sup>1</sup>, Thet Myint<sup>1</sup>, Sarah Blow<sup>2</sup>, Delordson Kallon<sup>2</sup>, Rachel Smith<sup>1</sup>, Arthi Anand<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, North West London Pathology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK; <sup>2</sup>Clinical Transplantation Laboratory, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK</i></p><p>HLA specific mutations in leukemic cells lines may occur as part of leukaemia immune evasion mechanisms. These may be particularly evident in peripheral blood samples taken during blast crisis and may result in altered expression of HLA proteins. The sensitivity of HLA typing by NGS allows for the detection of these mutations and it is therefore recommended that when detected, they are confirmed in non-disease tissue such as buccal or skin plugs or through the HLA typing of relatives.</p><p>Here we describe the case study of an AML patient in which the HLA-A locus exhibited a mutation in exon 1 resulting in a novel null allele (HLA-A*31:01 novel), the other allele being HLA-A*24:02. At the time of detection, the patient was undergoing an unrelated donor search with the initial search being carried out as if the patient were HLA-A*24:02 homozygous.</p><p>Due to lack of related donors available to confirm the mutation an alternative source of DNA was sought. A buccal sample was taken but showed leukemic cell infiltration following NGS typing. An attempt was therefore made to use a skin plug sample as a source of non-diseased cells. The skin plug sample also showed contamination with leukaemia cells, though to a lesser degree. This case study highlights the potential risk of donor searches being initiated with the incorrect HLA type even following confirmation of the type using buccal or skin biopsy samples. It demonstrates that these DNA sources may not always be a reliable source of disease-free tissue.</p><p><b><span>Carla Rosser</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Deborah Sage<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK</i></p><p>HLA antibody identification is routinely performed in our laboratory using One Lambda LABScreen™ Single Antigen (LABScreen) kits. We identified 54 sera, crossmatched against donor lymphocytes, where donor-specific antibody (DSA) has been detected by LABScreen. Of this cohort, DSA was confirmed by Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES) in 40/54 sera. These 40 sera were subsequently tested using Immucor LIFECODES® C3d Detection assay (LIFECODES-C3d) to determine whether assessment of LIFECODES-C3d DSA positivity could improve prediction of flow-cytometric crossmatch (FCXM) outcome in this cohort.</p><p>LIFECODES-C3d positive DSA was detected in 60% of sera (24/40). A trend towards C3d-binding DSA against HLA Class II proteins, particularly HLA-DQ, was identified alongside a higher proportion of non-C3d-binding DSA directed against HLA Class I proteins. When assessing C3d-binding capability of individual DSA in conjunction with FCXM outcome, LIFECODES-C3d positivity was seen in 68% of positive crossmatches and only 17% of negative crossmatches, with negative FCXMs attributed to HLA-DQ and HLA-DP DSA only. It has been suggested that complement-fixing capability is associated only with antibodies with higher mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values but these results indicate that LABScreen MFI value alone could not be used to accurately predict antibody LIFECODES-C3d positivity.</p><p>Our results suggest a role for LIFECODES-C3d assay alongside other antibody identification assays, to enable enhanced prediction and risk stratification with regards to the clinical relevance of DSA, compared to the use of HLA antibody identification assays alone and may be a better indicator of HLA antibody clinical relevance than MFI.</p><p><b><span>Luke Foster</span></b><sup>1</sup>, David Briggs<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>NHS Blood and Transplant, Birmingham, UK</i></p><p>In 2019, the UK National Kidney Allocation Scheme changed to allow unacceptable HLA-DPB1 antigens (UA-DPB1) listed with NHSBT-OTDT to be factored into allocation. The impact of transplanting across HLA-DPB1 donor specific antibodies (DSA) remains unclear. There is a risk of denying access to transplantation due to listed UA-DPB1 that may not produce a positive crossmatch and which may not be clinically significant. However, not listing UA-DPB1 may result in an increased risk of reallocation and thus onward shipping of organs if pre-transplant assessments conclude that the donor is incompatible. This in turn can increase cold ischemia time that is associated with worse transplant outcomes. We aimed to assess the impact of our approach not to list UA-DPB1 by reviewing all lymphocyte crossmatches that were performed between 2018 and 2019.</p><p>A total of 537 lymphocyte crossmatches were re-evaluated, considering the DPB1 typing information, DPB antibody history and DSA which impacted upon the decision to proceed to transplant.</p><p>Fifteen crossmatches were positive (2.8%), nine (1.7%) indicating an increased but acceptable risk for transplantation and six (1.1%) constituting a contraindication to transplant. All 15 were performed pre-transplant and there were no positive retrospective crossmatches. Five (0.9%) of the positive crossmatches involved DPB1 sensitisation, one of which proceeded to transplant and four which did not, with reasoning being multifactorial. Our findings support our approach of not listing UA-DPB1, but recommend that listing may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis, particularly for patients with consistently high DPB antibody levels that are likely to produce a positive crossmatch.</p><p><b><span>Selda Goktas</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Franco Tavarozzi<sup>1</sup>, Adam King<sup>1</sup>, Molly Green<sup>1</sup>, Margaret Walker<sup>1</sup>, Momin Shah<sup>1</sup>, Reetinder Grewal<sup>1</sup>, Michael Hoddinott<sup>1</sup>, Sandra Frater<sup>1</sup>, Sharon Vivers<sup>1</sup>, Lisa Walsh<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan, Hampstead, UK</i></p><p>The Anthony Nolan Histocompatibility Laboratory utilises GenDx NGSgo® as its primary method for high resolution HLA typing of 11 loci: HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, -DRB3,4,5, -DQB1, -DQA1, -DPA1, -DPB1, including all exons for HLA-DRB1 and whole gene primers for HLA-DQB1.</p><p>To manage sample throughput, an automated Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) set up was investigated. This involved a collaboration with Hamilton Robotics and the development of customised methods to process samples utilising the Hamilton Microlab STAR liquid handling robot. The aim of this work was to facilitate larger runs and also to increase the flexibility of the current NGS set up, enabling more combinations of HLA loci to be amplified.</p><p>Depending on the number of samples, two automated protocols were developed with Hamilton Robotics (low and high throughput). Low throughput mimics the manual process whereas for higher sample numbers, the high throughput option is more efficient. These options were validated on 16 and 96 samples, respectively.</p><p>Data generated using both the Illumina MiSeq and iSeq instruments was analysed using NGSengine (GenDx). All runs met the predefined minimum acceptance criteria, which included specific metrics such as cluster density, Q30 score and lowest read depth.</p><p>This collaboration demonstrated that running low and high throughput workflows using the Hamilton Microlab STAR, in conjunction with Illumina MiSeq and iSeq sequencers, resulted in acceptable metrics and 100% HLA concordance. Future work will focus on increased run complexity including varying combinations of HLA loci on the same run.</p><p><b><span>Sarah Peacock</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Miriam Manook<sup>1</sup>, Vasilis Kosmoliaptsis<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK</i></p><p>There is a subset of kidney patients difficult to transplant who may be eligible for consideration of modifying their criteria for listing unacceptable mismatches (UMM). A systematic review of records was undertaken to identify patients who had modified criteria applied. This identified 21 patients where listing criteria had been modified with nine transplanted across specificities that had been removed. The average standard cRF was 99.5% (97–100), applying modified criteria reduced the average cRF to 95.4% (67–100). In patients transplanted across modified criteria, in six of these there was one donor specific antibody (DSA) present and in three there were multiple DSA present. In total 14 DSA were crossed with the majority directed against HLA-C. The mean peak MFI crossed was 9157 (2686–21,004) and the mean current MFI crossed was 3800 (614–11,690). The mean follow up time was 562 days (7–1431) with no adverse clinical events for seven of the nine patients transplanted across DSA and at last follow up DSA levels for these patients were MFI &lt; 2000 or absent. One patient, transplanted across multiple DSA, lost their graft after 1 year due to antibody mediated rejection (AMR). Another patient 8 months post-transplant had increased serum creatinine and a biopsy showing Banff 1B acute rejection without features of AMR. Both of these patients had high level (MFI &gt; 5000) DSA present at last follow up. This review demonstrates that for selected patients modified listing criteria can result in successful transplantation but risks of doing so remain.</p><p><b><span>Sarah Dyer</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Emma Burrows<sup>1</sup>, Deborah Pritchard<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Welsh Blood Service, Ely Valley Road, Talbot Green, UK</i></p><p>We use LABScreen® (One Lambda, Inc) Mixed (LSM) kits to screen patients on the kidney transplant waiting list for HLA antibodies; positive samples are then tested using LABScreen® Single Antigen (LSA) kits. All sera are treated with EDTA.</p><p>We identified a male patient, cRF 92% monitored in the laboratory since 2018, that had tested LSM negative with current serum, but had previously been LSA positive for HLA-DQ2 (6 months previously, all five DQ2 beads positive with MFI 4219-17197). All other CII beads are consistently negative. DQ2 is a previous transplant mismatch listed as an unacceptable antigen.</p><p>There are four beads in the CII LSM test that carry DQ2 (Table 2). The ratio of these beads ranged from 0.3 to 1.34 (positive &gt; 1.9). Previous LSM testing gave highest ratios of 2.15–5.</p><p>LSA testing on the current sera confirmed the DQ2 with MFI 3655-20275. Crossmatching against two DQ2 cells yielded positive results with both historic and current serum (auto xm negative). Lifecodes® Lifescreen beads were positive, and Lifecodes Single Antigen assay confirmed DQ2. These results add weight to the fact this is a LSM ‘missed’ antibody.</p><p>To investigate the unexpected negative CII LSM result, further tests were performed on the current serum; dilution testing, DTT treatment, full bead protocol (half-bead utilised routinely), and testing using LSM with IgM conjugate. All tests gave negative results (Table 2).</p><p>This case highlights that LSM screening kits may not detect all clinically relevant antibodies, and the importance of analysing samples alongside historic results.</p><p><b><span>Nikita Sinha</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Stephen Weston<sup>1</sup>, Paul Dunn<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, UK</i></p><p>It has been well established that anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are the main cause of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). There is anecdotal evidence, however, that non-HLA antibodies might be involved in AMR episodes after solid organ transplantation with an increasing number of patients presenting with pathological features of AMR in the absence of anti-HLA DSA. The aim of this study is to establish the role of non-HLA antibodies in patients with suspected AMR, with no anti-HLA DSA, following kidney transplantation. To achieve this, serum samples from the study group (<i>n</i> = 23) were screened using LIFECODES® non-HLA antibody kits, which is a multiplex assay that allows the detection of antibodies against 60 non-HLA markers. Pre- and post-transplant serum samples were chosen to establish any changes in non-HLA antibody profiles following transplantation and whether non-HLA antibodies had a role in graft rejection in these patients. Of the 60 non-HLA markers, a significant difference (<i>p</i> &lt; .05) in pre- and post-transplant mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values was seen in 15 markers. Lower MFI values were seen post-transplant for all 15 statistically significant markers. Of these, five markers met the suggested cut-off value to be classed as positive – Actin (9/23), Collagen II (13/23), Collagen III (8/23), HARS (6/23) and LGALS3 (6/23). Lower MFI values post-transplant could be due to the effects of immunosuppressive drugs administered to patients following transplantation. Further research is still required. In particular, larger, collaborative studies could aid in establishing the clinical relevance of non-HLAantibodies in solid organ transplantation.</p><p><b><span>Sarah Peacock</span></b><sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK</i></p><p>This patient is a 33 year old female who had previously received a combined liver, pancreas and jejunum transplant 2013; at that time she was highly sensitised (cRF 100%) due to blood transfusions. This transplant crossed multiple HLA class I and II donor specific antibodies (HLA-DSA) (MFI range 2946–21,999) corresponding to a positive T &amp; B cell lymphocytotoxic crossmatch. Her pancreas failed in 2014 and there were episodes of T cell and antibody mediated rejection of the liver in 2020. Her native kidney failed in 2019 leading to dialysis dependence. The plan was to proceed with direct live kidney donation from her father as it would have been challenging to identify a compatible graft given her sensitisation which is predominately directed against HLA-A (she herself is homozygous HLA-A32). Her live kidney donor (LKD) shared repeat HLA-A3, -DQ6 and -DP2 mismatches with her previous transplant with current HLA antibody screening results show she remained highly sensitised including HLA-DSA against HLA-A3 (MFI:523) that had been seen at this low level from approximately 6 weeks post-transplant. Direct transplantation from her LKD proceeded with a current negative T &amp; B cell lymphocytotoxic crossmatch (historical B cell positive). The HLA mismatch grade was 1.1.1 and overall this transplant conferred intermediate immunological risk with close post-transplant monitoring of both the kidney &amp; liver allograft function recommended. There was delayed graft function which recovered by day 9 and 6 months post-transplant the patient remains well at home with no HLA-DSA and no episodes of rejection.</p><p><b><span>Rhea McArdle</span></b><sup>1,2</sup>, Rebecca Cope<sup>1,2</sup>, Afzal Chaudhry<sup>3,4</sup>, Lisa Sharkey<sup>5</sup>, Sarah Peacock<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Tissue Typing Laboratory, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; <sup>2</sup>Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Division of Medical Education, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; <sup>3</sup>Department of Nephrology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; <sup>4</sup>Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, UK; <sup>5</sup>Department of Gastroenterology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK</i></p><p>Despite recent advances that have improved patient outcomes following intestinal transplantation (ITx), achieving long-term survival and rejection-free survival is still challenging. Understanding the relevance of pre-transplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor specific antibody (DSA) in ITx and the immunomodulatory potential of the liver within the allograft is crucial to providing an accurate assessment of pre-transplant immunological risk, which could influence and improve post-transplant outcomes further. Thus, this was the primary objective of this retrospective study in 95 adult ITx patients transplanted at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust between 2007 and 2019.</p><p>Two novel programs were developed and validated to aid in DSA identification in this dataset. Fifty-four (57%) ITx cases contained a liver, and 28 (29%) harboured pre-transplant DSA. Using the Kaplan-Meier survival method, pre-transplant DSA greater than 500 mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) as identified by Luminex single antigen beads, seemed to negatively affect post-ITx survival and rejection outcomes. Furthermore, liver-inclusive allografts seemed to show resistance to HLA class I DSA. These findings could be clinically important but statistical significance was not achieved via log-rank tests and cox proportional hazard models, indicating a need for future analysis in a larger patient cohort.</p><p>Nevertheless, our data hints towards consistency with other ITx studies where deleterious DSA effects have been demonstrated, and where liver inclusion is protective from HLA class I DSA. This is in line with United Kingdom guidelines for immunological risk. We hope that our publicly available research programs developed will support ease of gaining statistically relevant data in the future.</p><p><b><span>Charlotte A. Cambridge</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Thomas R. Turner<sup>1,2</sup>, Jonathan A.M. Lucas<sup>1</sup>, Gabriel J. Benitez<sup>1</sup>, Neema P. Mayor<sup>1,2</sup>, Steven G.E. Marsh<sup>1,2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute, Royal Free Hospital, UK; <sup>2</sup>UCL Cancer Institute, Royal Free Campus, UK</i></p><p>PacBio Single Molecule Real-Time (SMRT) technology facilitates full-gene sequencing of complex HLA genes. Several barcoding methods are possible, enabling sample and gene multiplexing: barcoded primer (BCP) or barcoded adapter (BCA), including blunt-ended (BCAv1) or overhang (BCAv2) adapters. Here, we compare data quality of the three methods. Twelve BCP, ten BCAv1 and seven BCAv2 libraries were sequenced on the PacBio Sequel, containing ≤96 samples for ≥2 full-length class II genes: HLA-DRB1, -DQB1 and -DPB1. Lima was used to demultiplex and filter subreads by barcode quality score (pre-filtering = barcode quality scores for all potential reads assigned to a barcode; post-filtering = reads meeting selection criteria). We observed higher mean quality scores for BCAv1 versus BCPs at the pre- (62.6 (<i>n</i> = 1092) vs. 51.7 (<i>n</i> = 1229); <i>P</i> = &lt; .0001) and post-filtering (68.6 (<i>n</i> = 848) vs. 65.9 (<i>n</i> = 666), <i>P</i> = &lt; .0001) stages. BCAv2 had higher mean scores versus BCAv1 at the pre-filtering stage (64.2 (<i>n</i> = 706) vs. 61.6 (<i>n</i> = 1249); <i>P</i> = &lt; .0001), implying that raw subreads generated by BCAv2 are of higher quality. BCAs negate the need for barcoded target-specific PCR primers, resulting in improved amplification success for high quality DNA samples (≤98% BCAs vs. ≤88% BCPs), and can reduce cost per sample versus BCPs as multiplexing increases. Overall, BCAs generate high quality sequence data, with BCAv2 outperforming BCAv1 at the pre-filtering stage. This data will inform optimisation of library preparation and analysis workflows, improving efficiency of ultra-high resolution HLA typing on the SMRT platform.</p><p><b><span>Dominic Barker</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Xenia Georgiou<sup>1</sup>, Michael A Cooper<sup>1</sup>, Thomas R Turner<sup>2</sup>, James Robinson<sup>2</sup>, Steven GE Marsh<sup>2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute, Hampstead, UK; <sup>2</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, Hampstead, UK</i></p><p>The IPD-IMGT/HLA Database is the official repository for sequences named by the WHO Nomenclature Committee for Factors of the HLA system. It provides a highly curated dataset of sequences and metadata as a resource to the HLA community. In recent years the advent of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) has increased the volume and complexity of data being submitted to the database. This technology has also been used to further characterise the International HLA and Immunogenetics Workshop (IHIW) cell lines, increasing their HLA typing to ultra-high resolution. These highly characterised cells are widely used as reference material by the HLA community for the development of new HLA typing methods. In response to the growing size and complexity of the database, IPD recently developed a REST API allowing developers to build tools to query the database directly. Using this API, we have developed a new IHIW Cell Query Tool aimed at improving the accessibility of data on these cells. This tool also allows this data to be downloaded in a variety of formats for offline use. The IHIW Cell Query Tool supports the continued study of the IHIW cells and their importance as a resource to the HLA community.</p><p><b><span>Amy De'Ath</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Deborah Pritchard<sup>1</sup>, Tracey Rees<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>UK NEQAS for H&amp;I, Cardiff, UK</i></p><p>Scheme 3 assesses participants’ ability to correctly determine the specificity of HLA antibodies in 10 samples annually. Reporting of antibodies to HLA-DQA and -DPA is optional and not assessed. An analysis of the data submitted for DQA and DPA in 2020–21 and 2021–22 was performed.</p><p>In 2020–21, 45/64 (70%) participants submitted data for DQA antibodies and 24/64 (38%) for DPA antibodies. Three (2%) DQA specificities reached consensus present, 24 (18%) consensus absent, 79 (61%) were reported as negative by all labs and 24 (18%) did not reach consensus. For DPA 0 specificities reached consensus present, eight (11%) consensus absent, 30 (43%) were reported a negative by all labs and 32 (46%) did not reached consensus.</p><p>In 2021-22, 25/65 (38%) participants submitted data for DQA antibodies (9/24 37.5% UK&amp;I) and 19/65 (29%) for DPA antibodies (8/24 33.3% UK&amp;I). Eight (6%) DQA specificities reached consensus present, 23 (18%) consensus absent, 56 (43%) were reported as negative by all labs and 43 (33%) did not reach consensus. For DPA 3 (4%) specificities reached consensus present, 0 consensus absent, 63 (90%) were reported a negative by all labs and 4 (6%) did not reached consensus.</p><p>The DQA/DPA specificities that reached consensus present were DQA1*04:01, 05:01, 05:03, 05:05, 06:01 and DPA1*02:01, 02:02, 04:01.</p><p>In the UK&amp;I 63% laboratories reported considering antibodies to DQA in clinical transplant compatibility assessment whilst 44% consider DPA antibodies. NEQAS encourage all labs to report results for DQA/DPA antibodies with the intention that these antibodies will be assessed in the future.</p><p>Thomas R. Turner<sup>1</sup>, Matilda C. Tierney<sup>2</sup>, Michael A. Cooper<sup>2</sup>, Victor-Randolph N. Boatey<sup>2</sup>, Neema P. Mayor<sup>1</sup>, Steven G.E. Marsh<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK; <sup>2</sup>Anthony Nolan Research Institute, London, UK</i></p><p>During routine, ultra-high resolution HLA typing in our laboratory, we identified three novel intronic variants in a healthy individual, AN300903, who has Efik (Nigeria) and Ashanti (Ghana) ancestry. Full-gene HLA amplicons were generated using PCR with VeriFi polymerase (PCR Biosystems, UK). A sequencing library was made using PacBio ETPK 2.0 and barcoded adaptors, according to manufacturer's instructions, then ran on a Sequel instrument. Data was analysed using an in-house bioinformatics workflow. The extended HLA typing of AN300903 is: A*36:01:01:01, 02:02:01:01, B*53:01:01:01, C*04:01:01:75, E*01:01:01:01, 01:03:02:01, F*01:01:02:11, 01:03:01:03, G*01:04:04, 01:03:01:02, DRA*01:03, 01:02:02var, DRB3*01:62:01:01, 02:02:01var, DRB1*03:02:01, 11:01:02:03, DQA1*01:02:01:03, 04:01:01:04, DQB1*04:02:01:08, 06:02:01:04, DPA1*02:02:02:04, 03:01:01:05, DPB1*01:01:01:02, 105:01:01var. The novel DPB1 allele is likely a recombinant of a DPB1*105:01:01:03 and a DPB1*16:01:01:02/652:01/653:01/1286:01. All novel alleles will be submitted to the ENA and the IPD-IMGT/HLA Database. No family samples were available, so we used haplostats.org to predict the likely haplotypes of AN300903. With 93.6% certainty it predicted A*36:01∼C*04:01∼B*53:01∼DRB1*11:01∼DQB1*06:02 and A*02:02∼C*04:01∼B*53:01∼DRB1*03:02∼DQB1*04:02. These are the second (0.8% frequency) and 176th (0.07% frequency) most common haplotypes in black Africans, respectively. Based on our observations of allele associations in other samples, it's likely the novel DRA and DRB3 alleles are on the same haplotype. We also confirmed the recently identified DRA*01:03 and DRB3*01:62, observed with DRB1*03:02. Ultra-high resolution HLA typing of AN300903 highlights the under-appreciated non-coding diversity in a young, black, British male on the stem cell register. This potentially reflects further diversity in donors of African ancestry, that is only identifiable with extended, full-length HLA sequencing.</p><p>Laura Ford<sup>1</sup>, Alison Logan<sup>1</sup>, <b><span>Anna Barker</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Julie Johnson<sup>1</sup>, Stephine Whiteside<sup>1</sup>, Helena Lee<sup>1</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Manchester Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester, UK</i></p><p>The Transplantation Laboratory provides a service to clinicians which determines percentage donor chimaerism in a patient post bone marrow transplantation using the GenePrint24 STR methodology (Promega). The Laboratory receives ∼4000 of these samples per year and the current method of analysis and reporting was time-consuming and involved numerous manual transcriptions, with a potential risk of error.</p><p>As part of the NHS Long-term Plan, seven Genomic Laboratory Hubs have been generated which will be responsible for coordinating Genetic based work in a particular region of the country. The Laboratory's STR team has been assigned to the North West Genomics Laboratory Hub and as a consequence the turnaround time for reporting the STR chimaerism data may need to be reduced. A new technique to analyse and report STRs that was both robust and quicker to perform was required to meet any shorter turnaround times. As a substitute to expensive commercial software and to improve laboratory efficiency, an inhouse method was developed. A system of Excel spreadsheets was designed, validated and introduced which will automatically calculate percentage donor chimaerism when peak area values from the analysis software Genemapper (Thermofisher) are entered.</p><p>This new method saves 23 min per patient (42 min–19 min) for a set of three samples to be analysed, reported and authorised. This time equates to ∼68 working days a year, which frees up staff time for alternative work. Thus, not only is this new method quicker but also improves patient safety by reducing manual transcriptions and potential errors.</p><p><b><span>Julie Johnson</span></b><sup>1</sup>, Kay Poulton<sup>1</sup>, Lesley Lappin<sup>2</sup>, Paula Ormandy<sup>2</sup></p><p><i><sup>1</sup>Transplantation Laboratory, Mancheseter Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK; <sup>2</sup>University of Salford, Salford, UK</i></p><p>Accreditation is a procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition that a laboratory is competent to carry out procedures according to specified standards. The rationale being that if these standards are met there is a level of assurance that the service provided is of an acceptable level of quality. Throughout the NHS, laboratories have been encouraged to implement accreditation as a tool with which to demonstrate an acceptable level of service quality. However, evidence to substantiate there is any true benefit of accreditation is lacking.</p><p>The current process for a laboratory to obtain accreditation is time consuming, bureaucratic, and costly, with demands on the laboratory which can delay innovation and improvements to the patient service. In European medical laboratories, an alternative approach has been adopted successfully. This alternative approach uses a Flexible rather than a Fixed scope of Practice which may benefit experienced laboratories, allowing autonomy within their accredited scope to remain patient focused and to adapt to innovation and science in a timely cost-effective manner. This approach has not yet been fully explored within NHS based hospital laboratories.</p><p>This single centre study aims to analyse the implementation of the Flexible scope accreditation using a quasi-experimental design with a mixed methods approach for data collection. Longitudinal data will be collected to evaluate the implementation of the Flexible Scope using a retrospective-prospective study design to validate and verify the overall impact of implementing a Flexible scope on an NHS laboratory service.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Immunogenetics\",\"volume\":\"49 S1\",\"pages\":\"10-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/iji.12586\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Immunogenetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/iji.12586\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Immunogenetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/iji.12586","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这里,我们描述了移植后HLA分型对治疗选择产生重大影响的两个病例。两名患者在接受单倍体兄弟姐妹移植后都经历了复发。在复发诊断时进行NGS HLA分型,这些结果与移植后嵌合和细胞遗传学检测相结合,证实一名患者经历HLA丢失,而另一名患者没有。因此,复发并HLA丢失的患者继续进行第二次单倍体移植,而未HLA丢失的复发患者则考虑进行DLI移植。Anna Barker1, Laura Ford1, Stephine Whiteside1, Poppy Greenaway1, Rebecca Dench1, Helena lee11曼彻斯特大学NHS基金会信托基金,曼彻斯特,英国,用于干细胞移植后植入监测的谱系特异性嵌合分析已大大增加;在过去的两年里增长了51%。血样处理需要在采集后24小时内完成,因此在星期五收到的血样必须在当天处理。将细胞分离时间延长至24小时以上作为实验室工作流程审查的一部分进行了研究,目的是减少工作人员时间和仪器的压力。使用RoboSep™-S (STEMCELL™Technologies)自动细胞分离器从血液中分离CD3+和CD15+细胞。4名患者的样本分别在3个时间点进行处理(样本1 - 3在1、3和5天,样本4在3、6和7天)。提取的DNA使用GenePrint®24系统(Promega)进行常规嵌合检测。用流式细胞术测定每个分离细胞群的纯度。样品放置5天(有一例7天)对细胞群纯度、供体嵌合率(表1)和电泳峰高(均为&gt;3000 RFU)。虽然最好立即处理样品,但工作量往往超过仪器容量和处理样品的可用时间。结果的质量在5天内不受影响,这意味着周五晚收到的样品可以在周一处理,减少了工作人员的时间压力。伊娃·桑托斯-努内兹1,卡特里娜·斯宾斯利2,科琳娜·弗里曼3,米歇尔·威利科姆2,阿蒂·阿南德1实验室哈默史密斯医院,伦敦西北部病理由帝国理工学院NHS信托主办,英国伦敦;2西伦敦肾移植中心,帝国学院NHS信托,伦敦,英国;使用算法计算分子错配需要高分辨率或第二场(2F)的HLA分型。然而,这种级别的分辨率并不总是可用的。为了克服这个问题,可以使用计算机算法来推断第二场基因型。目的:确定使用2F预测算法Easy-HLA (https://hla.univ-nantes.fr/recherche/recherche.php)的准确性,以及结果的差异是否会导致两种表位分析工具的分子错配评分的差异。方法:将28例肾移植受者用PCR-SSO (n = 23)和PCR-SSP (n = 5)生成的HLA类型上传到Easy-HLA的“HLA- upgrade tool”中。用NGS对样品重新分型,并对结果进行比较。采用HLAMatchmaker (www.epitopes.net)和PIRCHE-II算法(www.pirche.com)计算HLA等位基因错配负荷和PIRCHE-II评分。结果:单点单点升级(E-SSO)估计的每个位点2F等位基因的准确率分别为HLA- a(93.5%)、HLA- b(95.7%)、HLA- c(93.5%)、HLA- drb1(91.3%)、HLA- dqb1(97.8%),单点单点升级(E-SSP)估计的准确率分别为80.0%、80.0%、80.0%、60.0%和40.0%。种族准确度的差异也被注意到;白(97.5%)、黑(94.4%)、亚洲(91.2%),其他(90.0%)。HLA Matchmaker对I类和II类的E-SSO一致性分别为96%和100%,对E-SSP的一致性分别为60%和40%。在7/23(30%)的E-SSO样本(范围0-62)和3/5(60%)的E-SSP样本(范围0-95)中,PIRCHE II评分出现偏差。结论:总之,从中级分型中成功推断出2F数据是可能的。利用Easy-HLA等算法提供的中间(SSO)分型结果和统计及群体遗传学数据可以提高准确率。Emma Holmes1, Jennifer gas1, Sue Jordan1, Deborah Sage11NHS血液与移植中心,图汀,英国虚拟交叉配型广泛用于评估肾移植受者和已故供者之间的相容性,以减少冷缺血时间。在图廷的NHS血液和移植中心,只有HLA抗体阴性且之前没有移植过的患者才有资格进行虚拟交叉配型。分析了2016年至2020年进行的735例死亡供体交叉配型,其中494例患者进行了移植,以确定是否可以将合格标准扩展到包括HLA抗体阳性的患者,这些患者没有针对潜在供体的供体特异性抗体(DSA)。 HLA抗体阴性患者5202例(68%)进行交叉配型,其中虚拟交叉配型383例。在没有DSA的情况下,HLA抗体阳性患者进行了127例(17%)实验室交叉配型。根据BSHI/BTS指南,所有这些都被报告为具有标准的免疫风险,这表明实验室交叉配型除了HLA抗体检测外,没有提供可能改变临床患者管理的额外信息。有DSA存在的HLA抗体阳性患者进行了106例(14%)实验室交叉配型。这三组患者中都包括之前接受过移植的患者。NHSBT-OTDT报告的临床排斥事件分析显示,三组患者的急性排斥发生率相似。根据这些数据,虚拟交叉匹配策略已扩展到包括无DSA的敏感患者。HLA抗体检测用于确认患者的抗体谱在移植时保持不变。Jennifer gas1, Susan Jordan1, Deborah Sage11NHSBT, London, uk1肾移植受者HLA抗体的特征对于评估其与潜在的已故或活体供者的相容性是必要的。单抗原珠(SAB)固相测定法简化了抗体分析,然而,通过抗原靶来定义这些抗体,而不是通过抗原靶来定义这些抗体,被认为更具临床相关性。在本病例研究中,我们报告了一位46岁的男性肾脏移植患者,我们使用One Lambda Labscreen SAB试验对其血清进行了检测,发现其血清中含有针对HLA-DP的抗体,该抗体不能单独由DPB1或DPA1靶点定义。结合表位注册表和公开的晶体结构,确定DPA1位置50(谷氨酰胺,Q或精氨酸,R)和DPB1位置85-87(谷氨酸-丙氨酸-缬氨酸(EAV)或甘氨酸-脯氨酸-蛋氨酸(GPM))可以构成单一抗体靶点。重新分析该患者的SAB谱显示,只有上述位置的Q和EAV的DP抗原呈阳性。NGS HLA-DP分型显示为Q-GPM。进一步使用Immucor Lifecodes单抗原试剂盒和Labscreen Supplementary Class II SAB试剂盒进行HLA抗体检测也得到了DP抗体谱,这可以用Q-EAV表位靶点来解释。该患者抗体仅在与携带Q-EAV DP分子的细胞孵育时发生吸收;Q-GPM无吸收。将可能结合的α - β链表位纳入表位分析软件,并列出表位,而不是抗原,作为不可接受的,将为未来的兼容性评估提供更有针对性的方法。Sejal morjari1, Arun Gupta1, Delordson M kallon11临床移植实验室,Barts Health NHS Trust, London, uk胸腺移植是一种新兴的临床选择,用于出生时没有胸腺的婴儿,这是一种与迪乔治综合征(DGS)相关的症状。患者AN(3个月,女性)于2019年初被诊断为DGS,于2019年7月在大奥蒙德街医院接受了无条件胸腺移植手术,捐赠者是一名无亲属。未进行供体或受体HLA分型。3个月活检未发现胸腺上皮,1年后未见免疫重建。移植前血清经Luminex单抗原检测未见供体特异性抗体(dsa)存在。然而,到2019年10月,患者已经重新发展为DQ7 DSA &gt;5000 MFI有排斥迹象。随后,患者的DSA水平下降,考虑进行第二次移植。由于HLA抗体的存在,H&I实验室建议临床团队对潜在的HLA供体进行分型。通过qPCR对供体样本进行分型,并于2022年1月用环孢素诱导进行第二次胸腺移植。患者每周监测DSA,发展为新生A24 DSA &lt;2周后增加到2000 MFI, 3周时增加到2000 MFI。移植后1个月新增DQA1*05 DSA(峰值DSA &gt;10000 MFI)。AN用利妥昔单抗治疗,然后进行3个周期血浆置换,每个周期后监测HLA抗体。三个周期后,她的DSA水平稳定在3000 MFI左右,并继续监测患者。本病例强调了H&I实验室在促进胸腺移植和帮助避免抗体介导的排斥反应中的作用。 在这里,我们描述了一个AML患者的病例研究,其中HLA-A位点在外显子1上表现出突变,导致一个新的空等位基因(HLA-A*31:01 novel),另一个等位基因是HLA-A*24:02。在检测时,患者正在进行不相关的供体搜索,初始搜索以患者为HLA-A*24:02纯合子进行。由于缺乏可用的相关供体来确认突变,因此寻求替代的DNA来源。口腔标本经NGS分型后显示白血病细胞浸润。因此,尝试使用皮肤塞样本作为非病变细胞的来源。皮肤堵塞样本也显示出白血病细胞的污染,尽管程度较轻。本案例研究强调了即使在使用口腔或皮肤活检样本确认了HLA类型后,也可能以不正确的HLA类型开始供体搜索的潜在风险。这表明,这些DNA来源可能并不总是无病组织的可靠来源。Carla Rosser1, Deborah Sage11NHS血液和移植,图廷,UKHLA抗体鉴定在我们的实验室常规进行,使用One Lambda LABScreen™单抗原(LABScreen)试剂盒。我们鉴定了54份与供者淋巴细胞交叉匹配的血清,其中供者特异性抗体(DSA)已通过LABScreen检测到。在该队列中,40/54例血清中,Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES)证实了DSA。随后使用Immucor LIFECODES®C3d检测法(LIFECODES-C3d)对这40份血清进行检测,以确定评估LIFECODES-C3d DSA阳性是否可以改善该队列中流式细胞交叉匹配(FCXM)结果的预测。60%的血清检测到LIFECODES-C3d阳性DSA(24/40)。针对HLA II类蛋白,特别是HLA- dq的c3d结合DSA的趋势,以及针对HLA I类蛋白的更高比例的非c3d结合DSA。当结合FCXM结果评估单个DSA的c3d结合能力时,68%的阳性交叉匹配中出现LIFECODES-C3d阳性,阴性交叉匹配中只有17%出现LIFECODES-C3d阳性,阴性FCXMs仅归因于HLA-DQ和HLA-DP DSA。有人认为,补体固定能力仅与具有较高平均荧光强度(MFI)值的抗体相关,但这些结果表明,LABScreen MFI值不能单独用于准确预测抗体LIFECODES-C3d阳性。我们的研究结果表明,与单独使用HLA抗体鉴定分析相比,LIFECODES-C3d检测与其他抗体鉴定分析可以增强DSA临床相关性的预测和风险分层,并且可能是比MFI更好的HLA抗体临床相关性指标。2019年,英国国家肾脏分配计划改变,允许将NHSBT-OTDT列出的不可接受的HLA-DPB1抗原(UA-DPB1)纳入分配因素。跨HLA-DPB1供体特异性抗体(DSA)移植的影响尚不清楚。由于列出的UA-DPB1可能不会产生阳性交叉配型,并且可能没有临床意义,因此存在拒绝移植的风险。然而,不列出UA-DPB1可能会导致重新分配器官的风险增加,因此如果移植前评估得出供体不相容的结论,器官将继续运输。这反过来又会增加冷缺血时间,从而导致移植结果恶化。我们旨在通过回顾2018年至2019年期间进行的所有淋巴细胞交叉配型,评估不列出UA-DPB1的方法的影响。考虑影响移植决定的DPB1分型信息、DPB抗体史和DSA,对537例淋巴细胞交叉配型进行重新评估。15例交叉匹配阳性(2.8%),9例(1.7%)表明移植风险增加但可接受,6例(1.1%)构成移植禁忌症。所有15例患者均在移植前进行手术,没有阳性的回顾性交叉匹配。5例(0.9%)阳性交叉配型涉及DPB1致敏,其中1例进行了移植,4例没有,原因是多因素的。我们的研究结果支持我们不列出UA-DPB1的方法,但建议在个案的基础上列出可能是合适的,特别是对于持续高DPB抗体水平的患者,可能产生阳性交叉匹配。 开发并验证了两个新程序,以帮助在该数据集中识别DSA。54例(57%)ITx病例包含肝脏,28例(29%)存在移植前DSA。使用Kaplan-Meier生存法,移植前DSA大于500的平均荧光强度(MFI)(由Luminex单抗原珠鉴定)似乎会对移植后的生存和排斥结果产生负面影响。此外,肝包涵异体移植物似乎对HLA I类DSA具有抵抗性。这些发现可能具有重要的临床意义,但没有通过log-rank检验和cox比例风险模型获得统计学意义,这表明需要在未来更大的患者队列中进行分析。然而,我们的数据暗示了与其他ITx研究的一致性,这些研究已经证明了有害的DSA效应,并且肝包涵体对HLA I类DSA具有保护作用。这符合英国的免疫风险指南。我们希望我们开发的公开可用的研究程序将支持在未来轻松获得统计相关数据。夏洛特·a·剑桥1,托马斯·r·特纳1,2,乔纳森·A.M.Lucas1, Gabriel J. Benitez1, Neema P. mayor1,2, Steven G.E. Marsh1,21英国皇家自由医院安东尼诺兰研究所;UKPacBio单分子实时(SMRT)技术促进了复杂HLA基因的全基因测序。几种条形码方法是可能的,使样品和基因复用:条形码引物(BCP)或条形码适配器(BCA),包括钝端(BCAv1)或悬置(BCAv2)适配器。在这里,我们比较了三种方法的数据质量。在PacBio Sequel上对12个BCP文库、10个BCAv1文库和7个BCAv2文库进行测序,包含≤96个样本,≥2个全长II类基因:HLA-DRB1、-DQB1和-DPB1。Lima通过条形码质量分数对子读取进行多路分离和过滤(预过滤=分配给条形码的所有潜在读取的条形码质量分数;后过滤=符合选择标准的读数)。我们观察到BCAv1的平均质量评分高于bcp,分别为62.6 (n = 1092)和51.7 (n = 1229);P = &lt;。)和后过滤(68.6 (n = 848)和65.9 (n = 666), P = & lt;。)的阶段。BCAv2在预滤波阶段的平均得分高于BCAv1 (64.2 (n = 706)比61.6 (n = 1249);P = &lt;0.0001),这意味着BCAv2生成的原始子reads质量更高。bca不需要条形码目标特异性PCR引物,从而提高了高质量DNA样品的扩增成功率(≤98% bca vs≤88% bcp),并且随着多路复用的增加,与bcp相比,每个样品的成本可以降低。总体而言,bcaa产生高质量的序列数据,BCAv2在预滤波阶段优于BCAv1。这些数据将为优化文库准备和分析工作流程提供信息,提高SMRT平台上超高分辨率HLA分型的效率。多米尼克·巴克1,Xenia Georgiou1,迈克尔·A·库珀1,托马斯·R·特纳2,詹姆斯·罗宾逊2,史蒂文·GE马歇尔21安东尼·诺兰研究所,汉普斯特德,英国;2Anthony Nolan研究所和UCL癌症研究所,汉普斯特,英国IPD-IMGT/HLA数据库是由WHO HLA系统因子命名委员会命名的序列的官方存储库。它为HLA社区提供了一个高度管理的序列数据集和元数据资源。近年来,下一代测序(NGS)的出现增加了提交给数据库的数据量和复杂性。该技术还被用于进一步表征国际HLA和免疫遗传学研讨会(IHIW)细胞系,将其HLA分型提高到超高分辨率。这些高度特征性的细胞被HLA社区广泛用作开发新的HLA分型方法的参考材料。为了应对数据库不断增长的规模和复杂性,IPD最近开发了一个REST API,允许开发人员构建工具来直接查询数据库。使用这个API,我们开发了一个新的IHIW细胞查询工具,旨在提高这些细胞数据的可访问性。该工具还允许以各种格式下载这些数据以供离线使用。IHIW细胞查询工具支持IHIW细胞的持续研究及其作为HLA社区资源的重要性。Amy De' ath1, Deborah pritchar1, Tracey Rees11UK英国卡迪夫H&I的NEQAS计划3每年评估参与者在10个样本中正确确定HLA抗体特异性的能力。报告HLA-DQA和-DPA抗体是可选的,不进行评估。对2020-21年和2021-22年提交给DQA和DPA的数据进行分析。在2020-21年,45/64(70%)的参与者提交了DQA抗体的数据,24/64(38%)的参与者提交了DPA抗体的数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Poster Abstract

Anthony Calvert1, Anthony Poles1, Matthew Hopkins1, Tim Hayes2

1NHS Blood and Transplant, Filton, UK; 2Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, UK

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare complication of heparin therapy with mild thrombocytopenia but potentially fatal thrombosis. HIT antibodies target the epitope of platelet factor 4 (PF4) and heparin. Laboratory investigations commonly detect antibodies by ELISA. The British Society for Haematology guidelines suggest clinical significant IgG antibodies equate to an OD > 1.0. Studies show an OD ≥ 1.4 corresponds with ≥50% chance of positive serotonin release assay (SRA) (Warkentin et al. J Thromb Haemost 2008; 6(8):1304-12).

Common practice for a HIT positive patient is repeat testing until a negative result indicates the safe use of Heparin, which is then administered pre-procedure and ceased immediately afterwards. Conditioning includes antibody titre reduction by plasmapheresis, multiple sessions are costly and can delay surgery. PF4/heparin antibodies are detected in 5-22% cardiac surgery patients but only 1%–2% have HIT (Pishko et al. Semin Thromb Hemost 2017; 43(7): 691-698).

A HIT positive pre-transplant patient was tested after each plasmapheresis using ELISA (Immucor HAT45G) and a platelet activation assay (IQ Products HITAlert) to compare HIT antibody levels with ability to activate platelets. Results showed an OD > 1.4 associated with positive activation, comparable to Warkentin's observations. The advantage of HITAlert is it detects functional antibodies and measures the expression of activation markers by flow cytometry, not radiolabelled serotonin release. The assay is then suitable for use in the routine laboratory environment, but requires freshly isolated (<2 h) ABO O platelets.

The patient received a successful heart transplant after the first negative activation result, sooner than waiting for negative ELISA results.

Carla Rosser1, Deborah Sage1

1NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK

The use of antibody-epitope analysis tools can improve the interpretation of in vitro HLA antibody identification assay data, particularly for identification of false positive reactions. HLA antibody-epitope analysis using HLAMatchmaker was performed on 22 crossmatched sera where donor-specific antibody (DSA) had previously been identified by One Lambda LABScreen™ Single Antigen (LABScreen). These sera were retrospectively tested by Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES) and BAG Healthcare HISTO SPOT® (HISTO SPOT) assays.

All three HLA antibody identification assays identified DSA in serum that did not cause a positive flow-cytometric crossmatch (FCXM). Antibody-epitope analysis supports the presence of DSA in 12/22 of these sera, indicating a higher sensitivity of the solid phase assays compared to the FCXM. However, antibody-epitope analysis was unable to explain 13% (5/39) of LABScreen DSA, compared to 5% (1/19) by LIFECODES and 0% (0/9) by HISTO SPOT. In this selected sera cohort (i.e. LABScreen DSA positive), 50% of HISTO SPOT, 33% of LIFECODES assays and 8% by LABScreen correctly predicted a negative FCXM result. All three assays demonstrated 100% concordance for sera with a positive FCXM (10/22).

Disparities between the antibody identification assays, particularly LABScreen and LIFECODES occurred in several samples, where different interpretations of antibody-epitope interactions could explain the antibody reaction pattern. This data illustrates the benefits of verifying antibody assay results where they are being used for clinical risk interpretation. Whilst antibody-epitope analysis is complex and challenging to introduce routinely in a clinical laboratory, it offers the opportunity to develop a better understanding of complex antibody profiles.

Rachel Smith1, Fiona Powell1, Betia Nouri1, Mazen Mabrok1, Ambika Camille1, Renuka Palanicawander1, Eduardo Olavarria1, Arthi Anand1

1Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK

Post transplant HLA typing at the H&I laboratory, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust is a new concept driven by the increased numbers of haploidentical transplants being performed and the implementation of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) HLA typing.

Thirty percent of patients transplanted with a haploidentical donor go on to relapse. Treatment choices differ depending on whether the patient is relapsing with or without HLA loss. NGS HLA typing can help determine if relapse is occurring with HLA loss due to its increased sensitivity. Relapse with HLA loss is defined as the genomic loss or downregulation of the patient's mismatched haplotype in the re-emerging leukaemic cells. This is an attempt by the cancer to evade the graft vs. leukaemic effect (GvL) by donor T cells. Donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI), a common relapse treatment post HPCT is not recommended for those patients experiencing HLA loss due to the increased risk of Graft vs Host Disease without the benefit of the GvL response.

Here we describe two cases where post transplant HLA typing made a significant impact on treatment choice. Both patients experienced relapse following a haploidentical sibling transplant. NGS HLA typing was performed at the point of relapse diagnosis and these results combined with the post transplant chimerism and cytogeneic testing confirmed that one patient was experiencing HLA loss while the other was not. As a result, the patient experiencing relapse with HLA loss went on to have a second haploidentical transplant while DLI's were considered for the patient relapsing without HLA loss.

Anna Barker1, Laura Ford1, Stephine Whiteside1, Poppy Greenaway1, Rebecca Dench1, Helena Lee1

1Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK

Lineage specific chimaerism analysis for engraftment monitoring following stem cell transplantation has greatly increased; by 51% in the past 2 years.

Sample processing is required within 24 h of the blood samples being taken, hence those received on a Friday must be processed the same day. Extending the time to cell separation beyond 24 h was investigated as part of a review of laboratory workflow, with the aim of reducing pressure on staff time and instrumentation.

CD3+ and CD15+ cells were isolated from blood using RoboSep™-S (STEMCELL™ Technologies) automated cell separators. Samples from four patients were each processed at three time points (samples 1–3 at 1, 3 and 5 days, sample 4 at 3, 6, and 7 days). Extracted DNA was tested as for routine chimerism using the GenePrint® 24 System (Promega). The purity of each isolated cell population was determined using flow cytometry.

There was no detrimental effect of sample age up to 5 days (in one case 7 days) on purity of the cell population, percentage donor chimaerism (Table 1), and electropherogram peak height (all > 3000 RFU).

Although it is best to process samples immediately, workload can often exceed instrument capacity and the time available to process the samples. Quality of the results is not affected up to 5 days, which means that samples received late on a Friday can be processed on Monday, reducing pressure on staff time.

Eva Santos-nunez1, Katrina Spensley2, Corinna Freeman3, Michelle Willicombe2, Arthi Anand1

1H&I Laboratory Hammersmith Hospital, North West London Pathology hosted by Imperial College NHS Trust, London, UK; 2West London Renal and Transplant Centre, Imperial College NHS Trust, London, UK; 3Clinical Transplant Laboratory (Viapath), Guy's Hospital, London, UK

Introduction: Using algorithms to calculate molecular mismatches requires HLA typing at high resolution or second field (2F). However, this level of resolution is not always available. To overcome this, computer algorithms to infer second field genotypes can be used.

Aim: To determine the accuracy of using a 2F prediction algorithm, Easy-HLA (https://hla.univ-nantes.fr/recherche/recherche.php) and whether discrepancies in results lead to differences in the molecular mismatch scores of two epitope analysis tools.

Methods: HLA types of 28 renal transplant recipients generated by PCR-SSO (n = 23) and PCR-SSP (n = 5) were uploaded to the “HLA-Upgrade tool” of Easy-HLA. Samples were re-typed by NGS and results compared. HLA eplet mismatch load and PIRCHE II scores were calculated using HLAMatchmaker (www.epitopes.net) and PIRCHE-II algorithm (www.pirche.com).

Results: The accuracy of the estimated 2F alleles per locus was HLA-A (93.5%), HLA-B (95.7%), HLA-C (93.5%), HLA-DRB1 (91.3%), HLA-DQB1 (97.8%) for SSO upgrades (E-SSO), and 80.0%, 80.0%, 80.0%, 60.0% and 40.0% for SSP upgrades (E-SSP). Ethnic accuracy differences were also noted; White (97.5%), Black (94.4%), Asian (91.2%) and Other (90.0%).

E-SSO concordance using HLA Matchmaker was 96% and 100% for Class I and II respectively, 60% and 40% for E-SSP. Deviations in PIRCHE II scores were seen in 7/23 (30%) of E-SSO samples (range 0–62) and 3/5 (60%) of E-SSP samples (range 0–95).

Conclusion: In summary, it is possible to successfully infer 2F data from intermediate level typing. The accuracy may be improved by using intermediate (SSO) typing results and statistical and population genetics data provided by algorithms such Easy-HLA.

Emma Holmes1, Jennifer Gauss1, Sue Jordan1, Deborah Sage1

1NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK

Virtual crossmatching is widely used to assess compatibility between a renal transplant recipient and deceased donor to reduce cold ischaemia time. At NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, only patients that are HLA antibody negative and have not been previously transplanted are eligible for a virtual crossmatch. Seven hundred and thirty-five deceased donor crossmatches carried out from 2016 to 2020, from which 494 patients were transplanted, were analysed to determine whether the eligibility criteria could be extended to include HLA antibody positive patients that did not have a donor specific antibody (DSA) directed against the prospective donor. Five hundred and two (68%) HLA antibody negative patients were crossmatched, of which 383 were completed by virtual crossmatch. One hundred and twenty-seven (17%) laboratory crossmatches were performed for HLA antibody positive patients in the absence of DSA. All of these were reported as having a standard immunological risk, in line with the BSHI/BTS guidelines, which indicates that laboratory crossmatching did not provide additional information, beyond HLA antibody testing, that could have altered clinical patient management. One hundred and six (14%) laboratory crossmatches were performed for HLA antibody positive patients in the presence of DSA. All three groups include patients that have previously been transplanted. Analysis of clinical rejection episodes reported to NHSBT-OTDT showed that there were similar rates of acute rejection between the three patient groups. In light of this data, the virtual crossmatch policy has been extended to include sensitised patients in the absence of DSA. HLA antibody testing is used to confirm the patient's antibody profile remains unchanged at the time of transplant.

Jennifer Gauss1, Susan Jordan1, Deborah Sage1

1NHSBT, London, UK

Characterisation of a renal transplant recipient's HLA antibodies is necessary to assess their compatibility with a potential deceased or living donor. Single Antigen Bead (SAB) solid phase assays have simplified antibody analysis, however defining these antibodies by their epitope/eplet targets, rather than by their antigen targets, is considered more clinically relevant. In this case study, we present a 46-year-old, previously transplanted, male renal patient whose serum we tested using the One Lambda Labscreen SAB assay and was found to have antibodies directed at HLA-DP that could not be defined by a DPB1 or DPA1 target alone. Using a combination of the epitope registry and publicly available crystal structures it was determined that DPA1 position 50 (Glutamine,Q or Arginine,R) and DPB1 postion 85–87 (Glutamic Acid-Alanine-Valine (EAV) or Glycine-Proline-Methionine (GPM)) could feasibly constitute a single antibody target. Re-analysis of this patient's SAB profile showed that only the DP antigens that were Q and EAV at the aforementioned positions were positive. HLA-DP typing by NGS showed the patient was Q-GPM. Further HLA antibody testing using Immucor Lifecodes Single Antigen kits and Labscreen Supplementary Class II SAB kits also resulted in DP antibody profiles that could be explained by a Q-EAV epitope target. Absorption of this patient's antibodies only occurred when incubated with a cell carrying Q-EAV DP molecules; no absorption occurred with Q-GPM. Incorporating possible combined alpha-beta chain epitopes into epitope analysis software and listing epitopes, rather than antigens, as unacceptable, will provide a more targeted approach to compatibility assessment in the future.

Sejal Morjaria1, Arun Gupta1, Delordson M Kallon1

1Clinical Transplantation Laboratory, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK

Thymus transplantation is an emerging clinical option for babies born with no thymus, a symptom associated with DiGeorge syndrome (DGS).

Patient AN (3 months, female), diagnosed with DGS in early 2019, received an unconditioned thymus transplant in July 2019 from an unrelated donor at Great Ormond Street Hospital. No prior donor or recipient HLA typing was performed. Three-month biopsies did not detect thymic epithelium and there was no immune reconstitution after 1 year. Pre-transplant serum tested by Luminex single antigen assay showed no pre-existing donor specific antibodies (DSAs). However, by October 2019 the patient had developed de novo DQ7 DSA > 5000 MFI with signs of rejection.

Subsequently, the patient's DSA levels decreased and she was considered for a second transplant. Due to the presence of HLA antibodies, the H&I laboratory advised the clinical team to HLA type potential donors. Donor samples were typed by qPCR and a second thymus transplant was undertaken in January 2022 with cyclosporine induction. The patient was monitored weekly for DSA, developing de novo A24 DSA < 2000 MFI after 2 weeks, increasing to >2000 MFI at 3 weeks. Additional de novo DQA1*05 DSAs were detected at month post-transplant (peak DSA > 10,000 MFI).

AN was treated with rituximab followed by three cycles of plasma exchange with HLA antibody monitoring after each cycle. After three cycles her DSA levels had stabilised around 3000 MFI and the patient continues to be monitored.

This case highlights the role of the H&I laboratory in facilitating thymus transplants and helping to avoid antibody mediated rejection.

Paul Wright1, Marcus Lowe1, Robin Kippax1, Anna Barker1, Alison Logan1, Helena Lee1, Natalia Diaz Burlinson1, Stephen Sheldon1, Kay Poulton1

1Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK

HLA allele frequency data is beneficial for identifying patients for which it may be challenging to find a suitable unrelated donor, and in routine analysis of genotyping data when scrutinising results. Despite the many advancements in genotyping the HLA gene complex, with next generation sequencing providing higher resolution typing than previously possible, there are few tools and reference materials available with high resolution data. Coding using Python was developed for extracting HLA allele frequency data from the local next generation sequencing services. Data from 11 HLA loci (HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1/3/4/5, -DQA1, -DQB1, -DPA1, -DPB1) were collected from all samples tested using AlloSeq HLA Tx17 next generation sequencing (CareDx, USA) with the MiSeq platform (Illumina, USA) (using the IMGT/HLA v3.43 reference data set) between April and December 2021 (n = 1636). Data for all loci were presented as allele frequency, with the exception of HLA-DRB3/4/5, which were presented as carrier frequency. This data set provides the department with new insights into high resolution HLA allele frequencies, such as the allele frequencies of HLA-DQA1 and -DPA1, and the allele frequencies at third field resolution for various alleles, such as HLA-A*68:01:01 (freq = 0.0122) versus A*68:01:02 (freq = 0.0251) and HLA-B*44:03:01 (freq = 0.0504) versus B*44:03:02 (freq = 0.0067). The next aim of the project is to advance the current data set to allow analysis by patient type (for example, deceased donor or renal transplantation patients) and to develop a data set for assessing HLA linkage disequilibrium frequencies at third field resolution.

Kim McShane1, Emma Burrows1, Deborah Pritchard1, Tracey Rees1

1Welsh Transplantation and Immunogenetics Laboratory, Talbot Green, UK

Recent case reports have revealed HNA-3a antibodies are associated with increased antibody-mediated rejection and graft loss in kidney allograft recipients. Ninety-five percent of the UK population is HNA-3a antigen positive.

Two multi-parous female transfused patients presented with unexplained strong positive deceased donor T and B-cell flow cytometry crossmatch (XM). Further investigation confirmed them as HNA-3b/3b with HNA-3a antibodies. Both partners typed as HNA-3a antigen positive, indicating antibodies were likely to be pregnancy stimulated. Patient 1 was deemed unsuitable for transplantation due to co-morbidities. HNA compatible family donors were investigated for patient two with no success. This patient remains on the deceased donor list, but is expected to be FCXM positive with 95% of offers. Live donor transplantation with antibody removal is under consideration.

Due to the risk of HNA antibodies being missed by virtual XM, and reported poorer clinical outcomes, we subsequently screened patients awaiting kidney transplant (n = 298) for HNA antibodies using the LABScreen Multi kit, as this kit is currently used in our laboratory for TRALI risk reduction. Samples with a positive HNA-3 result (n = 22, 7.4%) were referred to a reference laboratory for confirmatory testing. Two (0.67%) were confirmed to be positive for HNA-3a antibodies. False positive rate 9%.

To mitigate the risk to virtual crossmatching, we now HNA antibody screen (once) all kidney transplant patients. Confirmed positives are unsuitable for virtual XM. HNA genotyping as a first line test is being considered to identify the 5% of patients requiring HNA-3 antibody testing.

Blanka Zamostna1, Cem Mak1, Jasper Taal1, Pavel Jiroutek1, Doug Bost1

1JETA Molecular, Utrecht, the Netherlands

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an established cure for haematological disorders. Early, accurate, and sensitive determination of hematopoietic chimerism is crucial for the adjustment of a transplant recipient's treatment. Onventional STR and qPCR methods to detect graft failure after HSCT are limited by their dynamic range of analysis (STR-PCR: 5%−100% and qPCR:0,1%−30%). Digital PCR (dPCR) is a 3rd generation technology and has proved in many studies to combine end point quantification over a wide measurement range (0.01%−90%) with excellent sensitivity, accuracy and reproducibility.

We have developed and validated a system of 42 dPCR assays and software enabling highly sensitive stem cell engraftment monitoring. Our approach allows for facile quantification of minute amounts of minor components in a mixture, while reducing workflow and analysis burdens. Each assay was validated using at least three independent control DNA mixtures with concentrations ranging from 90% down to 0.05% minor component in the presence of 50ngs input DNA. The results obtained using dPCR were concordant with the values generated using qPCR.

The use of dPCR allows for sensitive and precise quantification of target DNA and due to its unparalleled sensitivity, this technique represents a particularly useful diagnostic tool in chimerism monitoring. In comparison with the wide used qPCR chimerism analysis, dPCR has been shown to anticipate a relapse significantly earlier and therefore, it may guide timely post-transplantation therapeutic interventions. Compared to NGS methods, this system can deliver 72 answers within one working day, with highly reduced cost per sample and hands on time.

Olivia Shaw1, Chloe Martin1, Deeya Balgobin1, Sarah Blears1, Corinna Freeman1

1Viapath, London, UK

HNA-3 specific antibody may be implicated in rejection episodes following renal transplantation (Key et.al. J Renal Transplant Sci, 2(2):81–84). HNA-3 is bi-allelic, −3a/−3b, and homozygote individuals may develop antibody to the non-self variant.

HNA-3 is expressed on a variety of cell types including lymphocytes, leading to positive T and B cell flow crossmatches, and renal endothelial cells, thus a target for rejection.

Following two local cases of AMR in the face of HNA-3a specific antibody, and cases of positive crossmatches attributable to HNA-3a or -b specific antibody, we have introduced a screening programme for HNA-3 specific antibody using LABScreen Multi (OneLambda).

Between Jan 2020 and May 2022 7360 tests were performed. One hundred and twenty tests in 80 patients were positive for HNA-3a and 102 tests in 77 patients were positive for HNA-3b. ‘True’ positivity was assigned following HNA typing of patients testing positive on multiple samples. This gave confirmed antibody specificity in 20 patients for HNA-3a and 16 patients for HNA-3b, reflecting 7% of the active waiting list.

Patients testing ‘true’ positive require a prospective crossmatch prior to transplant regardless of HLA specific antibody status. Since this introduction an additional six prospective crossmatches have been performed, with 50% giving a positive result. To date no transplant has been refused due to HNA specific antibody.

We report that HNA-3 specific antibody can impact on crossmatch results and routine screening should form part of the immunological risk assessment and guidance given to Clinicians and patients prior to transplant.

Jennifer Lord1, Rebecca Dench1, Nicola Martin1, Paul Wright1, Anna Barker1, Alison Logan1, Helena Lee1

1Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK

Next generation sequencing (NGS) has become the routine methodology to obtain a high resolution HLA type for optimal donor selection in Haematopoietic Progenitor Cell Transplantation (HPCT). NGS provides sequencing beyond the antigen recognition domain (ARD), making it possible to detect HLA mismatches between the recipient and potential donor that are not detected by other HLA typing techniques.

A patient with T cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia was referred in 2021 for HPCT work-up and HLA typed by NGS (AlloSeq Tx17, CareDx). Two siblings were screened as potential donors by typing at HLA-B using LABType™ SSO (One Lambda). Sibling A appeared to be HLA matched with the patient at intermediate level resolution, whereas sibling B did not. Sibling A was HLA typed by NGS to ensure they were matched at HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, -DQB1 and -DPB1, which showed sibling A had a novel allele at HLA-B and hence a mismatch with the patient that had not been identified by LABType™ SSO. A single nucleotide polymorphism was observed at position 2798 in exon 5 of HLA-B, which excluded HLA-B*51:01:01, 52:01:01 detected by NGS in the patient. Further typing of both parents demonstrated the novel HLA-B allele was not inherited from either parent and may be a spontaneous point mutation in sibling A.

This case demonstrates the importance of high-resolution verses intermediate level HLA typing to optimise HPCT donor selection even in the presence of a family study, as HLA matching outside the ARD may improve transplant outcome.

Fiona Powell1, Betia Nouri1, Mazen Mabrok1, Thet Myint1, Sarah Blow2, Delordson Kallon2, Rachel Smith1, Arthi Anand1

1Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, North West London Pathology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK; 2Clinical Transplantation Laboratory, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK

HLA specific mutations in leukemic cells lines may occur as part of leukaemia immune evasion mechanisms. These may be particularly evident in peripheral blood samples taken during blast crisis and may result in altered expression of HLA proteins. The sensitivity of HLA typing by NGS allows for the detection of these mutations and it is therefore recommended that when detected, they are confirmed in non-disease tissue such as buccal or skin plugs or through the HLA typing of relatives.

Here we describe the case study of an AML patient in which the HLA-A locus exhibited a mutation in exon 1 resulting in a novel null allele (HLA-A*31:01 novel), the other allele being HLA-A*24:02. At the time of detection, the patient was undergoing an unrelated donor search with the initial search being carried out as if the patient were HLA-A*24:02 homozygous.

Due to lack of related donors available to confirm the mutation an alternative source of DNA was sought. A buccal sample was taken but showed leukemic cell infiltration following NGS typing. An attempt was therefore made to use a skin plug sample as a source of non-diseased cells. The skin plug sample also showed contamination with leukaemia cells, though to a lesser degree. This case study highlights the potential risk of donor searches being initiated with the incorrect HLA type even following confirmation of the type using buccal or skin biopsy samples. It demonstrates that these DNA sources may not always be a reliable source of disease-free tissue.

Carla Rosser1, Deborah Sage1

1NHS Blood and Transplant, Tooting, UK

HLA antibody identification is routinely performed in our laboratory using One Lambda LABScreen™ Single Antigen (LABScreen) kits. We identified 54 sera, crossmatched against donor lymphocytes, where donor-specific antibody (DSA) has been detected by LABScreen. Of this cohort, DSA was confirmed by Immucor LIFECODES LSA (LIFECODES) in 40/54 sera. These 40 sera were subsequently tested using Immucor LIFECODES® C3d Detection assay (LIFECODES-C3d) to determine whether assessment of LIFECODES-C3d DSA positivity could improve prediction of flow-cytometric crossmatch (FCXM) outcome in this cohort.

LIFECODES-C3d positive DSA was detected in 60% of sera (24/40). A trend towards C3d-binding DSA against HLA Class II proteins, particularly HLA-DQ, was identified alongside a higher proportion of non-C3d-binding DSA directed against HLA Class I proteins. When assessing C3d-binding capability of individual DSA in conjunction with FCXM outcome, LIFECODES-C3d positivity was seen in 68% of positive crossmatches and only 17% of negative crossmatches, with negative FCXMs attributed to HLA-DQ and HLA-DP DSA only. It has been suggested that complement-fixing capability is associated only with antibodies with higher mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values but these results indicate that LABScreen MFI value alone could not be used to accurately predict antibody LIFECODES-C3d positivity.

Our results suggest a role for LIFECODES-C3d assay alongside other antibody identification assays, to enable enhanced prediction and risk stratification with regards to the clinical relevance of DSA, compared to the use of HLA antibody identification assays alone and may be a better indicator of HLA antibody clinical relevance than MFI.

Luke Foster1, David Briggs1

1NHS Blood and Transplant, Birmingham, UK

In 2019, the UK National Kidney Allocation Scheme changed to allow unacceptable HLA-DPB1 antigens (UA-DPB1) listed with NHSBT-OTDT to be factored into allocation. The impact of transplanting across HLA-DPB1 donor specific antibodies (DSA) remains unclear. There is a risk of denying access to transplantation due to listed UA-DPB1 that may not produce a positive crossmatch and which may not be clinically significant. However, not listing UA-DPB1 may result in an increased risk of reallocation and thus onward shipping of organs if pre-transplant assessments conclude that the donor is incompatible. This in turn can increase cold ischemia time that is associated with worse transplant outcomes. We aimed to assess the impact of our approach not to list UA-DPB1 by reviewing all lymphocyte crossmatches that were performed between 2018 and 2019.

A total of 537 lymphocyte crossmatches were re-evaluated, considering the DPB1 typing information, DPB antibody history and DSA which impacted upon the decision to proceed to transplant.

Fifteen crossmatches were positive (2.8%), nine (1.7%) indicating an increased but acceptable risk for transplantation and six (1.1%) constituting a contraindication to transplant. All 15 were performed pre-transplant and there were no positive retrospective crossmatches. Five (0.9%) of the positive crossmatches involved DPB1 sensitisation, one of which proceeded to transplant and four which did not, with reasoning being multifactorial. Our findings support our approach of not listing UA-DPB1, but recommend that listing may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis, particularly for patients with consistently high DPB antibody levels that are likely to produce a positive crossmatch.

Selda Goktas1, Franco Tavarozzi1, Adam King1, Molly Green1, Margaret Walker1, Momin Shah1, Reetinder Grewal1, Michael Hoddinott1, Sandra Frater1, Sharon Vivers1, Lisa Walsh1

1Anthony Nolan, Hampstead, UK

The Anthony Nolan Histocompatibility Laboratory utilises GenDx NGSgo® as its primary method for high resolution HLA typing of 11 loci: HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, -DRB3,4,5, -DQB1, -DQA1, -DPA1, -DPB1, including all exons for HLA-DRB1 and whole gene primers for HLA-DQB1.

To manage sample throughput, an automated Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) set up was investigated. This involved a collaboration with Hamilton Robotics and the development of customised methods to process samples utilising the Hamilton Microlab STAR liquid handling robot. The aim of this work was to facilitate larger runs and also to increase the flexibility of the current NGS set up, enabling more combinations of HLA loci to be amplified.

Depending on the number of samples, two automated protocols were developed with Hamilton Robotics (low and high throughput). Low throughput mimics the manual process whereas for higher sample numbers, the high throughput option is more efficient. These options were validated on 16 and 96 samples, respectively.

Data generated using both the Illumina MiSeq and iSeq instruments was analysed using NGSengine (GenDx). All runs met the predefined minimum acceptance criteria, which included specific metrics such as cluster density, Q30 score and lowest read depth.

This collaboration demonstrated that running low and high throughput workflows using the Hamilton Microlab STAR, in conjunction with Illumina MiSeq and iSeq sequencers, resulted in acceptable metrics and 100% HLA concordance. Future work will focus on increased run complexity including varying combinations of HLA loci on the same run.

Sarah Peacock1, Miriam Manook1, Vasilis Kosmoliaptsis1

1Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK

There is a subset of kidney patients difficult to transplant who may be eligible for consideration of modifying their criteria for listing unacceptable mismatches (UMM). A systematic review of records was undertaken to identify patients who had modified criteria applied. This identified 21 patients where listing criteria had been modified with nine transplanted across specificities that had been removed. The average standard cRF was 99.5% (97–100), applying modified criteria reduced the average cRF to 95.4% (67–100). In patients transplanted across modified criteria, in six of these there was one donor specific antibody (DSA) present and in three there were multiple DSA present. In total 14 DSA were crossed with the majority directed against HLA-C. The mean peak MFI crossed was 9157 (2686–21,004) and the mean current MFI crossed was 3800 (614–11,690). The mean follow up time was 562 days (7–1431) with no adverse clinical events for seven of the nine patients transplanted across DSA and at last follow up DSA levels for these patients were MFI < 2000 or absent. One patient, transplanted across multiple DSA, lost their graft after 1 year due to antibody mediated rejection (AMR). Another patient 8 months post-transplant had increased serum creatinine and a biopsy showing Banff 1B acute rejection without features of AMR. Both of these patients had high level (MFI > 5000) DSA present at last follow up. This review demonstrates that for selected patients modified listing criteria can result in successful transplantation but risks of doing so remain.

Sarah Dyer1, Emma Burrows1, Deborah Pritchard1

1Welsh Blood Service, Ely Valley Road, Talbot Green, UK

We use LABScreen® (One Lambda, Inc) Mixed (LSM) kits to screen patients on the kidney transplant waiting list for HLA antibodies; positive samples are then tested using LABScreen® Single Antigen (LSA) kits. All sera are treated with EDTA.

We identified a male patient, cRF 92% monitored in the laboratory since 2018, that had tested LSM negative with current serum, but had previously been LSA positive for HLA-DQ2 (6 months previously, all five DQ2 beads positive with MFI 4219-17197). All other CII beads are consistently negative. DQ2 is a previous transplant mismatch listed as an unacceptable antigen.

There are four beads in the CII LSM test that carry DQ2 (Table 2). The ratio of these beads ranged from 0.3 to 1.34 (positive > 1.9). Previous LSM testing gave highest ratios of 2.15–5.

LSA testing on the current sera confirmed the DQ2 with MFI 3655-20275. Crossmatching against two DQ2 cells yielded positive results with both historic and current serum (auto xm negative). Lifecodes® Lifescreen beads were positive, and Lifecodes Single Antigen assay confirmed DQ2. These results add weight to the fact this is a LSM ‘missed’ antibody.

To investigate the unexpected negative CII LSM result, further tests were performed on the current serum; dilution testing, DTT treatment, full bead protocol (half-bead utilised routinely), and testing using LSM with IgM conjugate. All tests gave negative results (Table 2).

This case highlights that LSM screening kits may not detect all clinically relevant antibodies, and the importance of analysing samples alongside historic results.

Nikita Sinha1, Stephen Weston1, Paul Dunn1

1University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, UK

It has been well established that anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) are the main cause of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). There is anecdotal evidence, however, that non-HLA antibodies might be involved in AMR episodes after solid organ transplantation with an increasing number of patients presenting with pathological features of AMR in the absence of anti-HLA DSA. The aim of this study is to establish the role of non-HLA antibodies in patients with suspected AMR, with no anti-HLA DSA, following kidney transplantation. To achieve this, serum samples from the study group (n = 23) were screened using LIFECODES® non-HLA antibody kits, which is a multiplex assay that allows the detection of antibodies against 60 non-HLA markers. Pre- and post-transplant serum samples were chosen to establish any changes in non-HLA antibody profiles following transplantation and whether non-HLA antibodies had a role in graft rejection in these patients. Of the 60 non-HLA markers, a significant difference (p < .05) in pre- and post-transplant mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values was seen in 15 markers. Lower MFI values were seen post-transplant for all 15 statistically significant markers. Of these, five markers met the suggested cut-off value to be classed as positive – Actin (9/23), Collagen II (13/23), Collagen III (8/23), HARS (6/23) and LGALS3 (6/23). Lower MFI values post-transplant could be due to the effects of immunosuppressive drugs administered to patients following transplantation. Further research is still required. In particular, larger, collaborative studies could aid in establishing the clinical relevance of non-HLAantibodies in solid organ transplantation.

Sarah Peacock1

1Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK

This patient is a 33 year old female who had previously received a combined liver, pancreas and jejunum transplant 2013; at that time she was highly sensitised (cRF 100%) due to blood transfusions. This transplant crossed multiple HLA class I and II donor specific antibodies (HLA-DSA) (MFI range 2946–21,999) corresponding to a positive T & B cell lymphocytotoxic crossmatch. Her pancreas failed in 2014 and there were episodes of T cell and antibody mediated rejection of the liver in 2020. Her native kidney failed in 2019 leading to dialysis dependence. The plan was to proceed with direct live kidney donation from her father as it would have been challenging to identify a compatible graft given her sensitisation which is predominately directed against HLA-A (she herself is homozygous HLA-A32). Her live kidney donor (LKD) shared repeat HLA-A3, -DQ6 and -DP2 mismatches with her previous transplant with current HLA antibody screening results show she remained highly sensitised including HLA-DSA against HLA-A3 (MFI:523) that had been seen at this low level from approximately 6 weeks post-transplant. Direct transplantation from her LKD proceeded with a current negative T & B cell lymphocytotoxic crossmatch (historical B cell positive). The HLA mismatch grade was 1.1.1 and overall this transplant conferred intermediate immunological risk with close post-transplant monitoring of both the kidney & liver allograft function recommended. There was delayed graft function which recovered by day 9 and 6 months post-transplant the patient remains well at home with no HLA-DSA and no episodes of rejection.

Rhea McArdle1,2, Rebecca Cope1,2, Afzal Chaudhry3,4, Lisa Sharkey5, Sarah Peacock1

1Tissue Typing Laboratory, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; 2Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Division of Medical Education, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; 3Department of Nephrology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; 4Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, UK; 5Department of Gastroenterology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK

Despite recent advances that have improved patient outcomes following intestinal transplantation (ITx), achieving long-term survival and rejection-free survival is still challenging. Understanding the relevance of pre-transplant human leukocyte antigen (HLA) donor specific antibody (DSA) in ITx and the immunomodulatory potential of the liver within the allograft is crucial to providing an accurate assessment of pre-transplant immunological risk, which could influence and improve post-transplant outcomes further. Thus, this was the primary objective of this retrospective study in 95 adult ITx patients transplanted at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust between 2007 and 2019.

Two novel programs were developed and validated to aid in DSA identification in this dataset. Fifty-four (57%) ITx cases contained a liver, and 28 (29%) harboured pre-transplant DSA. Using the Kaplan-Meier survival method, pre-transplant DSA greater than 500 mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) as identified by Luminex single antigen beads, seemed to negatively affect post-ITx survival and rejection outcomes. Furthermore, liver-inclusive allografts seemed to show resistance to HLA class I DSA. These findings could be clinically important but statistical significance was not achieved via log-rank tests and cox proportional hazard models, indicating a need for future analysis in a larger patient cohort.

Nevertheless, our data hints towards consistency with other ITx studies where deleterious DSA effects have been demonstrated, and where liver inclusion is protective from HLA class I DSA. This is in line with United Kingdom guidelines for immunological risk. We hope that our publicly available research programs developed will support ease of gaining statistically relevant data in the future.

Charlotte A. Cambridge1, Thomas R. Turner1,2, Jonathan A.M. Lucas1, Gabriel J. Benitez1, Neema P. Mayor1,2, Steven G.E. Marsh1,2

1Anthony Nolan Research Institute, Royal Free Hospital, UK; 2UCL Cancer Institute, Royal Free Campus, UK

PacBio Single Molecule Real-Time (SMRT) technology facilitates full-gene sequencing of complex HLA genes. Several barcoding methods are possible, enabling sample and gene multiplexing: barcoded primer (BCP) or barcoded adapter (BCA), including blunt-ended (BCAv1) or overhang (BCAv2) adapters. Here, we compare data quality of the three methods. Twelve BCP, ten BCAv1 and seven BCAv2 libraries were sequenced on the PacBio Sequel, containing ≤96 samples for ≥2 full-length class II genes: HLA-DRB1, -DQB1 and -DPB1. Lima was used to demultiplex and filter subreads by barcode quality score (pre-filtering = barcode quality scores for all potential reads assigned to a barcode; post-filtering = reads meeting selection criteria). We observed higher mean quality scores for BCAv1 versus BCPs at the pre- (62.6 (n = 1092) vs. 51.7 (n = 1229); P = < .0001) and post-filtering (68.6 (n = 848) vs. 65.9 (n = 666), P = < .0001) stages. BCAv2 had higher mean scores versus BCAv1 at the pre-filtering stage (64.2 (n = 706) vs. 61.6 (n = 1249); P = < .0001), implying that raw subreads generated by BCAv2 are of higher quality. BCAs negate the need for barcoded target-specific PCR primers, resulting in improved amplification success for high quality DNA samples (≤98% BCAs vs. ≤88% BCPs), and can reduce cost per sample versus BCPs as multiplexing increases. Overall, BCAs generate high quality sequence data, with BCAv2 outperforming BCAv1 at the pre-filtering stage. This data will inform optimisation of library preparation and analysis workflows, improving efficiency of ultra-high resolution HLA typing on the SMRT platform.

Dominic Barker1, Xenia Georgiou1, Michael A Cooper1, Thomas R Turner2, James Robinson2, Steven GE Marsh2

1Anthony Nolan Research Institute, Hampstead, UK; 2Anthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, Hampstead, UK

The IPD-IMGT/HLA Database is the official repository for sequences named by the WHO Nomenclature Committee for Factors of the HLA system. It provides a highly curated dataset of sequences and metadata as a resource to the HLA community. In recent years the advent of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) has increased the volume and complexity of data being submitted to the database. This technology has also been used to further characterise the International HLA and Immunogenetics Workshop (IHIW) cell lines, increasing their HLA typing to ultra-high resolution. These highly characterised cells are widely used as reference material by the HLA community for the development of new HLA typing methods. In response to the growing size and complexity of the database, IPD recently developed a REST API allowing developers to build tools to query the database directly. Using this API, we have developed a new IHIW Cell Query Tool aimed at improving the accessibility of data on these cells. This tool also allows this data to be downloaded in a variety of formats for offline use. The IHIW Cell Query Tool supports the continued study of the IHIW cells and their importance as a resource to the HLA community.

Amy De'Ath1, Deborah Pritchard1, Tracey Rees1

1UK NEQAS for H&I, Cardiff, UK

Scheme 3 assesses participants’ ability to correctly determine the specificity of HLA antibodies in 10 samples annually. Reporting of antibodies to HLA-DQA and -DPA is optional and not assessed. An analysis of the data submitted for DQA and DPA in 2020–21 and 2021–22 was performed.

In 2020–21, 45/64 (70%) participants submitted data for DQA antibodies and 24/64 (38%) for DPA antibodies. Three (2%) DQA specificities reached consensus present, 24 (18%) consensus absent, 79 (61%) were reported as negative by all labs and 24 (18%) did not reach consensus. For DPA 0 specificities reached consensus present, eight (11%) consensus absent, 30 (43%) were reported a negative by all labs and 32 (46%) did not reached consensus.

In 2021-22, 25/65 (38%) participants submitted data for DQA antibodies (9/24 37.5% UK&I) and 19/65 (29%) for DPA antibodies (8/24 33.3% UK&I). Eight (6%) DQA specificities reached consensus present, 23 (18%) consensus absent, 56 (43%) were reported as negative by all labs and 43 (33%) did not reach consensus. For DPA 3 (4%) specificities reached consensus present, 0 consensus absent, 63 (90%) were reported a negative by all labs and 4 (6%) did not reached consensus.

The DQA/DPA specificities that reached consensus present were DQA1*04:01, 05:01, 05:03, 05:05, 06:01 and DPA1*02:01, 02:02, 04:01.

In the UK&I 63% laboratories reported considering antibodies to DQA in clinical transplant compatibility assessment whilst 44% consider DPA antibodies. NEQAS encourage all labs to report results for DQA/DPA antibodies with the intention that these antibodies will be assessed in the future.

Thomas R. Turner1, Matilda C. Tierney2, Michael A. Cooper2, Victor-Randolph N. Boatey2, Neema P. Mayor1, Steven G.E. Marsh1

1Anthony Nolan Research Institute and UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK; 2Anthony Nolan Research Institute, London, UK

During routine, ultra-high resolution HLA typing in our laboratory, we identified three novel intronic variants in a healthy individual, AN300903, who has Efik (Nigeria) and Ashanti (Ghana) ancestry. Full-gene HLA amplicons were generated using PCR with VeriFi polymerase (PCR Biosystems, UK). A sequencing library was made using PacBio ETPK 2.0 and barcoded adaptors, according to manufacturer's instructions, then ran on a Sequel instrument. Data was analysed using an in-house bioinformatics workflow. The extended HLA typing of AN300903 is: A*36:01:01:01, 02:02:01:01, B*53:01:01:01, C*04:01:01:75, E*01:01:01:01, 01:03:02:01, F*01:01:02:11, 01:03:01:03, G*01:04:04, 01:03:01:02, DRA*01:03, 01:02:02var, DRB3*01:62:01:01, 02:02:01var, DRB1*03:02:01, 11:01:02:03, DQA1*01:02:01:03, 04:01:01:04, DQB1*04:02:01:08, 06:02:01:04, DPA1*02:02:02:04, 03:01:01:05, DPB1*01:01:01:02, 105:01:01var. The novel DPB1 allele is likely a recombinant of a DPB1*105:01:01:03 and a DPB1*16:01:01:02/652:01/653:01/1286:01. All novel alleles will be submitted to the ENA and the IPD-IMGT/HLA Database. No family samples were available, so we used haplostats.org to predict the likely haplotypes of AN300903. With 93.6% certainty it predicted A*36:01∼C*04:01∼B*53:01∼DRB1*11:01∼DQB1*06:02 and A*02:02∼C*04:01∼B*53:01∼DRB1*03:02∼DQB1*04:02. These are the second (0.8% frequency) and 176th (0.07% frequency) most common haplotypes in black Africans, respectively. Based on our observations of allele associations in other samples, it's likely the novel DRA and DRB3 alleles are on the same haplotype. We also confirmed the recently identified DRA*01:03 and DRB3*01:62, observed with DRB1*03:02. Ultra-high resolution HLA typing of AN300903 highlights the under-appreciated non-coding diversity in a young, black, British male on the stem cell register. This potentially reflects further diversity in donors of African ancestry, that is only identifiable with extended, full-length HLA sequencing.

Laura Ford1, Alison Logan1, Anna Barker1, Julie Johnson1, Stephine Whiteside1, Helena Lee1

1Manchester Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester, UK

The Transplantation Laboratory provides a service to clinicians which determines percentage donor chimaerism in a patient post bone marrow transplantation using the GenePrint24 STR methodology (Promega). The Laboratory receives ∼4000 of these samples per year and the current method of analysis and reporting was time-consuming and involved numerous manual transcriptions, with a potential risk of error.

As part of the NHS Long-term Plan, seven Genomic Laboratory Hubs have been generated which will be responsible for coordinating Genetic based work in a particular region of the country. The Laboratory's STR team has been assigned to the North West Genomics Laboratory Hub and as a consequence the turnaround time for reporting the STR chimaerism data may need to be reduced. A new technique to analyse and report STRs that was both robust and quicker to perform was required to meet any shorter turnaround times. As a substitute to expensive commercial software and to improve laboratory efficiency, an inhouse method was developed. A system of Excel spreadsheets was designed, validated and introduced which will automatically calculate percentage donor chimaerism when peak area values from the analysis software Genemapper (Thermofisher) are entered.

This new method saves 23 min per patient (42 min–19 min) for a set of three samples to be analysed, reported and authorised. This time equates to ∼68 working days a year, which frees up staff time for alternative work. Thus, not only is this new method quicker but also improves patient safety by reducing manual transcriptions and potential errors.

Julie Johnson1, Kay Poulton1, Lesley Lappin2, Paula Ormandy2

1Transplantation Laboratory, Mancheseter Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK; 2University of Salford, Salford, UK

Accreditation is a procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition that a laboratory is competent to carry out procedures according to specified standards. The rationale being that if these standards are met there is a level of assurance that the service provided is of an acceptable level of quality. Throughout the NHS, laboratories have been encouraged to implement accreditation as a tool with which to demonstrate an acceptable level of service quality. However, evidence to substantiate there is any true benefit of accreditation is lacking.

The current process for a laboratory to obtain accreditation is time consuming, bureaucratic, and costly, with demands on the laboratory which can delay innovation and improvements to the patient service. In European medical laboratories, an alternative approach has been adopted successfully. This alternative approach uses a Flexible rather than a Fixed scope of Practice which may benefit experienced laboratories, allowing autonomy within their accredited scope to remain patient focused and to adapt to innovation and science in a timely cost-effective manner. This approach has not yet been fully explored within NHS based hospital laboratories.

This single centre study aims to analyse the implementation of the Flexible scope accreditation using a quasi-experimental design with a mixed methods approach for data collection. Longitudinal data will be collected to evaluate the implementation of the Flexible Scope using a retrospective-prospective study design to validate and verify the overall impact of implementing a Flexible scope on an NHS laboratory service.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Immunogenetics (formerly European Journal of Immunogenetics) publishes original contributions on the genetic control of components of the immune system and their interactions in both humans and experimental animals. The term ''genetic'' is taken in its broadest sense to include studies at the evolutionary, molecular, chromosomal functional and population levels in both health and disease. Examples are: -studies of blood groups and other surface antigens- cell interactions and immune response- receptors, antibodies, complement components and cytokines- polymorphism- evolution of the organisation, control and function of immune system components- anthropology and disease associations- the genetics of immune-related disease: allergy, autoimmunity, immunodeficiency and other immune pathologies- All papers are seen by at least two independent referees and only papers of the highest quality are accepted.
期刊最新文献
Association of PADI4 Gene Polymorphisms With Susceptibility to Rheumatoid Arthritis: Evidence From 24 Case-Control Studies. Associations Between Interleukin-10 Polymorphisms and Susceptibility to Sjögren's Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis. Issue Information Nomenclature for factors of the HLA system, update July, August and September 2024 Role of C–C chemokine receptor type 5 in pathogenesis of malaria and its severe forms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1