Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36687549›Full record

ArticleAsian journal of transfusion science

Prozone phenomenon in pretransplant testing: An interesting conundrum involving solid-phase and cell-based assays.

Parvind Singh, Aseem Kumar Tiwari, Vikash Chandra Mishra, Trupti Vimlakar Deshpande, Pranav Dorwal, Amit Kr Bhardwaj, Sneha Kumari, Vimarsh Raina

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian journal of transfusion science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Parvind SinghDepartment of Transplant Immunology, Chimera Transplant Research Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Aseem Kumar TiwariDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Medanta - The Medicity, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Vikash Chandra MishraDepartment of Transplant Immunology, Chimera Transplant Research Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Trupti Vimlakar DeshpandeDepartment of Transplant Immunology, Chimera Transplant Research Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Pranav DorwalDepartment of Flowcytometry, Waikato Hospital, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Amit Kr BhardwajDepartment of Transplant Immunology, Chimera Transplant Research Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Sneha KumariDepartment of Transplant Immunology, Chimera Transplant Research Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Vimarsh RainaDepartment of Transplant Immunology, Chimera Transplant Research Foundation, New Delhi, India.
National Institute of Immunology · INMedanta The Medicity · INWaikato Hospital · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman leukocyte antigen (HLA) is a major determinant in deciding upon solid organ histocompatibility. Donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (Donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSAs)) are always a contraindication for solid organ transplantation, and identification of DSA becomes very crucial before transplantation to provide long-term graft survival. For identification of DSA, usually, either cell-based or HLA bead-based assay is being used in laboratories. However, both cell-based and bead-based assays have certain limitations. One such common limitation is "prozone effect," which can give false-negative results. Here, we would like to present a small pilot study to analyze the effect of the prozone phenomenon in the cell-based and HLA bead-based assays and its utility in histocompatibility testing. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn a series of four experiments, cell-based assay, flow cytometric cross-match (FCXM), and HLA bead-based flow cytometric panel reactive antibodies (PRAs) were performed. Single-antigen bead (SAB) testing was conducted as a first experiment on four known positives samples for anti-HLA antibody-antibodies. In the second experiment, these four samples were pooled together (called pooled sera in the text) and tested for FCXM and PRA. In the third experiment, known commercially available positive control sera were mixed with pooled positive sera (positive control sera + pooled sera) to prepare, what we have called "positive concoction" in the text. In the fourth experiment, the positive concoction was diluted serially (1:2, 1:4, 1:8, and 1:16) and FCXM and PRA were performed again to analyze and compare the prozone effect.

resultsPooled sera did not have the expected median fluorescence intensity (MFI) values in FCXM assay, whereas the PRA was showing >90% positivity. In positive concoction, the MFI of FCXM assay was observed to be declining; however, PRA values remained almost constant. Dilutions of the pooled sera showed that MFI values of FCXM assays were increased suddenly after dilution. The highest MFI values were observed in 1:4 dilution of the sera, and then, it declined gradually, but the PRA values remained almost constant even after serial dilutions.

conclusionIn our experimental findings, it was clear that cell-based assay (FCXM) was more severely affected by the prozone, whereas solid-phase (flow PRA) assay remained resistant to prozone.

Indexed as

Anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodiesflow cytometric cross-matchflow cytometrypanel reactive antibodiesprozone effect (hook effect)single-antigen bead assaysolid-phase immunoassay

Identifiers

PMID36687549
PMCPMC9855212
OpenAlexW4288494852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.