ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2026
Characterisation, development, and validation of an in-house antibody cell panel: A prospective cross-sectional study from a tertiary care hospital.
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives Minor blood group antigens (apart from ABO) can cause haemolytic transfusion reaction in patients who need multiple transfusions. Antibodies against these antigens are typically detected using commercial cell panels. Developing indigenous panels ensures the potential for inclusion of population-specific antigens. We aimed to develop and validate in-house antibody cell panels to detect antibodies against minor blood group antigens and compare it with commercial panel. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted between July 2022 and December 2023 among 3000 voluntary blood donors. Participants with 'O' blood group who were direct antiglobulin test negative and transfusion-transmitted infection non-reactive underwent phenotyping for low-prevalence antigens (E, K, Ina, Cw). Extended phenotyping was performed for individuals positive for these antigens. Based on selected antigens corresponding to commonly encountered clinically significant alloantibodies, in-house panels were developed and validated using known antibody-positive and antibody-negative samples, and their diagnostic performance was evaluated against a commercial panel. Results Of the 3,000 participants, 700 belonged to 'O' blood group. The prevalence of E, K, Ina, and Cw positivity was 105 (15%), 17 (2.4%), 15 (2.1%), and 10 (1.4%), respectively. A 4- and a 12-cell panel were developed for screening and identification, respectively, from 16 participants. The sensitivity and specificity of in-house panel were 100% [95% Confidence interval (CI): 91.2-100%], and 100% (95% CI: 98.6-100%), respectively when validated with commercial cell panel. The annual cost for a commercial cell panel was INR (₹) ₹1,04,800, while in-house panel's one-time cost was ₹55,760 with recurring cost of ₹1,440 every three months. Interpretation and conclusions The in-house antibody cell panel demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance to the commercial panel, with complete concordance, along with lower cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.