|
Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article 
Blood, Vol. 95 No. 8 (April 15), 2000:
pp. 2699-2708
RED CELLS
Weak D alleles express distinct phenotypes
Franz F. Wagner,
Alexander Frohmajer,
Birgit Ladewig,
Nicole I. Eicher,
Cornelie B. Lonicer,
Thomas H. Müller,
Manfred H. Siegel, and
Willy A. Flegel
From Abteilung Transfusionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Ulm
and DRK-Blutspendedienst Baden-Württemberg, Institut Ulm, Ulm;
Biotest AG, Dreieich, Germany; ZLB Zentrallaboratorium,
Blutspendedienst SRK, Bern, Switzerland; Blutspendedienst des BRK,
München; DRK-Blutspendedienst Niedersachsen-Oldenburg, Institut
Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany; and DRK-Blutspendedienst
Sachsen, Institut Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
 |
Abstract |
The weak D phenotype is caused by many different RHD alleles
encoding aberrant RhD proteins, raising the possibility of distinct serologic phenotypes and of anti-D immunizations in weak D. We reported
6 new RHD alleles, D category III type IV, DIM, and the weak D
types 4.1, 4.2.1, 4.2.2, and 17. The immunohematologic features of 18 weak D types were examined by agglutination and flow cytometry with
more than 50 monoclonal anti-D. The agglutination patterns of the
partial D phenotypes DIM, DIII type IV, and DIV
type III correlated well with the D epitope models, those of the weak D
types showed no correlation. In flow cytometry, the weak D types
displayed type-specific antigen densities between 70 and 4000 RhD
antigens per cell and qualitatively distinct D antigens. A Rhesus D
similarity index was devised to characterize the extent of qualitative
changes in aberrant D antigens and discriminated normal D from all
tested partial D, including D category III. In some rare weak D types,
the extent of the alterations was comparable to that found in partial
Ds that were prone to anti-D immunization. Four of 6 case reports with
anti-D in weak D represented auto-anti-D. We concluded that, in
contrast to previous assumptions, most weak D types, including
prevalent ones, carry altered D antigens. These observations are
suggestive of a clinically relevant potential for anti-D immunizations
in some, but not in the prevalent weak D types, and were used to derive
an improved transfusion strategy in weak D patients.
(Blood. 2000;95:2699-2708)
© 2000 by The American Society of Hematology.
 |
Introduction |
The Rhesus D antigen (ISBT 004.001; RH1) is expressed
by the RhD protein. Anti-D is still the leading cause for the hemolytic disease of the newborn.1,2 Depending on the population, 3% to 25% of white individuals lack the antigen D. As anti-D
immunizations can occur readily in D-negative recipients,3
the antigen D is of critical importance for the blood transfusion
strategy, and the most important blood group antigen determined by a protein.
About 0.2% to 1% of white individuals carry red cells with a reduced
expression of the D antigen (weak D).4-6 For more than 45 years, anti-D immunizations are known to occur infrequently in
D-positives,7-10 often in individuals with such a low
antigen D density.7 Usually these cases could be traced to
a few partial D phenotypes,11,12 especially D category
VI.10 Most, but not all, partial D can be identified by the
lack of reactivity with certain monoclonal anti-D antibodies, which is
interpreted as lack of certain "D epitopes."13 The
increasingly elaborated D epitope schemes13-16 allowed the
identification and classification of many new partial D.
However, it had been impossible to obtain unequivocal evidence for
serologic differences in the majority of weak D. In such samples, the
lack of reactivity with anti-D may be attributed to the reduced
expression of the D antigen rather than the lack of any D
epitope.11,17,18 As no definitive serologic variation could
be established over the years, it became generally accepted that most
weak Ds possess a normal D antigen.19-23 As a consequence, the possibility of anti-D immunization in weak D was often
disregarded.20,22,23 It should be noted that a substantial
number of anti-D immunizations in weak D24 and in
unclassified samples25 remained unexplained in regard to a
serologic and molecular classification.
We showed that most, if not all, weak D phenotypes carried altered RhD
proteins.26 For example, in the weak D type 4, 2 transmembraneous amino acid residues are substituted, which was reminiscent of ARRO-1 reported as partial D.27 These
findings raised the possibility of qualitative changes in the D
antigen of some weak D types. To corroborate the safety of
the current D-positive transfusion strategy in weak D, a serologic
workup of a representative collection of different weak D types was timely.
With the use of numerous weak D samples of known genotype and more than
80 monoclonal anti-D, we investigated immunohematologic differences of
18 weak D types and 5 partial D, including 5 newly characterized
RHD alleles. The different weak D types presented distinct
immunohematologic features. We derived a Rhesus index, showed its use
as a rough estimate for an anti-D immunization rate, and analyzed 6 case reports of weak D with anti-D. On the basis of our results, we
proposed improved transfusion strategies in weak D patients.
 |
Materials and methods |
Blood samples
EDTA- or citrate-anticoagulated blood samples were collected from
white blood donors in southwestern Germany or referred to our
laboratory. Weak D type 4.1, type 17, and DIM were identified among
white blood donors with weak D expression. Seven antigen D-positive
samples were sent to the German Rhesus Immunization Registry because of
an anti-D. One of these samples, DIII type IV, was
classified as DIII subtype, because of a negative
crossmatch with DIIIc. The genotype of the
DIIIc red cells (kindly provided by Silvano Wendel, Sao
Paulo, Brazil) was confirmed using RHD exon-specific
PCR-SSP.28 An anti-D was from a different DIIIc
proband (kindly provided by Anna Ribera, Barcelona, Spain).
Sequencing of the 10 RHD exons from genomic DNA
DNA was prepared as described previously.28 Nucleotide
sequencing was performed using Prism dye terminator cycle-sequencing kit with AmpliTaq FS DNA polymerase and Prism BigDye terminator cycle
sequencing ready reaction kit (Applied Biosystems, Weiterstadt, Germany) with a DNA sequencing unit (ABI 373A and ABI 377, Applied Biosystems). Nucleotide sequencing of genomic DNA stretches
representative for all 10 RHD exons was accomplished as
described.26 In some samples, modified reactions were used:
For exon 1 PCR, re13 was substituted by re04 or re012 (exon 6, rf51 by
rf52; exon 7, re617 by re615; exon 10, rr4 by rez2); for exon 3 sequencing re31 and rb20d were substituted by re29. Primer sequences
were re012, TCCACTTTCCACCTCCCTGC; re04,
AGGTCACATCCATTTATCCCACTG; re29,
TCTTCTATTCCCACAGAAAGTAGG; re615,
GTAACTCATAGTGTGGTCCGTAG; rez2,
CCTTGGTCTGCCAGAATTTTCA, rf52, TGAGAGCTGAGGGTGTCAGA.
Immunohematology
Monoclonal anti-D were provided by the Workshop on Monoclonal
Antibodies Against Human Red Blood Cells and Related
Antigens.29 Agglutination was tested in a gel matrix test
(LISS-Coombs 37°C, DiaMed-ID Micro Typing System; DiaMed, Cressier
sur Morat, Switzerland) using the following antibodies: B9A4B2 (number
III-1-28), D-89/47 (29), HG/92 (30), D-90/7 (31), D-90/17 (32), D-90/12
(33), HeM-92 (34), 175-2 (35), 17 010C9 (36), NaTH28-3C11 (37),
NaTH87-4A5 (38), NaTH53-2A7 (39), AUB-2F7/Fiss (41), CAZ7-4C5 (42),
LOR11-2D9 (43), LOR12-E2 (44), LOR17-6C7 (45), LOR17-8D3 (46),
LOR28-21D3 (47), LOR28-7E6 (48), LOR29-F7 (49), LORA (50), LORE (51),
MAR-1F8 (52), NAU3-2E8 (53), NAU6-1G6 (54), NAU6-4D5 (55), NOI (56),
NOU (57), SAL17-4E8 (58), SAL20-12D5 (59), SALSA-12 (60), VOL-3F6 (61),
ZIG-189 (62), 822 (68), 819 (69), BTSN4 (71), BTSN6 (72), BTSN10 (73),
LHM76/58 (74), LHM76/55 (75), LHM76/59 (76), LHM77/64 (77), LHM59/19
(78), LHM70/45 (79), LHM50/2B (80), LHM169/80 (81), LHM169/81 (82),
LHM174/102 (83), LHM50/3.5 (84), LHM59/25 (85), LHM59/20 (86), T3D2F7
(87), C205-29 (88), CLAS1-126 (89), F5S (90), H2D5D2F5 (93), RAB.B15
(94), BIRMA-DG3 (95), BIRMA-D6 (96), BIRMA-D56 (97), P3187 (98), P3F17
(99), P3F20 (100), P3G6 (101), P3AF6 (102), BRAD3 (105), L87.1G7 (108),
MS26 (112), MS201 (113), D10 (114), HIRO-1 (115), HIRO-6 (116), HIRO-3
(117), HIRO-4 (118), ID6-H8 (119), HIRO-7 (120), HIRO-8 (121), HIRO-2
(122), MCAD-6 (124), HS114 (134), BS87 (180).
Flow cytometry
Flow cytometry was performed using monoclonal IgG anti-D BS221,
BS227, BS228, BS229, BS231, and H41 (Biotest, Dreieich, Germany); P3 × 35, P3 × 241, P3 × 249, P3 × 290,
and HM16 (Diagast, Loos, France) and the following Workshop IgG anti-D:
number 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 41, 43, 44, 45, 47, 49, 55, 56, 58, 59, 68, 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 80, 81, 82, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 101, 102, 105, 108, 112, 114, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 124 plus BRAD5 (Workshop number 104), and D6D02 (123). The secondary
antibody was goat antihuman IgG, Fab-fragment, FITC-conjugated
(supplied by Dianova; Jackson Immunoresearch, Hamburg, Germany).
All blood samples were stored on fluid nitrogen. The fluorescence was
compared with that of a standard CDe/cde red cell of known antigen
density (13 000 RhD antigens per cell).18 The standard
cell was measured twice and the geometric mean of both results was
used. Measurements with more than 15% difference were repeated.
Background fluorescence was determined with RhD-negative samples.
Generally, markers were set to count all red cells, even if a fraction
of red cells appeared unstained. The weak D type 10 donor displayed
about 50% unstained cells in samples from 2 independent donations, for
this type the antigen density was derived from the stained red cell
population. The number of RhD epitopes detected by a specific
monoclonal anti-D was calculated as described previously.18,30
Antigen density
The RhD antigen density (RhD antigens per cell) of a red cell sample
was estimated as the median of the epitope densities detected with all
antibodies that resulted in epitope densities above a cutoff. This
cutoff was defined as 0.1 of the 90 percentile of the epitope densities
detected with all monoclonal anti-D used in flow cytometry.
In the experiments involving several samples for weak D type 1 to type
5, antigen densities were estimated as geometric means of the epitope
densities detected with the anti-D BS221, BS227, BS228, BS229, BS231,
and H41. These estimates varied from the estimate based on the full set
of antibodies by a factor of 0.98 (weak D type 2) to 1.23 (weak D type
4) and were therefore considered representative.
Rhesus D similarity index
A Rhesus index was calculated as the ratio of the 10 percentile to
the 90 percentile of the epitope densities detected with all anti-D.
For 2 samples (weak D type 12 and type 17), no Rhesus index was given
because the 90 percentile was less than 200 epitopes per cell.
The Rhesus index was derived as a measure of the variation of the
epitopes detected by different antibodies under the assumption of an
approximately log-normal distribution. Compared with other measures,
like range or SD, it was robust to outliers and minor deviations from
the assumed distribution. The Rhesus index may range from 1 in normal D
to 0 in partial D that were lacking many D epitopes.
We simulated the possible effect of assay variability on the Rhesus
index for normal D: We calculated a standard error of SDctrl = 0.0165 for the logarithms of the epitope
densities measured with the second control sample. Similar to all other
samples, this control was standardized on the geometric mean of the 2 control samples. Because of the error propagation rule,31
the standard error of a sample was expected to be
SDmeas = ([SDctrl × 2]2 + [SDctrl × 2]2/2) = 0.0286
A log-normal distribution with such a SD yields an expected ratio of 10 percentile to 90 percentile of
10z(0.1) × 0.0286/10z(0.9) × 0.0286 = 10 1.2816 × 0.0286/101.2816 × 0.0286 = 0.845
where z(0.1) and z(0.9) denote the 0.1 and 0.9 limits of the standard
normal distribution. These calculations indicated that normal D samples
yield a Rhesus index of about 0.845.
Analysis of 6 weak D samples carrying anti-D
We differentiated the antibodies in a gel matrix assay (LISS-Coombs
37°C, DiaMed-ID Micro Typing System; DiaMed). In addition, some
antibodies were confirmed in a solid phase assay (Capture R; Immucor,
Norcross, GA). Because some low-titer auto-anti-D may fail in weak D
samples to cause positive direct antiglobulin tests, we performed
antibody elutions to determine the presence of red cell-bound
antibodies. For all 6 samples, the full-length coding sequence was
determined by sequencing all 10 RHD exons from genomic DNA as
described previously.
Statistics
For the interpretation of data, the epitope densities were assumed
to have an approximate log-normal distribution; however, all inferences
were derived using distribution-independent test methods. Different
frequencies were compared using the 2 test
for a 2 × 2 contingency table.31 Antigen densities
of multiple types were compared using the 2-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test for each comparison31 and the Bonferroni-Holm
procedure32 to correct for multiple testing as indicated in
"Results."
 |
Results |
Molecular characterization of RHD alleles
The molecular bases of 6 RHD alleles were determined (Table
1). Weak D types 4.1, 4.2.1, and 4.2.2 shared both amino acid substitutions, T201R and F223V, that are typical
of weak D type 4,26 but each carried 1 additional missense
mutation. DIII type IV also displayed multiple dispersed
missense mutations. Weak D type 17 and DIM had single missense
mutations in the transmembraneous and exofacial protein segments,
respectively.
Serology of 17 weak D types and 3 partial D
An exhaustive collection of weak D phenotypes and, for comparison, 3 partial D were tested with 82 monoclonal anti-D (Table 2). As known for DIIIa and
DIIIc,13,16 DIII type IV was
agglutinated by all monoclonal anti-D. This finding corroborated the
classification as DIII subtype, based on the negative
crossmatch with DIIIc (see "Materials and methods").
DIV type III and DIM displayed antibody reactivity patterns
as predicted by the known D epitopes. The reaction pattern of
DIV type III differed from that reported for
DIVb16 by negative results with 4 of 12 anti-D grouped in
epitope 15/16, which may represent a serologic split of this epitope.
The reaction pattern of DIM was unique and resembled an intermediate of
D category VI18 and DFR.16,33
In contrast to the 3 partial D, the fit of the antibody reaction
"patterns" with known D epitopes was not satisfactory in most of
the 17 weak D types. There were 189 negative results obtained with 22 IgM antibodies, but only 117 negative results with the 60 IgG
antibodies investigated ( 2 = 190;
P < .001). Two IgM antibodies (numbers 54 and 57) did not
agglutinate any weak D sample. Possible "epitope splits" were conspicuously found with anti-D that were associated with an overall weak reactivity. These observations could easily be explained, if the
determination of reaction patterns was confounded by the low and
variable antigen densities in all weak D.
RhD antigen density of weak D is type-specific
A large number of samples with the prevalent weak D types were
analyzed for their RhD antigen densities (Table
3). The antigen density was type-specific.
With the exception of weak D type 3 and 4, the antigen densities of all
prevalent weak D types differed significantly for each pairwise
comparison (P < .01; 2-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test with
Bonferroni-Holm correction for multiple testing, n = 10).
Suppressive effect of C in trans
The antigen densities of 2 CCDee weak D type 1 samples (deduced
genotype based on the known CDe haplotype association26 of
weak D type 1: CDe/Cde), 1 CcDEe weak D type 2 sample (deduced genotype: Cde/cDE), and 1 CcDee type 4 sample (deduced genotype: Cde/cDe) were determined (Table 4). These
samples had considerably lower antigen densities than the controls
with cde in trans. For comparison, a weak D type 3 sample with cdE in
trans expressed an antigen density similar to its controls.
Epitope density profiles
For antigen density determination, epitope density profiles were
established with 59 IgG monoclonal anti-D as described
previously.18,30 The regular D antigens of a CcDee control
showed a single narrow peak (Figure 1,
panel A).18 Two partial D, DHMi34 (panel B) and
DIV type III26 (panel C), had considerably to
extremely broadened peaks. Three representative weak D types (panels D
to F) showed peaks ranging from single and narrow (weak D type 3), like
that of the regular D antigen, to broadened (weak D type 4.0 and type 7), that was reminiscent of partial D.

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 1.
Epitope density profiles of selected normal D, partial D,
and weak D samples.
On the abscissa, ranges of epitope densities (sites/cell) as detected
by various anti-D are given using a logarithmic scale. On the ordinate,
the number of anti-D representing the particular ranges of sites/cell
are shown. The following phenotypes are depicted: Panel A, normal CcDee
sample; Panel B, DHMi; Panel C, DIV type III; Panel
D, weak D type 3; Panel E, weak D type 4.0; Panel F, weak D type
7.
|
|
Rh antigen densities of rare weak D types
The epitope density profiles as shown in Figure 1 were determined
for a larger number of control, partial D, and weak D phenotypes. These
data were used to calculate the antigen density representing the
quantitative expression of the D antigen. The antigen densities of
controls and known partial D (Table 5) were
consistent with previous reports.30,35,36 Of the 2 partial
D defined in this study, DIII type IV had an enhanced
antigen density compared with its appropriate control (ccDee). The
second partial D had a very much diminished antigen density
and, hence, was dubbed DIM. Its antigen density was lower than
DVI type I and represented one of the lowest antigen
densities ever reported for partial D.
The antigen densities of weak D samples varied between less than 100 in
weak D type 12 and about 4000 RhD antigens per cell in weak D type 4.1. The highest antigen densities were observed for weak D type 3 and types
4. Most rare weak D types had low antigen densities, like weak D type
12 and type 17, which expressed the lowest antigen densities of all
aberrant D antigens tested. The 4 most frequent weak D types (weak D
type 1 to type 4) representing 95% of all weak D26 had
antigen densities higher than 400 RhD antigens per cell.
Rhesus D similarity index
A Rhesus D similarity index (Rhesus index) was defined as the ratio
of the 10 percentile and 90 percentile of the epitope densities (Table
5). The Rhesus index measured a qualitative difference to the D antigen
of the standard phenotype CcDee. Ideally, normal D antigens would have
an index of 1, grossly aberrant partial D an index of 0. Because of the
known assay variability, the Rhesus index for normal D antigens was
expected to be approximately 0.845 (see "Materials and methods").
All normal D antigens tested showed Rhesus indices of 0.84 to 0.90 (Table 5). In contrast, all partial D tested had Rhesus indices of less
than 0.7. The Rhesus index allowed us to discriminate DIII
samples, which are agglutinated by all monoclonal anti-D, from normal
D. Partial D lacking many D epitopes, like DVI or
DIV, had a Rhesus index of 0.
In weak D, the Rhesus indices ranged from 0.78 in weak D type 3 to 0.03 in weak D type 7 (Table 5). Interestingly, the Rhesus indices of 14 of
16 weak D types were equal or lower than the Rhesus index of
DIIIc, indicating that their D antigen deviated from normal
D at least as much as DIIIc, which is known to allow an
anti-D immunization. The 3 most prevalent weak D types (weak D type 1 to type 3) had Rhesus indices greater than the DVII, whose
carriers are frequent among white individuals37 and generally transfused D-positive without clinical problems.
Distinct immunohematologic features of weak D types
As shown in Table 3, weak D type 1 and type 2 can be distinguished
from weak D type 3 and types 4 by their different antigen densities. To
further differentiate weak D type 1 from type 2, we determined the
ratios of epitopes detected by the 2 IgG monoclonal anti-D BS227 and
BS229 (Figure 2), similar to our previous
approach with the 3 DVI types.18 All 25 weak D
type 1 samples had ratios greater than 1.2, whereas all 24 weak D type
2 samples had ratios equal to or less than 1.0, which allowed a ready
discrimination by immunohematologic methods. Likewise, a discrimination
of weak D type 3 from type 4 was possible by the ratio of epitopes
detected by the 2 IgG monoclonal anti-D BS227 and H41 (data not shown).

View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 2.
Distinct immunohematologic features of the 5 most
frequent weak D types.
The RhD antigen density is plotted on the ordinate. On the abscissa,
the ratio of RhD epitopes detected by the 2 monoclonal anti-Ds, BS227
and BS229, is shown. Data of 74 weak D samples are shown. : weak D
type 1, n = 25; : weak D type 2, n = 24 (only 23 different
positions are discernible because 2 samples overlapped); ×: weak
D type 3, n = 12; : weak D type 4.0, n = 7; : weak D type 5, n = 6.
|
|
Molecular structure and phenotype
For 18 RHD alleles with single nucleotide substitutions, we
correlated the involved amino acid positions with the antigen densities
(Figure 3, panel A) and the Rhesus indices
(Figure 3, panel B). Many of the weak D types with strongly reduced
antigen densities of less than 500 RhD antigens per cell had amino acid exchanges in the transmembraneous part of the RhD protein. Most of
these types also displayed moderately reduced Rhesus indices ranging
from 0.2 to 0.6. Likewise, many weak D types with intracellular substitutions had antigen densities in the range of 500 to 2000 RhD
antigens per cell, and most of them displayed almost normal RhD
indices. Interestingly, weak D type 7, for which the substituted amino
acid was predicted to be deeply buried in the transmembraneous helix
11, had a very low Rhesus index of 0.03 and a rather high antigen
density of 2400 RhD antigens per cell. There was no simple relation of
the type of substitution to the antigen density or the Rhesus index.
For example, the seemingly conservative M295I substitution in weak D
type 11 caused a very low antigen density.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 3.
Relationship of involved amino acid position, antigen
density, and Rhesus index.
A model for the orientation of the RhD protein in the red-cell membrane
is shown.26 The amino acid positions involved and their
effect on antigen density (A) and on Rhesus index (B) are indicated for
15 weak D and 3 partial D alleles with single missense mutations.
Symbols denote major changes ( , antigen density less than 500 RhD
antigens/cell or Rhesus index less than 0.2, respectively), moderate
changes ( , 500-2000 RhD antigens/cell; Rhesus index, 0.2-0.6), and
minor changes ( , more than 2000 RhD antigens/cell; Rhesus index more
than 0.6). RhD antigen density was too low for the determination of the
Rhesus indices in 2 weak D types ( , weak D type 12 and type 17).
|
|
Six case reports of weak D with anti-D
The overlap of the Rhesus indices of weak D and partial D with
documented anti-D production fostered a search for samples with weak D
phenotype and anti-D.38 Six samples were referred to
us.39 Four samples could be assigned to the previously
described RHD alleles weak D type 1, type 2, and type 15. Two
samples carried new alleles that belonged to the group of weak D type 4 alleles and were designated weak D type 4.2 (Table
6). The anti-D observed in the frequent
weak D type 1 and type 2 were shown to represent auto-anti-D by
antibody elution. In contrast, weak D type 15 and 1 sample of type 4.2 had allo-anti-D; it should be noted that these 2 types had Rhesus
indices lower than 0.3, which was lower than all other weak D types
(Table 3) with the single exception of weak D type
7.
 |
Discussion |
The 17 analyzed weak D types expressed distinct phenotypes. Each
weak D type was associated with a certain range of RhD antigen densities. In contrast to previous conjectures, weak D types possessed slightly to considerably altered D antigens. The extent of qualitative changes observed in weak D overlapped with that observed in partial D. We provided experimental evidence that the risk of allo-anti-D immunization in the frequent weak D types was, however, low. The data
allowed us to formulate a rational framework for a transfusion strategy
in weak D patients.
For many years phenotypic differences among weak D samples have been
noted and comprised quantitative changes, like antigen density
variation,15,20,35,40-48 and qualitative changes, like variable epitope presentation.20,25,47 Apparently, these
differences were too subtle to base a satisfying classification of weak
D on serologic criteria alone. Antibody dissociation constants in weak
D were reported to be indistinguishable from normal D.21 A
qualitative classification failed in the majority of weak D types
(Table 2), often because of confounding effects like low antigen
density17 and slight antigenic differences (Table
4). Antigen densities of different weak D types overlapped (Table 3),
which may have previously been mistaken to represent a continuum of D
antigen densities in weak D.42,43,49
Altered binding characteristics of monoclonal anti-D were previously
reported for several partial D,18,30,35,50 even if the
respective epitopes were known to be present. Prompted by these
observations, we proposed a Rhesus index as a complementary tool for
discerning qualitative changes of the D antigen. The technical features
of the Rhesus index were designed to minimize confounding by low
antigen density. The Rhesus index achieved a discrimination of
DIII from normal D, that was previously beyond the scope of
any monoclonal antibody-based technique. The Rhesus index gauged the
loss or deviation of the target epitopes compared with normal antigen D
for a large number of IgG monoclonal anti-D. Clinical observations confirmed that this parameter represented a rough estimate of the
anti-D immunization rate: DVI, of known high immunization
risk, had a Rhesus index of 0. In contrast, the Rhesus index of
DVII was 0.48 and indicated a much less altered antigen D
than in DVI. This finding correlated well with the
infrequent anti-D immunization in DVII, despite generally
D-positive transfusion in this most prevalent partial D in white
individuals.37,51
The concurrent quantification of antigen density and antigen
variability allowed us to put the previously separate concepts of
partial D and weak D into context. Normal D samples had normal antigen
densities and normal Rhesus indices. Aberrant RhD phenotypes with about
normal antigen density were detectable by virtue of their qualitative
changes only, even if the changes were discrete, and have been dubbed
partial D.52 We will not be surprised if many such aberrant
RhD were not yet recognized by serologic methods. In contrast, aberrant
RhD with reduced antigen density could be detected by their low antigen
density or by their qualitative changes. Because of the difficulties in
discerning qualitative abnormalities in samples with weak D antigen
expression, only those presenting prominent qualitative changes were
previously prone to be identified as separate entities and considered
partial D. Most other such samples were lumped together and loosely
marked "weak D." Hence, in the group of aberrant RhD with less
than 5000 antigens per cell, it is not surprising to find a continuum
of qualitative changes varying from an almost normal D antigen, like in
weak D type 3, to an extremely altered D antigen, like in
DVI type I.
We evaluated epidemiologic data to corroborate the use of the Rhesus
index for predicting an anti-D immunization risk in weak D. In the
Rhesus Immunization Registry, RhD-positive samples with suspected
anti-D production were collected and systematically analyzed at the
molecular level.39 Two allo-anti-D were shown in weak D
type 4.2 and type 15 for which the Rhesus index indicated considerably
altered D antigens. Three other weak D samples proved to be auto-anti-D
in weak D type 1 and type 2, which have an almost normal Rhesus index.
Both weak D types represent 88% of all weak D, whereas weak D type 4.2 and type 15 comprise less than 2% in white individuals.26
The inverse relationship of population frequency and allo-anti-D
observation was intriguing and suggested that the Rhesus index may be
representative of the immunization risk.
In many countries,25,53 transfusion recipients are
currently typed and transfused D-positive, if their red cells are
agglutinated by 2 IgM monoclonal anti-D that do not react with
DVI. This policy ensures D-negative transfusions in
DVI patients that are at risk of anti-D
immunization.5,18,25 There is no defined antigen density
threshold for D-positive transfusions in weak D patients. Rather, the
transfusion strategy in weak D patients is not controlled and depends
on the accidental sensitivity of the preferred typing reagents and methods.
We propose an RhD typing and transfusion strategy based on
scientifically deduced criteria: An improved strategy should take account of the population frequencies of weak D types26 and the qualitative changes of their antigen D in conjunction with the
observed anti-D immunization events. On the basis of our data, we
conclude that an optimized antigen density threshold in white individuals would provide for D-positive transfusions in patients with
such weak D types only that have an antigen density similar or higher
than weak D type 2. This antigen density threshold of about 400 RhD
antigens per cell is well within the detection limits of currently
available IgM monoclonal anti-D typing reagents and methods, like tubes
and gels without requiring an antiglobulin test. Then, weak D type 2 red cells would be preferred for quality control of anti-D sera and
typing methods.
Applying the proposed threshold would provide for a D-positive
transfusion in 97%26 of all white weak D patients, the
vast majority of whom carry weak D type 1, type 2, and type 3. For these 3 most prevalent weak D types, D-positive transfusion can be
considered safe because these types have a low predicted immunization risk, are frequent, and no immunization events have been documented yet. In contrast, even a moderate anti-D immunization risk may have
been missed in the rarer weak D types, like weak D type 9, and Rhesus
indices implicated a potential of anti-D immunization in several of
these types, like weak D type 15.
Lowering the threshold below 400 RhD antigens per cell would be
feasible, for example, by applying the antiglobulin test, and
marginally increase the number of weak D patients transfused D-positive. However, this increase would affect patients carrying a
multitude of rare weak D types for which an anti-D immunization risk
was likely or could not be excluded. We propose to consider Rh-negative
transfusion of individuals carrying those weak D types of lower
frequency and lower antigen density representing less than 3% of all
weak D in white individuals.26
There were rare weak D types, like type 7 and type 4.2, with antigen
densities well above the proposed threshold, which were likely or known
to be at risk for anti-D immunization. D-negative transfusions in such
weak D types could currently only be achieved at the expense of
D-negative transfusions in all weak D patients. Such a strategy may
still be rational in populations with a high frequency of these weak D
types. Further advances may be brought forth by improved typing
reagents with a low affinity for weak D type 4.2 and type 7 and a high
affinity for weak D type 1, type 2, and type 3. Phage display
technology might allow the specific selection and cloning of those
antibodies54 by differential panning with suitable weak D
types. Once established, such improved typing strategies with novel
reagents would enhance the transfusion safety without incurring
additional typing costs.
For donor typing, all potentially immunogenic RHD-positive
samples should be recognized as RhD-positive. The safety of weak D red
cell unit transfusion to D-negative patients remains
equivocal.20,55 Hence, a typing method with a high
sensitivity,53,56 like the antiglobulin test in combination
with oligoclonal anti-D and gel, may be recommended.
The phenotypic analysis of more than 20 aberrant RhD with single amino
acid substitutions revealed that in general, transmembranous mutations
hindered membrane integration and antigen expression most severely.
Intracellular and extracellular mutations were less impeding in this
regard. Amino acid substitutions on or close to the red cell surface
had usually the most pronounced qualitative effects. The
notion26 that the substitution of the RHD-specific amino acids in the transmembranous parts of RhD coded by exons 4 and 5 with their RHCE-specific counterparts lowers antigen density, whereas the N152T substitution enhances D expression, was further supported by the phenotypes of weak D type 4.1, type 4.2, and DIII type IV. The reduction of the antigen density by a Cde
haplotype in trans, known as Ceppellini effect,57 was also
effective in weak D. The seeming paradoxical lower antigen density of
most ccDEe weak D samples compared with CcDee weak D
samples35,46 simply indicated that, like in the 3 DVI types,18 the major influence of the
molecular type overrided the modulating effect of C in trans.
Current epitope models attributed no58,59 or a
few60 D epitopes to RhD exofacial loop 5. In contrast,
most, but not all,61 older studies with
polyclonal62-64 and monoclonal65 anti-D
predicted that the conservation of the only exofacial cysteine at
position 285 in loop 5 was very critical for anti-D immunoreactivity. A site-directed mutagenesis study66 showed that a D with a
C285A substitution retained most D epitopes. In contrast, DIM carrying a C285Y substitution lacked many D epitopes currently mapped to loop 3, like epD2, epD17, epD18, and epD22, and to loop 4, like epD1, epD2,
epD3, and epD20/21. This indicated that these epitopes are sensitive
for major structural changes of the D protein. In contrast, the
possibly linear epitopes of loop 6,67 like epD5, epD6, and
epD23, were retained in DIM.
We characterized 4 RHD alleles, DIII type IV, weak
D type 4.1, type 4.2.1, and type 4.2.2, with amino acid changes in 2 or
more exons. Four similar RHD alleles,
DIIIa,68 DIVa,69
ARRO-1,27 and weak D type 4.0,26 had been known
previously. ARRO-1,27 now called DAR, may be identical to
weak D type 4.2. It is interesting to note that 7 of these 8 RHD alleles, whose multiple residue substitutions cannot be
explained by 1 simple gene conversion event, certainly arose in the cDe
haplotype. All 8 haplotypes may represent branches of the RH
evolutionary tree separate from the branches leading to the prevalent
RH haplotypes in white individuals. The L62F and A137V
substitutions in DIII type IV were likely remnants of very
old RHD alleles because identical amino acids at these
positions are present in extant RH alleles of the great
apes.70,71
Note added in proof.
After the revised version of our manuscript was submitted, Hemker et
al72 published the full coding sequence of the partial D
DAR. It shares the 3 missense mutations found in weak D type 4.2.1 and
type 4.2.2 but lacks their silent mutations. Hence, in "weak D
parlance," DAR might be dubbed weak D type 4.2.0. But we acknowledge
the priority of the DAR nomenclature.
 |
Acknowledgments |
We thank Hans-Hermann Sonneborn and Manfred Ernst, Biotest AG,
Dreieich, Germany, for generously supplying us with their monoclonal anti-D. We are greatly indebted to all contributors of the Workshop on
Monoclonal Antibodies Against Human Red Blood Cells and Related Antigens, who provided most other monoclonal anti-D. We
thank Silvano Wendel, Sao Paulo, Brazil, and Anna Ribera, Barcelona, Spain, for red cells and antibodies of the rare DIIIc
phenotype and Christoph Gassner and Diether Schönitzer,
Innsbruck, Austria, for the weak D type 13 sample. We thank Anita
Hacker, Marianne Lotsch, Katharina Schmid, Sabine Zahn, and Olga
Zarupski for expert technical assistance.
 |
Footnotes |
Submitted August 13, 1999; accepted December 16, 1999.
Supported by the DRK-Blutspendedienst
Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, Germany, and by the
University of Ulm (Forschungsförderungsprojekt P 422 and P 531),
Ulm, Germany.
T.H.M. is now at Franz-Volhard-Klinik, Max-Delbrück-Centrum
für Molekulare Medizin, Berlin-Buch, Germany.
Reprints: Willy A. Flegel, Abteilung
Transfusionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, and
DRK-Blutspendedienst Baden-Württemberg, Institut Ulm,
Helmholtzstrasse 10, D-89081 Ulm, Germany; e-mail: waf{at}ucsd.edu.
The publication costs of this
article were defrayed in part by
page charge payment. Therefore,
and solely to indicate this fact,
this article is hereby marked
"advertisement"
in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
section 1734.
 |
References |
1.
Filbey D, Hanson U, Wesstrom G.
The prevalence of red cell antibodies in pregnancy correlated to the outcome of the newborn: a 12 year study in central Sweden.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand.
1995;74:687[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
2.
Bowman J.
The management of hemolytic disease in the fetus and newborn.
Semin Perinatol.
1997;21:39[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
3.
Urbaniak SJ, Robertson AE.
A successful program of immunizing Rh-negative male volunteers for anti-D production using frozen/thawed blood.
Transfusion.
1981;21:64[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
4.
Stratton F.
A new Rh allelomorph.
Nature.
1946;158:25.
5.
Wagner FF, Kasulke D, Kerowgan M, Flegel WA.
Frequencies of the blood groups ABO, Rhesus, D category VI, Kell, and of clinically relevant high-frequency antigens in South-Western Germany.
Infusionsther Transfusionsmed.
1995;22:285[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
6.
Mourant AE, Kopec AC, Domaniewska-Sobczak K.
The Distribution of the Human Blood Groups and Other Polymorphisms. London: Oxford University Press; 1976.
7.
Argall CI, Ball JM, Trentelman E.
Presence of anti-D antibody in the serum of a Du patient.
J Lab Clin Med.
1953;41:895.
8.
Sacks MS, Wiener AS, Jahn EF, Spurling CL, Unger LJ.
Isosensitization to a new blood factor, RhD, with special reference to its clinical importance.
Ann Int Med.
1959;51:740.
9.
Unger LJ, Wiener AS, Katz L.
Studies on blood factors RhA, RhB, and RhC.
J Exp Med.
1959;110:495[Abstract].
10.
Tippett P, Sanger R.
Observations on subdivisions of Rh antigen D.
Vox Sang.
1962;7:9.
11.
Tippett P, Lomas-Francis C, Wallace M.
The Rh antigen D: partial D antigens and associated low incidence antigens.
Vox Sang.
1996;70:123[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
12.
Flegel WA, Wagner FF, Müller TH, Gassner C.
Rh phenotype prediction by DNA typing and its application to practice.
Transfus Med.
1998;8:281[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
13.
Lomas C, Tippett P, Thompson KM, Melamed MD, Hughes-Jones NC.
Demonstration of seven epitopes on the Rh antigen D using human monoclonal anti-D antibodies and red cells from D categories.
Vox Sang.
1989;57:261[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
14.
Lomas C, McColl K, Tippett P.
Further complexities of the Rh antigen D disclosed by testing category DII cells with monoclonal anti-D.
Transfus Med.
1993;3:67[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
15.
Jones J, Filbey D.
Selection of monoclonal antibodies for the identification of D variants: ability to detect weak D and to split epD2, epD5 and epD6/7.
Vox Sang.
1996;70:173[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
16.
Scott M.
Rh serology coordinator's report.
Transfus Clin Biol.
1996;3:333[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
17.
Flegel WA, Wagner FF.
RHD antigen density and agglutination in RHD variant red cells.
Transfus Clin Biol.
1996;3:385[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
18.
Wagner FF, Gassner C, Müller TH, Schönitzer D, Schunter F, Flegel WA.
Three molecular structures cause Rhesus D category VI phenotypes with distinct immunohematologic features.
Blood.
1998;91:2157[Abstract/Free Full Text].
19.
Huang CH.
Molecular insights into the Rh protein family and associated antigens.
Curr Opin Hematol.
1997;4:94[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
20.
Gorick B, McDougall DCJ, Ouwehand WH, et al.
Quantitation of D sites on selected `weak D' and `partial D' red cells.
Vox Sang.
1993;65:136[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
21.
Cunningham NA, Zola AP, Hui HL, Taylor LM, Green FA.
Binding characteristics of anti-Rh0(D) antibodies to Rh0(D)-positive and Du red cells.
Blood.
1985;66:765[Abstract/Free Full Text].
22.
Moore BPL.
Does knowledge of Du status serve a useful purpose?
Vox Sang.
1984;46:95.
23.
Mollison PL, Engelfriet CP, Contreras M.
Blood Transfusion in Clinical Medicine. London: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1993.
24.
Domen R, Hoeltge G.
Alloanti-D antibody formation following transfusion in patients with the weak D (Du) phenotype [abstract].
Blood.
1997;90:130b.
25.
Jones J, Scott ML, Voak D.
Monoclonal anti-D specificity and Rh D structure: criteria for selection of monoclonal anti-D reagents for routine typing of patients and donors.
Transfus Med.
1995;5:171[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
26.
Wagner FF, Gassner C, Müller TH, Schönitzer D, Schunter F, Flegel WA.
Molecular basis of weak D phenotypes.
Blood.
1999;93:385[Abstract/Free Full Text].
27.
Hemker M, Ligthart PC, Faas BHW, et al.
ARRO-1: a new partial D phenotype involving exon 4 and 5 (abstract).
Vox Sang.
1998;74:1331.
28.
Gassner C, Schmarda A, Kilga-Nogler S, et al.
RhesusD/CE typing by polymerase chain reaction using sequence-specific primers.
Transfusion.
1997;37:1020[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
29.
Rouger P, Muller J-Y.
Third International Workshop and Symposium on Monoclonal Antibodies Against Human Red Cells and Related Antigens: Section RH.
Transfus Clin Biol.
1996;3:329[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
30.
Flegel WA, Wagner FF.
RHD epitope density profiles of RHD variant red cells analyzed by flow cytometry.
Transfus Clin Biol
1996;3:429[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
31.
Sachs L.
Angewandte Statistik. Berlin: Springer; 1992.
32.
Holm S.
A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure.
Scand J Stat.
1979;6:65.
|