Sintasath D M, Bei M, Steiner N, Ng J, Alosco S, Hegland J D, Hurley C K
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia 20007, USA.
Tissue Antigens. 1997 Oct;50(4):366-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0039.1997.tb02889.x.
Unrelated volunteer donors (69) recruited by the National Marrow Donor Program were HLA typed by DNA-based methods for both the HLA-A and -B loci. Each donor had been previously typed by serology by at least two independent laboratories. Of the 69 samples, all serologic laboratories were in concordance for HLA-A in 62 typed samples and for HLA-B in 48 typed samples. Of the serologically concordant samples, 5 samples typed for HLA-A and 7 samples typed for HLA-B received DNA and serology types differing in their level of resolution. One sample typed for HLA-A and 3 samples typed for HLA-B by DNA methods gave different results from their serologic assignments. Of the samples exhibiting disparities among the different serologic typing laboratories, the DNA-defined types of 7 samples typed for HLA-A and 18 samples typed for HLA-B were consistent with at least one of the serologic assignments. The DNA types for the remaining 3 HLA-B typed samples did not agree with the serologic assignments and their alleles were subsequently sequenced. One of these sequences was a previously undefined allele, B*1537. Sharing of polymorphic sequences among HLA allelic products creates difficulties for consistent serologic assignments of some types complicating the process of identifying potential donors from bone marrow registries. Thus, the use of DNA-based typing techniques for characterization of donor class I types should allow a more consistent definition of types and should speed the donor selection process.
由国家骨髓捐赠项目招募的69名无关志愿捐赠者,通过基于DNA的方法对HLA - A和 - B位点进行了HLA分型。每位捐赠者之前都已由至少两个独立实验室通过血清学方法进行过分型。在这69个样本中,所有血清学实验室对62个已分型样本的HLA - A分型结果一致,对48个已分型样本的HLA - B分型结果一致。在血清学结果一致的样本中,5个HLA - A分型样本和7个HLA - B分型样本的DNA分型和血清学分型在分辨率水平上存在差异。通过DNA方法对1个HLA - A分型样本和3个HLA - B分型样本的检测结果与血清学结果不同。在不同血清学分型实验室之间存在差异的样本中,7个HLA - A分型样本和18个HLA - B分型样本的DNA定义分型与至少一种血清学结果一致。其余3个HLA - B分型样本的DNA分型与血清学结果不一致,随后对其等位基因进行了测序。其中一个序列是一个先前未定义的等位基因,B*1537。HLA等位基因产物之间多态性序列的共享给某些类型的一致血清学分型带来了困难,使从骨髓登记处识别潜在捐赠者的过程变得复杂。因此,使用基于DNA的分型技术来鉴定捐赠者的I类分型,应能实现更一致的分型定义,并加快捐赠者选择过程。