Comparison between enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and cytotoxic cross-match procedures for detecting IgG anti-donor antibodies.

BACKGROUND

Disadvantages inherent to complement-dependent cytotoxicity cross-match (CDC XM) methods are the requirements for complement and viable target cells, detection of antibodies (Abs) against non-HLA antigens, and subjective scoring. Cross-Stat (SangStat Medical Corp., Menlo Park, CA), a recently developed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay XM procedure for the detection of IgG anti-donor HLA Abs, is theoretically devoid of these flaws.

METHODS

We compared results of Cross-Stat and our standard anti-human globulin (AHG)-enhanced CDC XM procedure on 524 sera from 230 transplant candidates, which were evaluated against 51 cadaveric donors.

RESULTS

There was a significant correlation between AHG-CDC IgG XM and Cross-Stat results (P<0.001). For false negative sera, repeat AHG-CDC IgG XMs were still positive after platelet absorption, indicating that the Abs present were either non-HLA Abs or anti-HLA class II. Flow cytometry testing of false positive sera usually (42/62) substantiated Cross-Stat results, indicating that the discrepancy with AHG-CDC IgG XM is caused by greater sensitivity of Cross-Stat. Relative to the AHG-CDC XM, the sensitivity of Cross-Stat was 100%, the specificity was 93%, the positive predictive value was 73%, and the negative predictive value was 100%. A technical shortcoming of the Cross-Stat assay is that the frequency of indeterminate samples in the assays was 15%. Among 49 Cross-Stat negative vs. 13 Cross-Stat positive primary cadaveric renal allograft recipients (all AHG-CDC IgG-XM negative), there was no statistical difference in overall graft survival.

CONCLUSION

Given the important theoretical advantages of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based XM methods over the CDC XM, however, further testing of the clinical relevance of the Cross-Stat is warranted.