Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Becoming a chef in the human leukocyte antigen kitchen

interpretation and modification of human leukocyte antigen–antibody assays
Authors: Robert S. Liwski; Howard M. Gebel; Anna L. Greenshields; Robert A. Bray;

Becoming a chef in the human leukocyte antigen kitchen

Abstract

Fluorescence-based human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody detection methods, including flow cytometric crossmatch and single antigen bead assays revolutionized HLA antibody identification and assessment of immunological risk in transplant candidates and patients. Nevertheless, these assays are not flawless and their interpretation can be complex. This review highlights the limitations of the single antigen bead and flow cytometric crossmatch assays and discusses protocol modifications and interpretive approaches to address these issues.Several limitations of HLA antibody detection methods have been identified in recent years. Protocol variability, denatured epitopes, and interfering factors can all significantly impact the identification of clinically relevant HLA antibodies. A number of solutions to address these challenges have been developed. These include pretreatment of sera, method standardization, and protocol modifications. In addition, HLA epitope-based analysis approaches to improve interpretation of antibody test results have been introduced.In the 50 years, since Patel and Terasaki first developed the crossmatch assay there have been remarkable advances in HLA antibody testing methodology. However, with these advances, new problems emerged and solutions had to be developed. As the technology continues to evolve, our methods and ability to interpret results must keep pace to provide transplant patients with the best possible care.

Related Organizations
Keywords

HLA Antigens, Histocompatibility Testing, Humans, Flow Cytometry, Antibodies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    6
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
6
Top 10%
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author? Do you have the OA version of this publication?