Bryant, S.

Abstract Our facility changed antibody screening methods from a gel microcolumn–based test (ID-Micro Typing System Gel Test; Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Inc., Raritan, NJ) to an automated solid-phase test (Galileo/Capture-R Ready-Screen [I and II], Immucor, Inc., Norcross, GA). To determine whether detection rates for commonly encountered clinically significant red blood cell antibodies differed as a consequence of this change, preimplementation and postimplementation antibody identification records were retrospectively reviewed. A statistically significant difference in the percentage of positive screening tests during the gel microcolumn testing period (73,903 total screens, 1.56% confirmed positive) versus the solid-phase screening period (80,242 total screens, 1.81% confirmed positive; p < 0.0002) was observed. The number of antibodies to K identified was significantly lower with solid phase than with gel (27% decrease; p = 0.004). It is unknown whether there is a statistical difference in delayed or hemolytic transfusion reaction rates as this was not evaluated. Immunohematology 2013;29:101–04.

ABSTRACT The diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) is commonly made by serologic testing with Western blot (WB) analysis serving as an important supplemental assay. Although specific, the interpretation of WBs for diagnosis of LB (i.e., Lyme WBs) is subjective, with considerable variability in results. In addition, the processing, reading, and interpretation of Lyme WBs are laborious and time-consuming procedures. With the need for rapid processing and more objective interpretation of Lyme WBs, we evaluated the performances of two automated interpretive systems, TrinBlot/BLOTrix (Trinity Biotech, Carlsbad, CA) and BeeBlot/ViraScan (Viramed Biotech AG, Munich, Germany), using 518 serum specimens submitted to our laboratory for Lyme WB analysis. The results of routine testing with visual interpretation were compared to those obtained by BLOTrix analysis of MarBlot immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG and by ViraScan analysis of ViraBlot and ViraStripe IgM and IgG assays. BLOTrix analysis demonstrated an agreement of 84.7% for IgM and 87.3% for IgG compared to visual reading and interpretation. ViraScan analysis of the ViraBlot assays demonstrated agreements of 85.7% for IgM and 94.2% for IgG, while ViraScan analysis of the ViraStripe IgM and IgG assays showed agreements of 87.1 and 93.1%, respectively. Testing by the automated systems yielded an average time savings of 64 min/run compared to processing, reading, and interpretation by our current procedure. Our findings demonstrated that automated processing and interpretive systems yield results comparable to those of visual interpretation, while reducing the subjectivity and time required for Lyme WB analysis.

Controversy exists regarding the pathogenic or predictive role of anti-myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) antibodies in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Four immunopathological patterns (IP) have been recognized in early active MS lesions, suggesting heterogeneous pathogenic mechanisms. Whether MOG antibodies contribute to this pathological heterogeneity and potentially serve as biomarkers to identify specific pathological patterns is unknown. Here we report the frequencies of antibodies to human recombinant MOG (identified by Western blot and enzymelinked immunoabsorbent assay (ELISA)) in patients with pathologically proven demyelinating disease, and investigate whether antibody status is associated with clinical course, HLA-DR2 genotype, IP or treatment response to plasmapheresis. The biopsy cohort consisted of 72 patients: 12 pattern I, 43 pattern II and 17 pattern III. No association was found between MOG antibody status and conversion to clinically definite MS, DR-2 status, IP or response to plasmapheresis. There was poor agreement between Western blot and ELISA (kappa=0.07 for MOG IgM). Fluctuations in antibody seropositivity were seen for 3/4 patients tested serially by Western blot. This study does not support a pathologic pattern-specific role for MOG-antibodies. Variable MOG-antibody status on serial measurements, coupled with the lack of Western blot and ELISA correlations, raises concern regarding the use of MOG-antibody as an MS biomarker and underscores the need for methodological consensus.