4.6 Article

A Uniform Genomic Minor Histocompatibility Antigen Typing Methodology and Database Designed to Facilitate Clinical Applications

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 1, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000042

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Commission
  2. Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)
  3. Macropa Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Minor Histocompatibility (H) antigen mismatches significantly influence the outcome of HLA-matched allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The molecular identification of human H antigens is increasing rapidly. In parallel, clinical application of minor H antigen typing has gained interest. So far, relevant and simple tools to analyze the minor H antigens in a quick and reliable way are lacking. Methodology and Findings. We developed a uniform PCR with sequence-specific primers (PCR-SSP) for 10 different autosomal minor H antigens and H-Y. This genomic minor H antigen typing methodology allows easy incorporation in the routine HLA typing procedures. DNA from previously typed EBV-LCL was used to validate the methodology. To facilitate easy interpretation for clinical purposes, a minor H database named dbMinor (http://www.lumc.nl/dbminor) was developed. Input of the minor H antigen typing results subsequently provides all relevant information for a given patient/donor pair and additional information on the putative graft-versus-host, graft-versus-tumor and host-versus-graft reactivities. Significance. A simple, uniform and rapid methodology was developed enabling determination of minor H antigen genotypes of all currently identified minor H antigens. A dbMinor database was developed to interpret the genomic typing for its potential clinical relevance. The combination of the minor H antigen genomic typing methodology with the online dbMinor database and applications facilitates the clinical application of minor H antigens anti-tumor targets after stem cell transplantation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据