Strengths and limitations
The major strength of our study is the unselected study population: as
coverage of the national screening program is near 100% in the
Netherlands8 and serological assessment (titers and
ADCC tests) for the risk on HDFN is performed at Sanquin Diagnostic
services only, all women with D antibodies in the Netherlands that were
pregnant during our study period were identified.
Another strong point of this study was our response rate of 73%.
Furthermore, no selection bias seems to be induced by selecting women
with two or more subsequent pregnancies only (supplemental text and
Table S1).
A limitation of this study is however that cut-offs for the disease
categories are somewhat arbitrary, as the clinical rationale for
treatment decisions is not always clear in retrospect and might vary
over time. Our main finding that disease severity increases in the
majority of subsequent pregnancies at risk is however supported by the
increase in almost all raw disease characteristics in Table S3.
CONCLUSION
The severity of anti-RhD mediated HDFN increases in the majority of
subsequent pregnancies with RhD-positive foetuses. The risk of severe
HDFN in a subsequent pregnancy can be estimated using the moment of
antibody detection, antibody characteristics as reflected by ADCC test
results and the severity of HDFN in the first immunized pregnancy.
Mothers with antibodies occurring during their first pregnancy of a
RhD-positive child, who never received RhIg, detected at
27th week screening, are more at risk for developing
severe disease in a subsequent pregnancy. Further research should focus
on identifying this group of ‘high-responders’ to establish whether an
additional, early administration of RhIg could be beneficial.
Furthermore, the development of more effective non-invasive treatment
options for foetuses affected by HDFN could possibly ameliorate outcome.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to Fleur Zwanenburg and Cindy de Jong, department of Obstetrics,
LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands, for their efforts in collecting and
transforming study data without financial compensation.
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST
Authors report no conflict of interest.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION STATEMENT
CZ and YMS: conception, planning, carrying out, analyzing and writing.
JK, IvK, EL, DO, MdH: conception, planning, reviewing. PL: planning and
analysing. JGvdB: conception, analysing, reviewing. EvdS: conception,
reviewing. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
DETAILS OF ETHICS APPROVAL
The medical ethics committee of the Leiden University Medical Center
approved the protocol (P15.101/NV/nv). Written informed consent was
obtained from all mothers included in this study.
FUNDING
This research was supported by a grant from Sanquin Blood Supply
(L2181). The design, conduct or publication of the study was not
influenced by this financial support.
REFERENCES
1. Zwiers C, Oepkes D, Lopriore E, Klumper FJ, de Haas M, van Kamp IL.
The near disappearance of foetal hydrops in relation to current
state-of-the-art management of red cell alloimmunization. Prenatal
diagnosis. 2018;38(12):943-50.
2. CentraalBegeleidingsOrgaan. Richtlijn Bloedtransfusie. 2011.
3. de Haas M, Thurik FF, Koelewijn JM, van der Schoot CE. Haemolytic
disease of the foetus and newborn. Vox sanguinis. 2015;109(2):99-113.
4. Walker W, Murray S, Russell JK. Stillbirth due to haemolytic disease
of the newborn. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp. 1957;64(4):573-81.
5. Mollison P, Engelfriet, CP, Contreras M. Blood Transfusion in
Clinical Medicine. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 1993.
6. Koelewijn JM, de Haas M, Vrijkotte TG, Bonsel GJ, van der Schoot CE.
One single dose of 200 microg of antenatal RhIG halves the risk of
anti-D immunization and haemolytic disease of the foetus and newborn in
the next pregnancy. Transfusion. 2008;48(8):1721-9.
7. Derrick Tovey LA, Robinson AE. Reduced severity of Rh-haemolytic
disease after anti-D immunoglobulin. British medical journal.
1975;4(5992):320-2.
8. van der Ploeg CPB, Schönbeck Y, Oomen P, Vos K. Prenatale Screening
Infectieziekten en Erytrocytenimmunisatie (PSIE). Procesmonitor 2016.:
RIVM and TNO; 2018 23-7-2018.
9. Urbaniak SJ, Greiss MA, Crawford RJ, Fergusson MJ. Prediction of the
outcome of rhesus haemolytic disease of the newborn: additional
information using an ADCC assay. Vox sanguinis. 1984;46(5):323-9.
10. Oepkes D, van Kamp IL, Simon MJ, Mesman J, Overbeeke MA, Kanhai HH.
Clinical value of an antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity assay
in the management of Rh D alloimmunization. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
2001;184(5):1015-20.
11. Tiblad E, Westgren M, Pasupathy D, Karlsson A, Wikman AT.
Consequences of being Rhesus D immunized during pregnancy and how to
optimize new prevention strategies. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica
Scandinavica. 2013;92(9):1079-85.
12. Dajak S, Roje D, Haspl ZH, Maglic PE. The importance of antenatal
prevention of RhD immunisation in the first pregnancy. Blood transfusion
= Trasfusione del sangue. 2014;12(3):410-5.
13. Schonewille H, Doxiadis, II, Levering WH, Roelen DL, Claas FH, Brand
A. HLA-DRB1 associations in individuals with single and multiple
clinically relevant red blood cell antibodies. Transfusion.
2014;54(8):1971-80.
14. Hall AM, Cairns LS, Altmann DM, Barker RN, Urbaniak SJ. Immune
responses and tolerance to the RhD blood group protein in HLA-transgenic
mice. Blood. 2005;105(5):2175-9.
15. Stegmann TC, Veldhuisen B, Nagelkerke SQ, Winkelhorst D, Schonewille
H, Verduin EP, et al. RhIg-prophylaxis is not influenced by FCGR2/3
polymorphisms involved in red blood cell clearance. Blood.
2017;129(8):1045-8.
16. MacKenzie IZ, Bowell P, Gregory H, Pratt G, Guest C, Entwistle CC.
Routine antenatal Rhesus D immunoglobulin prophylaxis: the results of a
prospective 10 year study. British journal of obstetrics and
gynaecology. 1999;106(5):492-7.
17. Sonneveld ME, Koelewijn J, de Haas M, Admiraal J, Plomp R, Koeleman
CA, et al. Antigen specificity determines anti-red blood cell IgG-Fc
alloantibody glycosylation and thereby severity of haemolytic disease of
the foetus and newborn. British journal of haematology.
2017;176(4):651-60.
18. Kapur R, Della Valle L, Sonneveld M, Hipgrave Ederveen A, Visser R,
Ligthart P, et al. Low anti-RhD IgG-Fc-fucosylation in pregnancy: a new
variable predicting severity in haemolytic disease of the foetus and
newborn. British journal of haematology. 2014;166(6):936-45.