Chemical Basis for Qualitative and Quantitative Differences Between ABO Blood Groups and Subgroups: Implications for Organ Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood group ABH(O) carbohydrate antigens are carried by precursor structures denoted type I-IV chains, creating unique antigen epitopes that may differ in expression between circulating erythrocytes and vascular endothelial cells. Characterization of such differences is invaluable in many clinical settings including transplantation. Monoclonal antibodies were generated and epitope specificities were characterized against chemically synthesized type I-IV ABH and related glycans. Antigen expression was detected on endomyocardial biopsies (n = 50) and spleen (n = 11) by immunohistochemical staining and on erythrocytes by flow cytometry. On vascular endothelial cells of heart and spleen, only type II-based ABH antigens were expressed; type III/IV structures were not detected. Type II-based ABH were expressed on erythrocytes of all blood groups. Group A1 and A2 erythrocytes additionally expressed type III/IV precursors, whereas group B and O erythrocytes did not. Intensity of A/B antigen expression differed among group A1 , A2 , A1 B, A2 B and B erythrocytes. On group A2 erythrocytes, type III H structures were largely un-glycosylated with the terminal "A" sugar α-GalNAc. Together, these studies define qualitative and quantitative differences in ABH antigen expression between erythrocytes and vascular tissues. These expression profiles have important implications that must be considered in clinical settings of ABO-incompatible transplantation when interpreting anti-ABO antibodies measured by hemagglutination assays with reagent erythrocytes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".