Hello,

I have a tech who insists that it is bad practice to rule out big C on R1R1 cells that are Cw+. I find this ridiculous, but is there anyone else that has this practice and is there any literature to back this up, or visa versa? I would appreciate any and all ideas.

Thank you,

apfelblosm

Hello,

I have a tech who insists that it is bad practice to rule out big C on R1R1 cells that are Cw+. I find this ridiculous, but is there anyone else that has this practice and is there any literature to back this up, or visa versa? I would appreciate any and all ideas.

Thank you,

apfelblosm

I am afraid to say that your tech is talking rubbish. As long as the R1wR1 red cells have been tested with anti-C (which they would have been), there is no problem.

Many people wrongly believe that the "w" of Cw stands for weak; it does not. It stands for Willis, who was the donor whose blood sensitised the recipient to make the first recorded anti-Cw (they also made the first recorded anti-Lua and the first recorded anti-Kpc - they were quite a good respondent!).

Many people also still think that the C, c and Cw antigens are all antithetical; they are not.

C and c are antithetical with each other, of course, but Cw is antithetical with Cx and MAR, but not with C or c.

Therefore, it is quite in order to rule out an anti-C with an R1wR1 cell.