Accessible Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter December 16, 2020

Basophil counting in hematology analyzers: time to discontinue?

Johannes J. M. L. Hoffmann ORCID logo

Abstract

Basophils (basophilic granulocytes) are the least abundant cells in blood. Nowadays, basophils are included in the complete blood count performed by hematology analyzers and therefore reported in practically all patients in whom hematologic investigations are requested. However, hematology analyzers are not reliable enough to report clinically useful results. This is due to a combination of very high analytical imprecision and poor specificity, because the chemical and physical methods used for basophil counting in hematology analyzers are ill-defined and thus basophils are not well recognized by the analyzers. As a result, false basophil counts are quite common. In view of increasing analytical performance demands, hematology laboratories should stop reporting basophil counts produced by hematology analyzers. Suggestions for alternative pathways are presented for those situations where basophils are of clinical relevance.


Corresponding author: Dr. Johannes J. M. L. Hoffmann, H3L Consult, Nuenen, The Netherlands, E-mail: .

  1. Research funding: None declared.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.

References

1. Steiner, M, Huber, S, Harrer, A, Himly, M. The evolution of human basophil biology from neglect towards understanding of their immune functions. BioMed Res Int 2016;2016:1–16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8232830. Search in Google Scholar

2. Blank, U, Falcone, FH, Nilsson, G. The history of mast cell and basophil research – some lessons learnt from the last century. Allergy 2013;68:1093–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/all.12197. Search in Google Scholar

3. Borzova, E. The absolute basophil count. In: Gibbs, B, Falcone, F, editors. Basophils and mast cells methods in molecular biology. New York, NY: Humana; 2020, vol 2163:109–24 pp. Search in Google Scholar

4. Feriel, J, Depasse, F, Geneviève, F. How I investigate basophilia in daily practice. Int J Lab Hematol 2020;42:237–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.13146. Search in Google Scholar

5. Amouzadeh-Ghadikolai, O, Reicht, G, Quehenberger, F, Robier, C, Valent, P, Sotlar, K, et al.. Basophilia of the peripheral blood in patients with ulcerative colitis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2020;55:248–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2019.1710247. Search in Google Scholar

6. Wimazal, F, Germing, U, Kundi, M, Noesslinger, T, Blum, S, Geissler, P, et al.. Evaluation of the prognostic significance of eosinophilia and basophilia in a larger cohort of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. Cancer 2010;116:2372–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25036. Search in Google Scholar

7. Valent, P, Sotlar, K, Blatt, K, Hartmann, K, Reiter, A, Sadovnik, I, et al.. Proposed diagnostic criteria and classification of basophilic leukemias and related disorders. Leukemia 2017;31:788. https://doi.org/10.1038/leu.2017.15. Search in Google Scholar

8. Smith, CJ, Kluck, LA, Ruan, GJ, Ashrani, AA, Hook, CC, Marshall, AL, et al.. The differential diagnosis of basophilia in patients undergoing BCR-ABL testing. Am J Hematol 2020;95:E216–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.25830. Search in Google Scholar

9. Kolkhir, P, Church, MK, Altrichter, S, Skov, PS, Hawro, T, Frischbutter, S, et al.. Eosinopenia, in chronic spontaneous urticaria, is associated with high disease activity, autoimmunity, and poor response to treatment. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2020;8:318–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2019.08.025. Search in Google Scholar

10. Hirsch, SR, Rimm, AA, Zastrow, JE. The absolute peripheral basophil count. A new and more precise method. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1974;53:303–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-6749(74)90110-9. Search in Google Scholar

11. Briggs, C, Longair, I, Slavik, M, Thwaite, K, Mills, R, Thavaraja, V, et al.. Can automated blood film analysis replace the manual differential? An evaluation of the CellaVision DM96 automated image analysis system. Int J Lab Hematol 2009;31:48–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2007.01002.x. Search in Google Scholar

12. Park, SH, Park, CJ, Choi, MO, Kim, MJ, Cho, YU, Jang, S, et al.. Automated digital cell morphology identification system (CellaVision DM96) is very useful for leukocyte differentials in specimens with qualitative or quantitative abnormalities. Int J Lab Hematol 2013;35:517–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12044. Search in Google Scholar

13. Mansberg, HP, Saunders, AM, Groner, W. The Hemalog D white cell differential system. J Histochem Cytochem 1974;22:711–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/22.7.711. Search in Google Scholar

14. Gilbert, HS, Ornstein, L. Basophil counting with a new staining method using alcian blue. Blood 1975;46:279–86. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.v46.2.279.bloodjournal462279. Search in Google Scholar

15. Bain, BJ, Neill, PJ, Scott, D, Scott, TJ, Innis, MD. Automated differential leucocyte counters: an evaluation of the Hemalog D and A comparison with the Hematrak. I. Principles of operation; reproducibility and accuracy on normal blood samples. Pathology 1980;12:83–100. https://doi.org/10.3109/00313028009060057. Search in Google Scholar

16. Davies, S, Bain, BJ. Basophil counts on the Technicon H*1 automated counter. Clin Lab Haematol 1996;18:35–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2257.1996.tb00734.x. Search in Google Scholar

17. Harris, N, Jou, JM, Devoto, G, Lotz, J, Pappas, J, Wranovics, D, et al.. Performance evaluation of the ADVIA 2120 hematology analyzer: an international multicenter clinical trial. Lab Hematol 2005;11:62–70. https://doi.org/10.1532/lh96.04064. Search in Google Scholar

18. Ruzicka, K, Veitl, M, Thalhammer-Scherrer, R, Schwarzinger, I. The new hematology analyzer Sysmex XE-2100. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001;125:391–6. Search in Google Scholar

19. Takagi, Y, Kono, M, Yamamoto, S, Wada, A, Morikawa, T. Comparison of optical data from flow cytometry and microscopy of leukocytes after exposure to specific reagents. Microscopy 2015;64:305–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmicro/dfv023. Search in Google Scholar

20. Briggs, C, Longair, I, Kumar, P, Singh, D, Machin, SJ. Performance evaluation of the Sysmex haematology XN modular system. J Clin Pathol 2012;65:1024–30. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2012-200930. Search in Google Scholar

21. Kaido, M, Takagi, Y, Kono, M, Nakazawa, F, Yamamoto, S, Wada, A, et al.. Investigation of morphological changes for the discrimination of nucleated red blood cells and other leukocytes in Sysmex XN hematology analyzer scattergrams using transmission electron microscopy. Pract Lab Med 2017;8:70–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2017.05.001. Search in Google Scholar

22. Jo, Y, Kim, SH, Koh, K, Park, J, Shim, YB, Lim, J, et al.. Reliable, Accurate determination of the leukocyte differential of leukopenic samples by using Hematoflow method. Kor J Lab Med 2011;31:131–7. https://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.131. Search in Google Scholar

23. Grillone, R, Grimaldi, E, Scopacasa, F, Dente, B. Evaluation of the fully automated hematological analyzer Mindray BC 6800: comparison with Horiba ABX Pentra DX120. Int J Lab Hematol 2014;36:e55–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12164. Search in Google Scholar

24. Meintker, L, Ringwald, J, Rauh, M, Krause, SW. Comparison of automated differential blood cell counts from Abbott Sapphire, Siemens Advia 120, Beckman Coulter DxH 800, and Sysmex XE-2100 in normal and pathologic samples. Am J Clin Pathol 2013;139:641–50. https://doi.org/10.1309/ajcp7d8eczrxgwcg. Search in Google Scholar

25. Chabot-Richards, DS, George, TI. White blood cell counts. Reference methodology. Clin Lab Med 2015;35:11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2014.10.007. Search in Google Scholar

26. Müller, R, Mellors, I, Johannessen, B, Aarsand, AK, Kiefer, P, Hardy, J, et al.. European multi-center evaluation of the Abbott Cell-Dyn Sapphire hematology analyzer. Lab Hematol 2006;12:15–31. https://doi.org/10.1532/lh96.05041. Search in Google Scholar

27. Amundsen, EK, Henriksson, CE, Holthe, MR, Urdal, P. Is the blood basophil count sufficiently precise, accurate, and specific?: three automated hematology instruments and flow cytometry compared. Am J Clin Pathol 2012;137:86–92. https://doi.org/10.1309/ajcp19bfthytmoro. Search in Google Scholar

28. Van der Beken, Y, Van Dalem, A, Van Moer, G, Segers, E, Damiaens, S, Hoffmann, J, et al.. Performance evaluation of the prototype Abbott Alinity hq hematology analyzer. Int J Lab Hematol 2019;41:448–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.13020. Search in Google Scholar

29. Ducrest, S, Meier, F, Tschopp, C, Pavlovic, R, Dahinden, CA. Flow cytometric analysis of basophil counts in human blood and inaccuracy of hematology analyzers. Allergy 2005;60:1446–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00910.x. Search in Google Scholar

30. Mikkelsen, S, Bibby, BM, Dolberg, MKB, Dahl, R, Hoffmann, HJ. Basophil sensitivity through CD63 or CD203c is a functional measure for specific immunotherapy. Clin Mol Allergy 2010;8:2. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-7961-8-2. Search in Google Scholar

31. Wolanczyk-Medrala, A, Barg, W, Medrala, W. CD164 as a basophil activation marker. Curr Pharmaceut Des 2011;17:3786–96. https://doi.org/10.2174/138161211798357890. Search in Google Scholar

32. Kim, Z, Choi, BS, Kim, JK, Won, DI. Basophil markers for identification and activation in the indirect basophil activation test by flow cytometry for diagnosis of autoimmune urticaria. Ann Lab Med 2016;36:28–35. https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.28. Search in Google Scholar

33. Cottard, A, Wagner-Ballon, O, Le Priol, J, Azzaoui, I, Ly-Sunarram, B, Fest, T, et al.. Improvement of the leukocyte differential performed by flow cytometry using the advanced 2.0 version of the CytoDiff CXP software. Cytometry 2014;85A:653–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.22497. Search in Google Scholar

34. Santos, AF, Bécares, N, Stephens, A, Turcanu, V, Lack, G. The expression of CD123 can decrease with basophil activation: implications for the gating strategy of the basophil activation test. Clin Trans Allergy 2016;6:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13601-016-0100-4. Search in Google Scholar

35. Roussel, M, Davis, BH, Fest, T, Wood, BL. On behalf of the International Council for Standardization in Hematology. Toward a reference method for leukocyte differential counts in blood: comparison of three flow cytometric candidate methods. Cytometry 2012;81A:973–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.22092. Search in Google Scholar

36. Cembrowski, GS, Smith, B, Tung, D. Rationale for using insensitive quality control rules for today’s hematology analyzers. Int J Lab Hematol 2010;32:606–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2010.01229.x. Search in Google Scholar

37. Vis, JY, Huisman, A. Verification and quality control of routine hematology analyzers. Int J Lab Hematol 2016;38:100–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12503. Search in Google Scholar

38. Bonci, F. Automated blood cell counting: the role of pseudobasophilia in acute nonlymphocytic leukemia. Haematologica 1992;77(1 Suppl):52–3. Search in Google Scholar

39. Bizzaro, N, Bain, RJ, Davies, S. Pseudobasophilia on the Technicon automated cell counters. Clin Lab Haematol 1996;18:298–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2257.1996.tb01299.x. Search in Google Scholar

40. Hur, M, Lee, YK, Lee, KM, Kim, HJ, Cho, HI. Pseudobasophilia as an erroneous white blood cell differential count with a discrepancy between automated cell counters: report of two cases. Clin Lab Haematol 2004;26:287–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2257.2004.00615.x. Search in Google Scholar

41. Gibbs, G, Campbell, G, Christie, I. Pseudobasophilia and the Advia 120. Hematology 2009;14:159–63. https://doi.org/10.1179/102453309x426209. Search in Google Scholar

42. Chandrashekar, V, Ganguly, M, Laksman, A. Pseudobasophilia and its relation to leukocyte morphological flags on the Advia 2120 analyzer. Int J Lab Hematol 2012;34(1 Suppl):75. Search in Google Scholar

43. Molina, A, Merino, A, Alcaraz, J, Arnau, M, Fumanal, S, Ortiz, V, et al.. False automatic basophil counts associated with lymphoproliferative disorders with expression in peripheral blood. Clin Chim Acta 2019;493(1 Suppl):422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2019.03.898. Search in Google Scholar

44. Chandrashekar, V. Basophil differentials as a marker for atypical lymphocyte morphologic characteristics. Lab Med 2013;44:133–5. https://doi.org/10.1309/lmljd02zo5imxmxj. Search in Google Scholar

45. Jácomo, RH, Lozano, VF, Da Cunha Neto, JG, Costa, SS. What’s the meaning of basophilia in Sysmex XE-2100? Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011;135:415. https://doi.org/10.1043/2010-0441-LE.1. Search in Google Scholar

46. Pai, S. Pseudobasophilia on the Sysmex XE-2100: a useful screening tool for primary dengue infection in endemic areas. Int J Lab Hematol 2012;34(1 Suppl):25. Search in Google Scholar

47. Piva, E, Pelloso, M, Ciubotaru, D, Penello, L, Burlina, A, Plebani, M. The role of automated analyzers in detecting abnormal granulation of leucocytes in lysosomal storage diseases: Maroteaux–Lamy disease. Am J Hematol 2013;88:527–527.https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.23377. Search in Google Scholar

48. Mannem, C, Krishanmurthy, T, Gayathri, BR, Prabhu, PD. Characterization of pseudobasophilia on Sysmex-XT 1800i automated hematology analyser. Int J Res Med Sci 2017;5:2912–6. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20172594. Search in Google Scholar

49. Muniraj, F, Amritraj, V. Pseudobasophilia in pediatric age group. Int J Sci Study 2015;3:5–10. Search in Google Scholar

50. Geneviève, F, Godon, A, Marteau-Tessier, A, Zandecki, M. Automated hematology analysers and spurious counts Part 2. Leukocyte count and differential. Ann Biol Clin 2012;70:141–54. https://doi.org/10.1684/abc.2012.0665. Search in Google Scholar

51. Lobreglio, G, Valacca, A, De Rinaldis, P. Pseudobasophilia in Maroteaux-Lamy syndrome. Eur J Lab Med 1999;7:97–8. Search in Google Scholar

52. Mucci, P, Durand, F, Lebel, B, Bousquet, J, Préfaut, C. Basophils and exercise-induced hypoxemia in extreme athletes. J Appl Physiol 2001;90:989–96. https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.2001.90.3.989. Search in Google Scholar

53. Stacchini, A, Demurtas, A, Godio, L. Flow cytometric detection of degranulated basophils in chronic myeloid leukemia in accelerated phase. Cytometry 2011;80B:122–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.b.20566. Search in Google Scholar

54. Tormey, CA, Siddon, AJ. Morphology and flow cytometry of atypical basophils. Blood 2018;132:552. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-05-850073. Search in Google Scholar

55. Valent, P, Horny, HP, Arock, M. The underestimated role of basophils in Ph(+) chronic myeloid leukaemia. Eur J Clin Invest 2018;48:e13000. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13000. Search in Google Scholar

56. Aarsand, AK, Fernandez-Calle, P, Webster, C, Coskun, A, Gonzales-Lao, E, Diaz-Garzon, J, et al.. EFLM biological variation Database. Available from: https://biologicalvariation.eu/ [Accessed 2 Nov 2020]. Search in Google Scholar

57. Coskun, A, Braga, F, Carobene, A, Tejedor Ganduxe, X, Aarsand Aasne, K, Fernández-Calle, P, et al.. Systematic review and meta-analysis of within-subject and between-subject biological variation estimates of 20 haematological parameters. Clin Chem Lab Med 2020;58:25–32. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2019-0658. Search in Google Scholar

58. Barnes, PW, McFadden, SL, Machin, SJ, Simson, E. The international consensus group for hematology review: suggested criteria for action following automated CBC and WBC differential analysis. Lab Hematol 2005;11:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1532/lh96.05019. Search in Google Scholar

59. Comar, SR, Malvezzi, M, Pasquini, R. Are the review criteria for automated complete blood counts of the International Society of Laboratory Hematology suitable for all hematology laboratories? Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter 2014;36:219–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjhh.2014.03.011. Search in Google Scholar

60. La Gioia, A. Increased basophils in peripheral blood: an underutilized criterion for the early diagnosis of chronic myelogenous leukemia. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2020;80:452–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2020.1774799. Search in Google Scholar

61. Lesesve, JF, Benbih, M, Lecompte, T. Accurate basophils counting: not an easy goal! Clin Lab Haematol 2005;27:143–4.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2257.2005.00667.x. Search in Google Scholar

62. Bruegel, M, Nagel, D, Funk, M, Fuhrmann, P, Zander, J, Teupser, D. Comparison of five automated hematology analyzers in a university hospital setting: Abbott cell-Dyn Sapphire, Beckman Coulter DxH 800, Siemens Advia 2120i, Sysmex XE-5000, and Sysmex XN-2000. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1057–71. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2014-0945. Search in Google Scholar

63. Park, Y, Song, J, Song, S, Song, KS, Ahn, MS, Yang, MS, et al.. Evaluation of the Abbott cell-Dyn Sapphire hematology analyzer. Kor J Lab Med 2007;27:162–8. https://doi.org/10.3343/kjlm.2007.27.3.162. Search in Google Scholar

64. Woo, K-S, Jeong, I-H, An, G-D, Lim, H-H, Han, J-Y. Performance evaluation of new Abbott Alinity hq hematology analyzer. Int J Lab Hematol 2019;41:657–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.13082. Search in Google Scholar

65. Tan, BT, Nava, AJ, George, TI. Evaluation of the beckman Coulter UniCel DxH 800 and Abbott Diagnostics cell-Dyn Sapphire hematology analyzers on pediatric and neonatal specimens in a tertiary care hospital. Am J Clin Pathol 2011;135:929–38. https://doi.org/10.1309/ajcp2exnslggrvsq. Search in Google Scholar

66. Tan, BT, Nava, AJ, George, TI. Evaluation of the beckman Coulter UniCel DxH 800, beckman Coulter LH 780, and Abbott Diagnostics CELL-DYN Sapphire hematology analyzers on adult specimens in a tertiary care hospital. Am J Clin Pathol 2011;135:939–51. https://doi.org/10.1309/ajcp1v3uxeiqtsle. Search in Google Scholar

67. Park, BG, Park, CJ, Kim, S, Yoon, CH, Kim, DH, Jang, S, et al.. Comparison of the Cytodiff flow cytometric leucocyte differential count system with the Sysmex XE-2100 and beckman Coulter UniCel DxH 800. Int J Lab Hematol 2012;34:584–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2012.01439.x. Search in Google Scholar

68. Jo, Y-A, Kim, M, Kim, H-S, Kang, HJ, Lee, YK. Evaluation of the Mindray BC-6800 complete blood counts analyzer. Lab Med Online 2013;3:131–7. https://doi.org/10.3343/lmo.2013.3.3.131. Search in Google Scholar

69. Bruegel, M, George, TI, Feng, B, Allen, TR, Bracco, D, Zahniser, DJ, et al.. Multicenter evaluation of the Cobas m 511 integrated hematology analyzer. Int J Lab Hematol 2018;40:672–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12903. Search in Google Scholar

70. Seo, JY, Lee, ST, Kim, SH. Performance evaluation of the new hematology analyzer Sysmex XN-series. Int J Lab Hematol 2015;37:155–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12254. Search in Google Scholar

71. Genc, S, Dervisoglu, E, Erdem, S, Arslan, O, Aktan, M, Omer, B. Comparison of performance and abnormal cell flagging of two automated hematology analyzers: Sysmex XN 3000 and Beckman Coulter DxH 800. Int J Lab Hematol 2017;39:633–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12717. Search in Google Scholar

72. Schoorl, M, Schoorl, M, Chevallier, M, van der Ploeg, T, van Pelt, J. Multicenter verification of the Sysmex XN-series. Int J Lab Hematol 2017;39:489–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12674. Search in Google Scholar

73. Pérez, I, Redín, ME, Vives, A, Garrido, A, Urrechaga, E, Lacasta, M. Local verification between the hematological analyzers Sysmex XN-series and XE-5000. Int J Lab Hematol 2016;38:256–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12478. Search in Google Scholar

74. Buoro, S, Pipitone, S, Fanelli, A, Francione, S, Da Rin, G, Di Fabio, A, et al.. Valutazione multicentrica dei conteggi cellulari ottenuti con 8 analizzatori ematologici automatici. Biochim Clin 2016;40:195–203. Search in Google Scholar

75. Cherian, S, Levin, G, Lo, WY, Mauck, M, Kuhn, D, Lee, C, et al.. Evaluation of an 8-color flow cytometric reference method for white blood cell differential enumeration. Cytometry 2010;78B:319–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.b.20529. Search in Google Scholar

76. Pursnani, D, Hippargi, SB. Sysmex XN1000 versus manual method in leukopenic blood samples. J Clin Diagn Res 2018;12:EC05–10. Search in Google Scholar

77. Wu, J, Buhl, MR, Vacca, G. Basophil analysis system and method, US Patent 9,810,618 B2; 2017. Search in Google Scholar

78. Kim, JE, Kim, BR, Woo, KS, Han, JY. Evaluation of the leukocyte differential on a new automated flow cytometry hematology analyzer. Int J Lab Hematol 2012;34:547–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2012.01432.x. Search in Google Scholar

79. Gac, F, Thibert, JB, Le Berre, C, Le Priol, J, Semana, G, Fest, T, et al.. Evaluation of CytoDiff™ on cord blood WBC differential. Int J Lab Hematol 2013;35:46–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2012.01460.x. Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-10-14
Accepted: 2020-12-02
Published Online: 2020-12-16
Published in Print: 2021-04-27

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston