{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020172910662824207, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01095100864553314, 'mean_word_length': 5.091228070175439, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Nomenclature for Factors of the HLA System 1984

The HLA Nomenclature Committee met under the auspices of the WHO after the 9th International Histocompatibility Testing Workshop to consider revisions and additions to the nomenclature of factors identified by serological and cellular typing following the principles established successively in previous reports [l-61. The nomenclature for the variants of the complement components controlled by genes of the HLA region was not considered as it was assumed that this was the responsibility of those with a special interest in complement [see, e.g., 71. Special attention was given to establishing a revised system of nomenclature for the products (sometimes called class 11) of what can now be called the HLA-D region, based on the recent advances in our understanding of the biochemistry and genetics of these products. The decision to upgrade a specificity, namely to drop its ‘w’ designation, took into account the correlation in the overall workshop data between the local laboratory assignment of a specificity and that arrived at by the central computer analysis. A correlation coefficient of around 0.95 or higher together with general availability of appropriate antisera was taken as a sufficient indication of adequate clarity of definition of a specificity to drop the ‘w’ designation. This criterion was applied equally to broader and narrower specificities even though, in some cases, the splits of the broader specificity were not so well defined. This is, for example, still the case for HLA-B5 with its splits B51 and Bw52. The retention of a ‘w’ in the designation remains an indication that the specificity, though clearly identified, may not always be easily defined.