Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (7) (remove)
Language
- English (7)
Has Fulltext
- yes (7)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (7)
Keywords
- ARDS (1)
- Allogeneic (1)
- CD34 + cells (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- G-CSF (1)
- Mobilization (1)
- RBC (1)
- SARS-CoV-2 (1)
- Second donation (1)
- Stem cell (1)
Institute
- Medizin (7)
Background: The INTERCEPT™ Blood System for Red Blood Cells (RBCs) utilizes amustaline (S‐303) and glutathione (GSH) to inactivate pathogens and leukocytes in transfused RBCs. Treatment‐emergent low titer non‐hemolytic antibodies to amustaline/GSH RBC were detected in clinical trials using a prior version of the process. The amustaline/GSH process was re‐formulated to decrease S‐303 RBC adduct formation.
Study Design and Methods: A standard three‐cell antibody screening panel was modified to include reagent red cells (RRC) with high (S‐303H) or low (S‐303L) S‐303 adduct density as assessed by flow cytometry, representative of the original and current amustaline/GSH treatment processes, respectively. General hospital and RBC transfusion‐dependent patients never exposed, and clinical trial subjects exposed to amustaline/GSH RBC were screened for antibodies to amustaline/GSH RBC using a standardized agglutination assay.
Results: Twelve (0.1%) of 10,721 general hospital and 5 (0.5%) of 998 repeatedly‐transfused patients not previously exposed to amustaline/GSH RBCs expressed natural, low titer (2‐32) IgM and/or IgG (non‐IgG1 or IgG3 isotype) antibodies with acridine (a structural element of amustaline) (n = 14) or non‐acridine (n = 3) specificity. 11 of 17 sera reacted with S‐303L panel RRCs. In clinical studies 81 thalassemia and 25 cardiac surgery patients were transfused with a total of 1085 amustaline/GSH RBCs and no natural or treatment‐emergent S‐303 antibodies were detected.
Conclusion: Standardized RRC screening panels are sensitive for the detection of natural and acquired S‐303‐specific antibodies. Natural low titer antibodies to amustaline/GSH RBC are present in 0.15% of naïve patients. The clinical relevance of these antibodies appears minimal but is under further investigation.
Background and Objectives: Patient blood (more accurately: haemoglobin, Hb) management (PBM) aims to optimize endogenous Hb production and to minimize iatrogenic Hb loss while maintaining patient safety and optimal effectiveness of medical interventions. PBM was adopted as policy for patients by the World Health Organization (WHO), and, all the more, should be applied to healthy donors. Materials and Methods: Observational data from 489 bone marrow (BM) donors were retrospectively analysed, and principles of patient blood management were applied to healthy volunteer BM donations. Results and Conclusion: We managed to render BM aspiration safe for donors, notably completely avoiding the collection of autologous blood units and blood transfusions through iron management, establishment and curation of high-yield aspiration technique, limitation of collection volume to 1·5% of donor body weight and development of volume prediction algorithms for the requested cell dose.
Background and Objectives: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are needed by almost every acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) patient undergoing induction chemotherapy and constitute a cornerstone in supportive measures for cancer patients in general. Randomized controlled trials have shown non‐inferiority or even superiority of restrictive transfusion guidelines over liberal transfusion guidelines in specific clinical situations outside of medical oncology. In this study, we analysed whether more restrictive RBC transfusion reduces blood use without affecting hard outcomes.
Materials and Methods: A total of 352 AML patients diagnosed between 2007 and 2018 and undergoing intensive induction chemotherapy were included in this retrospective analysis. In the less restrictive transfusion group, patients received RBC transfusion for haemoglobin levels below 8 g/dl (2007–2014). In the restrictive transfusion group, patients received RBC transfusion for haemoglobin levels below 7 g/dl (2016–2018). Liberal transfusion triggers were never endorsed.
Results: A total of 268 (76·1%) and 84 (23·9%) AML patients fell into the less restrictive and restrictive transfusion groups, respectively. The less restrictive transfusion group had 1 g/dl higher mean haemoglobin levels, received their first RBC transfusions earlier and needed 1·5 more units of RBC during the hospital stay of induction chemotherapy. Febrile episodes, C‐reactive protein levels, admission to the intensive care unit, length of hospital stay as well as response and survival rates did not differ between the two cohorts.
Conclusion: From our retrospective analysis, we conclude that a more restrictive transfusion trigger does not affect important outcomes of AML patients. The opportunity to test possible effects of the more severe anaemia in the restrictive transfusion group on quality of life was missed.
Background: Healthy volunteer registry donors have become the backbone of stem cell transplantation programs. While most registrants will never become actual donors, a small minority are called upon twice, most commonly for the same patient because of poor graft function. Anecdotal evidence provides no hard reasons to disallow second-time mobilized apheresis, but few centers have treated enough two-time donors for definitive conclusions. Moreover, for reasons unknown, the efficiency of G-CSF varies greatly between donations.
Methods: Comparison of outcomes of first vs. second donations can formally confirm G-CSF responsiveness as intrinsically, likely genetically, determined. In our database, we identified 60 donors (1.3%) who received two cycles of G-CSF 24 days to 4 years apart and systematically compared mobilization outcomes.
Results: First and second mobilization and collection proceeded without severe or unusual adverse effects. First-time mobilization efficiency was highly predictive of second-time mobilization. Neither mobilization efficiency nor time lag between donations affected the similarity of first- and second-time mobilization outcomes.
Conclusions: With the caveat that only donors with an unremarkable first donation were cleared for a second, our data indicate that a second donation is feasible, equally tolerable as a first donation, and efficient. Moreover, the data strongly support the notion of donor-intrinsic variables dictating mobilization response and argue against relevant damage to the stem cell compartment during mobilization with rhG-CSF.
Previous studies reported on the safety and applicability of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) to ameliorate pulmonary inflammation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Thus, multiple clinical trials assessing the potential of MSCs for COVID-19 treatment are underway. Yet, as SARS-inducing coronaviruses infect stem/progenitor cells, it is unclear whether MSCs could be infected by SARS-CoV-2 upon transplantation to COVID-19 patients. We found that MSCs from bone marrow, amniotic fluid, and adipose tissue carry angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 and transmembrane protease serine subtype 2 at low levels on the cell surface under steady-state and inflammatory conditions. We did not observe SARS-CoV-2 infection or replication in MSCs at steady state under inflammatory conditions, or in direct contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected Caco-2 cells. Further, indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 production in MSCs was not impaired in the presence of SARS-CoV-2. We show that MSCs are resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection and retain their immunomodulation potential, supporting their potential applicability for COVID-19 treatment.
Background In the pandemic, testing for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR in one of the pillars on which countermeasures are based. Factors limiting the output of laboratories interfere with the effectiveness of public health measures. Conserving reagents by pooling samples in low-probability settings is proposed, but may cause dilution and loss of sensitivity.
Methods We tested an alternate approach (FACT) by simultaneously incubating multiple respiratory swabs in a single tube. This protocol was evaluated by serial incubation of a respiratory swab in up to 10 tubes. The analytics validity of this concept was demonstrated in a five-sample mini pool set-up. It was consequently applied in the testing of 50 symptomatic patients (five-sample pools) as well as 100 asymptomatic residents of a nursing home (ten-sample pools).
Results Serial incubation of a respiratory swab in up to 10 tubes did not lead to a significant decline in viral concentration. The novel FACT-protocol did not cause a false negative result in a five-sample mini-pool setup, with non-significantly differing Ct values between single sample and mini-pool NAT. In two routine applications, all mini pools containing positive patient samples were correctly identified.
Conclusions Our proposed FACT-protocol did not cause a significant loss in analytic or diagnostic sensitivity compared to single sample testing in multiple setups. It reduced the amount of reagents needed by up to 40%, and also reduced hands-on time. This method could enhance testing efficiency, especially in groups with a low pretest-probability, such as systemically relevant professional groups.
Background: In the pandemic, testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction is one of the pillars on which countermeasures are based. Factors limiting the output of laboratories interfere with the effectiveness of public health measures. Conserving reagents by pooling samples in low-probability settings is proposed but may cause dilution and loss of sensitivity. Blood transfusion services had experience in performance of high throughput nucleic acid testing (NAT) analysis and can support the national health system by screening of the inhabitants for SARS-COV-2.
Methods: We evaluated a new approach of a multiple-swab method by simultaneously incubating multiple respiratory swabs in a single tube. Analytical sensitivity was constant up to a total number of 50 swabs. It was consequently applied in the testing of 50 symptomatic patients (5-sample pools) as well as 100 asymptomatic residents of a nursing home (10-sample pools).
Results: The novel method did not cause false-negative results with nonsignificantly differing cycle threshold values between single-swab and multiple-swab NAT. In two routine applications, all minipools containing positive patient samples were correctly identified.
Conclusions: The new method enables countries to increase the total number of testing significantly. The multiple-swab method is able to screen system relevant groups of employees frequently. The example in Germany shows that blood transfusion services can support general health systems with their experience in NAT and their high-throughput instruments. Screening of a huge number of inhabitants is currently the only option to prevent a second infection wave and enable exit strategies in many countries.