Charlotte Llewelyn

Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and blood transfusion

Background and Objectives  This paper reports the results to 1 March 2006 of an ongoing UK study, the Transfusion Medicine Epidemiological Review (TMER), by the National CJD Surveillance Unit (NCJDSU) and the UK Blood Services (UKBS) to determine whether there is any evidence that Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (CJD), including sporadic CJD (sCJD), familial CJD (fCJD), and variant CJD (vCJD) is transmissible via blood transfusion.

A no-prophylaxis platelet-transfusion strategy for hematologic cancers.

BACKGROUND The effectiveness of platelet transfusions to prevent bleeding in patients with hematologic cancers remains unclear. This trial assessed whether a policy of not giving prophylactic platelet transfusions was as effective and safe as a policy of providing prophylaxis. METHODS We conducted this randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial at 14 centers in the United Kingdom and Australia. Patients were randomly assigned to receive, or not to receive, prophylactic platelet transfusions when morning platelet counts were less than 10×10(9) per liter. Eligible patients were persons 16 years of age or older who were receiving chemotherapy or undergoing stem-cell transplantation and who had or were expected to have thrombocytopenia. The primary end point was bleeding of World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, 3, or 4 up to 30 days after randomization. RESULTS A total of 600 patients (301 in the no-prophylaxis group and 299 in the prophylaxis group) underwent randomization between 2006 and 2011. Bleeding of WHO grade 2, 3, or 4 occurred in 151 of 300 patients (50%) in the no-prophylaxis group, as compared with 128 of 298 (43%) in the prophylaxis group (adjusted difference in proportions, 8.4 percentage points; 90% confidence interval, 1.7 to 15.2; P=0.06 for noninferiority). Patients in the no-prophylaxis group had more days with bleeding and a shorter time to the first bleeding episode than did patients in the prophylaxis group. Platelet use was markedly reduced in the no-prophylaxis group. A prespecified subgroup analysis identified similar rates of bleeding in the two study groups among patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation. CONCLUSIONS The results of our study support the need for the continued use of prophylaxis with platelet transfusion and show the benefit of such prophylaxis for reducing bleeding, as compared with no prophylaxis. A significant number of patients had bleeding despite prophylaxis. (Funded by the National Health Service Blood and Transplant Research and Development Committee and the Australian Red Cross Blood Service; TOPPS Controlled-Trials.com number, ISRCTN08758735.).

The Transfusion Alternatives Preoperatively in Sickle Cell Disease (TAPS) study: a randomised, controlled, multicentre clinical trial

BACKGROUND No consensus exists on whether preoperative blood transfusions are beneficial in patients with sickle-cell disease. We assessed whether perioperative complication rates would be altered by preoperative transfusion. METHODS We did a multicentre, randomised trial. Eligible patients were aged at least 1 year, had haemoglobin SS or Sβ(0)thalassaemia sickle-cell-disease subtypes, and were scheduled for low-risk or medium-risk operations. Patients were randomly assigned no transfusion or transfusion no more than 10 days before surgery. The primary outcome was the proportion of clinically important complications between randomisation and 30 days after surgery. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS 67 (96%) of 70 enrolled patients-33 no preoperative transfusion and 34 preoperative transfusion-were assessed. 65 (97%) of 67 patients had the haemoglobin SS subtype and 54 (81%) were scheduled to undergo medium-risk surgery. 13 (39%) of 33 patients in the no-preoperative-transfusion group had clinically important complications, compared with five (15%) in the preoperative-transfusion group (p=0.023). Of these, 10 (30%) and one (3%), respectively, had serious adverse events. The unadjusted odds ratio of clinically important complications was 3.8 (95% CI 1.2-12.2, p=0.027). 10 (91%) of 11 serious adverse events were acute chest syndrome (nine in the no-preoperative-transfusion group and one in the preoperative-transfusion group). Duration of hospital stay and readmission rates did not differ between study groups. INTERPRETATION Preoperative transfusion was associated with decreased perioperative complications in patients with sickle-cell disease in this trial. This approach could, therefore, be beneficial for patients with the haemoglobin SS subtype who are scheduled to undergo low-risk and medium-risk surgeries. FUNDING NHS Blood and Transplant.

Restrictive versus liberal blood transfusion for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (TRIGGER): a pragmatic, open-label, cluster randomised feasibility trial

BACKGROUND Transfusion thresholds for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding are controversial. So far, only three small, underpowered studies and one single-centre trial have been done. Findings from the single-centre trial showed reduced mortality with restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. We aimed to assess whether a multicentre, cluster randomised trial is a feasible method to substantiate or refute this finding. METHODS In this pragmatic, open-label, cluster randomised feasibility trial, done in six university hospitals in the UK, we enrolled all patients aged 18 years or older with new presentations of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, irrespective of comorbidity, except for exsanguinating haemorrhage. We randomly assigned hospitals (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation sequence (random permuted block size of 6, without stratification or matching) to either a restrictive (transfusion when haemoglobin concentration fell below 80 g/L) or liberal (transfusion when haemoglobin concentration fell below 100 g/L) RBC transfusion policy. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate, protocol adherence, haemoglobin concentration, RBC exposure, selection bias, and information to guide design and economic evaluation of the phase 3 trial. Main exploratory clinical outcomes were further bleeding and mortality at day 28. We did analyses on all enrolled patients for whom an outcome was available. This trial is registered, ISRCTN85757829 and NCT02105532. FINDINGS Between Sept 3, 2012, and March 1, 2013, we enrolled 936 patients across six hospitals (403 patients in three hospitals with a restrictive policy and 533 patients in three hospitals with a liberal policy). Recruitment rate was significantly higher for the liberal than for the restrictive policy (62% vs 55%; p=0·04). Despite some baseline imbalances, Rockall and Blatchford risk scores were identical between policies. Protocol adherence was 96% (SD 10) in the restrictive policy vs 83% (25) in the liberal policy (difference 14%; 95% CI 7-21; p=0·005). Mean last recorded haemoglobin concentration was 116 (SD 24) g/L for patients on the restrictive policy and 118 (20) g/L for those on the liberal policy (difference -2·0 [95% CI -12·0 to 7·0]; p=0·50). Fewer patients received RBCs on the restrictive policy than on the liberal policy (restrictive policy 133 [33%] vs liberal policy 247 [46%]; difference -12% [95% CI -35 to 11]; p=0·23), with fewer RBC units transfused (mean 1·2 [SD 2·1] vs 1·9 [2·8]; difference -0·7 [-1·6 to 0·3]; p=0·12), although these differences were not significant. We noted no significant difference in clinical outcomes. INTERPRETATION A cluster randomised design led to rapid recruitment, high protocol adherence, separation in degree of anaemia between groups, and non-significant reduction in RBC transfusion in the restrictive policy. A large cluster randomised trial to assess the effectiveness of transfusion strategies for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is both feasible and essential before clinical practice guidelines change to recommend restrictive transfusion for all patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. FUNDING NHS Blood and Transplant Research and Development.

Do All Patients With Hematologic Malignancies and Severe Thrombocytopenia Need Prophylactic Platelet Transfusions?: Background, Rationale, and Design of a Clinical Trial (Trial of Platelet Prophylaxis) to Assess the Effectiveness of Prophylactic Platelet Transfusions

Although considerable advances have been made in many aspects of platelet transfusion therapy in the last 30 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, including the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding in patients with bone marrow failure. We have designed a randomized controlled trial to compare prophylactic platelet use with a threshold of a platelet count of 10 x 10(9)/L with no prophylaxis in adult thrombocytopenic patients with hematologic malignancies. The trial question is whether a no-prophylactic policy for the use of platelet transfusions in patients with hematologic malignancies is not inferior to a threshold prophylactic policy at 10 x 10(9)/L, for bleeding at World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, 3, or 4, up to 30 days from randomization. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients who have a significant clinical bleed, defined as WHO grade 2 or higher up to 30 days from randomization. Subsidiary clinical outcome measures include time to first bleed and a descriptive analysis of all severe bleeds. A bleeding assessment form is completed daily for all study subjects until day 30 from randomization. Minor modifications were made to the definitions at WHO grades 1 and 2 for petechiae and duration of nose bleeds, after piloting of the bleeding assessment forms. This study has been designed as a 2-stage randomized trial with an interim analysis planned after a minimum of 100 patients had been randomized and had completed their period of observation. Patients have initially been enrolled through 3 United Kingdom hematology centers. The interim analysis has been completed, and the results have confirmed a final sample size of 600 patients. Recruitment is now being extended to other centers in United Kingdom and Australia. Local research nurses are not blinded to treatment allocation, but a number of measures to reduce risk of assessment bias include repeated education around standard operating procedures, common definitions, and duplication of assessments. The expected completion date for the 5-year study is December 2011.

Impact of prophylactic platelet transfusions on bleeding events in patients with hematologic malignancies: a subgroup analysis of a randomized trial

A recent randomized trial compared a policy of no prophylaxis with a policy of prophylactic platelet (PLT) transfusions at counts of fewer than 10 × 109/L in patients with hematologic malignancies. The results suggested the effectiveness of prophylactic PLT transfusions may vary according to patient diagnosis and treatment plan.

Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in a transfusion recipient: coincidence or cause?

BACKGROUND: To date there have been four instances of infection transmitted through blood transfusions derived from individuals who later developed variant Creutzfeldt‐Jakob disease (vCJD). The identification of further transmission of vCJD through this route would have important implications for risk assessment and public health.

A retrospective case note review of deceased recipients of vCJD-implicated blood transfusions.

Background  To date, four instances of probable transfusion–transmission of variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD) infection have been described, and surviving recipients of vCJD‐implicated blood components have been informed that they may be ‘at risk’ of vCJD. Nearly two‐thirds of all recipients of vCJD‐implicated blood components are deceased, and many died before the vCJD risk was known. The primary aim of this study was to determine retrospectively whether there was evidence that any of the other deceased recipients of vCJD‐implicated blood components had any clinical signs or symptoms suggestive of vCJD in life. In addition, pathological material from recipients, stored at the time of surgery or autopsy, was sought to allow testing for evidence of vCJD infection. A secondary aim of the study was to obtain information on invasive healthcare procedures undertaken on recipients following the transfusion to identify the potential for onward transmission of infection.

Costs and quality of life associated with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the UK: cohort analysis of patients in a cluster randomised trial

Objectives Data on costs associated with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) are scarce. We provide estimates of UK healthcare costs, indirect costs and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients presenting to hospital with AUGIB. Setting Six UK university hospitals with >20 AUGIB admissions per month, >400 adult beds, 24 h endoscopy, and on-site access to intensive care and surgery. Participants 936 patients aged ≥18 years, admitted with AUGIB, and enrolled between August 2012 and March 2013 in the TRIGGER trial of AUGIB comparing restrictive versus liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion thresholds. Primary and secondary outcome measures Healthcare resource use during hospitalisation and postdischarge up to 28  days, unpaid informal care, time away from paid employment and HRQoL using the EuroQol EQ-5D at 28  days were measured prospectively. National unit costs were used to value resource use. Initial in-hospital treatment costs were upscaled to a UK level. Results Mean initial in-hospital costs were £2458 (SE=£216) per patient. Inpatient bed days, endoscopy and RBC transfusions were key cost drivers. Postdischarge healthcare costs were £391 (£44) per patient. One-third of patients received unpaid informal care and the quarter in paid employment required time away from work. Mean HRQoL for survivors was 0.74. Annual initial inhospital treatment cost for all AUGIB cases in the UK was estimated to be £155.5 million, with exploratory analyses of the incremental costs of treating hospitalised patients developing AUGIB generating figures of between £143 million and £168 million. Conclusions AUGIB is a large burden for UK hospitals with inpatient stay, endoscopy and RBC transfusions as the main cost drivers. It is anticipated that this work will enable quantification of the impact of cost reduction strategies in AUGIB and will inform economic analyses of novel or existing interventions for AUGIB. Trial registration number ISRCTN85757829 and NCT02105532.

Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusion for Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Rationale and Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Feasibility Trial

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is the commonest reason for hospitalization with hemorrhage in the UK and the leading indication for transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs). Observational studies suggest an association between more liberal RBC transfusion and adverse patient outcomes, and a recent randomised trial reported increased further bleeding and mortality with a liberal transfusion policy. TRIGGER (Transfusion in Gastrointestinal Bleeding) is a pragmatic, cluster randomized trial which aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of implementing a restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion policy in adult patients admitted with AUGIB. The trial will take place in 6 UK hospitals, and each centre will be randomly allocated to a transfusion policy. Clinicians throughout each hospital will manage all eligible patients according to the transfusion policy for the 6-month trial recruitment period. In the restrictive centers, patients become eligible for RBC transfusion when their hemoglobin is < 8 g/dL. In the liberal centers patients become eligible for transfusion once their hemoglobin is < 10 g/dL. All clinicians will have the discretion to transfuse outside of the policy but will be asked to document the reasons for doing so. Feasibility outcome measures include protocol adherence, recruitment rate, and evidence of selection bias. Clinical outcome measures include further bleeding, mortality, thromboembolic events, and infections. Quality of life will be measured using the EuroQol EQ-5D at day 28, and the costs associated with hospitalization for AUGIB in the UK will be estimated. Consent will be sought from participants or their representatives according to patient capacity for use of routine hospital data and day 28 follow up. The study has ethical approval for conduct in England and Scotland. Results will be analysed according to a pre-defined statistical analysis plan and disseminated in peer reviewed publications to relevant stakeholders. The results of this study will inform the feasibility and design of a phase III randomized trial.