Meghan Delaney

Guidelines on the Use of Therapeutic Apheresis in Clinical Practice—Evidence-Based Approach from the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: The Sixth Special Issue

The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) Journal of Clinical Apheresis (JCA) Special Issue Writing Committee is charged with reviewing, updating, and categorizing indications for the evidence‐based use of therapeutic apheresis in human disease. Since the 2007 JCA Special Issue (Fourth Edition), the Committee has incorporated systematic review and evidence‐based approaches in the grading and categorization of apheresis indications. This Seventh Edition of the JCA Special Issue continues to maintain this methodology and rigor to make recommendations on the use of apheresis in a wide variety of diseases/conditions. The JCA Seventh Edition, like its predecessor, has consistently applied the category and grading system definitions in the fact sheets. The general layout and concept of a fact sheet that was used since the fourth edition has largely been maintained in this edition. Each fact sheet succinctly summarizes the evidence for the use of therapeutic apheresis in a specific disease entity. The Seventh Edition discusses 87 fact sheets (14 new fact sheets since the Sixth Edition) for therapeutic apheresis diseases and medical conditions, with 179 indications, which are separately graded and categorized within the listed fact sheets. Several diseases that are Category IV which have been described in detail in previous editions and do not have significant new evidence since the last publication are summarized in a separate table. The Seventh Edition of the JCA Special Issue serves as a key resource that guides the utilization of therapeutic apheresis in the treatment of human disease. J. Clin. Apheresis 31:149–162, 2016.

Guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis in clinical practice - Evidence-based approach from the writing committee of the american society for apheresis

The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) JCA Special Issue Writing Committee is charged with reviewing, updating and categorizating indications for therapeutic apheresis. Beginning with the 2007 ASFA Special Issue (Fourth Edition), the committee has incorporated systematic review and evidence‐based approach in the grading and categorization of indications. This Sixth Edition of the ASFA Special Issue has further improved the process of using evidence‐based medicine in the recommendations by consistently applying the category and GRADE system definitions, but eliminating the “level of evidence” criteria (from the University HealthCare Consortium) utilized in prior editions given redundancy between GRADE and University HealthCare Consortium systems. The general layout and concept of a fact sheet that was utilized in the Fourth and Fifth Editions, has been largely maintained in this edition. Each fact sheet succinctly summarizes the evidence for the use of therapeutic apheresis in a specific disease entity. This article consists of 78 fact sheets (increased from 2010) for therapeutic indications in ASFA categories I through IV, with many diseases categorized having multiple clinical presentations/situations which are individually graded and categorized. J. Clin. Apheresis 28:145–284, 2013.

Effects of Red-Cell Storage Duration on Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND Some observational studies have reported that transfusion of red-cell units that have been stored for more than 2 to 3 weeks is associated with serious, even fatal, adverse events. Patients undergoing cardiac surgery may be especially vulnerable to the adverse effects of transfusion. METHODS We conducted a randomized trial at multiple sites from 2010 to 2014. Participants 12 years of age or older who were undergoing complex cardiac surgery and were likely to undergo transfusion of red cells were randomly assigned to receive leukocyte-reduced red cells stored for 10 days or less (shorter-term storage group) or for 21 days or more (longer-term storage group) for all intraoperative and postoperative transfusions. The primary outcome was the change in Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (MODS; range, 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating more severe organ dysfunction) from the preoperative score to the highest composite score through day 7 or the time of death or discharge. RESULTS The median storage time of red-cell units provided to the 1098 participants who received red-cell transfusion was 7 days in the shorter-term storage group and 28 days in the longer-term storage group. The mean change in MODS was an increase of 8.5 and 8.7 points, respectively (95% confidence interval for the difference, -0.6 to 0.3; P=0.44). The 7-day mortality was 2.8% in the shorter-term storage group and 2.0% in the longer-term storage group (P=0.43); 28-day mortality was 4.4% and 5.3%, respectively (P=0.57). Adverse events did not differ significantly between groups except that hyperbilirubinemia was more common in the longer-term storage group. CONCLUSIONS The duration of red-cell storage was not associated with significant differences in the change in MODS. We did not find that the transfusion of red cells stored for 10 days or less was superior to the transfusion of red cells stored for 21 days or more among patients 12 years of age or older who were undergoing complex cardiac surgery. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; RECESS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00991341.).

Transfusion reactions: prevention, diagnosis, and treatment

Blood transfusion is one of the most common procedures in patients in hospital so it is imperative that clinicians are knowledgeable about appropriate blood product administration, as well as the signs, symptoms, and management of transfusion reactions. In this Review, we, an international panel, provide a synopsis of the pathophysiology, treatment, and management of each diagnostic category of transfusion reaction using evidence-based recommendations whenever available.

It's time to phase in RHD genotyping for patients with a serologic weak D phenotype

In 2014, the College of American Pathologists (CAP) Transfusion Medicine Resource Committee (TMRC) reported the results of a survey of more than 3100 laboratories concerning their policies and procedures for testing serological weak D phenotypes and administration of Rh immune globulin (RhIG).1 Among the findings of this survey is the observation that there is a lack of standard practice in the United States for interpreting the RhD type when a serological weak D phenotype is detected. In some laboratories, an individual with a serological weak D phenotype, especially if a blood donor, is interpreted to be RhD-positive. In the same or other laboratories, especially if a serological weak D phenotype is detected in a female of child-bearing potential, the individual is likely to be managed as RhD-negative for transfusions and, if pregnant, considered a candidate for RhIG. Also, the performance characteristics of serological typing methods for RhD vary. For patients, including pregnant women, the majority of laboratories have policies and procedures that do not use the indirect antiglobulin (weak D) test, thereby avoiding detection of a serological weak D phenotype so that the RhD type will be interpreted to be RhD-negative. Other laboratories typically perform a weak D test for the same category of patients. For blood donors and newborns, it is standard practice for laboratories to have policies and procedures for RhD typing to ensure that serological weak D phenotypes are detected and interpreted as RhD-positive.1 The goal of these RhD typing practices is to protect RhD-negative persons from inadvertent alloimmunization to the D antigen by exposure to RhD-positive RBCs, including RBCs expressing a serological weak D phenotype. Although there has not been a recent prospective study in the United States, it is estimated that current RhD typing practice, together with contemporary obstetrical practices for administration of antepartum and postpartum RhIG, is 98.4 to 99 percent successful in preventing RhD alloimmunization and RhD hemolytic disease of the fetus/newborn.2 However, there are unwarranted consequences associated with the practice of not determining the RHD genotype of persons with a serological weak D phenotype, including unnecessary injections of RhIG and transfusion of RhD-negative RBCs -- always in short supply -- when RhD-positive RBCs could be transfused safely. CAP’s TMRC reviewed the current status of RHD genotyping and proposed that selective integration of RHD genotyping in laboratory practices could improve the accuracy of RhD typing results, reduce unnecessary administration of RhIG in women with a serological weak D phenotype, and decrease unnecessary transfusion of RhD-negative RBCs to recipients with a serological weak D phenotype.1 In response to the findings of the CAP TMRC survey, AABB and CAP convened a Work Group on RHD Genotyping and charged it with developing recommendations to clarify clinical issues related to RhD typing in persons with a serological weak D phenotype. As an initial step for formulating recommendations, the Work Group reviewed the current state of molecular science of RHD, including more than 140 publications covering background;1-12 D variants with anti-D;13-29 molecular basis of serological weak D phenotypes;30-92 reviews, editorials and commentaries;93-129 technical resources;130-142 and standards and guidelines.143-149 This Commentary summarizes the proceedings and recommendations of the Work Group.

Molecular blood typing augments serologic testing and allows for enhanced matching of red blood cells for transfusion in patients with sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) patients have dissimilar red blood cell (RBC) phenotypes compared to the primarily Caucasian blood donor base due, in part, to underlying complex Rh and silenced Duffy expression. Gene array–based technology offers high‐throughput antigen typing of blood donors and can identify patients with altered genotypes. The purpose of the study was to ascertain if RBC components drawn from predominantly Caucasian donors could provide highly antigen‐matched products for molecularly typed SCD patients.

High-resolution HLA matching in double-umbilical-cord-blood reduced-intensity transplantation in adults

BACKGROUND: Double‐cord‐blood transplantation (DCBT) offers an option for patients receiving reduced‐intensity transplants. These unique transplants have two donors, both of whom are usually HLA mismatched at one to two loci.

A Centralized Recipient Database Enhances the Serologic Safety of RBC Transfusions for Patients With Sickle Cell Disease

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the utility of a centralized transfusion service model in preventing the transfusion of incompatible units in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). METHODS The serologic records of transfused patients with SCD were reviewed. The index hospital was where an alloantibody was initially detected. RESULTS In total, 150 patients with SCD were evaluated; 66 (44.0%) of 150 were alloimmunized. In 42 (63.6%) of these patients, 1 or more antibodies evanesced. The median number of hospitals visited by patients with SCD for RBC transfusion with 1 or more evanesced antibodies was three (range, one to eight); the median number of nonindex hospitals was two (range, one to seven). Of the patients with evanesced antibodies, 28.6% received transfusions at various nonindex hospitals 20 or more times after the antibody evanesced. CONCLUSIONS A centralized database can help identify patients with SCD who have evanesced alloantibodies and prevent issuing incompatible RBC units.

Low frequency of anti-D alloimmunization following D+ platelet transfusion: the Anti-D Alloimmunization after D-incompatible Platelet Transfusions (ADAPT) study.

The reported frequency of D alloimmunization in D− recipients after transfusion of D+ platelets varies. This study was designed to determine the frequency of D alloimmunization, previously reported to be an average of 5 ± 2%. A primary anti‐D immune response was defined as the detection of anti‐D ≥ 28 d following the first D+ platelet transfusion. Data were collected on 485 D− recipients of D+ platelets in 11 centres between 2010 and 2012. Their median age was 60 (range 2–100) years. Diagnoses included: haematological (203/485, 42%), oncological (64/485, 13%) and other diseases (218/485, 45%). Only 7/485 (1·44%; 95% CI 0·58–2·97%) recipients had a primary anti‐D response after a median serological follow‐up of 77 d (range: 28–2111). There were no statistically significant differences between the primary anti‐D formers and the other patients, in terms of gender, age, receipt of immunosuppressive therapy, proportion of patients with haematological/oncological diseases, transfusion of whole blood‐derived or apheresis platelets or both, and total number of transfused platelet products. This is the largest study with the longest follow‐up of D alloimmunization following D+ platelet transfusion. The low frequency of D alloimmunization should be considered when deciding whether to administer Rh Immune Globulin to D− males and D− females without childbearing potential after transfusion of D+ platelets.

International validation of a dithiothreitol (DTT)-based method to resolve the daratumumab interference with blood compatibility testing

Daratumumab (DARA) consistently interferes with routine blood bank serologic testing by directly binding to CD38 expressed on reagent red blood cells (RBCs). Treating RBCs with dithiothreitol (DTT) eliminates the DARA interference. We conducted an international, multicenter, blinded study aimed at validating the DTT method for use by blood bank laboratories worldwide.