Absence of D alloimmunization in D- pediatric oncology patients receiving D-incompatible single-donor platelets

Rh immune globulin immunoprophylaxis after RhD-positive red cell exposure in RhD-negative patients via transfusion: A survey of practices

BACKGROUND

Current Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB) standards require transfusion services to have a policy on Rh immune globulin (RhIG) immunoprophylaxis for when RhD-negative patients are exposed to RhD-positive red cells. This is a survey of AABB-accredited transfusion services in the United States (US) regarding institutional policies and practices on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD-negative patients receive RhD-positive (i.e., RhD-incompatible) packed red blood cell (pRBC) and platelet transfusions.

RESULTS

Approximately half of the respondents (50.4%, 116/230) have policies on RhIG administration after RhD-incompatible pRBC and platelet transfusions, while others had policies for only pRBC (13.5%, 31/230) or only platelet (17.8%, 41/230) transfusions, but not both. In contrast, 18.3% (42/230) report that their institution has no written policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD-incompatible transfusions. Most institutions (70.2%, 99/141) do not have policies addressing safety parameters to mitigate the risk of hemolysis associated with the high dose of RhIG required to prevent RhD alloimmunization after RhD-incompatible pRBC transfusions.

DISCUSSION

With approximately half of US AABB-accredited institutions report having policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after both RhD-incompatible pRBC and platelet transfusions, some institutions may not be in compliance with AABB standards. Further, most with policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD-incompatible pRBC transfusion do not have written safeguards to mitigate the risk of hemolysis associated with the high dose of RhIG required.

CONCLUSION

This survey underscores the diverse and inadequate institutional policies on RhIG immunoprophylaxis after RhD exposure in Rh-negative patients via transfusion. This observation identifies an opportunity to improve transfusion safety.

Anti-D immunization after D positive platelet transfusions in D negative recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anti-D can be formed after D-incompatible platelet transfusions due to contaminating D+ red blood cells. These antibodies are of particular importance in women of childbearing potential, because anti-D is most often involved in severe cases of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. This systematic review determined the frequency of anti-D after D+ platelet transfusions and risk factors for D alloimmunization.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Relevant literature was searched using PubMed, Embase and Web of Science until December 2022. Overall anti-D frequency and risk factors were estimated using a random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In 22 studies, a total of 3028 D- patients received a mean of six D+ platelet transfusions. After a mean follow-up of seven months 106 of 2808 eligible patients formed anti-D. The pooled anti-D frequency was 3.3% (95% CI 2.0-5.0%; I2 71%). After including only patients with an undoubtable follow-up of at least 4 weeks, 29 of 1497 patients formed anti-D with a pooled primary anti-D rate of 1.9% (95% CI 0.9-3.2%, I2 44%). Women and patients receiving whole blood derived platelets had two and five times higher anti-D rates compared with men and patients receiving apheresis derived platelets, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Anti-D immunization is low after D incompatible platelet transfusions and dependent on recipients' sex and platelet source. We propose anti-D prophylaxis in girls and women, capable of becoming pregnant in the future, that received D+ platelets, regardless of platelet source, to reduce the risk of anti-D induced hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn.

Rethinking the transfusion pathway in myelodysplastic syndromes: Study protocol for a novel randomized feasibility n-of-1 trial of weekly-interval red cell transfusion in myelodysplastic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Anemia in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) is associated with poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and physical function, and is frequently treated with transfusions. The current common practice of transfusing multiple red blood cells (RBC) units every 2-4 weeks may result in peaks/troughs in hemoglobin (Hb) level, yet maintaining a stable Hb may better improve HRQoL. We describe a study protocol aiming to investigate the feasibility of weekly low-dose RBC transfusion in MDS patients, including assessing HRQoL and physical function outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In this n-of-1 pilot study, patients receive two treatment arms, with randomly allocated treatment sequence: arm A (patient's usual transfusion schedule) and arm B (weekly transfusion, individualized per patient). To facilitate timely delivery of weekly transfusion, extended-matched RBCs are provided, with transfusion based upon the previous week's Hb/pre-transfusion testing results to eliminate delays of awaiting contemporaneous cross-matching. Primary outcome is the feasibility of delivering weekly transfusion. Secondary outcomes include HRQoL, functional activity measurements, RBC usage, and alloimmunization rates. A qualitative substudy explores patient and staff experiences.

RESULTS

The trial is open in Australia, Netherlands, and UK. The first patient was recruited in 2020. Inter-country differences in providing RBCs are observed, including patient genotyping versus serological phenotyping to select compatible units.

DISCUSSION

This pilot trial evaluates a novel personalized transfusion approach of weekly matched RBC transfusion and challenges the dogma of current routine pre-transfusion matching practice. Findings on study feasibility, HRQoL, and physical functional outcomes and the qualitative substudy will inform the design of a larger definitive trial powered for clinical outcomes.

What Laboratory Tests and Physiologic Triggers Should Guide the Decision to Administer a Platelet or Plasma Transfusion in Critically Ill Children and What Product Attributes Are Optimal to Guide Specific Product Selection? From the Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding

OBJECTIVES

To present consensus statements and supporting literature for plasma and platelet product variables and related laboratory testing for transfusions in general critically ill children from the Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding.

DESIGN

Systematic review and consensus conference of international, multidisciplinary experts in platelet and plasma transfusion management of critically ill children.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENTS

Critically ill pediatric patients at risk of bleeding and receiving plasma and/or platelet transfusions.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A panel of 10 experts developed evidence-based and, when evidence was insufficient, expert-based statements for laboratory testing and blood product attributes for platelet and plasma transfusions. These statements were reviewed and ratified by the 29 Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative - Control/Avoidance of Bleeding experts. A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, from inception to December 2020. Consensus was obtained using the Research and Development/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method. Results were summarized using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method. We developed five expert consensus statements and two recommendations in answer to two questions: what laboratory tests and physiologic triggers should guide the decision to administer a platelet or plasma transfusion in critically ill children; and what product attributes are optimal to guide specific product selection?

CONCLUSIONS

The Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding program provides some guidance and expert consensus for the laboratory and blood product attributes used for decision-making for plasma and platelet transfusions in critically ill pediatric patients.

Red blood cell alloimmunisation after platelet transfusion (excluding ABO blood group system)

Red blood cell alloimmunisation after transfusion of red blood cell concentrates carries a risk for every recipient. This risk is particularly high for patients with conditions such as sickle cell disease. However, red blood cell alloimmunisation can also occur after platelet concentrate transfusion. All blood group systems other than ABO are affected, and there are several mechanisms responsible for this alloimmunisation. The practical implications of this are a need to match red blood cell concentrates in all alloimmunised patients and, in pregnant women, recongnition of the risk of developing haemolytic disease of the foetus and newborn. Several measures can be taken to prevent alloimmunisation: in the case of the D antigen, for example, anti-RhD immunoglobulins can be infused before transfusing platelet concentrates from an RhD-positive donor in a RhD-negative recipient.

Platelet Transfusion: And Update on Challenges and Outcomes

Platelet transfusion is a common practice in onco-hematologic patients for preventing or treating hemorrhages. Platelet concentrates can be transfused with therapeutic or prophylactic purposes. With the aim to help clinicians to take the decisions on platelet transfusion, some guidelines have been developed based on the current scientific evidence. However, there are some controversial issues and available scientific evidence is not enough to solve them. There is little information about what is the best platelet product to be transfused: random platelets or single donor apheresis platelets, and plasma-suspended or additive solution suspended platelets. Platelets are often transfused without respecting the ABO compatibility, but influence of this practice on platelet transfusion outcome is not well established. In the prophylactic platelet transfusion set there are some questions unsolved as the platelet threshold to transfuse prior to specific procedures or surgery, and even if platelet transfusion is necessary for some specific procedures as autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. A challenging complication raised from multiple platelet transfusions is the platelet transfusion refractoriness. The study and management of this complication is often disappointing. In summary, although it is a widespread practice, platelet transfusion has still many controversial and unknown issues. The objective of this article is to review the current evidence on platelet transfusion practices, focusing on the controversial issues and challenges.

Predisposing factors for anti-D immune response in D- patients with chronic liver disease transfused with D+ platelet concentrates

BACKGROUND

Recent reports have indicated that the risk of anti-D alloimmunization following D-incompatible platelet (PLT) transfusion is low in hematology and oncology patients. We investigated the rate of anti-D alloimmunization in RhD-negative (D^- ) patients with chronic liver disease transfused with D⁺ platelet concentrates (PCs) and the factors involved, at a liver transplant (LT) center.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We reviewed the blood bank database from January 2003 to October 2016. D^- patients who had received D⁺ PLT transfusions were eligible if they had undergone antibody screening at least 28 days after the first D⁺ PC transfusion, had no previous or concomitant exposure to D⁺ blood products, and had not received anti-D immunoglobulins.

RESULTS

Six of the 56 eligible patients (10.7%) had anti-D antibodies. All had received whole blood-derived PCs. Four of 20 patients (20%) untransplanted or transfused before LT and only two of 36 patients (5.6%) transfused during or after LT produced anti-D antibodies. These two patients were on maintenance immunosuppression based on low-dose steroids and tacrolimus. The factors identified as significantly associated with anti-D immune response were the presence of red blood cell immune alloantibodies before D⁺ PLT transfusion (p = 0.003), and D⁺ PLT transfusion outside the operative and postoperative (5 days) periods for LT (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

D^- patients with chronic liver disease transfused with D⁺ PLTs before LT are at high risk of developing anti-D antibodies. Preventive measures should be considered for these patients.

Anti-D Alloimmunization after RhD-Positive Platelet Transfusion in RhD-Negative Women under 55 Years Diagnosed with Acute Leukemia: Results of a Retrospective Study

Background

Anti-D alloimmunization can occur when platelets from RhD-positive donors are transfused to RhD-negative patients, due to red blood cell residues in the platelet concentrates.

Methods

Our objective was to analyze the anti-D alloimmunization rate in a selected group of women under 55 years of age diagnosed with acute leukemia over an 18-year period. We focused the analysis on RhD-negative patients who received RhD-positive platelet transfusions.

Results

From January 1998 to October 2016, 382 women under 55 years were diagnosed with acute leukemia. A total of 56 patients were RhD-negative, and 48 (85.7%) received RhD-positive platelets. The median number of platelet concentrates transfused per patient was 23, and 48% of all platelet transfusions were RhD-positive. The 48 RhD-negative patients received a total of 949 RhD-positive platelet concentrates. Two patients developed anti-D: a 36-year-old woman with M3 acute myeloblastic leukemia and a 52-year-old patient with a secondary acute myeloblastic leukemia.

Conclusion

We conclude that there is a need for agreement in the transfusion guidelines on the recommendation of anti-D alloimmunization prophylaxis. We suggest a possible benefit in favor of anti-D prophylaxis in childbearing women with acute leukemia.

Cancer type predicts alloimmunization following RhD-incompatible RBC transfusions

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressed, RhD-negative oncology patients tend to have lower rates of sensitization to the D antigen when they receive transfusion with RhD-positive blood components. Clinical factors associated with alloimmunization to the D antigen in RhD-negative oncology patients when they receive transfusion with RhD-positive red blood cells (RBCs) have not been well defined.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a 4-year, retrospective analysis identifying RhD-negative oncology patients who received RhD-positive RBCs and were not previously alloimmunized to the D antigen. Age, sex, race, ABO group, primary oncology diagnosis, and numbers of RhD-incompatible RBC transfusions were recorded. The association between antibody formation and clinical factors was studied. The incidence of alloanti-D was calculated from a subsequent antibody-detection test performed at least 28 days after receipt of the first transfusion of RhD-positive RBCs.

RESULTS

In total, 545 RhD-negative oncology patients received 4295 RhD-positive RBC transfusions. Of these, 76 (14%) became alloimmunized to the D antigen. Diagnosis type was the only factor significantly associated with responder status. The logistic regression model indicated that patients who had myelodysplastic syndrome or solid malignancies were more likely to be responders than those who had acute leukemia.

CONCLUSION

We measured a 14% sensitization rate to the D antigen in our RhD-negative oncology population. The rate of alloimmunization was higher in patients who had solid cancers (22.6%) or myelodysplastic syndrome (23%) compared with those who had other hematologic malignancies (7%). Knowledge of diagnoses that predispose to RhD alloimmunization enables better utilization of RhD-negative RBCs during times of shortage.

Current trends in platelet transfusions practice: The role of ABO-RhD and human leukocyte antigen incompatibility

Platelet transfusions have contributed to the revolutionary modern treatment of hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. Despite the long-term application of platelet transfusion in therapeutics, all aspects of their optimal use (i.e., in cases of ABO and/or Rh (D incompatibility) have not been definitively determined yet. We reviewed the available data on transfusion practices and outcome in ABO and RhD incompatibility and platelet refractoriness due to anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies. Transfusion of platelets with major ABO-incompatibility is related to reduced posttransfusion platelet (PLT) count increments, compared to ABO-identical and minor, but still are equally effective in preventing clinical bleeding. ABO-minor incompatible transfusions pose the risk of an acute hemolytic reaction of the recipient that is not always related to high anti-A, B donor titers. ABO-identical PLT transfusion seems to be the most effective and safest therapeutic strategy. Exclusive ABO-identical platelet transfusion policy could be feasible, but alternative approaches could facilitate platelet inventory management. Transfusion of platelets from RhD positive donors to RhD negative patients is considered to be effective and safe though is associated with low rate of anti-D alloimmunization due to contaminating red blood cells. The prevention of D alloimmunization is recommended only for women of childbearing age. HLA alloimmunization is a major cause of platelet refractoriness. Managing patients with refractoriness with cross-matched or HLA-matched platelets is the current practice although data are still lacking for the efficacy of this practice in terms of clinical outcome. Leukoreduction contributes to the reduction of both HLA and anti-D alloimmunization.

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.

[Platelet transfusion and immunization anti-Rh1: implication for immunoprophylaxis]

Rhesus (Rh) antigens are not expressed on platelets but residual red cells carry the risk of anti-D iso-immunization in transfusion recipients of platelet concentrates (PC). The main theoretical risk associated with this reaction relates to female subjects due to potential obstetrical situations of maternal-foetal Rh incompatibility. Isogroup PC transfusion in this system is therefore advised. However, logistical constraints impose frequent Rh-incompatible transfusions that require the recommendation of anti-Rh immunoglobulin in a girl of childbearing age in this situation. This recommendation, already restricted to a group of patients deserves to be questioned over a decade after being issued. Data from published reports are difficult to interpret because of the heterogeneity of the few series (CP type, immune status, timing of biological tests) but the current techniques for preparing products and most common use of CP apheresis limited the risk of immunization. Moreover, platelet transfusions are particularly relevant to immunocompromised populations which, to what extent (heavy chemotherapy and/or hematopoietic stem cells recipients) seems to be protected from this risk. It is noteworthy that the clinical consequences that may be expected from such immunization are not reported. Although some authors emphasize significant isoimmunization rates (maximum 19%), the heterogeneous conditions and the lack of evidence of clinical consequence suggest evaluating the recommendations or revising them towards more targeted indications of seroprophylaxis.

Blood banking/immunohematology: special relevance to pediatric patients

Blood banking/immunohematology is an area of laboratory medicine that involves the preparation of blood and blood components for transfusion as well as the selection and monitoring of those components following transfusion. The preparation, modification, and indications of both traditional and newer products are described in this review, along with special considerations for neonates, patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, those with sickle cell disease, and others. Immunohematological techniques are critical in the provision of blood and blood products and are briefly discussed.

Platelet transfusion - the art and science of compromise

SUMMARY

Many modern therapies depend on platelet (PLT) transfusion support. PLTs have a 4- to 7-day shelf life and are frequently in short supply. In order to optimize the inventory PLTs are often transfused to adults without regard for ABO compatibility. Hemolytic reactions are infrequent despite the presence of 'high titer' anti-A and anti-B antibodies in some of the units. Despite the low risk for hemolysis, some centers provide only ABO identical PLTs to their recipients; this practice might have other beneficial outcomes that remain to be proven. Strategies to mitigate the risk of hemolysis and the clinical and laboratory outcomes following ABO-matched and mismatched transfusions will be discussed. Although the PLTs themselves do not carry the D antigen, a small number of RBCs are also transfused with every PLT dose. The quantity of RBCs varies by the type of PLT preparation, and even a small quantity of D+ RBCs can alloimmunize a susceptible D- host. Thus PLT units are labeled as D+/-, and most transfusion services try to prevent the transfusion of D+ PLTs to D- females of childbearing age. A similar policy for patients with hematological diseases is controversial, and the elements and mechanisms of anti-D alloimmunization will be discussed.

Platelet transfusions from D+ donors to D- patients: a 10-year follow-up study of 1014 patients

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend that platelets (PLTs) from D- donors should be given to D- patients. However, such evidence comes from studies with a limited number of included patients that reported an incidence of anti-D alloimmunization to be up to 19%. We thus decided to extend these findings by examining anti-D alloimmunization at our institution, where PLT transfusions from D+ donors are transfused to D- patients because of logistic constraints.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

From April 1999 to December 2009, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical and transfusion records of all D- patients who received PLT transfusions from D+ donors at our hospital. PLT concentrates (PCs) were obtained from apheresis and from whole blood donations. RhIG was not administered after the transfusion of PCs from D+ donors. The antibody screen test to detect anti-D was performed by low-ionic-strength solution indirect antiglobulin test using the gel test.

RESULTS

Our series comprises 1014 D- patients who received 5128 PLT transfusions from D+ donors (89% were pooled PCs). We had 315 (31.1%) patients who had a blood sample to analyze the presence of anti-D 4 or more weeks after the first D+ PLT transfusion with a median follow-up of 29 weeks (range, 4-718 weeks). Anti-D developed in 12 (3.8%) of these 315 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of anti-D alloimmunization of D- patients after receiving pooled PCs from D+ donors is low. The transfusion of D-incompatible pooled PCs without immunoprophylaxis to D- men or D- women without childbearing potential seems a reasonable and safe alternative.

Does a febrile reaction to platelets predispose recipients to red blood cell alloimmunization?

BACKGROUND

A variable effect of inflammation on alloimmunization to transfused red blood cells (RBCs) in mice has been recently reported. We investigated whether RBC alloimmunization in humans was affected by transfusion of blood products in temporal proximity to experiencing a febrile transfusion reaction (FTR) to platelets (PLTs), an event predominantly mediated by inflammatory cytokines.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Blood bank databases were used to identify patients who experienced an FTR or possible FTR to PLTs from August 2000 to March 2008 (FTR group). The control group of patients received a PLT transfusion on randomly selected dates without experiencing an FTR. The "event" was defined as the PLT transfusion that caused the FTR in the FTR group or the index PLT transfusion in the control group. The number of transfused blood products and their proximity to the event were recorded along with other recipient data. The primary endpoint was the rate of RBC alloimmunization between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were 190 recipients in the FTR group and 245 in the control group. Overall, the recipients in the control group were younger and received more blood products on the day of their event and over the subsequent 10 days. The alloimmunization rate among recipients in the FTR group was higher than in the control group (8% vs. 3%, respectively; p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary data support our hypothesis that recipient inflammation may affect RBC alloimmunization in humans; however, a more detailed understanding of the pathophysiologic association between inflammation and alloimmunization is required before definitive conclusions can be reached.

Blood component therapy

Blood component transfusion is integral in the treatment of infants and children by pediatricians, surgeons, intensivists, and hematologists/oncologists. Technologic advances in blood collection, separation, anticoagulation, and preservation have resulted in component preparation of red blood cells, platelets, white blood cells, and plasma, which are superior to whole blood used in the past. Advances in donor selection, infectious disease testing, leukoreduction filters, and gamma irradiation have made products safer. Physicians prescribing blood components should have a basic understanding of indications (and contraindications) and be cognizant of methods of preparation, proper storage conditions, and requirements for modification of blood products to prevent potential adverse effects.

Efficacy and Adverse Events of Platelet Transfusion Product-Specific Differences

SUMMARY: TWO PREPARATIONS ARE AVAILABLE FOR PLATELET TRANSFUSION: single-donor apheresis platelet concentrates (APC) and pooled platelet concentrates (PPC) prepared from 4-6 whole blood units. Clear advantages of APC over PPC are a markedly reduced donor exposure of recipients, and easier logistics when attempting a complete supply with ABO-identical and Rh-compatible platelet concentrates. Regulations should aim at complete ABO-identical platelet transfusions because major and minor ABO-incompatible platelet transfusions are probably associated with significantly increased morbidity and mortality. The main advantage of PPC is lower costs. Preparation of PPC is however inevitably accompanied by substantial wastage of plasma and red cells. Only major supraregional blood transfusion centers can guarantee full-coverage supply with ABO-identical and Rh-compatible PPC. Whether APC are more effective than PPC and associated with fewer septic platelet transfusion reactions as shown in some but not all studies, has to be examined in future prospective controlled trials.

Detection of anti-D in D- recipients transfused with D+ red blood cells

BACKGROUND

The D antigen is highly immunogenic, requiring only a small quantity of transfused red blood cells (RBCs) to cause alloimmunization in D- immunocompetent recipients. The relatively low sensitization rate in oncology patients transfused with D+ platelets is well documented. A study of the alloimmunization rate of primarily nononcology D- recipients transfused with D+ RBCs was undertaken.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Transfusion service records were examined to identify D- recipients who were not alloimmunized to the D antigen and who had a follow-up antibody screen performed at least 10 days after the initial D+ RBC transfusion(s). The age and sex of the recipients, date and number of D+ RBC transfusion(s) and their leukoreduction status, all subsequent serologic investigations, and the hospital ward where the units were issued were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 98 study-eligible recipients identified who received a total of 445 D+ RBC units. The mean follow-up length was 182 days. Most recipients (87%) had antibody screens performed more than 21 days after the initial D+ RBC transfusion. In total, 24 recipients made 44 new alloantibodies: 22 anti-D (22%), 11 anti-E, 5 anti-C, 2 anti-K, and 1 each of anti-Kp(a), anti-Jk(a), anti-Bg, and anti-Fy(b). The rate of anti-D alloimmunization among recipients of entirely leukoreduced D+ units was 13 percent (1/8). Reexposure to D+ RBCs after the initial bleeding episode did not increase the rate of alloimmunization.

CONCLUSIONS

The 22 percent rate of anti-D alloimmunization in patients requiring urgent RBC transfusion was intermediate between the rates previously reported for D- oncology patients transfused with D+ RBCs and that in immunocompetent volunteer recipients.

Anti-D alloimmunization after D-mismatched allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematologic diseases

BACKGROUND

The de novo development of anti-D after D-mismatched allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is a possibility that must be considered. The transfusion of D- blood components after AHSCT has been recommended but anti-D alloimmunization in this setting has been studied little. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze anti-D formation after D-mismatched AHSCT.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Thirty patients with a hematologic disease who underwent D-mismatched AHSCT were retrospectively studied. Support therapy included red blood cells (RBCs) and platelet (PLT) concentrates (PCs) from whole-blood donations and PLTs from apheresis. After AHSCT, patients received D+ PCs without administering Rh immunoglobulin (RhIG). An antibody screening to detect anti-D was performed by low-ionic-strength saline-indirect antiglobulin test with the tube test.

RESULTS

Fifteen D+ patients received stem cells (SCs) of D- donors and 15 D- patients received SCs of D+ donors. After AHSCT, patients received a median of 11.5 (range, 0-32) D- RBC units. D+ patients received 682 (83%) of 825 PLT units from D+ donors, and D- patients received 573 (85%) of 678 PLT units from D+ donors. None of the 30 patients developed anti-D after a median follow-up of 32 weeks (range, 4-310 weeks).

CONCLUSION

Anti-D alloimmunization after performing a D-mismatched AHSCT is infrequent in patients with hematologic diseases although patients receive D-mismatched PLT transfusions without RhIG administration.

Transfusions de concentrés plaquettaires Rhésus incompatible au CHU de Rouen : pratiques et conséquences

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines for distribution and use of blood products have been established for both blood transfusion institution and hospitals, in particular for the use of Rh (D)-incompatible platelet concentrates. The aim of this study was to evaluate: 1) the rate of attribution for the Rh (D)-incompatible platelets concentrates, 2) the immunisation prophylaxis practices, 3) the immunological consequences using short and medium term follow-up of transfused patients.

METHODS

Patients with Rh (D)-incompatible platelets concentrate administered during the year 2003 at Rouen University Hospital were retrospectively selected. Patients on transfusion were described. The relationship of various factors with the injection as well as the appearance of allo-immunization was statistically tested.

RESULTS

During a year, 280 Rh (D)-incompatible platelets concentrates were administered to 67 patients. Immunisation prophylaxis by injection of Ig anti-D was not systematically performed. Four immunizations in the Rhesus group system were identified: 2 against D antigen (Ag), 1 against E Ag and 1 against C Ag. Immunisations against D Ag occurred for two younger women considered as immunodeficient. Immunization prophylaxis was more frequent in poly-transfused patients. However no difference was observed for the other factors.

CONCLUSION

Compatibility concerning Rhesus (D) is not always possible. The immunization against red cells persists, in particular against the antigens of the Rhesus group system and moreover for the immunodeficient patients. Recommendations for immunization prophylaxis by injection of specific anti-D immune-globulin (Ig) could be reconsidered.

Transfusion management strategies: a survey of practicing pediatric hematology/oncology specialists

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the criteria used by pediatric oncologists for the transfusion of red blood cells and platelets to pediatric oncology patients.

PROCEDURE

Data regarding red blood cell and platelet transfusion practices were collected with an internet-based survey of physician members of the American Society for Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (ASPH/O). Respondents were asked to define platelet and red blood cell transfusion thresholds in a variety of clinical scenarios, and to describe criteria for dealing with cytomegalovirus (CMV) transmission from blood products, platelet dosing strategies, and prevention of RhD alloimmunization.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 31.4% (264 of 841). Of the respondents, 76% indicated that their institution had defined criteria for acceptable transfusion practice; of these respondents, 114 (57%) indicated that there were special guidelines for pediatric oncology patients. Examination of the distribution of threshold platelet counts and hemoglobin levels that would prompt transfusion indicated a wide range of transfusion practice in commonly encountered clinical scenarios. Similar variability in practice was evident in platelet dosing strategies, CMV prevention strategies, and in the use of anti-D in RhD-negative patients who received RhD-positive platelets.

CONCLUSIONS

This current survey demonstrates that transfusion practices vary widely among pediatric hematology/oncology specialists and that prospective clinical trials may be necessary to determine optimal criteria for blood product support in pediatric oncology patients.

Prevention of immunization to D+ red blood cells with red blood cell exchange and intravenous Rh immune globulin

BACKGROUND

Although young women who are D- occasionally receive unintentional transfusions with D+ red blood cells (RBCs), there are little data to assist with management of such an event. Two cases of D- girls transfused with D+ RBCs are reported. In an effort to prevent formation of anti-D, RBC exchange followed by administration of intravenous (IV) Rh immune globulin (RhIg) was used.

CASE REPORTS

Patient 1, a 56-kg, 16-year-old D- girl, was involved in a motor vehicle crash. She received 4 units of Group O uncrossmatched D+ RBCs. Thirty-six hours after admission, she underwent RBC exchange with 10 units of D- RBCs, followed by a total of 2718 microg of IV RhIg over 32 hours. Six months later, her antibody screen was negative. Patient 2, a 39-kg, 10-year-old D- girl with aplastic anemia, received 1 unit of D+ RBCs. She underwent RBC exchange on the same day with 5 units of D- RBCs, followed by a total of 900 microg of IV RhIg over 8 hours. Six months later her antibody screen was negative.

CONCLUSION

RBC exchange followed by a calculated dose of IV RhIg was successful in preventing allo-immunization to D. Several small studies suggest that both trauma and hematology patients may be less capable of becoming immunized with the transfusion of D+ blood components. Until these findings are more clearly defined, there will be times when prevention of immunization of any D- girl is desired. RBC exchange followed by RhIg appears to be one way to achieve this goal.

Transient anti rhesus alloantibody produced by graft after non-myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplant

BACKGROUND

We report the case of a patient who received an allogeneic transplant with peripheral blood compatible ABO, Rhesus mismatched progenitor cells and who developed an asymptomatic transient anti Rhesus alloimmunisation.

CASE REPORT

A 56-year-old man with renal cell carcinoma received a non-myeloablative allogeneic PBPC ABO compatible graft from his HLA-identical brother. Graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis consisted of cyclosporine alone. On day + 59, prior to any transfusion, a positive direct antiglobulin test (IgG++, C3d-) was detected. The indirect antiglobulin test (IAT) was considered doubtful, and IAT identification revealed the presence of an active anti Rhesus antibody (anti D specificity) in the patient's serum. This immunisation had no clinical consequence, with no acute hemolytic episode. Further monitoring showed negative antibody screening tests on day + 78.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge this is the first reported case of transient anti Rh (D) allo-immunisation after non-myeloablative allogeneic peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) transplant. The period of occurrence and the specificity of this antibody strongly suggest a donor cell origin.

Platelet transfusion in an infant leading to formation of anti-D: implications for immunoprophylaxis

BACKGROUND

The immature infant immune system rarely makes RBC alloantibodies; however, most studies confirming the absence of alloantibodies in infants have involved transfusions that were matched for one of the most immunogenic antigens, rhesus D. The potential for D- infants to develop anti-D is unknown. Specifically, this issue has not been analyzed for infants receiving whole-blood-derived PLTs from D+ donors. The importance of understanding such risk is underscored by the fact that anti-D formation can be prevented by the administration of Rh immunoglobulin.

CASE REPORT

A D- infant with congenital heart disease received two D-mismatched whole-blood-derived PLT units at 17 weeks of age. He did not receive Rh immunoglobulin prophylaxis. Upon a subsequent admission 13 months later, anti-D was identified in his plasma sample.

CONCLUSION

The case presented here demonstrates that a young infant can respond to less than 0.6 mL of D+ RBCs and documents the youngest patient to have developed a RBC alloantibody from a PLT transfusion. To prevent anti-D formation, we recommend administering Rh immunoglobulin to all D- pediatric patients that receive PLT transfusions from D+ donors [correction].

Non-ABO red blood cell alloantibodies following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Immune-mediated hemolysis is a well-recognized occurrence which complicates the period following a bone marrow transplant (BMT). However, although many studies have investigated the hemolytic anemia following ABO-incompatible BMT, data regarding the occurrence of alloantibodies against red blood cell (RBC) antigens other than ABO in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation are limited. In this review, we briefly analyze the most important non-ABO red blood cell (RBC) antigen systems involved in the development of post-BMT alloimmune hemolytic anemia, paying particular attention to the pathogenic mechanisms and the clinical significance of the alloantibodies involved. Among the non-ABO RBC antigens, RhD antigen is the one most frequently implicated in the development of post-BMT alloimmune hemolytic anemia. Although less frequent than hemolysis following transplants with ABO incompatibility, non-ABO-incompatible allograft hemolysis may severely complicate the post-BMT period creating difficult clinical management issues. For this reason, we advise careful pre-transplant donor and recipient checks for the most important RBC antigen systems and close post-BMT immunohematological monitoring in those patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant with RBC antigen incompatibility.

Probability of anti-D development in D- patients receiving D+ RBCs

BACKGROUND

In some situations, the administration of D+ RBCs to D- patients is necessary. The probability of a subsequent anti-D formation is assumed to be around 80 percent, a figure based primarily on studies in healthy volunteers. It was hypothesized that patients requiring blood transfusion have a much lower probability of developing antibodies.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed whereby 78 D- patients were evaluated for the development of RBC antibodies after administration of D+ RBCs. For the analysis of the cross-sectional observations, parametric models were used for interval-censored data.

RESULTS

Anti-D was detected in 16 of 78 patients. Considering the individual patient's inspection times, the calculated probability of developing antibody following D+ RBC supply was shown to be below 41.7 percent (upper 95% confidence bound) and estimated as 30.4 percent. The data hinted toward an inverse correlation between the number of transfused units and the probability of antibody formation. Interestingly, 6 of these 16 patients developed additional IgG autoantibody. In 3 of those cases, evidence for prolonged hemolysis was found.

CONCLUSION

The actual frequency of antibody formation in our patients is much lower than assumed. On the other hand, prolonged hemolysis probably induced by additional autoreactive antibodies might occur. This possible complication has not yet been addressed. Further studies might reveal whether a less restricted transfusion policy with respect to D matching is justified in selected patients.

Absence of D- alloimmunization in AIDS patients receiving D-mismatched RBCs

BACKGROUND

More than 80 percent of D- patients who receive D+ blood become alloimmunized to the D antigen. Anemia occurs in most AIDS patients at some point in the disease. D- patients with AIDS may require blood transfusion and, during times of blood shortage, may receive D+ RBCs. They would be expected to become alloimmunized to the d antigen.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The records of the transfusion service between January 1996 and July 2000 were reviewed for D- patients who received D+ blood. IATs were performed before the initial transfusion and subsequently when the patient required further RBC transfusion.

RESULTS

Eight D- AIDS patients who received multiple transfusions (three women and five men; age range, 31-44 years; mean, 44 years) who received between 2 and 11 units (mean, 6.25) of D+ RBCs were identified. Antibody screens were performed at 8 to 65 weeks after transfusion. It was found that none of the eight D- AIDS patients developed anti-D. ABO antibodies were found as expected. During the same period, it was found that six D- patients admitted with other diagnoses who received 1 to 9 units of D+ RBCs, all developed anti-D within 7 to 19 weeks of transfusion.

CONCLUSION

Patients with AIDS may not form alloantibodies to the D antigen. This may be attributable to their immunodepressed state, particularly to the decrease in CD4+ T lymphocytes. Therefore, during blood shortages, transfusion of D+ blood to D- AIDS patients may be without any subsequent consequence.

Alloimmunization to RhD antigen in RhD-incompatible haemopoietic cell transplants with non-myeloablative conditioning

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Following exposure to RhD antigen, anti-D develops in up to 20% of RhD-negative patients on chemotherapy, but seldom in the recipients of haemopoietic cell (HC) or solid-organ transplants. Data on anti-D formation come from HC transplants using myeloablative conditioning; no data are available for the non-myeloablative HC transplants. The two types of transplant have a distinct isohaemagglutinin disappearance rate and different kinetics of post-transplant red-cell engraftment. The objective of the study was to analyse anti-D formation in patients receiving non-myeloablative transplants from RhD-incompatible donors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients were analysed: nine RhD-negative recipients of RhD-positive haemopoietic cells; and seven RhD-positive recipients of a graft from a RhD-negative donor. Patients were sequentially tested for irregular antibodies, as well as donor/recipient chimerism by cytogenetics and analysis of DNA variable-number tandem repeats.

RESULTS

Despite having received 7-499 ml of D-positive red cells, none of the RhD-negative recipients developed anti-D. The median follow-up was 202 days. By contrast, anti-D was identified in one of seven RhD-positive recipients of an RhD-negative graft.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-myeloablative conditioning containing fludarabine and/or Campath 1H, with cyclosporin A given post-transplant, effectively prevents anti-D formation in RhD-negative recipients of a RhD-positive graft. However, anti-D developed in an RhD-positive recipient of an RhD-negative graft, who was also exposed to RhD-positive blood products before and after the transplant. Transfusion of RhD-positive products should be avoided in such patients.