Risk-based decision making in transfusion medicine

Transfusion-transmitted Babesia spp.: a changing landscape of epidemiology, regulation, and risk mitigation

Babesia spp. are tick-borne parasites with a global distribution and diversity of vertebrate hosts. Over the next several decades, climate change is expected to impact humans, vectors, and vertebrate hosts and change the epidemiology of Babesia. Although humans are dead-end hosts for tick-transmitted Babesia, human-to-human transmission of Babesia spp. from transfusion of red blood cells and whole blood-derived platelet concentrates has been reported. In most patients, transfusion-transmitted Babesia (TTB) results in a moderate-to-severe illness. Currently, in North America, most cases of TTB have been described in the United States. TTB cases outside North America are rare, but case numbers may change over time with increased recognition of babesiosis and as the epidemiology of Babesia is impacted by climate change. Therefore, TTB is a concern of microbiologists working in blood operator settings, as well as in clinical settings where transfusion occurs. Microbiologists play an important role in deploying blood donor screening assays in Babesia endemic regions, identifying changing risks for Babesia in non-endemic areas, investigating recipients of blood products for TTB, and drafting TTB policies and guidelines. In this review, we provide an overview of the clinical presentation and epidemiology of TTB. We identify approaches and technologies to reduce the risk of collecting blood products from Babesia-infected donors and describe how investigations of TTB are undertaken. We also describe how microbiologists in Babesia non-endemic regions can assess for changing risks of TTB and decide when to focus on laboratory-test-based approaches or pathogen reduction to reduce TTB risk.

Leveraging Donor Populations to Study the Epidemiology and Pathogenesis of Transfusion-Transmitted and Emerging Infectious Diseases

The tragedy of transfusion-associated hepatitis and HIV spurred a decades-long overhaul of the regulatory oversight and practice of blood transfusion. Consequent to improved donor selection, testing, process control, clinical transfusion practice and post-transfusion surveillance, transfusion in the United States and other high-income countries is now a very safe medical procedure. Nonetheless, pathogens continue to emerge and threaten the blood supply, highlighting the need for a proactive approach to blood transfusion safety. Blood donor populations and the global transfusion infrastructure are under-utilized resources for the study of infectious diseases. Blood donors are large, demographically diverse subsets of general populations for whom cross-sectional and longitudinal samples are readily accessible for serological and molecular testing. Blood donor collection networks span diverse geographies, including in low- and middle-income countries, where agents, especially zoonotic pathogens, are able to emerge and spread, given limited tools for recognition, surveillance and control. Routine laboratory storage and transportation, coupled with data capture, afford access to rich epidemiological data to assess the epidemiology and pathogenesis of established and emerging infections. Subsequent to the State of the Science in Transfusion Medicine symposium in 2022, our working group (WG), "Emerging Infections: Impact on Blood Science, the Blood Supply, Blood Safety, and Public Health" elected to focus on "leveraging donor populations to study the epidemiology and pathogenesis of transfusion-transmitted and emerging infectious diseases." The 5 landmark studies span (1) the implication of hepatitis C virus in post-transfusion hepatitis, (2) longitudinal evaluation of plasma donors with incident infections, thus informing the development of a widely used staging system for acute HIV infection, (3) explication of the dynamics of early West Nile Virus infection, (4) the deployment of combined molecular and serological donor screening for Babesia microti, to characterize its epidemiology and infectivity and facilitate routine donor screening, and (5) national serosurveillance for SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The studies highlight the interplay between infectious diseases and transfusion medicine, including the imperative to ensure blood transfusion safety and the broader application of blood donor populations to the study of infectious diseases.

Risk of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease transmission by blood transfusion in Australia

Background and Objectives

Most of the 233 worldwide cases of variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD) have been reported in the United Kingdom and 3 have been associated with transfusion‐transmission. To mitigate the potential vCJD risk to blood safety, Australian Red Cross Lifeblood imposes restrictions on blood donation from people with prior residency in, or extended travel to, the United Kingdom during the risk period 1980–1996. We have modified a previously published methodology to estimate the transfusion‐transmission risk of vCJD associated with fresh component transfusion in Australia if the UK residence deferral was removed.

Materials and Methods

The prevalence of current pre‐symptomatic vCJD infection in the United Kingdom by age at infection and genotype was estimated based on risk of exposure to the bovine spongiform encephalopathy agent for the period 1980–1996. These results were used to estimate the age‐specific prevalence of undiagnosed, pre‐symptomatic vCJD in the Australian population in the current year due to prior UK residency or travel. The primary model outputs were the 2020 vCJD risks/unit of vCJD contamination, transfusion‐transmission (infections) and clinical cases.

Results

The overall (prior UK residency in and travel to United Kingdom, 1980–1996) mean risk of contamination per unit was 1 in 29,900,000. The risks of resulting vCJD transmission (infection) and clinical case were 1 in 389,000,000 and 1 in 1,450,000,000, respectively.

Conclusion

Our modelling suggests that removing the Lifeblood donation deferral for travel to, or UK residence, would result in virtually no increased risk of vCJD transfusion‐transmission and would be a safe and effective strategy for increasing the donor base.

How do I think about blood donor eligibility criteria for medical conditions?

Every blood center must determine blood donor eligibility criteria for donors with medical conditions, often based on very limited published data and variable practice. This manuscript briefly outlines possible impacts of donor medical conditions on donor and recipient safety and product quality, and describes the multidisciplinary approach used in Canada to think about donor criteria issues. Many years of experience are distilled into practical considerations in determining criteria, possible sources of information, and factors for successful change implementation, to hopefully assist medical and technical staff engaged in decision-making around donor eligibility.

West Nile virus and blood transfusion safety: A European perspective

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is a growing concern for the transmission of arboviral infections by blood transfusion in Europe. However, no assessment of the risk of transmission through all European blood supplies has been reported. Risk regulations at a European level should take differences in local transmission risk and the risk of transmission by travelling donors into consideration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A risk model and publicly available tool were developed to calculate the risk of transmission by all European blood supplies for arboviral outbreaks within Europe. Data on individual European blood supplies from Council of Europe reports and inter-European travel data from EUROSTAT were used to populate this model.

RESULTS

Each neuroinvasive case of WNV reported in Europe will on average result in 0·43 (95%CI: 0·32-0·55) infected blood product by locally infected donors and 0·010 (95%CI: 0·006-0·015) infected products by travelling donors. On basis of the 1373 neuroinvasive human WNV cases reported in the outbreak of 2018, it is estimated that without safety interventions this outbreak would have resulted in 708 (95%CI: 523-922) infected components derived from resident donors. Noncompliance to European regulations, which requires donor deferral or testing of donors who visited WNV-infected areas, would have resulted in 7.4 (95%CI: 4·7-11·1) infected blood components derived from infectious travelling donors exposed in outbreak areas throughout Europe.

CONCLUSION

The risk of WNV transmission by a local outbreak is on average 113 times (95%CI: 95-139), so two orders of magnitude higher than the risk of transmission by travelling donors in Europe.

Science in action? A critical view of UK blood donation deferral policy and men who have sex with men

The rules that govern blood donation vary globally. Some potential blood donors are ineligible for immediate blood donation, and as such are deferred until such time that they become eligible. This practice, the blood donation deferral period, is intended to reduce the risk of blood-borne infections being transfused into a blood product-recipient. As blood screening technologies improve, the risk of an infected blood product remaining undetected decreases-and so too have the deferral periods for certain donors. Much has been made of the importance of an evidence-based, scientific approach to protecting blood product-recipients. However, these deferrals are controversial. What exactly determines the blood donation deferral period? This article argues that blood donation deferral periods are not merely the result of enacting empirical data. Instead, the deferral periods represent a negotiation between scientific evidence, experts, politically expedient narratives, institutionalised risk aversion, as well as more mundane concerns such as operational feasibility. As a case study, I examine how the UK Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs changed the 12-month deferral period for blood donation from men who have sex with men to a 3-month deferral period.

A WHO tool for risk-based decision making on blood safety interventions

Background

Risk‐based decision making is increasingly recognized as key to support national blood policy makers and blood operators concerning the implementation of safety interventions, especially to address emerging infectious threats and new technology opportunities. There is an urgent need for practical decision support tools, especially for low‐ and middle‐income countries that may not have the financial or technical capability to develop risk models. WHO supported the development of such a tool for blood safety. The tool enables users to perform both a quantitative Multi‐Criteria Decision Assessment and a novel step‐by‐step qualitative assessment.

Study Design and Methods

This paper summarizes the content, functionalities, and added value of the new WHO tool. A fictitious case study of a safety intervention to reduce the risk of HIV transmission by transfusion was used to demonstrate the use and usefulness of the tool.

Results

Application of the tool highlighted strengths and weaknesses of both the quantitative and qualitative approaches. The quantitative approach facilitates assessment of the robustness of the decision but lacks nuances and interpretability especially when multiple constraints are taken into consideration. Conversely, while unable to provide an assessment of robustness, the step‐by‐step qualitative approach helps structuring the thought process and argumentation for a preferred intervention in a systematic manner.

Conclusion

The relative strengths and weaknesses of the quantitative and step‐by‐step qualitative approach to risk‐based decision making are complementary and mutually enhancing. A combination of the two approaches is therefore advisable to support the selection of appropriate blood safety interventions for a particular setting.

Review of current transfusion therapy and blood banking practices

Transfusion Medicine is a dynamically evolving field. Recent high-quality research has reshaped the paradigms guiding blood transfusion. As increasing evidence supports the benefit of limiting transfusion, guidelines have been developed and disseminated into clinical practice governing optimal transfusion of red cells, platelets, plasma and cryoprecipitate. Concepts ranging from transfusion thresholds to prophylactic use to maximal storage time are addressed in guidelines. Patient blood management programs have developed to implement principles of patient safety through limiting transfusion in clinical practice. Data from National Hemovigilance Surveys showing dramatic declines in blood utilization over the past decade demonstrate the practical uptake of current principles guiding patient safety. In parallel with decreasing use of traditional blood products, the development of new technologies for blood transfusion such as freeze drying and cold storage has accelerated. Approaches to policy decision making to augment blood safety have also changed. Drivers of these changes include a deeper understanding of emerging threats and adverse events based on hemovigilance, and an increasing healthcare system expectation to align blood safety decision making with approaches used in other healthcare disciplines.

Hepatitis E Virus Infection in Blood Donors and Risk to Patients in the United States and Canada

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is the most common cause of acute hepatitis worldwide including large water-borne outbreaks, zoonotic infections and transfusion transmissions. Several countries have initiated or are considering blood donor screening in response to high HEV-RNA donation prevalence leading to transfusion-transmission risk. Because HEV transmission is more common through food sources, the efficacy of blood donor screening alone may be limited. HEV-nucleic acids in 101 489 blood donations in the United States and Canada were studied. A risk-based decision-making framework was used to evaluate the quantitative risks and cost-benefit of HEV-blood donation screening in Canada comparing three scenarios: no screening, screening blood for all transfused patients or screening blood for only those at greatest risk. HEV-RNA prevalence in the United States was one per 16 908 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1:5786-1:81987), whereas Canadian HEV-RNA prevalence was one per 4615 (95% CI, 1:2579-1:9244). Although 4-fold greater, Canadian HEV-RNA prevalence was not significantly higher than in the United States. Viral loads ranged from 20 to 3080 international units per mL; all successfully typed infections were genotype 3. No HEV-RNA false-positive donations were identified for 100 percent specificity. Without donation screening, heart and lung transplant recipients had the greatest HEV-infection risk (1:366962) versus kidney transplant recipients with the lowest (1:2.8 million) at costs of $225 546 to $561 810 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for partial or universal screening, respectively. Higher cost per QALY would be expected in the United States. Thus, HEV prevalence in North America is lower than in countries performing blood donation screening, and if implemented, is projected to be costly under any scenario.

Prevention of transfusion-transmitted infections

Since the 1970s, introduction of serological assays targeting virus-specific antibodies and antigens has been effective in identifying blood donations infected with the classic transfusion-transmitted infectious agents (TTIs; hepatitis B virus [HBV], HIV, human T-cell lymphotropic virus types I and II, hepatitis C virus [HCV]). Subsequently, progressive implementation of nucleic acid-amplification technology (NAT) screening for HIV, HCV, and HBV has reduced the residual risk of infectious-window-period donations, such that per unit risks are <1 in 1 000 000 in the United States, other high-income countries, and in high-incidence regions performing NAT. NAT screening has emerged as the preferred option for detection of newer TTIs including West Nile virus, Zika virus (ZIKV), and Babesia microti Although there is continual need to monitor current risks due to established TTI, ongoing challenges in blood safety relate primarily to surveillance for emerging agents coupled with development of rapid response mechanisms when such agents are identified. Recent progress in development and implementation of pathogen-reduction technologies (PRTs) provide the opportunity for proactive rather than reactive response to blood-safety threats. Risk-based decision-making tools and cost-effectiveness models have proved useful to quantify infectious risks and place new interventions in context. However, as evidenced by the 2015 to 2017 ZIKV pandemic, a level of tolerable risk has yet to be defined in such a way that conflicting factors (eg, theoretical recipient risk, blood availability, cost, and commercial interests) can be reconciled. A unified approach to TTIs is needed, whereby novel tests and PRTs replace, rather than add to, existing interventions, thereby ameliorating cost and logistical burden to blood centers and hospitals.