Gender-neutral donor deferral policies: experience in Argentina implementing individual risk-assessment policies

Assessing HIV trends among blood donors in five Brazilian blood centers: The impact of individual donor assessment

BACKGROUND

In many countries, including Brazil, time-based blood donation deferral policies for gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) have been replaced by individual donor assessment (IDA). We examined HIV prevalence and incidence among first-time (FTD) and repeat donors (RD), comparing data from ~3.5 years before and after the IDA policy implementation in 2020.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-IV-Pediatric (REDS-IV-P) Brazil component collects blood donor screening data from five public centers. From January 2017 to December 2023, we report frequencies, rates, and 95% confidence interval (CI) of confirmed HIV-positive donations among FTD, HIV NAT-yield rates for FTD and RD, and the incidence of confirmed HIV among RD before and after the policy change. We also report multivariable regression analysis results.

RESULTS

Confirmed HIV prevalence in FTD was 79 per 100,000 (95% CI 72-87) before and 100 per 100,000 (95% CI 90-109) after the policy change, with differences between centers. HIV NAT-yield rates decreased for RD (p = .0025), with no change for FTD (p = .3). HIV incidence in RD did not increase (12.4 [95% CI: 11.1-13.9] vs. 10.3 [95% CI: 9-11.7] per 100,000 person-years).

DISCUSSION

Our findings showed no significant difference in HIV incidence among RD. Although HIV prevalence among FTD increased, there was no rise in HIV NAT-yield donations. The analysis highlights challenges in interpreting changes within specific groups and blood centers, underscoring the importance of multicenter monitoring of transfusion-transmitted infections.

Syphilis in a blood bank in Argentina: Prevalence trends and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, there has been a worrying increase in the prevalence of syphilis. Blood banks have a major role in monitoring the trend of these events, despite the bias due to the altruistic donation strategy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the seroprevalence of syphilis and analyse its association with defined risk factors among blood donors at the regional blood center at Hospital Prof. Dr. J. P. Garrahan, period 2016-2022.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Donor screening was performed with treponemal and non-treponemal tests to determine the prevalence of active and past syphilis. Sociodemographic characteristics of donors were analysed and the association with potential risk factors was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 72 874 donations were processed during the study period. The overall prevalence of specific anti-Treponema pallidum antibodies was 0.69% (95% CI = 0.63-0.75). Active syphilis seroprevalence was 0.30% (95% CI = 0.25-0.33). Not active syphilis seroprevalence was 0.39% (95% CI = 0.35-0.44). Anti-T. pallidum seroprevalence among first-time donations was 1.26% (95% CI = 1.14-1.38) while in repeat donations it was 0.16% (95% CI = 0.12-0.21). In univariate analysis, we found an association between syphilis and having a history of any sexually transmitted infection (OR: 5.09, 95% CI = 2.20-11.70, p < 0.01) and being first-time donors (OR: 3.48, 95% CI = 1.70-7.09, p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Although the overall prevalence of syphilis is 0.69%, among repeat donors prevalence as low as 0.16% was found. This demonstrates the need to maintain and improve screening strategies and promotion of voluntary, altruistic and repeat donation.

Virological safety of the UK blood supply in the era of individual risk assessments and HIV PrEP

A more individualised donor selection policy was implemented in the UK in 2021, which replaced the previous 3-month deferral for men who have sex with men (MSM). Other blood services have a variety of policies in place to ensure the virological safety of blood components, ranging from an indefinite ban on MSM, to a defined period of exclusion, or to an individualised risk assessment that is not based on gender or sexual orientation. Justification of these policies should be based on scientific evidence including assessment of lengths of virological window periods, infectious disease epidemiology within donor populations and donation screening assay sensitivities. Developments in molecular technology and assays which can detect both antibodies and antigens in the very early stages of infection have significantly reduced the risk in most developed countries. However, the increasing usage of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent acquisition of HIV infection after possible high-risk sexual contact within the UK blood donor population has been recently noted. It has brought with it new diagnostic challenges within blood screening, notably possible non-detection of HIV RNA and serological markers following PrEP use despite potential infectivity. The use of other testing strategies such as detection of HIV DNA and screening for non-declared PrEP usage should be investigated further.

Perceived risk of HIV transmission by blood transfusion among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) in Australia

BACKGROUND

In Australia, men who have sex with men (MSM) are deferred from blood donation for 3 months from last sexual contact. Internationally, deferral policies for MSM are evolving in the direction of expanded inclusivity in response to community expectations. To inform future policy options, we assessed perceptions of the risk of HIV transmission from blood transfusion among Australian MSM.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Flux is an online prospective cohort of Australian gay and bisexual men (cis or trans, regardless of their sexual history) and other men who have had sex with men (gbMSM). We included questions on blood donation rules, window period (WP) duration, infectivity of blood from people with HIV on treatment and attitudes to more detailed questioning of sexual practices in the regular survey of Flux participants and conducted a descriptive analysis of responses.

RESULTS

Of 716 Flux participants in 2019, 703 responded to the blood donation questions. The mean age was 43.7 years (SD 13.6 years). Overall, 74% were willing to confidentially respond to specific sexual behavior questions, such as the last time they had sex and the type of sex they had, in order to be considered eligible to donate blood. The majority (92%) of participants correctly assessed the duration of the WP as less than 1 month. When asked whether transfusion of blood from a donor with HIV and an undetectable viral load could transmit HIV, just under half (48%) correctly said yes.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests Australian gbMSM are generally comfortable with answering more detailed questions regarding sexual activity during the assessment to donate, indicating they would do so honestly. gbMSM are knowledgeable about the WP duration, important for their ability to correctly self-assess their HIV risk. However, half of participants incorrectly assessed the transmissibility by blood transfusion from an HIV positive person with an undetectable viral load, suggesting the need for a targeted education campaign.

Willingness and eligibility to donate blood under 12-month and 3-month deferral policies among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Ontario, Canada

In Canada, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) are a population that are willing to donate blood, if eligible, but have a history of ineligibility and deferrals due to concerns that their blood poses an increased risk of HIV entering the blood supply. Our objective was to examine the proportion of GBMSM who are willing and eligible to donate under the 12-month deferral policy (implemented in 2016) and the 3-month deferral policy (implemented in 2019). Data for this study comes from the #iCruise study, a mixed cohort study designed to examine sexual health outreach experiences through online services and mobile apps among GBMSM in Ontario. A total of 910 participants were recruited between July 2017 and January 2018. Eligibility criteria include identify as male (cisgender or transgender); at least 14 years old; having had sex with a man in the previous year or identifying as sexually/romantically attracted to other men or identifying as gay, bisexual, queer or two-spirit; and living or working in Ontario or having visited Ontario four or more times in the past year. Participants completed a baseline and a follow-up questionnaire. A subset of #iCruise participants (n = 447) further completed this questionnaire. Willingness and eligibility to donate blood were assessed under 12-month and 3-month deferral policies. Of the 447 GBMSM surveyed, 309 (69.1%) reported a general interest in donating blood. 109 (24.4%) GBMSM were willing, 75 (16.7%) were eligible, and 24 (5.4%) were both willing and eligible to donate blood under the 12-month deferral policy. Under the 3-month deferral policy, willingness and eligibility to donate blood increased significantly to 42.3% and 29.3%, respectively. The percent of GBMSM who were both willing and eligible to donate blood also increased significantly to 12.3% under the 3-month deferral policy. The increase in willingness to donate blood varied by age, ethnicity, and geographic residence of participants whereas the increase in eligibility to donate blood varied by education level of participants. Under the 3-month deferral policy, GBMSM who were 50 years or older, identified as bisexual or other, had a lower education level, and who were not 'out' to others were more likely to be eligible to donate. GBMSM who reported a general interest in donating blood were more likely to be willing to donate blood under both deferral policies. The most common reason for not being interested in donating blood was the MSM deferral policy itself; many participants interpreted the policy as discriminatory for 'singling out' GBMSM or self-assed themselves as ineligible. Among study participants, both willingness and eligibility to donate blood was significantly higher under the 3-month deferral policy. The results suggest that a time-based reduction to a 3-month deferral policy is impactful but limited. Future research should measure GBMSM's willingness and eligibility under the individual risk-based assessment (to be implemented in 2022).

Validation of new, gender-neutral questions on recent sexual behaviors among plasma donors and men who have sex with men

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Several blood services might eventually interview donors with gender-neutral questions on sexual behaviors to improve the inclusivity of blood donation. We tested two ways (i.e., "scenarios") of asking donors about their recent sexual behaviors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study comprised 126 regular source plasma donors and 102 gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM), including 73 cis-gbMSM (i.e., the "cis-gbMSM subgroup," which excluded nonbinary, genderqueer, and trans individuals). In Scenario 1, participants were asked if, in the last 3 months, they "have […] had a new sexual partner or more than one sexual partner." In Scenario 2, they were asked "Have you had a new sexual partner?" and "have you had more than one sexual partner?". Validation questions included more specific questions on the type of partners and sexual activity.

RESULTS

Among plasma donors, sensitivity was 100.0% for both scenarios; specificity was 100.0% and 99.1% for Scenarios 1 and 2, respectively. Among gbMSM, sensitivity was 74.5% and 82.9% for Scenarios 1 and 2, respectively; specificity was 100.0% for both scenarios. Among cis-gbMSM, sensitivity was 88.6% and 100.0% for Scenarios 1 and 2, respectively; specificity was 100.0% for both scenarios. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of Scenario 2 was significantly higher than that of Scenario 1 among gbMSM and in the cis-gbMSM subgroup (all p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Scenario 2 questions performed well among plasma donors and cis-gbMSM, but less so in the broader gbMSM population.

Seronegative human T-cell lymphotropic virus 1 carriers in blood banks: A potential viral source for silent transmission?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Transfusion-transmitted viruses count among the greatest threats to blood safety. In Argentina, current laws oblige testing all donated blood for the presence of antibodies against human T-cell lymphotropic viruses 1 and 2 (HTLV-1/2). In endemic zones of the country, a high rate of seronegative HTLV-1 individuals with clear evidence of infection because of symptoms and/or presence of tax sequences of HTLV-1 and/or IgG anti-Tax antibodies has been recently described. Migration from endemic to nonendemic zones of Argentina is very frequent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During a 1-year period, in the blood bank of Córdoba city, we performed molecular screening of all donors who were born in or arose from endemic zones for HTLV-1/2 in Argentina and neighbouring countries.

RESULTS

By screening 219 bp of HTLV-1/2 tax gene, 0.6% (2/317) of the blood donors proved to be positive for HTLV-1 tax sequence. One of the donors presented anti-Tax antibodies, demonstrating the transcriptional activity of the tax gene, and the other donor was also positive for LTR and pol gene sequences. The HTLV-1 genetic analysis of the LTR sequence determined that it belonged to the Cosmopolitan subtype HTLV-1aA.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest potential limitations of some currently approved screening assays for HTLV-1 detection applied in some donor populations and the possibility of an HTLV-1 seronegative carrier state with the potential for silent transmission by blood.

Risk of transfusion-related acute lung injury and human immunodeficiency virus associated with donations from trans donors in Quebec, Canada

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Blood operator must establish selection criteria according to the populations at risk of blood-related infections and complications. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the risks of transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) associated with donations from trans persons.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Donor screening data from Héma-Québec were used. The risks of TRALI and HIV were estimated based on internal data and assumptions derived from the literature. The risk was assessed under four scenarios: a most likely scenario, an optimistic scenario and two pessimistic scenarios. All scenarios assumed no prior screening for trans donors.

RESULTS

The trans population comprised 134 donors, including 94 (70.1%) trans men. Of the 134 donors, 58 (43.3%) were deferred from donating a blood-derived product because of an ongoing gender-affirming genital surgery, and the remaining 76 (56.7%) were eligible donors. The risk of having a TRALI-causing donation, given that it comes from a trans man, was estimated at one every 115-999 years for all scenarios. The risk of having an HIV-contaminated donation, given that it comes from a trans woman, was estimated at one every 1881-37,600 years for all scenarios.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that donations from trans persons are associated with a negligible risk of TRALI and HIV.

Sexual risk behavior questions: Understanding and mitigating donor discomfort

BACKGROUND

Blood operators are working to improve donor screening and eligibility for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM), and trans and nonbinary donors. Many consider screening all donors for specific sexual risk behaviors to be a more equitable approach that maintains the safety of the blood supply. Feasibility considerations with this change include ensuring donor understanding of additional sexual behavior questions and minimizing donor loss due to discomfort.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Qualitative one-on-one interviews were conducted with Canadian whole blood and plasma donors (N = 40). A thematic analysis was conducted to assess participants' understandings of the questions, examine their comfort/discomfort, and identify strategies to mitigate donor discomfort.

RESULTS

All participants understood what the sexual behavior questions were asking and thought the questions were appropriate. Themes related to comfort/discomfort include: their expectations of donor screening, social norms that they bring to donation, whether their answer felt like personal disclosure, knowing the reasons for the question, trusting confidentiality, confidence in knowing their sexual partner's behavior, and potential for the question to be discriminatory. Strategies to mitigate discomfort include: providing an explanation for the questions, forewarning donors of these questions, reducing ambiguity, and using a self-administered questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

While many blood operators and regulators view the move to sexual behavior-based screening for all donors as a significant paradigmatic shift, donors may not perceive additional sexual behavior questions as a significant change to their donation experience. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies to mitigate donor discomfort.

Blood Donation and COVID-19: Reconsidering the 3-Month Deferral Policy for Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men

In April 2020, in light of COVID-19-related blood shortages, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reduced the deferral period for men who have sex with men (MSM) from its previous duration of 1 year to 3 months.Although originally born out of necessity, the decades-old restrictions on MSM donors have been mitigated by significant advancements in HIV screening, treatment, and public education. The severity of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic-and the urgent need for safe blood products to respond to such crises-demands an immediate reconsideration of the 3-month deferral policy for MSM.We review historical HIV testing and transmission evidence, discuss the ethical ramifications of the current deferral period, and examine the issue of noncompliance with donor deferral rules. We also propose an eligibility screening format that involves an individual risk-based screening protocol and, unlike current FDA guidelines, does not effectively exclude donors on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. Our policy proposal would allow historically marginalized community members to participate with dignity in the blood donation process without compromising blood donation and transfusion safety outcomes.