Evidence-Based Policy and Practice Leads to Changes in the Criteria for MSM to Donate Blood

Problems with precaution: the transfusion medicine experience

The precautionary principle is a dominant paradigm governing risk-based decision-making. Today, there are increasing pressures to re-examine aggressive precautionary approaches, and to assess how the principle should be applied in the modern system. In this paper, we examined three key applications of precautionary approaches in the field of transfusion medicine to provide insight into the risks and benefits of these approaches. The three case studies examined were the donor deferral policies to safeguard against transfusion transmission of human immunodeficiency virus, variant Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, and, lastly, xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus. Characterization of precautionary applications was conducted using an embedded case study design. Our findings indicate that transfusion transmission mitigation strategies have become increasingly aggressive in the face of theoretical risks. In contrast, the review processes for implementation and reversal of precautionary policies have been slow, and historical donor deferral policies are still in place today. Application of precautionary approaches has proved challenging with both benefits and pitfalls. In light of emerging threats to the blood system, policy-makers should consider the implementation of frameworks to guide the appropriate application of precaution in transfusion medicine in the future.

Is having sex with other men a risk factor for transfusion-transmissible infections in male blood donors in Western countries? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although increased prevalence of transfusion transmissible infections (TTI) among "men who have sex with men" (MSM) has been well documented, the exclusion of MSM as blood donors is contested. The aim of this systematic review is to find studies that describe the risk of TTI in MSM blood donors.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cinahl, and Web of Science, and used GRADE for determining evidence quality. We included studies comparing MSM and non-MSM blood donors (or people eligible to give blood), living in areas most relevant for our Blood Service.

RESULTS

Out of 18 987 articles, 14 observational studies were included. Two studies directly compared MSM with non-MSM donors showing that MSM donors have a statistically significant higher risk of HIV-1 infections. In one of these studies it was shown that this was related to recent (< 12 months) MSM contact. In two additional studies no evidence was shown in favour of a certain deferral period for MSM. Ten studies, applying permanent deferral for MSM, compared infected versus non-infected donors. One study found that MSM is a statistically significant risk factor for HIV-1 infection in blood donors. For other TTI such as HBV or HCV, an increased risk of infection could not be demonstrated, because the precision of the results was affected by the low numbers of donors with MSM as risk factor, or because of risk of bias in the included studies. All studies included low level evidence, because of risk of bias and imprecision of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality studies investigating the risk of TTI in MSM who donate blood are scarce. The available evidence suggests a link between MSM blood donors and HIV-1 infection, but is too limited to be able to unambiguously/clearly recommend a certain deferral policy.

Three decades of MSM donor deferral policies. What have we learned?

In the early 1980s, donor deferrals targeting men who have sex with men (MSM) and other high-risk groups were implemented in response to the outbreak of HIV/AIDS. It has now been three decades since the implementation of these deferrals. We review the international experience with developing these policies, which involves combining scientific evidence with ethical and moral concerns and the challenge of moving from precautionary to risk management policies as scientific knowledge and technology evolves. We provide key lessons that can guide blood policymakers as they confront potential new threats to the safety of the blood system and also provide lessons to the wider public health community on how best to incorporate precaution into the policymaking process.