Comparison of hematopoietic progenitor cell collection using different inlet flow rates with the Fenwal Amicus

PURPOSE

We have used a hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) algorithm (standard [STD]) that restricted the inlet flow rate to 65 mL/min for peripheral white blood cell count (PWBC) >35 × 109 /L (STD). In this study, we evaluated a technique that allows 85 mL/min, regardless of the PWBC count (high). For patients with PWBC >35 × 109 /L, a prospective, randomized comparison of the high flow rate vs the STD PWBC-based flow rate (65 mL/min) was performed, comparing CD34+ and lymphocyte yields, collection efficiencies (CE1), mononuclear cells (MNC), and granulocytes, red blood cell (RBC), and platelet content.

METHODS

The Fenwal Amicus version 4.5 with a heparinized ACD-A anticoagulant (AC) delivered at a 26:1 AC ratio was used. Paired comparisons between high and STD techniques were assessed with Wilcoxon signed rank tests, with P < .05 considered significant. Data are summarized as medians.

RESULTS

Forty patient pairs (autologous) were compared. Diagnoses included primarily multiple myeloma (60%) and lymphoma (37.5%). High had significantly higher median average inlet rates (69 vs 55 mL/min), whole blood processed (20 vs 16 L), and cycles (15 vs 14) than STD. There were no significant differences in pre-procedure counts. Collection contents were (high/STD): 306/328 × 106 CD34+ cells, 48/59% CD34+ CE1 (significant), 0.2/0.2 × 109 /kg lymphocytes, 45/57% lymphocyte CE1, 63/59 × 109 WBC, 15/16 × 109 granulocytes, and 1.9/1.7 × 1011 platelets.

CONCLUSIONS

The simpler, standardized high flow technique did not significantly increase or decrease CD34+ cells or lymphocyte yields, but did significantly decrease CD34+ CE1. The effects on cross-cellular content were minimal and not clinically significant.

Serum eye drops: a survey of international production methods

BACKGROUND

Serum eye drops (SEDs) are used to treat dry eye syndrome and non-healing corneal lesions when other treatments fail. Despite many clinical studies demonstrating the efficacy of both autologous and allogeneic SEDs, there is no internationally harmonized method for producing SEDs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 40-question survey requesting information regarding donor selection, blood collection and processing, infectious disease screening, shelf life and regulatory requirements for the production of autologous and allogeneic SEDs was developed by the Biomedical Excellence for Safer Transfusion Collaborative. Survey data were collected into a database via a secure web interface and then downloaded into Excel for further analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 55 responses were received, with 21 responses from centres indicating they produce SEDs. Based on the responses, collection and processing practices differ widely, according to the size of the centre making the SEDs, and their ability to collect, process and test the blood.

CONCLUSION

Despite divergences in the methods for producing SEDs, the end result is a small-volume aliquot of serum that can be administered by a patient at home. If more centres move from producing autologous to allogeneic SEDs, this may provide an opportunity for production methods to become more standardized internationally.

Cord Blood Banking Standards: Autologous Versus Altruistic

Cord blood (CB) is either donated to public CB banks for use by any patient worldwide for whom it is a match or stored in a private bank for potential autologous or family use. It is a unique cell product that has potential for treating life-threatening diseases. The majority of CB products used today are for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and are accessed from public banks. CB is still evolving as a hematopoietic stem cell source, developing as a source for cellular immunotherapy products, such as natural killer, dendritic, and T-cells, and fast emerging as a non-hematopoietic stem cell source in the field of regenerative medicine. This review explores the regulations, standards, and accreditation schemes that are currently available nationally and internationally for public and private CB banking. Currently, most of private banking is under regulated as compared to public banking. Regulations and standards were initially developed to address the public arena. Early responses from the medical field regarding private CB banking was that at the present time, because of insufficient scientific data to support autologous banking and given the difficulty of making an accurate estimate of the need for autologous transplantation, private storage of CB as "biological insurance" should be discouraged (1, 2, 3). To ensure success and the true realization of the full potential of CB, whether for autologous or allogeneic use, it is essential that each and every product provided for current and future treatments meets high-quality, international standards.