Impact of genetic variation in the SMIM1 gene on Vel expression levels

BACKGROUND

Serologic determination of the Vel- phenotype is challenging due to variable Vel expression levels. In this study we investigated the genetic basis for weak Vel expression levels and developed a high-throughput genotyping assay to detect Vel- donors.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In 548 random Caucasian and 107 Vel+(w) donors genetic variation in the SMIM1 gene was studied and correlated to Vel expression levels. A total of 3366 Caucasian, 621 black, and 333 Chinese donors were screened with a high-throughput genotyping assay targeting the SMIM1*64_80del allele.

RESULTS

The Vel+(w) phenotype is in most cases caused by the presence of one SMIM1 allele carrying the major allele of the rs1175550 SNP in combination with a SMIM1*64_80del allele or in few cases caused by the presence of the SMIM1*152T>A or SMIM1*152T>G allele. In approximately 6% of Vel+(w) donors genetic factors in SMIM1 could not explain the weak expression. We excluded the possibility that lack of expression of another blood group system was correlated with weak Vel expression levels. Furthermore, using a high-throughput Vel genotyping assay we detected two Caucasian Vel- donors.

CONCLUSION

Weak Vel expression levels are caused by multiple genetic factors in SMIM1 and probably also by other genetic or environmental factors. Due to the variation in Vel expression levels, serologic determination of the Vel- phenotype is difficult and a genotyping assay targeting the c.64_80del deletion in SMIM1 should be used to screen donors for the Vel- phenotype.

Transfusion of pooled buffy coat platelet components prepared with photochemical pathogen inactivation treatment: the euroSPRITE trial

A nucleic acid-targeted photochemical treatment (PCT) using amotosalen HCl (S-59) and ultraviolet A (UVA) light was developed to inactivate viruses, bacteria, protozoa, and leukocytes in platelet components. We conducted a controlled, randomized, double-blinded trial in thrombocytopenic patients requiring repeated platelet transfusions for up to 56 days of support to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of platelet components prepared with the buffy coat method using this pathogen inactivation process. A total of 103 patients received one or more transfusions of either PCT test (311 transfusions) or conventional reference (256 transfusions) pooled, leukoreduced platelet components stored for up to 5 days before transfusion. More than 50% of the PCT platelet components were stored for 4 to 5 days prior to transfusion. The mean 1-hour corrected count increment for up to the first 8 test and reference transfusions was not statistically significantly different between treatment groups (13,100 +/- 5400 vs 14,900 +/- 6200, P =.11). By longitudinal regression analysis for all transfusions, equal doses of test and reference components did not differ significantly with respect to the 1-hour (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.1 to 6.1 x 10(9)/L, P =.53) and 24-hour (95% CI, -1.3 to 6.5 x 10(9)/L, P =.19) posttransfusion platelet count. Platelet transfusion dose, pretransfusion storage duration, and patient size were significant covariates (P <.001) for posttransfusion platelet counts. Clinical hemostasis, hemorrhagic adverse events, and overall adverse events were not different between the treatment groups. Platelet components prepared with PCT offer the potential to further improve the safety of platelet transfusion using technology compatible with current methods to prepare buffy coat platelet components.