Safety and protection of plasma donors: A scoping review and evidence gap map.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: As part of a large-scale project to safely increase plasma collection in Europe, the current scoping review identifies the existing evidence (gaps) on adverse events (AEs) and other health effects in plasmapheresis donors, as well as factors that may be associated with such events/effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched six databases and three registries. Study characteristics (publication type, language, study design, population, outcomes, associated factors, time of assessment, duration of follow-up, number and frequency of donations, convalescent plasma [y/n], setting and location) were synthesized narratively and in an interactive evidence gap map (EGM). RESULTS: Ninety-four research articles and five registrations were identified. Around 90% were observational studies (57 controlled and 33 uncontrolled), and most of them were performed in Europe (55%) or the United States (20%). Factors studied in association with donor health included donor characteristics (e.g., sex, age) (n = 27), cumulative number of donations (n = 21), donation frequency (n = 11), plasma collection device or programme (n = 11), donor status (first time vs. repeat) (n = 10), donation volume per session (n = 8), time in donation programme (n = 3), preventive measures (n = 2) or other (n = 9). CONCLUSION: The current scoping review provides an accessible tool for researchers and policymakers to identify the available evidence (gaps) concerning plasmapheresis donation safety. Controlled prospective studies with long-term donor follow-up are scarce. Furthermore, additional experimental studies comparing the health effects of different donation frequencies are required to inform a safe upper limit for donation frequency.

Men who have sex with men and risk for transfusion-transmissible infections in blood donors in Western countries: A systematic review update.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This systematic review update summarizes evidence concerning transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs) in male blood donors reporting sex with another man (MSM) or after easing the MSM deferral period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched five databases, including studies comparing MSM versus non-MSM donors (Type I), MSM deferral periods (Type II) or infected versus non-infected donors (Type III) in Western countries, and used GRADE to determine evidence certainty. RESULTS: Twenty-five observational studies were included. Four Type I studies suggest that there may be an increased risk for overall TTIs, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and syphilis in MSM donors, but the evidence is very uncertain. There was insufficient evidence of MSM with low-risk sexual behaviour. A Type II study indicates that easing the MSM deferral period to 1 year may have little to no effect on TTI risk. TTI prevalence in blood donors under 5-year, 1-year, 3-month or risk-based deferral in eight other Type II studies was too low to provide clear conclusions on the effect of easing the deferral. Three Type III studies reported that MSM may be a risk factor for HIV. Increased risk of HBV, hepatitis C virus and HTLV-I/II could not be shown. The evidence from Type III studies is very uncertain. CONCLUSION: There may be an increased risk of HIV in MSM blood donors. Shortening the deferral from permanent to 1 year may have little to no effect on TTI risk. However, there is limited, unclear evidence from observational studies concerning the impact of introducing 3-month or risk-based deferrals.

Lack of drug-induced post-retrieval amnesia for auditory fear memories in rats.

BACKGROUND: Long-term memory formation is generally assumed to involve the permanent storage of recently acquired memories, making them relatively insensitive to disruption, a process referred to as memory consolidation. However, when retrieved under specific circumstances, consolidated fear memories are thought to return to a labile state, thereby opening a window for modification (e.g., attenuation) of the memory. Several interventions during a critical time frame after this destabilization seem to be able to alter the retrieved memory, for example by pharmacologically interfering with the restabilization process, either by direct protein synthesis inhibition or indirectly, using drugs that can be safely administered in patients (e.g., propranolol). Here, we find that, contrary to expectations, systemic pharmacological manipulations in auditory fear-conditioned rats do not lead to drug-induced post-retrieval amnesia. RESULTS: In a series of well-powered auditory fear conditioning experiments (four with propranolol, 10 mg/kg, two with rapamycin, 20-40 mg/kg, one with anisomycin, 150 mg/kg and cycloheximide, 1.5 mg/kg), we found no evidence for reduced cued fear memory expression during a drug-free test in adult male Sprague-Dawley rats that had previously received a systemic drug injection upon retrieval of the tone fear memory. All experiments used standard fear conditioning and reactivation procedures with freezing as the behavioral read-out (conceptual or exact replications of published reports) and common pharmacological agents. Additional tests confirmed that the applied drug doses and administration routes were effective in inducing their conventional effects on expression of fear (propranolol, acutely), body weight (rapamycin, anisomycin, cycloheximide), and consolidation of extinction memories (cycloheximide). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast with previously published studies, we did not find evidence for drug-induced post-retrieval amnesia, underlining that this effect, as well as its clinical applicability, may be considerably more constrained and less readily reproduced than what the current literature would suggest.

Limited replicability of drug-induced amnesia after contextual fear memory retrieval in rats.

With the ultimate goal of investigating boundary conditions for post-reactivation amnesia, we set out to replicate studies in which systemic, post-reactivation administration of midazolam, propranolol, or cycloheximide resulted in amnesia for contextual fear memories. Our experiments involved conceptual as well as exact replications of previously published studies. In most of our experiments, we adopted a procedure that conformed to the standard 3-day protocol typically used in the literature, with contextual fear conditioning on day 1, unreinforced re-exposure to the conditioning context followed by systemic injection of the amnestic drug on day 2, and a memory retention test on day 3. Given the plethora of successful studies with large effects sizes and the absence of any failed replications in the literature, we were surprised to find that we were generally unable to replicate those findings. Our results suggest that post-reactivation amnesia by systemic drug administration in rats is more difficult to obtain than what would be expected based on published empirical reports. At present, it remains unclear which conditions determine the success of this procedure.

No harmful effect of propranolol administered prior to fear memory extinction in rats and humans.

Exposure therapy is an evidence-based treatment option for anxiety-related disorders. Many patients also take medication that could, in principle, affect exposure therapy efficacy. Clinical and laboratory evidence indeed suggests that benzodiazepines may have detrimental effects. Large clinical trials with propranolol, a common beta-blocker, are currently lacking, but several preclinical studies do indicate impaired establishment of safety memories. Here, we investigated the effects of propranolol given prior to extinction training in 9 rat studies (N = 215) and one human study (N = 72). A Bayesian meta-analysis of our rat studies provided strong evidence against propranolol-induced extinction memory impairment during a drug-free test, and the human study found no significant difference with placebo. Two of the rat studies actually suggested a small beneficial effect of propranolol. Lastly, two rat studies with a benzodiazepine (midazolam) group provided some evidence for a harmful effect on extinction memory, i.e., impaired extinction retention. In conclusion, our midazolam findings are in line with prior literature (i.e., an extinction retention impairment), but this is not the case for the 10 studies with propranolol. Our data thus support caution regarding the use of benzodiazepines during exposure therapy, but argue against a harmful effect of propranolol on extinction learning.

No evidence that post-training dopamine D2 receptor agonism affects fear generalization in male rats.

BACKGROUND: The neurotransmitter dopamine plays an important role in the processing of emotional memories, and prior research suggests that dopaminergic manipulations immediately after fear learning can affect the retention and generalization of acquired fear. AIMS: The current study focuses specifically on the role of dopamine D2 receptors (D2Rs) regarding fear generalization in adult, male Wistar rats, and aims to replicate previous findings in mice. METHODS: In a series of five experiments, D2R (ant)agonists were injected systemically, immediately after differential cued fear conditioning (CS+ followed by shock, CS- without shock). All five experiments involved the administration of the D2R agonist quinpirole at different doses versus saline (n = 12, 16, or 44 rats/group). In addition, one of the studies administered the D2R antagonist raclopride (n = 12). One day later, freezing during the CS+ and CS- was assessed. RESULTS: We found no indications for an effect of quinpirole or raclopride on fear generalization during this drug-free test. Importantly, and contradicting earlier research in mice, the evidence for the absence of an effect of D2R agonist quinpirole (1 mg/kg) on fear generalization was substantial according to Bayesian analyses and was observed in a highly powered experiment (N = 87). We did find acute behavioral effects in line with the literature, for both quinpirole and raclopride in a locomotor activity test. CONCLUSION: In contrast with prior studies in mice, we have obtained evidence against a preventative effect of post-training D2R agonist quinpirole administration on subsequent fear generalization in rats.

Balancing Donor Health and Plasma Collection: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Plasmapheresis Frequency.

Most plasma used for manufacturing plasma-derived medicinal products (PDMPs) such as albumin, immunoglobulin (Ig), and clotting factors is obtained from source plasma collected via plasmapheresis, the majority of which is contributed by the United States (US). While the demand for PDMPs continues to rise, it remains unclear whether high-frequency plasmapheresis, such as the twice-weekly plasma donation allowed in the US, may have any (long-term) adverse health effects on the donor. To investigate the frequency at which plasma can be donated without harm to the donor, the current systematic review explores the impact of plasma donation frequency on cardiovascular health, protein depletion, and adverse events in healthy plasma donors. We asked the following research question: What is the impact of plasmapheresis frequency (Intervention) on the safety or health (Outcome) of healthy donors (Population)? Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and Transfusion Evidence Library), 2 clinical trial registries (ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov), and the PROSPERO database were searched. Four observational and 2 experimental studies were included. The results showed that very high-frequency donation (twice per week) may result in a clinically relevant decrease in ferritin and bring IgG levels below the lower threshold of 6 g/l. However, the evidence is of low to very low certainty, and solid conclusions are hindered by the healthy donor effect and methodological limitations of the included studies. To determine a safe threshold donation frequency that minimizes any possible harmful effect on the donor, more high-quality prospective cohort studies and experimental studies are needed. We should expedite such studies to support recommendations, as conclusive evidence confirming or refuting the safety of maximum allowed donation frequencies is lacking. Donor protection is essential, given that healthy donors receive no direct medical benefit from donating plasma.

Appraising reconsolidation theory and its empirical validation.

Re-exposure to elements of prior experiences can create opportunities for inducing amnesia for those events. The dominant theoretical framework posits that such re-exposure can result in memory destabilization, making the memory representation temporarily sensitive to disruption while it awaits reconsolidation. If true, such a mechanism that allows for memories to be permanently changed could have important implications for the treatment of several forms of psychopathology. However, there have been contradictory findings and elusive occurrences of replication failures within the "reconsolidation" field. Considering its potential relevance for clinical applications, the fact that this "hot" research area is being dominated by a single mechanistic theory, and the presence of unexplainable contradictory findings, we believe that it is both useful and timely to critically evaluate the reconsolidation framework. We discuss potential issues that may arise from how reconsolidation interference has typically been deducted from behavioral observations, and provide a principled assessment of reconsolidation theory that illustrates that the theory and its proposed boundary conditions are vaguely defined, which has made it close to impossible to refute reconsolidation theory. We advocate for caution, encouraging researchers not to blindly assume that a reconsolidation process must underlie their findings, and pointing out the risks of doing so. Finally, we suggest concrete theoretical and methodological advances that can promote a fruitful translation of reminder-dependent amnesia into clinical treatment.

Reactivation-Dependent Amnesia for Contextual Fear Memories: Evidence for Publication Bias.

Research on memory reconsolidation has been booming in the last two decades, with numerous high-impact publications reporting promising amnestic interventions in rodents and humans. However, our own recently-published failed replication attempts of reactivation-dependent amnesia for fear memories in rats suggest that such amnestic effects are not always readily found and that they depend on subtle and possibly uncontrollable parameters. The discrepancy between our observations and published studies in rodents suggests that the literature in this field might be biased. The aim of the current study was to gauge the presence of publication bias in a well-delineated part of the reconsolidation literature. To this end, we performed a systematic review of the literature on reactivation-dependent amnesia for contextual fear memories in rodents, followed by a statistical assessment of publication bias in this sample. In addition, relevant researchers were contacted for unpublished results, which were included in the current analyses. The obtained results support the presence of publication bias, suggesting that the literature provides an overly optimistic overall estimate of the size and reproducibility of amnestic effects. Reactivation-dependent amnesia for contextual fear memories in rodents is thus less robust than what is projected by the literature. The moderate success of clinical studies may be in line with this conclusion, rather than reflecting translational issues. For the field to evolve, replication and non-biased publication of obtained results are essential. A set of tools that can create opportunities to increase transparency, reproducibility and credibility of research findings is provided.

No persistent attenuation of fear memories in humans: A registered replication of the reactivation-extinction effect.

It has been proposed that memory retrieval can destabilize consolidated memories, after which they need to be reconsolidated in order to be retained. The presentation of relevant information during memory reconsolidation could then result in the modification of a destabilized memory trace, by allowing the memory trace to be updated before being reconsolidated. In line with this idea, Schiller et al. (2010) have demonstrated that memory retrieval shortly before extinction training can prevent the later recovery of conditioned fear responding that is observed after regular extinction training. Those findings have been the subject of considerable controversy, due in part to theoretical reasons but also due to a number of failures to obtain similar results in conceptual replication attempts. Here, we report the results of a highly powered, direct, independent replication of the critical conditions of Schiller et al. (2010, Experiment 1). Due to misrepresentation of the exclusion criteria in the original Schiller et al. (2010) report, data collection was considerably delayed. When we eventually managed to attain our pre-registered sample size, we found that we could not observe any benefit of reactivation-extinction over regular extinction training in preventing recovery of conditioned fear. The results of the present study, along with the mixed findings in the literature and the misreporting in Schiller et al. (2010), give cause to question whether there is robust evidence that reactivation-extinction prevents the return of fear in humans.

Post-weaning housing conditions influence freezing during contextual fear conditioning in adult rats.

The present study aimed to investigate the influence of housing conditions on contextual fear memory malleability. Male Wistar rats were housed in enriched, standard, or impoverished conditions after weaning and remained in these conditions throughout the entire experiment. After six weeks into those housing conditions, all animals underwent a 3-day protocol including contextual fear conditioning (day 1), memory reactivation followed by systemic administration of midazolam or vehicle (day 2), and a retention test (day 3). Percentage freezing was used as a behavioral measure of contextual fear. There was no evidence for an effect of housing conditions on the sensitivity of contextual fear memory to amnestic effects of post-reactivation midazolam administration, and no indication for amnestic effects of post-reactivation midazolam overall (including in the standard group). The inability to replicate previous demonstrations of post-reactivation amnesia using the same protocol underscores the subtle nature of post-reactivation pharmacological memory interference. Notably, impoverished housing resulted in a decrease in contextual freezing during contextual fear conditioning, reactivation and retention testing, compared to enriched and standard housing conditions. This observation warrants caution when interpreting the results from experiments regarding effects of housing on fear memory processes, particularly when freezing is used as a measure of fear.

In Search for Boundary Conditions of Reconsolidation: A Failure of Fear Memory Interference.

The presentation of a fear memory cue can result in mere memory retrieval, destabilization of the reactivated memory trace, or the formation of an extinction memory. The interaction between the degree of novelty during reactivation and previous learning conditions is thought to determine the outcome of a reactivation session. This study aimed to evaluate whether contextual novelty can prevent cue-induced destabilization and disruption of a fear memory acquired by non-asymptotic learning. To this end, fear memory was reactivated in a novel context or in the original context of learning, and fear memory reactivation was followed by the administration of propranolol, an amnestic drug. Remarkably, fear memory was not impaired by post-reactivation propranolol administration or extinction training under the usual conditions used in our lab, irrespective of the reactivation context. These unexpected findings are discussed in the light of our current experimental parameters and alleged boundary conditions on memory destabilization.

Parameter optimization for automated behavior assessment: plug-and-play or trial-and-error?

Behavioral neuroscience is relying more and more on automated behavior assessment, which is often more time-efficient and objective than manual scoring by a human observer. However, parameter adjustment and calibration are a trial-and-error process that requires careful fine-tuning in order to obtain reliable software scores in each context configuration. In this paper, we will pinpoint some caveats regarding the choice of parameters, and give an overview of our own and other researchers' experience with widely used behavioral assessment software. We conclude that, although each researcher should weigh the pros and cons of relying on software vs. manual scoring, we should be aware of possible divergence between both scores, which might be especially relevant when dealing with subtle behavioral effects, like for example in generalization or genetic research.