Incidence of transfusion-induced platelet-reactive antibodies evaluated by specific assays for the detection of human leucocyte antigen and human platelet antigen antibodies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work was to study the incidence of transfusion-induced platelet-reactive antibodies in a selective patient population and evaluate different methodologies for platelet antibody screening (PAS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients were retrospectively selected and divided into three separate groups: haematological malignancies (Group 1: n = 33); cardiac and orthopaedic patients (Group 2: n = 31) and a control group (Group 3: n = 23) selected with the same diagnoses of Group 2. PRE- and POST-transfusion samples were tested for PAS by the following tests: PIFT (platelet immunofluorescence test), MAIPA (monoclonal antibody immobilization of platelet antigen), Flow PRA(R) and LCT (lymphocytotoxicity test). RESULTS: There was not a 100% concordance among the methodologies used. PIFT, MAIPA and Flow PRA presented very similar results whereas that of LCT differed from the other methods. A high rate of positive results (32%) was found in the PRE samples followed by an increase of almost 50% after blood transfusion (POST samples: 42.5% of positivity), but there was a statistical difference (P < 0.05) between the PRE and POST transfusion sample only for the Flow PRA(R) technique tested on Group 2. Human leucocyte antigen (HLA) class I antibodies were present on 97.4% of POST positive samples, 5.4% presented anti-human platelet antigen (HPA)-1b antibodies and 8.1% presented a mix of pan-reactive antibodies against glycoprotein IIbIIIa, IaIIa and IbIX. CONCLUSIONS: Blood transfusion did not increase the rate of alloimmunization in our haematological patients (Group 1); however, the patients were already admitted with a high rate of alloimmunization (12%). Group 2 patients are being immunized and the impact of this procedure remains to be studied as these patients may eventually undergo further hospitalization and receive more blood transfusion.

The absolute number of circulating CD34+ cells as the best predictor of peripheral hematopoietic stem cell yield.

Many controversies still exist about the timing of leukapheresis procedures for PBSC transplantation. Thirty-nine patients were followed daily by monitoring the absolute PB WBC count and CD34+ cell enumeration prior to apheresis. These determinations were compared with the apheresis cell content (nucleated cells and CD34+ cells yield). There was a highly significant correlation between PB CD34+ cells and apheresis CD34+ cell yield (r = 0.921, p < 0.001). A small but significant correlation was found between the PB WBC count and the apheresis nucleated cell content (r = 0.383, p < 0.001), but no correlation was found between PB WBC count and apheresis CD34+ cell yield (r = -0.065, p = 0.460). A target value of 20 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/L was determined to be the most reliable predictor to collect at least 1.0 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg in a single apheresis. Of the 39 patients, 20 could be followed after transplantation, and a good correlation was found for total number of CD34+ cells reinfused and platelet and neutrophil engraftment. No correlation was found for nucleated cells infused and engraftment. CD34+ cell determination is a better predictor than WBC count for timing leukapheresis and is thus recommended for monitoring the quality of the product.