Blood transfusion is associated with donor leukocyte microchimerism in trauma patients.

INTRODUCTION: Blood transfusion can result in survival of donor leukocyte subpopulations in the recipient. Persistence of donor leukocytes in the transfusion recipient is termed microchimerism. Microchimerism likely reflects engraftment of the recipient with donor hematopoietic stem cells and is very uncommon with transfusion for elective surgery, sickle cell anemia, thalassemia, and HIV. We have found, however, that microchimerism may be more common in trauma patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine how frequently transfusion after trauma is associated with microchimerism. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 45 trauma patients who were transfused > or =2 units of PRBCs. We sampled blood before hospital discharge and determined microchimerism by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of specimens using quantitative allele-specific HLA DR assays to detect non-recipient alleles. Data are expressed as median with interquartile range. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 38 (interquartile range 25, 58) years, ISS of 19 (13, 29), and mortality of 7%. Seventy-eight percent were men, and 84% had blunt trauma. Patients received a median of 6 (4, 16) (range 2, 87) units of PRBCs. Of the 45 patients, 24 (53%) had evidence of microchimerism. Compared with patients without evidence of microchimerism, these patients had no difference in mean age, gender, ISS, units of PRBCs transfused, time from transfusion to blood sampling, or proportion that underwent splenectomy. Twenty-one of the 24 patients with microchimerism had only 1 or 2 non-recipient DR alleles identified by PCR. CONCLUSIONS: Transfusion after trauma is associated with over half of recipients having evidence of microchimerism. Age, sex, ISS, and splenectomy of the recipient and the number of transfused units did not correlate with microchimerism. Because the median time from transfusion to sampling for PCR analysis was not longer in the group without microchimerism, it is unlikely microchimerism is due merely to failure of the recipient to clear transfused donor leukocytes.

Early diagnosis and successful treatment of a patient with transfusion-associated GVHD with autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion-associated GVHD (TA-GVHD) is an uncommon complication of blood transfusion. Diagnosis of TA-GVHD is difficult, and it is usually rapidly fatal. There are few documented sur- vivors of TA-GVHD. CASE REPORT: A 61-year-old woman with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was treated with fludarabine followed by combination chemotherapy and high-dose radioimmunotherapy and peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) rescue. She was transfused with nonirradiated blood components at an outside hospital and presented 10 days later with rash, elevated liver enzymes, and progressive pancytopenia. Skin biopsy was consistent with GVHD, and HLA typing of lymphocytes from the patient demonstrated mixed chimerism. The patient was treated with solumedrol and cyclosporin A, followed by high-dose cyclophosphamide and antithymocyte globulin and autologous PBPC infusion. She had rapid engraftment, resolution of skin rash, and normalization of liver function abnormalities. She is in good health with normal blood counts and no evidence of CLL 34 months after transplantation. CONCLUSION: TA-GVHD occurs in the setting of an immunocompromised recipient receiving nonirradiated blood components. A typical presentation includes skin rash, liver function abnormalities, and pancytopenia. Demonstration of mixed chimerism by HLA typing facilitated diagnosis in this patient. High-dose immunosuppression, facilitated by the availability of autologous PBPCs, resulted in a successful outcome.

Comparative yield of HCV RNA testing in blood donors screened by 2.0 versus 3.0 antibody assays.

BACKGROUND: Two HCV antibody tests (EIA 2.0 [EIA2], Abbott; and the Version 3.0 ELISA [EIA3], Ortho) are currently licensed for screening of US blood donors. Testing of donors for HCV RNA allows comparison of the sensitivities of the two antibody-screening assays. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: All allogeneic blood donations at 13 US test sites were screened for HCV RNA by testing plasma minipools using an investigational assay (COBAS AmpliScreen HCV test, v2.0, Roche Molecular Systems). Some sites screened for HCV antibody by EIA2 and some used EIA3. The frequency of RNA-positive and antibody-negative (RNA-pos and Ab-neg) donations among donors screened by each antibody assay was compared. Antibody appearance was assessed in a donor follow-up study. RESULTS: A total of 5.51 x 10(6) donations were screened for HCV RNA. Of these, 2.27 million were screened for antibody by EIA2, and 3.24 million by EIA3. Twenty-three donations were HCV RNA-pos and Ab-neg. The frequency of RNA-pos and Ab-neg donations was higher among donations screened by EIA2 (1 in 134,000), compared to those screened by EIA3 (1 in 540,000) (p = 0.001). Of the 17 RNA-pos and Ab-neg donations identified by test sites that used EIA2, 14 were retested by EIA3 and 10 (71%) were reactive. Most RNA-pos and Ab-neg donors appear to be in the process of seroconversion. Donors that were initially EIA2-negative and EIA3-reactive showed a more prolonged pattern of seroconversion compared to those that were initially nonreactive by both antibody assays. Four donors were EIA2-negative, EIA3-reactive, and RIBA-indeterminate (c33c) for at least 90 days, 1 for more than 317 days. CONCLUSION: EIA3 would have detected the majority of RNA-positive donations missed by EIA2. Some RNA-positive donors are EIA2-negative and EIA3-reactive for a prolonged period of time.