Comparison of plasmapheresis with medical apheresis in terms of efficacy and cost in the acute treatment of hypertriglyceridemia in children with lipoprotein lipase deficiency.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare plasmapheresis and medical apheresis as lipid-lowering therapies in children with familial lipoprotein lipase (LPL) deficiency. METHODS: The data of 13 patients who were followed up after a diagnosis of LPL deficiency were retrospectively analyzed. Plasma triglyceride, cholesterol, amylase, and lipase values and complications were recorded before and after each patient underwent plasmapheresis or medical apheresis. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period of the patients was 99.64 ± 52.92 months in the medical apheresis group and 118 ± 16.97 months in the plasmapheresis group. While the mean triglyceride level before plasmapheresis was 1,875.38 ± 547.46 mg/dL, it was 617 ± 228.28 mg/dL after plasmapheresis. While the mean triglyceride level before medical apheresis was 1,756.86 ± 749.27 mg/dL, it was found to be 623.03 ± 51.36 mg/dL after medical apheresis. Triglyceride levels were decreased by 59.62% with medical apheresis and 65.57% with plasmapheresis. The cost of treatment for medical apheresis was found to be lower compared to plasmapheresis 296.93 ± 29.94 Turkish lira (USD 43.34 ± 4.01) vs. 3,845.42 ± 156.17 Turkish lira (USD 561.37 ± 20.93; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no standardized strategy for the acute treatment of hypertriglyceridemia due to LPL deficiency, medical apheresis is a safe and effective treatment with a low risk of side effects. Unlike plasmapheresis, medical apheresis can be performed in any center, which is another important advantage of the procedure.

Lipoprotein apheresis and PCSK9 inhibitors for severe familial hypercholesterolaemia: Experience from Australia and New Zealand.

INTRODUCTION: Severe familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) causes premature disability and death due to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and is refractory to standard lipid-lowering therapies. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) has long been a standard of care for patients with severe FH, but is invasive, expensive and time-consuming for patients and their caregivers. Newer drug therapies, including the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, may reduce the need for LA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We audited the records of 16 patients (eight homozygous, eight heterozygous) treated with LA in Australia and New Zealand, 14 of whom subsequently commenced PCSK9 inhibitor therapy. LA was performed by cascade filtration in all centres. RESULTS: LDL-cholesterol was acutely lowered by 69 ± 7% in patients with homozygous FH and by 72 ± 9% in those with heterozygous FH, representing time-averaged reductions of 36 ± 12% and 34 ± 5%, respectively. LA was well-tolerated, and patients reported comparable quality of life to population and disease-related norms. After commencement of PCSK9 inhibitors, four of seven patients with homozygous FH had meaningful biochemical responses, with a reduction in the frequency of LA permitted in one patient and complete cessation in another. Four of seven patients with heterozygous FH were able to be managed without LA after commencing PCSK9 inhibitors. CONCLUSION: While PCSK9 inhibitors have reduced the need for LA, some patients with severe FH continue to require LA, and will require it for the foreseeable future. However, emerging therapies, including angiopoetin-like 3 inhibitors, may further reduce the need for LA.

Reimbursement for therapeutic apheresis devices and procedures for using the healthcare insurance system in Japan.

The aim of this paper was to explain the insurance coverage status of therapeutic apheresis (excluding CHDF) in Japan, alongside the social system of medical reimbursement and concerns regarding the future sustainability of the healthcare system. Insurance schemes and premiums differed for individuals at different levels in the society (eg, municipal residents, employees, and public servants). Insurance premiums and their rates varied depending on the total household income, the number of people living together, age, and the place of residence. In addition, the medical expense subsidies for children through public expenditure were also described. Japan's generous insurance system and multiple medical expense subsidies provide financial support for patients. With Japan's history of medical expense subsidies based on the policy of supporting intractable diseases, we have established an environment where all citizens can receive therapeutic apheresis when needed if they are affected by a disease for which insurance coverage is indicated.

Current Role of Lipoprotein Apheresis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Lipoprotein apheresis is a very efficient but time-consuming and expensive method of lowering levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, lipoprotein(a)) and other apoB containing lipoproteins, including triglyceride-rich lipoproteins. First introduced almost 45 years ago, it has long been a therapy of "last resort" for dyslipidaemias that cannot otherwise be managed. In recent years new, very potent lipid-lowering drugs have been developed and the purpose of this review is to define the role of lipoprotein apheresis in the current setting. RECENT FINDINGS: Lipoprotein apheresis still plays an important role in managing patients with homozygous FH and some patients with other forms of hypercholesterolaemia and cardiovascular disease. In particular, patients not achieving treatment goals despite modern lipid-lowering drugs, either because these are not tolerated or the response is insufficient. Recently, lipoprotein(a) has emerged as an important cardiovascular risk factor and lipoprotein apheresis has been used to decrease lipoprotein(a) concentrations in patients with marked elevations and cardiovascular disease. However, there is considerable heterogeneity concerning the recommendations by scientific bodies as to which patient groups should be treated with lipoprotein apheresis. Lipoprotein apheresis remains an important tool for the management of patients with severe drug-resistant dyslipidaemias, especially those with homozygous FH.

Comparison and cost analysis of three protocols for mobilization and apheresis of haematopoietic progenitor cells.

INTRODUCTION: Autologous bone marrow transplantation is a component of the malignant hemopathy therapy. The preferred mobilization and collection method is apheresis. The aim of this study is to compare three protocols analyzing the effect of plerixafor, higher dose of G-CSF and large volume leukapheresis (LVL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study including 119 patients referred for mobilization. Three protocols were compared: (a) G-CSF 10 µg/kg/day subcutaneous (sc) × 4 days mobilizing 1 to 1.5 blood volumes. (b) G-CSF 10 µg/kg/day sc × 4 days + plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg/day sc preventively or as a rescue agent mobilizing 1 to 1.5 blood volumes. (c) G-CSF 20 µg/kg/day sc × 4 days ± plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg/day sc preventively or as a rescue agent mobilizing 3 to 4 blood volumes. RESULTS: The average number of days of apheresis was reduced to 1.37 with protocol 3. The average cost per patient was reduced by 67% compared with protocol 2 and increased by only 5% compared with protocol 1, reducing the failure rate to 0%. CONCLUSION: Adding preemptive or rescue plerixafor (protocol 2) to G-CSF 10 µg/kg/day alone (protocol 1) did not improve the days of apheresis nor the number of CD34+ cells collected but had higher cost and failure rate. Using LVL, plerixafor and G-CSF 20 µg/kg/day (protocol 3) decreased the number of sessions to 1.37, reduced the failure rate to 0% and led to a significant increase in the number of CD34+ cells collected without toxicity and with a similar cost to protocol 1.

Plerixafor in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients: a German analysis of time, effort and costs.

Mobilization and collection of peripheral blood stem cells is part of the standard treatment procedure for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. Mobilization is usually achieved with chemotherapy and/or cytokines, but plerixafor might be added in case of poor mobilization. Due to the high cost several institutions have developed their own management pathway to optimize use of plerixafor. Such models are however rarely generalizable; in a multi-center, European, non-interventional study, evaluating the impact of plerixafor in poor mobilizers, country specific differences in patient treatment and cost structure were obvious. For German centers, there was a non-significant reduction in the number of apheresis sessions carried out and in apheresis costs. In contrast to other European countries the majority of German Plerixafor patients were very poor mobilizing patients with initial CD34+ cell count ≤ 10/µl (40/51). In this group the number of apheresis sessions decreased from 2.1 to 1.6 sessions per patient (p = 0.01) and costs decreased from €6246 to €4758 (p = 0.01). Our results show that preemptive plerixafor use has a strong effect in poor mobilizers with an initial CD34+ cell count ≤ 10 cells/µl.

New subcutaneous PowerFlow port results in cost and time-savings in a busy outpatient apheresis clinic.

Many vascular access options, such as subcutaneous ports, are currently on the market for use in both medication infusion and for procedures, such as therapeutic plasma exchange and extracorporeal photopheresis. We compared the cost and time necessary to complete apheresis procedures using either Angiodynamic's Vortex or Bard's PowerFlow subcutaneous ports by reviewing our experience on two patients undergoing long-term apheresis treatments with at least 10 procedures with each type of port. We analyzed the cost of needles and thrombolytic therapy, staff time, overall procedure length, and the total time the patient was in the apheresis unit. We also compared flow rates and alarm rates between the two ports. In this small pilot study, use of the PowerFlow port resulted in significant cost and time savings, with mixed results for flow rates. Our results need to be confirmed in a larger patient population prior to recommending wide implementation of Bard's PowerFlow port.

Economic Implications of Pathogen Reduced and Bacterially Tested Platelet Components: A US Hospital Budget Impact Model.

BACKGROUND: US FDA draft guidance includes pathogen reduction (PR) or secondary rapid bacterial testing (RT) in its recommendations for mitigating risk of platelet component (PC) bacterial contamination. An interactive budget impact model was created for hospitals to use when considering these technologies. METHODS: A Microsoft Excel model was built and populated with base-case costs and probabilities identified through literature search and a survey of US hospital transfusion service directors. Annual costs of PC acquisition, testing, wastage, dispensing/transfusion, sepsis, shelf life, and reimbursement for a mid-sized hospital that purchases all of its PCs were compared for four scenarios: 100% conventional PCs (C-PC), 100% RT-PC, 100% PR-PC, and 50% RT-PC/50% PR-PC. RESULTS: Annual total costs were US$3.64, US$3.67, and US$3.96 million when all platelets were C-PC, RT-PC, or PR-PC, respectively, or US$3.81 million in the 50% RT-PC/50% PR-PC scenario. The annual net cost of PR-PC, obtained by subtracting annual reimbursements from annual total costs, is 6.18% above that of RT-PC. Maximum usable shelf lives for C-PC, RT-PC, and PR-PC are 3.0, 5.0, and 3.6 days, respectively; hospitals obtain PR-PC components earliest at 1.37 days. CONCLUSION: The model predicts minimal cost increase for PR-PC versus RT-PC, including cost offsets such as elimination of bacterial detection and irradiation, and reimbursement. Additional safety provided by PR, including risk mitigation of transfusion-transmission of a broad spectrum of viruses, parasites, and emerging pathogens, may justify this increase. Effective PC shelf life may increase with RT, but platelets can be available sooner with PR due to elimination of bacterial detection, depending on blood center logistics.

Plerixafor in poor mobilizers with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a multi-center time-motion analysis.

High-dose chemotherapy alongside peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) infusion has become the standard of care in different hematologic malignancies. The goal of PBSC mobilization is to allow collection of sufficient CD34+ cells to proceed to transplantation. The current mobilization regimen with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), alone or in combination with chemotherapy, still fails in 10-25% of patients. Plerixafor is able to rescue most of these patients from mobilization failure. In this study, we investigated the impact of plerixafor on the cost and time spent on apheresis in patients who were considered poor mobilizers, with <20 × 106/µl peripheral CD34+ cells after mobilization but prior to apheresis. Patient hospital records from ten centers in three European countries were reviewed and compared during two time periods, namely prior and after plerixafor introduction to the market. During the plerixafor period, patients spent less time on apheresis (350 vs. 461 min). Poor mobilizers given plerixafor collected more CD34+ cells during the first apheresis session, leading to a decrease in the average number of apheresis sessions needed. The total apheresis yield was unaffected. This analysis shows that the use of plerixafor lessens the time-effort associated with the management of poor mobilizers and reduces apheresis costs.

Impact of plerixafor (mozobil) on hospital efficiency: A single center experience.

Plerixafor (Mozobil) in combination with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has shown to increase mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) as compared to G-CSF alone in patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, up to 25% of patients treated with G-CSF alone still fail mobilization. Adding plerixafor to poor mobilizers allows to rescue these patients from mobilization failure and to reduce the number of apheresis sessions. The goal of this retrospective study was to capture the impact of plerixafor on treatment outcome and on apheresis department efficiency. The latter was measured in terms of time-slots lost, that is, the number of apheresis sessions scheduled but not carried out due to poor mobilization, and the number of elective apheresis sessions performed for patients undergoing extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP). Hospital records of patients treated before and after introduction of plerixafor were collected and analyzed. With plerixafor, the mobilization failure rate dropped from 12% to 4% and the mean number of time-slots lost per patient dropped from 1.39 to 0.89. Additional drug costs due to plerixafor were partially balanced by a reduction in apheresis sessions, resulting in an additional cost of 759€ per ASCT candidate. More importantly, with the use of plerixafor, the availability of time-slots turned from erratic to predictable such that freed capacity could be dedicated to other apheresis procedures. As a result, the number of ECP sessions increased from 0 in 2005 to 685 sessions in 2014.

The use of a medico economic database as a part of French apheresis registry.

An apheresis registry is a part of each learned apheresis society. The interest in this is obvious, in terms of knowledge of the practice of apheresis, adverse events, and technical issues. However, because of the weight of data entry it could never be exhaustive and some data will be missing. While continuing our registry efforts and our efforts to match with other existing registries, we decided to extend the data collection to a medico-economic database that is available in France, the Programme de Médicalisation du Système d'Information (PMSI) that has covered reimbursement information for each public or private hospital since 2007. It contains almost all apheresis procedures in all apheresis fields, demographic patient data, and primary and related diagnoses, among other data. Although this data does not include technical apheresis issues or other complications of the procedures, its interest is great and it is complementary to the registry. From 2003-2014, we have recorded 250,585 apheresis procedures, for 48,428 patients. We showed that the data are reliable and exhaustive. The information shows a perfect real life practice in apheresis, regarding indications, the rhythm and the duration of apheresis treatment. This prospective data collection is sustainable and allows us to assess the impact of healthcare guidelines. Our objective is to extend the data collection and match it to other existing databases; this will allow us to conduct, for example, a cohort study specifically for ECP.

Cost analysis of a randomized stem cell mobilization study in multiple myeloma.

Upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard therapy for younger multiple myeloma (MM) patients. MM patients usually undergo stem cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide (CY) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), or with G-CSF alone. A limited number of randomized studies are available comparing costs of different mobilization strategies. Eighty transplant-eligible patients aged up to 70 years with untreated MM were included in this prospective study. The patients were treated with RVD induction for three 21-day cycles and randomized 1:1 at inclusion into one of the two mobilization arms CY 2 g/m(2) + G-CSF [arm A] vs. G-CSF alone [arm B]. Plerixafor was given according to a specific algorithm if needed. Sixty-nine patients who received mobilization followed by blood graft collection were included in the cost analysis. The median total costs of the mobilization phase were significantly higher in arm A than in arm B (3855 € vs. 772 €, p ≤ 0.001). The cumulative median cost of the mobilization and collection phases was significantly lower in arm B than in arm A (8524 € vs. 11,622 €, p = 0.012). There was no significant difference between the arms in the total median costs of ASCT (n = 59) (34,997 € in arm A vs. 31,981 € in arm B, p = 0.118). Mobilization with G-CSF alone seems to be a preferable mobilization method for MM patients in terms of mobilization and apheresis costs. In addition, it requires less hospital resource utilization.

Systematic Review of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Apheresis for the Treatment of Familial Hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND: Apheresis is an important treatment for reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). We systematically reviewed the current literature surrounding LDL-C apheresis for FH. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electronic databases were searched for publications of LDL-C apheresis in patients with FH. Inclusion criteria include articles in English published in 2000-2013 that provide descriptions of practice patterns, efficacy/effectiveness, and costs related to LDL-C apheresis in patients with FH. Data were stratified by country and FH genotype where possible. Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria: 8 open-label clinical trials, 11 observational studies, 17 reviews/guidelines, and 2 health technology assessments. The prevalence of FH was not well characterized by country, and underdiagnosis was a barrier to FH treatment. Treatment guidelines varied by country, with some guidelines recommending LDL-C apheresis as first-line treatment in patients with homozygous FH and after drug therapy failure in patients with heterozygous FH. Additionally, guidelines typically recommended weekly or biweekly LDL-C apheresis treatments conducted at apheresis centers that may last 2 to >3 hours per session. Studies reported a range for mean LDL-C reduction after apheresis: 57-75% for patients with homozygous FH and 58-63% for patients with heterozygous FH. Calculated annual costs (in US$2015) may reach US$66 374 to US$228 956 per patient for weekly treatment. CONCLUSIONS: LDL-C apheresis treatment may be necessary for patients with FH when drug therapy is inadequate in reducing LDL-C to target levels. While apheresis reduces LDL-C, high per-session costs and the frequency of guideline-recommended treatment result in substantial annual costs, which are barriers to the optimal treatment of FH.

Utilization of stored autologous PBSCs to support second autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma patients in the era of novel agent therapy.

Outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM) have improved significantly with novel agent therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). ASCTs are typically planned as either tandem or a single transplant with additional stored PBSCs available for a second salvage transplant. To accommodate these strategies, many centers routinely collect and store adequate PBSCs for two ASCTs. We analyzed the cost associated with this practice by determining the expenses of PBSC collection, cryopreservation and storage, and the ultimate use of additional cryopreserved PBSCs in patients who had undergone at least one ASCT. There were 889 MM patients transplanted between 1993 and 2011 at our center. Most (N=726) had residual PBSCs in storage after their first ASCT (ASCT1). Only 135 patients underwent a second ASCT within a median of 14 months after ASCT1. The percentage of patients receiving a second ASCT declined over time. The resources required to collect and store unused PBSCs added up to 336 extra patient days of apheresis and 41 587 extra patient months of cryopreservation, translating into an average extra cost per patient of US$4981.12. A reconsideration of conventional PBSC collection and storage practices would save significant cost for the majority of MM patients who never undergo a second ASCT.

Red blood cell depletion from bone marrow and peripheral blood buffy coat: a comparison of two new and three established technologies.

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell (RBC) depletion is a standard technique for preparation of ABO-incompatible bone marrow transplants (BMTs). Density centrifugation or apheresis are used successfully at clinical scale. The advent of a bone marrow (BM) processing module for the Spectra Optia (Terumo BCT) provided the initiative to formally compare our standard technology, the COBE2991 (Ficoll, manual, "C") with the Spectra Optia BMP (apheresis, semiautomatic, "O"), the Sepax II NeatCell (Ficoll, automatic, "S"), the Miltenyi CliniMACS Prodigy density gradient separation system (Ficoll, automatic, "P"), and manual Ficoll ("M"). C and O handle larger product volumes than S, P, and M. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Technologies were assessed for RBC depletion, target cell (mononuclear cells [MNCs] for buffy coats [BCs], CD34+ cells for BM) recovery, and cost/labor. BC pools were simultaneously purged with C, O, S, and P; five to 18 BM samples were sequentially processed with C, O, S, and M. RESULTS: Mean RBC removal with C was 97% (BCs) or 92% (BM). From both products, O removed 97%, and P, S, and M removed 99% of RBCs. MNC recovery from BC (98% C, 97% O, 65% P, 74% S) or CD34+ cell recovery from BM (92% C, 90% O, 67% S, 70% M) were best with C and O. Polymorphonuclear cells (PMNs) were depleted from BCs by P, S, and C, while O recovered 50% of PMNs. Time savings compared to C or M for all tested technologies are considerable. CONCLUSION: All methods are in principle suitable and can be selected based on sample volume, available technology, and desired product specifications beyond RBC depletion and MNC and/or CD34+ cell recovery.

Plasma for fractionation in a public setting: cost analysis from the perspective of the third-party payer.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, within the legal mandate to pursue national self-sufficiency of plasma-derived medical products, the Regions are starting to organise trade to offset imbalances between need and availability. It is, therefore, necessary to determine the full cost to the Regions of plasma collection and handling. Here we report an analysis of plasma production costs in the Department of Transfusion Medicine of Verona Province, Veneto Region. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma is obtained from voluntary, non-remunerated donors from either whole blood or apheresis donation, and in Verona it is collected, validated and distributed only in Regional Health Service facilities, and then delivered to industry for processing. The amounts and costs of materials and activities needed to collect, produce, validate and distribute plasma were obtained from the Department of Transfusion Medicine. Attributable overhead expenses were assumed at 15% of direct costs. When plasma was collected as part of whole blood or from multi-component apheresis, joint costs (the costs of the common manufacturing process before the separation) were allocated to the plasma based on the tariff for single components, taken as proxy of the willingness to pay for them. In an alternative scenario plasma recovered from whole blood donations was considered a by-product. RESULTS: The estimated full cost of each valid unit of plasma derived from whole blood, multi-component apheresis, and plasma-apheresis was about € 30, € 73 and € 170, respectively. The estimated total cost per litre of plasma was € 113 for collection from whole blood and € 276 for collection from apheresis. When plasma recovered from whole blood donations was considered a by-product, its cost per litre was estimated to be € 26. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that the Italian donor-based system, in addition to its ethical and social values, can supply plasma at an affordable cost, comparable (albeit slightly higher) with costs in other recent analyses.

Apheresis in developing countries around the World.

At the combined American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) Annual Meeting/World Apheresis Association (WAA) Congress in San Francisco, California, in April of 2014, the opening session highlighted the status of apheresis outside of the United States. The organizers invited physicians active in apheresis in countries not usually represented at such international gatherings to give them a forum to share their experiences, challenges, and expectations in their respective countries with regard to both donor and therapeutic apheresis. Apheresis technology is expensive as well as technically and medically demanding, and low and median income countries have different experiences to share with the rest of the world. Apheresis procedures also require resources taken for granted in the developed world, such as reliable electrical power, that can be unpredictable in parts of the developing world. On the other hand, it was obvious that there are significant disparities in access to apheresis within the same country (such as in Brazil), as well as between neighboring nations in Africa and South America. A common trend in the presentations from Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, and South Africa, was the need for more and better physicians and practitioners' training in the indications of the various apheresis modalities and patient oversight during the procedures. As ASFA and WAA continue to work together, and globalization allows for increased knowledge-sharing, improved access to apheresis procedures performed by qualified personnel with safety and high-quality standards will be increasingly available.

Plerixafor on-demand combined with chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: significant improvement in peripheral blood stem cells mobilization and harvest with no increase in costs.

To date, no prospective study on Plerixafor 'on-demand' in combination with chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been reported. We present an interim analysis of the first prospective study in which Plerixafor was administered on-demand in patients affected by multiple myeloma and lymphoma who received high dose cyclophosphamide or DHAP (dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin) plus G-CSF to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC). One hundred and two patients were evaluable for response. A cohort of 240 patients receiving the same mobilizing chemotherapy was retrospectively studied. Failure to mobilize CD34(+) cells in peripheral blood was reduced by 'on-demand' strategy compared to conventional mobilization; from 13·0 to 3·0% (P = 0·004). Failure to harvest CD34(+) cells 2 × 10(6) /kg decreased from 20·9 to 4·0% (P = 0·0001). The on-demand Plerixafor strategy also resulted in a lower rate of mobilization failure (P = 0·03) and harvest failure (P = 0·0008) when compared to a 'bias-adjusted set of controls'. Evaluation of economic costs of the two strategies showed that the overall cost of the two treatments were comparable when salvage mobilizations were taken into account. When in combination with cyclophosphamide or DHAP plus G-CSF, the 'on-demand' use of Plerixafor showed, in comparison to conventionally treated patients, a significant improvement in mobilization of PBSC with no increase in overall cost.

Model calculations to quantify clinical and economic effects of pathogen inactivation in platelet concentrates.

BACKGROUND: Future shortages in platelet supply are expected in Germany due to demographic changes. A rising cancer incidence will lead to an increasing demand for platelet concentrates (PCs) while the number of potential donors will decrease. Pathogen inactivation (PI) aims to inactivate various infectious agents including emerging pathogens to extend the shelf-life of PCs and reduce the frequency of acute transfusion reactions (ATRs). In this context, the clinical and economic impact of PI on platelet transfusion was evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Model calculations were conducted for 2 scenarios considering different production settings. Frequencies of ATRs were based on literature analyses, platelet and ATR costs on cost analyses. RESULTS: The estimated average costs for ATRs of grade 1 and 2, irrespective of origin, and grade 3 (allergic) were € 104, € 238, and € 1,200, respectively. Approximately 400 PC-related ATRs per 10(5) transfusions can be avoided, with estimated savings amounting to € 77,000. The total cost increase was calculated to approximately € 30-50 per PI-treated PC. CONCLUSION: PI potentially saves plasma, prolongs shelf-life, decreases donor deferral, and reduces ATRs. Model calculations considering clinical and safety benefits of PI show a rational cost increase. The impact of PI should be further evaluated from a societal perspective regarding future blood supply and infectious disease globalization.

Treatment options for severe hypertriglyceridemia (SHTG): the role of apheresis.

Hypertriglyceridemia is associated with a number of severe diseases such as acute pancreatitis and coronary artery disease. In severe hypertriglyceridemia (SHTG, triglycerides > 1,000 mg/dL), rapid lowering of plasma triglycerides (TG) has to be achieved. Treatment regimes include nutritional intervention, the use of antihyperlipidemic drugs, and therapeutic apheresis. Apheretic treatment is indicated in medical emergencies such as hypertriglyceridemic pancreatitis. Reviewing the current literature, plasmapheresis appears to be a safe and useful therapeutic tool in patients suffering from SHTG. Apheretic treatment is able to remove the causative agent for pancreatic inflammation. Data suggests that the use of apheresis should be performed as early as possible in order to achieve best results. The use of plasmapheresis, however, is limited due to the rather high costs and the limited availability of the procedure.