Results of clinical effectiveness of conventional versus Mirasol-treated Apheresis Platelets in Patients with Hypoproliferative Thrombocytopenia (MiPLATE) trial.

BACKGROUND: The Mirasol® Pathogen Reduction Technology System was developed to reduce transfusion-transmitted diseases in platelet (PLT) products. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: MiPLATE trial was a prospective, multicenter, controlled, randomized, non-inferiority (NI) study of the clinical effectiveness of conventional versus Mirasol-treated Apheresis PLTs in participants with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. The novel primary endpoint was days of ≥Grade 2 bleeding with an NI margin of 1.6. RESULTS: After 330 participants were randomized, a planned interim analysis of 297 participants (145 MIRASOL, 152 CONTROL) receiving ≥1 study transfusion found a 2.79-relative rate (RR) in the MIRASOL compared to the CONTROL in number of days with ≥Grade 2 bleeding (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-4.67). The proportion of subjects with ≥Grade 2 bleeding was 40.0% (n = 58) in MIRASOL and 30.3% (n = 46) in CONTROL (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.97-1.81, p = .08). Corrected count increments were lower (p < .01) and the number of PLT transfusion episodes per participant was higher (RR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.41) in MIRASOL. There was no difference in the days of PLT support (hazard ratio = 0.86, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) or total number of red blood cell transfusions (RR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.91-1.37) between MIRASOL versus CONTROL. Transfusion emergent adverse events were reported in 119 MIRASOL participants (84.4%) compared to 133 (82.6%) participants in CONTROL (p = NS). DISCUSSION: This study did not support that MIRASOL was non-inferior compared to conventional platelets using the novel endpoint number of days with ≥Grade 2 bleeding in MIRASOL when compared to CONTROL.

Novel method for determining when a field-collected donor unit is sufficiently full.

BACKGROUND: Whole blood (WB) collections can occur downrange for immediate administration. An important aspect of these collections is determining when the unit is sufficiently full. This project tested a novel method for determining when a field collection is complete. METHODS: The amount of empty space at the top of WB units, destined to become LTOWB or separated into components, that were collected at blood centers or hospitals was measured by holding a WB unit off the ground and placing the top of a piece of string where the donor tubing entered the bag. The string was marked where it intersected the top of the column of blood in the bag and measured from the top. The WB units were also weighed. RESULTS: A total of 15 different bags, two of which were measured in two different filling volumes, from 15 hospitals or blood centers were measured and weighed. The most commonly used blood bag, Terumo Imuflex SP, had a median string length of 9 mm (range: 2-24 mm) and weighed a median of 565.1 g (range: 524.8-636.7 g). CONCLUSION: Pieces of string can be precut to the appropriate length depending on the type of bag before a mission where field WB collections might be required and a mark placed on the bag before the collection commences to indicate when the unit is full.

Demographics of first-time donors returning for donation during the pandemic: COVID-19 convalescent plasma versus standard blood product donors.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated low first-time donor return rates (DRR) following catastrophic events. Little is known, however, about the influence of demographic factors on the DRR of first-time donors during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the unique motivation of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors as compared to non-CCP donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Thirteen blood collection organizations submitted deidentified data from first-time CCP and non-CCP donors returning for regular (non-CCP) donations during the pandemic. DRR was calculated as frequencies. Demographic factors associated with returning donors: race/ethnicity, gender, and generation (Gen Z: 19-24, Millennial: 25-40, Gen X: 41-56, and Boomer: ≥57 years old), within the CCP and non-CCP first-time cohorts were compared using chi-square test at p < .05 statistical significance. RESULTS: From March 2020 through December 2021, there were a total of 44,274 first-time CCP and 980,201 first-time non-CCP donors. DRR were 14.6% (range 11.9%-43.3%) and 46.6% (range 10.0%-76.9%) for CCP and non-CCP cohorts, respectively. Age over 40 years (Gen X and Boomers), female gender, and White race were each associated with higher return in both donor cohorts (p < .001). For the non-CCP return donor cohort, the Millennial and Boomers were comparable. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate differences in returning donor trends between the two donor cohorts. The motivation of a first-time CCP donor may be different than that of a non-CCP donor. Further study to improve first-time donor engagement would be worthwhile to expand the donor base with a focus on blood donor diversity emphasizing engagement of underrepresented minorities and younger donors.