Platelet Transfusion before CVC Placement in Patients with Thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion guidelines regarding platelet-count thresholds before the placement of a central venous catheter (CVC) offer conflicting recommendations because of a lack of good-quality evidence. The routine use of ultrasound guidance has decreased CVC-related bleeding complications. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients with severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count, 10,000 to 50,000 per cubic millimeter) who were being treated on the hematology ward or in the intensive care unit to receive either one unit of prophylactic platelet transfusion or no platelet transfusion before ultrasound-guided CVC placement. The primary outcome was catheter-related bleeding of grade 2 to 4; a key secondary outcome was grade 3 or 4 bleeding. The noninferiority margin was an upper boundary of the 90% confidence interval of 3.5 for the relative risk. RESULTS: We included 373 episodes of CVC placement involving 338 patients in the per-protocol primary analysis. Catheter-related bleeding of grade 2 to 4 occurred in 9 of 188 patients (4.8%) in the transfusion group and in 22 of 185 patients (11.9%) in the no-transfusion group (relative risk, 2.45; 90% confidence interval [CI], 1.27 to 4.70). Catheter-related bleeding of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 4 of 188 patients (2.1%) in the transfusion group and in 9 of 185 patients (4.9%) in the no-transfusion group (relative risk, 2.43; 95% CI, 0.75 to 7.93). A total of 15 adverse events were observed; of these events, 13 (all grade 3 catheter-related bleeding [4 in the transfusion group and 9 in the no-transfusion group]) were categorized as serious. The net savings of withholding prophylactic platelet transfusion before CVC placement was $410 per catheter placement. CONCLUSIONS: The withholding of prophylactic platelet transfusion before CVC placement in patients with a platelet count of 10,000 to 50,000 per cubic millimeter did not meet the predefined margin for noninferiority and resulted in more CVC-related bleeding events than prophylactic platelet transfusion. (Funded by ZonMw; PACER Dutch Trial Register number, NL5534.).

HLA-matched platelet transfusions are effective only in refractory patients with positive HLA antibody screening.

BACKGROUND: Recipients of platelet transfusions with 1-hour corrected count increments (1hCCIs) of 7.5 or less on two subsequent platelet transfusions with random platelets may benefit from human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched platelet concentrates. We aimed to quantify the efficacy of HLA-matched platelets concentrates expressed in 1hCCIs. METHODS: We performed a cohort study among consecutive refractory patients who received HLA-matched platelet concentrates in the Netherlands between 1994 and 2017. We performed mixed-model linear regression comparing 1hCCIs after HLA split-antigen-matched transfusions with 1hCCIs after HLA-mismatched transfusions, adjusted for within-patient correlations. A donor-to-patient match was categorized as a split-match if all donor HLA-A and -B antigens were present in the patient as well; that is, donor and patient were HLA identical or compatible. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with positive or negative HLA antibody screens. Finally, the additional effect of ABO mismatches on 1hCCIs was investigated. RESULTS: The 1hCCI after an HLA-matched transfusion was 14.09 (95% reference interval, 1.13-29.89). This was 1.94 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-3.15) higher than 1hCCI after HLA-mismatched transfusions. In patients with negative HLA antibody screening tests, HLA matching did not affect 1hCCIs. Conditional on HLA matching, 1hCCIs decreased by 3.70 (95% CI, -5.22 to -2.18) with major ABO mismatches. CONCLUSION: Matched platelet concentrates yielded maximal 1hCCIs, whereas mismatched transfusions still resulted in adequate increments. There is no indication for HLA-matched platelets in patients with negative antibody screens.

Primary postpartum hemorrhage in women with von Willebrand disease and carriers of hemophilia: a retrospective analysis.

Background: Between 2002 and 2011, the incidence of severe primary postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in Dutch women with von Willebrand disease (VWD) and hemophilia carriers (HCs) was 8% vs 4.5% in the general population. Objectives: To determine the contemporary incidence of severe primary PPH in women with VWD and HCs. Methods: All women with VWD or HCs who delivered between 2012 and 2017 were selected from all 6 Dutch hemophilia treatment centers. Data on patient and disease characteristics, peripartum hematologic and obstetric management, and outcomes were retrospectively collected. Incidence of severe primary (≥1000 mL of blood loss ≤24 hours after childbirth) and primary (≥500 mL within ≤24 hours after childbirth) PPH was compared with the (1) previous cohort and (2) general Dutch population and between (3) women with VWD and HCs with third-trimester coagulation activity levels <50 international units (IU)/dL vs ≥50 IU/dL and (4) women treated with vs without peripartum hemostatic prophylaxis. Results: Three-hundred forty-eight deliveries (151 VWD, 167 hemophilia A, and 30 hemophilia B carriers) were included. The severe primary PPH incidence was 10% (36/348) and remained stable over time, whereas this incidence has increased in the general population (to 8%), leading to a similar risk (P = .17). Severe primary PPH risk was comparable between women with coagulation activity levels <50 and ≥50 IU/dL (11% [7/66] vs 10% [29/279]; odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.43-2.44) and comparable between those with and those without prophylaxis (12% [11/91] vs 10% [25/254]; odds ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.59-2.68). Conclusion: Severe primary PPH in women with VWD and HCs remained stable and is comparable with the increasing prevalence in the general population. More research is needed to find the optimal pregnancy management strategy for safe delivery in VWD and HC.

Daratumumab monotherapy in refractory warm autoimmune hemolytic anemia and cold agglutinin disease.

ABSTRACT: Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is a rare autoantibody-mediated disease. For steroid and/or rituximab-refractory AIHA, there is no consensus on optimal treatment. Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, could be beneficial by suppression of CD38+ plasma cells and thus autoantibody secretion. In addition, because CD38 is also expressed by activated T cells, daratumumab may also act via immunomodulatory effects. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of daratumumab monotherapy in an international retrospective study including 19 adult patients with heavily pretreated refractory AIHA. In warm AIHA (wAIHA, n = 12), overall response was 50% with a median response duration of 5.5 months (range, 2-12), including ongoing response in 2 patients after 6 and 12 months. Of 6 nonresponders, 4 had Evans syndrome. In cold AIHA (cAIHA, n = 7) overall hemoglobin (Hb) response was 57%, with ongoing response in 3 of 7 patients. One additional patient with nonanemic cAIHA was treated for severe acrocyanosis and reached a clinical acrocyanosis response as well as a Hb increase. Of 6 patients with cAIHA with acrocyanosis, 4 had improved symptoms after daratumumab treatment. In 2 patients with wAIHA treated with daratumumab, in whom we prospectively collected blood samples, we found complete CD38+ T-cell depletion after daratumumab, as well as altered T-cell subset differentiation and a severely diminished capacity for cell activation and proliferation. Reappearance of CD38+ T cells coincided with disease relapse in 1 patient. In conclusion, our data show that daratumumab therapy may be a treatment option for refractory AIHA. The observed immunomodulatory effects that may contribute to the clinical response deserve further exploration.

Occurrence of FVIII Inhibitors in Hemophilia A Patients Following an Institutional Switch to a Third Generation B-Domain-Deleted FVIII.

In 2018, Refacto AFR, a B-domain-deleted third-generation FVIII concentrate, became our preferential product. After the introduction, the development of inhibitors was prospectively monitored; retrospectively, we sought for risk factors in the patients who developed a de-novo inhibitor. Over a period of 15 months, 4/19 adult patients with non-severe haemophilia who were treated on demand for surgery, developed high titer antibodies to FVIII after administration of Refacto AFR; 5/52 mostly severe patients on prophylaxis, developed an inhibitor (3 ≥ 0.1 BU; 1 > 0.6 BU, 1 high titre) after they switched to Refacto AFR; all were children <14 years of age and with >100 exposure days, none related to surgery or intensive treatment; all received KovaltryR before. In conclusion: inhibitors were encountered in on demand patients and previously treated prophylaxis patients; this observation might be a coincidental finding, but also risk factors like genotype and surgery and/or that Refacto AFR is more immunogenic should be considered. For the patients on prophylaxis we hypothesize that loss of tolerance by preceding KovaltryR might have contributed to inhibitor development.

Different risk of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in carriers with factor V Leiden compared with non-carriers, but not in other thrombophilic defects. Results from a large retrospective family cohort study.

The term factor V Leiden (FVL) paradox is used to describe the different risk of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism that has been found in carriers of FVL. In a thrombophilic family-cohort, we estimated differences in absolute risks of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism for various thrombophilic defects. Of 2,054 relatives, 1,131 were female, 41 had pulmonary embolism and 126 deep vein thrombosis. Annual incidence for deep vein thrombosis in non-carriers of FVL was 0.19% (95%CI, 0.16-0.23), and 0.41% (95%CI, 0.28-0.58) in carriers; relative risk (RR) 2.1 (95%CI, 1.4-3.2). For pulmonary embolism these incidences were similar in carriers and non-carriers 0.07%, respectively; RR 1.0 (95% CI, 0.4-2.5). When co-inheritance of other thrombophilic defects was excluded the RR for deep vein thrombosis in FVL carriers was 7.0 (95%CI, 2.3-21.7) compared to non-carriers and 2.8 (95%CI, 0.5-14.4) for pulmonary embolism. For other thrombophilic defects no such effect was observed. Thus the FVL paradox was confirmed in our study. However, a similar paradox in carriers of other thrombophilic defects was not observed.

On tolerability and safety of a maintenance treatment with 6-thioguanine in azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine intolerant IBD patients.

AIM: To determine the tolerability and safety profile of a low-dose maintenance therapy with 6-TG in azathioprine (AZA) or 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) intolerant inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients over a treatment period of at least 1 year. METHODS: Database analysis. RESULTS: Twenty out of ninety-five (21%) patients discontinued 6-TG (mean dose 24.6 mg; mean 6-TGN level 540 pmol/8 x 10(8) RBC) within 1 year. Reasons for discontinuation were GI complaints (31%), malaise (15%) and hepatotoxicity (15%). Hematological events occurred in three patients, one discontinued treatment. In the 6-TG-tolerant group, 9% (7/75) could be classified as hepatotoxicity. An abdominal ultrasound was performed in 54% of patients, one patient had splenomegaly. CONCLUSION: The majority of AZA or 6-MP-intolerant IBD patients (79%) is able to tolerate maintenance treatment with 6-TG (dosages between 0.3 and 0.4 mg/kg per d). 6-TG may still be considered as an escape maintenance immunosuppressant in this difficult to treat group of patients, taking into account potential toxicity and efficacy of other alternatives. The recently reported hepatotoxicity is worrisome and 6-TG should therefore be administered only in prospective trials.