Inline and offline extracorporeal photopheresis: Device performance, cell yields and clinical response.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an effective treatment for graft-vs-host-disease (GvHD). Photopheresis can be performed in offline or inline method. The first uses a conventional cell separator for collection of mononuclear-cells that are photoactivated by a separate device and manually reinfused; the second one involves a dedicated device performing the entire procedure (collection, photoactivation and reinfusion). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The objective was to compare the two methods and cell product features to highlight key process, devices performance, and to evaluate ECP clinical response. Patients developing steroid-resistant GvHD underwent ECP as second-line treatment using either inline (Therakos CellEx) or offline system (Terumo BCT Spectra or Optia and UVA PIT system). Data about patients' features, pre-apheresis blood-count, cell product characteristics and clinical response were collected for analysis. RESULTS: We evaluated 494 procedures performed on 28 patients from April 2018 to March 2019. The offline procedure allows to achieve greater cell yield, it is characterized by larger processed blood volume, longer runtime, and higher ACD consumption. The inline procedure shows shorter runtime, high mononuclear-cells percentage and low percentage of granulocytes in cell product. We observed a significant difference in cell yields between inline and offline system; furthermore we did not find a significant relationship between cell dose and clinical response. CONCLUSION: Inline ECP is fast, highly automated and productive, making it particularly suitable for ECP treatments. Offline ECP collects high cell yields implying longer procedure and greater operator intervention. Our study did not find a significant relationship between cell dose and GVHD response.

Development of iron deficiency anemia in patients undergoing extracorporeal photopheresis: Comparison of the UVAR and CELLEX instruments.

INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is a procedure used to influence T-cell activity in patients suffering from immune-mediated cellular damage secondary to activated lymphocytes. Although well-tolerated, iron deficiency anemia (IDA) has been described. The goal herein is to describe IDA in patients who received extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) treatment using UVAR (Therakos Inc) and CELLEX (Therakos Inc) instruments. DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients treated with ECP from 2015 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. IDA was defined by a decrease in hemoglobin following treatment with concomitant decrease in mean cell volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, increased RBC distribution width, and/or iron studies compatible with IDA. RESULTS: During the four-year study period, thirty-four patients received ECP. Thirteen (38%) underwent treatment with the previous UVAR device while 21 (62%) received treatment on the newer CELLEX instrument. Nineteen (56%) of the cohort developed clinical and laboratory evidence of IDA with an average of 3.2 g/dL decrease in hemoglobin. Patients who developed IDA treated on the CELLEX instrument experienced a significantly greater drop in hemoglobin (P = .04) than those treated on the UVAR. Examining the CELLEX-treated patients, those who received the procedure at greater frequency experienced significantly greater drops in hemoglobin (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: IDA is a risk of chronic ECP therapy and is likely secondary to retained blood components in the instrument. The temporal relationship between anemia and ECP treatment has a direct correlation with the treatment schedule. Patients undergoing ECP treatment should be closely monitored for the development of IDA.

Extracorporeal Photochemotherapy: Mechanistic Insights Driving Recent Advances and Future Directions.

Dendritic cells (DCs) are professional antigen-presenting cells, necessary for the initiation and maintenance of antigen-specific immunity and tolerance. Decades of research have been driven by hopes to harness the immunological capabilities of DCs and achieve physiological partnership with the immune system for therapeutic ends. Potential applications for DC-based immunotherapy include treatments for cancer, autoimmune disorders, and infectious diseases. However, DCs have poor availability in peripheral and lymphoid tissues and have poor survivability in culture, leading to the development of multiple strategies to generate and manipulate large numbers of DCs ex vivo. Among these is Extracorporeal Photopheresis (ECP), a widely used cancer immunotherapy. Recent advancements have uncovered that stimulation of monocyte-to-DC maturation via physiologic inflammatory signaling lies at the mechanistic core of ECP. Here, we describe the landscape of DC-based immunotherapy, the historical context of ECP, the current mechanistic understanding of ex vivo monocyte-to-DC maturation in ECP, and the implications of this understanding on making scientifically driven improvements to modern ECP protocols and devices.

CD209+ monocyte-derived myeloid dendritic cells were increased in patients with leukemic cutaneous T-cell lymphoma undergoing extracorporeal photopheresis via the CELLEXTM system.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: We previously reported that myeloid dendritic cells (mDC) were increased in patients with leukemic cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (L-CTCL) following extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) using the Therakos UVAR XTS™ system. We now assessed monocyte-derived mDCs (Mo-DCs) in L-CTCL patients treated with the CELLEXTM photopheresis system. CD209, a transmembrane receptor, was used to define Mo-DCs. METHODS: Peripheral blood samples from baseline pre-ECP and at Day 2, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months post-ECP were analyzed by flow cytometry for Lin- HLA-DR+ CD123+ plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs), Lin- HLA-DR+ CD11c+ mDCs, and CD209+ mDCs. The expression of CD209 mRNA was assessed by real-time PCR. RESULTS: At baseline, 7 of 19 patients had lower than normal mDCs, and all patients had lower than normal CD209+ mDCs in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (0.005% in patients, n = 19, vs 0.50% in healthy donors, n = 7, P < .0001). The CD209+ mDC numbers only accounted for 3.28% out of total mDCs in patients compared with 66.51% in healthy donors. After treatment, the CD209+ mDC numbers showed increasing trends in patients. The average absolute numbers of CD209+ mDCs went up by 4.8-fold at 3 months (n = 10, P = .103) and by 6.4-fold at 6 months (n = 9, P = .100). CD209 mRNA expression went up in two patients responsive to therapy, parallel to CD209+ mDC numbers. L-CTCL patients achieved 70% overall clinical response rate (7/10) following ECP therapy with the CELLEXTM system. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the CELLEXTM photopheresis system is effective for treating L-CTCL patients like the UVAR XTS™ system, and in vivo-generated Mo-DCs increase following ECP.

The CELLEX is comparable to the UVAR-XTS for the treatment of acute and chronic graft versus host disease (GVHD).

BACKGROUND: Two extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) instruments, the CELLEX and the UVARXTS are currently being used "off-label" in the US for treatment of graft versus host disease (GVHD). Our study compared the performance of the two instruments in the setting of acute and chronic GVHD. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of patients with steroid refractory or steroid resistant GVHD undergoing ECP at Barnes Jewish Hospital. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the comparative efficacy of the two instruments with respect to steroid dose reduction (≥50% from baseline) and clinical improvement in GVHD. Chi-square/Fisher exact tests were used to compare the incidence of adverse events, while multivariate Cox regression was employed to assess a potential difference in mortality between the two instrument treatment cohorts. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in the odds of steroid dose reduction (OR = 1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-3.90, p = 0.50) or clinical improvement (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 0.63-6.41, p = 0.24) between the two instrument treatment cohorts. The frequency of adverse events (CELLEX 45.4%; UVAR XTS 40.5%, p = 0.55) was also comparable between the cohorts. There was no significant difference in mortality of either acute or chronic GVHD patients when treated by the CELLEX as compared to the UVAR-XTS (aHR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.35-1.25, p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of the two ECP instruments, the CELLEX and the UVAR-XTS, are comparable for the treatment of acute and chronic GVHD.

Extracorporeal photopheresis for graft-vs-host disease: A literature review and treatment guidelines proposed by the Nordic ECP Quality Group.

Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is one of the most used and established therapies for steroid-refractory graft-vs-host disease (GvHD), with a good effect to side effect profile. In this review, we present a summary of present literature and provide evidence-based treatment guidelines for ECP in GvHD. The guidelines constitute a consensus statement formed by the Nordic ECP Quality Group representing all ECP centres in the Nordic countries, and aims to facilitate harmonisation and evidence-based practice. In developing the guidelines, we firstly conducted a thorough literature search of original articles and existing guidelines. In total, we identified 26 studies for ECP use in acute GvHD and 36 in chronic GvHD. The studies were generally small, retrospective and heterogeneous regarding patient characteristics, treatment schedule and outcome assessment. In general, a majority of patients achieved partial response or better, but response rates varied by the organs affected. Head-to-head comparisons to other treatment modalities were lacking. Overall, we consider the quality of evidence to be low-moderate (GRADE) and encourage future prospective multi-armed trials to strengthen the present recommendations. However, despite limitations in evidence strength, standardised treatment schedules and regular follow-up are imperative to ensure the best possible patient outcome.

Apheresis red blood cells associated with repeated hemolysis during blood priming of the Cellex Photopheresis System.

Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) in young pediatric patients has a risk for procedural hypotension and anemia due to extracorporeal fluid shifts. A standard mitigation policy in these patients is to prime the device with packed red blood cells (RBC) or whole blood. We now report multiple episodes of hemolysis while attempting to prime the Therakos Cellex in a pediatric transplant patient undergoing a course of ECP for severe graft-vs-host-disease. Over the course of 40 ECP treatments, hemolysis was observed on five occasions. An extensive investigation found an association between hemolysis and apheresis RBC (A-RBC). Of 46 RBC units dispensed for blood priming, hemolysis occurred with 22% (4 of 18) of A-RBC and accounted for 80% (4 of 5) of all hemolysis episodes. Hemolysis was significantly higher with A-RBC when compared with RBC collected by whole blood donations (WB-RBC: 3.5% [1 of 28]; P = .049). A comparison of RBC attributes, including unit age, showed that hemolyzed A-RBC units tended to be younger than both nonhemolyzed RBC (6.5 vs 10.3 days, P = .018) and WB-RBC (8.5 days, P = .10). We hypothesize that A-RBC may exhibit "sublethal" RBC damage following prior exposure to centrifugal shear and negative forces at the time of collection, leading to a decrease in RBC deformability and increased susceptibility to hemolysis. This is the first report showing an increased susceptibility to hemolysis with A-RBC during priming of the Cellex.

[Single-center retrospective analysis of extracorporal photopheresis in clinical practice : Peripheral venous compared to central venous access]. / Unizentrische, retrospektive Analyse der praktischen Durchführung der extrakorporalen Photopherese : Periphervenöser und zentralvenöser Zugang im Vergleich.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporal photopheresis (ECP) was shown to be effective without severe side effects in the treatment of cutaneous T cell lymphoma (CTCL) and graft versus host disease (GvHD). However, only few studies investigated the practical aspects of ECP. METHODS: Treatment protocols of 2038 ECP procedures in 52 patients (CTCL, n = 29; GvHD, n = 15; other, n = 8) were evaluated. The patients were treated with the UVAR® XTS™ ECP system (Therakos, Inc. Johnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ, USA) between 2001 and 2010. All patients started with a peripheral venous access. During the course of treatment 7 patients were treated via a port and 4 via a central venous catheter. RESULTS: In all, 1765 (86.6%) treatments were performed with a peripheral venous access; 239 (11.7%) ECPs were done via a port and 34 (1.7%) via a central venous catheter. The peripheral venous access showed a higher flow rate and longer photoactivation time. ECPs via port lead to higher UV-irradiated volumes, longer treatment times and higher differences in systolic blood pressure. The following side effects were observed: being unwell (n = 13), hypo- (n = 13) and hypertension (n = 7), vertigo (n = 4), headache (n = 4), shortness of breath (n = 4), fever (n = 3) and metallic taste (n = 3). Technical complications such as problems with venous access (9.6%) occurred in 385 (18.9%) treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral venous access should be preferred for ECP treatments.

Mononuclear cell collection for extracorporeal photopheresis by using the "off-line" system: A comparative study between COBE Spectra and Spectra Optia devices.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an efficient and established therapy to treat acute and chronic graft vs host disease (GVHD). Using an "off-line" method, the first step (mononuclear cell [MNC] collection) is decisive, as long as a high MNC yield and purity in the collected product is desirable. Two "off-line" devices were compared: the COBE Spectra and the Spectra Optia (Terumo BCT), using both continuous and intermittent protocols. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twelve patients with GvHD (7 acute/5 chronic) were enrolled between June 2014 and May 2015 and were alternatively assigned for each procedure to either the COBE Spectra or the Spectra Optia cell separator. Patients characteristics and procedure/product parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: Two hundred procedures (100 per device) were included. The Spectra Optia system showed higher total nucleated cells and MNC collection efficiencies (18.6(10.2-29.7) vs 7.9(4.1-14.8)% and 43.6(20.3-59.5) vs 23.3(11.4-37.1)%, P < .001) and monocyte and lymphocyte collection efficiencies (55.2(17.7-83.2) vs 22.8(9-38.9)% and 38.3(26.7-53.4) vs 22.2(9-38.9)%, respectively, P < .001). Absolute platelet loss (PL) and PL per liter of blood processed were significantly lower in the Spectra Optia group (22.9(18.3-28.1) vs 33.6(26.5-41.1)%, P < .001 and 3.7(3.1-4.5) vs 4.3(3.5-4.2)%, P = .01, respectively). However, granulocyte contamination was higher (4.5(1.3-36) vs 1.2(0.4-5.7)%, P < .001) and a higher product haematocrit was obtained with the Spectra Optia (1(0.5-1.6) vs 0.3(0.2-0.5)%, P < .001), without an impact on irradiation time. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, Spectra Optia proved to be safe and effective in collecting MNC with high yield and purity for ECP in GvHD.

The efficacy of extracorporeal photopheresis to arrest bronchiolitis obliterans in lung allograft recipients was compared between two automated photopheresis instruments.

BACKGROUND: The most common instruments used for extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) treatment in the United States are the UVAR XTS and the CELLEX devices (Therakos, West Chester, PA). When compared to the UVAR XTS instrument, the efficacy of the CELLEX instrument to arrest the decline in lung function in patients with chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) related to bronchiolitis obliterans (BOS) has not been previously evaluated. METHODS: The relative efficacy of the CELLEX vs UVAR XTS ECP instruments was assessed by comparing the difference in rates of FEV1 decline before and after ECP treatment and survival in two series of lung allograft recipients with BOS who had been treated with these instruments. RESULTS: Similar Slope Difference values for change in rate of decline (6 months Post ECP - Pre ECP) were observed between the two cohorts (UVAR XTS: 85 ± 109 mL/month vs CELLEX: 76 ± 128 mL/month, p=0.72). A similar percentage of patients responded to ECP (UVAR XTS: 77% vs CELLEX: 89%; p=0.36) i.e., as defined as a positive difference in slope between the rate of decline of FEV1 before and 6 months after ECP. Survival at either 6 (p=0.89) or 12 (p=0.8) months after the start of ECP was not associated with instrument used despite a trend in higher early mortality (34% vs 17%, p=0.054) in the patients who were predominately treated with the CELLEX. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the use of the CELLEX for prospective studies designed to evaluate the merits of ECP in this population.

Extracorporeal photopheresis with TC-V in Japanese patients with steroid-resistant chronic graft-versus-host disease.

There are few established therapies for chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) refractory to first-line treatment with steroids. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) with a third-generation TC-V device in Japanese patients with cGVHD. Fifteen patients with steroid-resistant or -intolerant cGVHD after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation participated in this multicenter open-label study. Extracorporeal photopheresis was conducted on days 1-3, week 1; days 1-2, weeks 2-12; and days 1-2, weeks 16, 20, and 24. The composite primary endpoint consisted of evaluation of response and changes in steroid dose 24 weeks after ECP initiation. Secondary endpoints included response over time, concomitant drug dose, quality of life, and safety. Twelve patients completed scheduled ECP therapy; eight (66.7%) showed a response at week 24. In all 15 patients, the mean (± standard deviation) steroid dose decreased 0.115 ± 0.230 mg/kg/day from screening to week 24. Five serious, potentially treatment-related adverse events (heart failure, thrombosis in the device, pneumonia, edema, and wheezing) occurred; none were fatal. This study confirmed that ECP using the TC-V device was effective, with an acceptable toxicity profile. Further studies in larger cohorts are clearly warranted to determine its optimal use in Japanese patients with cGVHD.

Vascular access considerations for extracorporeal photopheresis.

Extracorporeal photopheresis is an immunomodulatory therapy indicated for patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, graft-versus-host disease, and heart or lung allograft rejection. Whole blood from the patient is drawn into the photopheresis instrument where it is separated into its components. Plasma, red blood cells, and the treated buffy coat are subsequently returned to the patient. Consistent, adequate blood flow is necessary to successfully complete the procedure. Vascular access options for photopheresis include peripheral vein cannulation, tunneled central venous catheters, and subcutaneous ports. Photopheresis is a very safe procedure; however, the complications and impact on the patient's quality of life associated with vascular access devices can be significant.

An ex vivo comparison of vascular access devices used in extracorporeal photopheresis.

BACKGROUND: Central venous access devices are commonly used in extracorporeal photopheresis, but their performance has not been systematically evaluated. The primary objective of this study was to compare pressures at various flow rates for central venous access devices in an ex vivo simulation of photopheresis. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Diluted, heparinized red blood cells were circulated through central access devices in series with a photopheresis system, and pressures at several flow rates were recorded. The devices tested were the Trifusion catheter (Hickman), the Vortex single-lumen and dual-lumen ports (Angiodynamics), and the TidalPort device (Norfolk). Flow rates were also compared for silicone and polyurethane catheters and for different catheter internal diameters. RESULTS: The Vortex dual-lumen port generated pressure alarms above flow rates of 60 mL/minute. Throughout flow rates from 5 to 100 mL/minute, the Trifusion catheter and the TidalPort device operated at lower pressures than the Vortex ports. Within typical clinical flow rates, neither catheter material nor internal diameter substantially affected pressure. CONCLUSION: Central venous access devices show large differences in pressure within flow rates used routinely in clinical settings. These differences cannot be fully attributed to catheter material composition or catheter internal diameter.

Apheresis buffy coat collection without photoactivation has no effect on apoptosis, cell proliferation, and total viability of mononuclear cells collected using photopheresis systems.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) has been approved for the treatment of advanced cutaneous T-cell lymphoma since 1988. While the precise mechanisms resulting in clinical effects are not fully understood, the photoactivation of mononuclear cells (MNCs) using ultraviolet A (UVA) light and methoxsalen is believed to be the predominant initiating process. The effects of MNC passage through the instrument without photoactivation are unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of cell processing through the photopheresis instruments on MNCs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Fourteen healthy male subjects underwent one simulated ECP procedure without reinfusion of buffy coats (BCs) in a two-center, open-label, prospective trial. Baseline peripheral blood BC, apheresis-separated untreated BC (BC1), and photoactivated BC (BC2) were evaluated in culture for viability by dye exclusion, apoptosis by annexin V binding, and cell proliferation response to phytohemagglutinin (PHA) stimulation by bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation. RESULTS: Photoactivation (BC2) resulted in 88% expression of annexin V by Day 1 of culture compared with 37 and 39% for baseline and untreated BC1. Cell viability by propidium iodide exclusion was reduced to 10% in BC2 on Day 1 versus 65 and 60% for baseline and BC1. The proliferative response to PHA stimulation was 97% inhibited in the photoactivated BC2. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that the mechanical processes used for cell separation and processing of the BC in the absence of photoactivation do not induce a significant amount of apoptosis compared to the standard ECP with methoxsalen and UVA photoactivation.

Extracorporeal photopheresis for graft versus host disease: Identifying a clinical pathway and associated resource utilization.

Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an established therapy for the treatment of graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) following an allogeneic stem cell transplant. We performed a prospective analysis of patients receiving ECP treatment for GVHD to identify a clinical pathway and resource utilization of this process. The cohort included consecutive allogeneic stem cell recipients with GVHD. ECP was performed using the CELLEX Photopheresis System or the UVAR XTS Photopheresis System (Therakos, Inc, Exton, PA). A clinical pathway was developed and a time and motion study was conducted to define the resource utilization and costs associated with ECP. Patients were treated with either CELLEX (n = 18 procedures) or UVAR (n = 4 procedures). Total time commitment for each procedure for the 2 machines differed. The time for ECP was 117 min (median, range: 91-164 min) using CELLEX and 161 min (median; range: 140-210) using the UVAR-XTS machine. Total costs of each ECP procedure were $3420.50. There is a considerable time commitment of the patient and the clinical staff when employing ECP to treat GVHD. ECP costs are significant considering this is a prolonged therapy continued for several months. With this finalized pathway and costs, we have a standardized clinical pathway for the treatment of GVHD. We are addressing minimizing resource utilization while emphasizing quality care for these patients.

How to perform extracorporeal photopheresis via port catheter.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is commonly performed via peripheral venous access catheter. If this is not possible, a tunneled central venous catheter may be considered. However, this access mode may be associated with high complication rates. Port catheters and permanent arteriovenous fistulas in principle could serve as alternative options; however, treatment opinions are limited. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We report on four adult patients with poor peripheral vein conditions in whom we performed ECP via port catheter. RESULTS: In three of four patients, problems arising from temporarily impaired blood aspiration or reinfusion were solved by repositioning the patient, intermittent flushing of the port catheter, and, in one patient, by instillation of 2500 units of heparin into the port prior to the first ECP of the 2-day cycle. One female patient sustained extensive central venous thrombosis. CONCLUSION: A port catheter may, in certain circumstances, constitute a patient-friendly alternative for venous ECP access when patients' peripheral veins are unsuitable. However, a prolonged ECP procedure duration must be taken into account for decision making.

Comparison of the CELLEX™ and UVAR-XTS™ closed-system extracorporeal photopheresis devices in the treatment of chronic graft-versus-host disease.

Extracorporeal Photopheresis (ECP) is a cellular immunotherapy frequently used for steroid-refractory graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Chronic GVHD (cGVHD), response to ECP is associated with survival benefit. The UVAR-XTSTM system and the more recently developed CELLEXTM device (both TherakosTM ) are the mainstay for ECP-delivery in the UK and US. No comparison of treatment outcomes has been reported. We retrospectively compared cGVHD response and steroid reduction and withdrawal in patients treated exclusively over 12 months with either the XTS (n = 51) or CELLEX (n = 50). Our hypothesis was that there would be no difference in clinical outcome or steroid changes in the 2 matched cohorts. We also compared infection incidence, infection-related death (IRD), and treatment time. Significant clinical improvement and regular capacity to reduce or cease steroids was encountered in both cohorts; at 6 months of ECP 70% of cutaneous cGvHD patients had partial or complete responses and 85% of patients receiving steroids pre-ECP had reduced dosage. In the XTS group we unexpectedly encountered both superior steroid reduction (86% dose at least halved vs. 61% for CELLEX, P = 0.01) and withdrawal (15 vs. 5 CELLEX, P = 0.01) and a trend for superior skin disease response in the CELLEX-treated cohort at 3 months. No inter-relationship was evident. Halving or greater reduction of steroid dose by 3 or 6 months was associated with reduced risk of IRD in the XTS cohort as was withdrawal at 6 months for the combined cohorts. By 6 months, XTS-treated patients had experienced fewer antibiotic-requiring infections (mean 1.9 vs. 2.8, P = 0.025). Origins for the disparities are unclear and warrant investigation.

Factual reflections and recommendations on extracorporeal photopheresis in pediatrics.

One of the biggest challenges in evaluating available literature on extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) practices in pediatric patients is the marked heterogeneity of approaches to the patient evaluation, procedural aspects and apheresis product analysis. These issues are most relevant in ECP management in children with graft versus host disease (GVHD) after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Extracorporeal photopheresis in pediatric patients is considered relatively safe with few adverse effects reported from retrospective or observational studies. Careful patient eligibility assessment for ECP procedures and close monitoring while on ECP therapy is still required by transfusion medicine and pediatric specialists. Particular attention is necessary considering the rapidly changing clinical status of children with graft versus host disease after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, focusing on hemodynamic compromise, hematologic and metabolic disturbances. This is a review of the approaches to some of the safety issues in long-term ECP therapy in low-weight pediatric patients.