An epitope-based approach of HLA-matched platelets for transfusion: a noninferiority crossover randomized trial.

Platelet transfusion refractoriness results in adverse outcomes and increased health care costs. Managing refractoriness resulting from HLA alloimmunization necessitates the use of HLA antigen-matched platelets but requires a large platelet donor pool and does not guarantee full matching. We report the first randomized, double-blind, noninferiority, crossover trial comparing HLA epitope-matched (HEM) platelets with HLA standard antigen-matched (HSM) platelet transfusions. Alloimmunized, platelet-refractory, thrombocytopenic patients with aplastic anemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, or acute myeloid leukemia were eligible. HEM platelets were selected using HLAMatchMaker epitope (specifically eplet) matching. Patients received up to 8 prophylactic HEM and HSM transfusions provided in random order. The primary outcome was 1-hour posttransfusion platelet count increment (PCI). Forty-nine patients were randomized at 14 UK hospitals. For intention to treat, numbers of evaluable transfusions were 107 and 112 for HEM and HSM methods, respectively. Unadjusted mean PCIs for HEM and HSM methods were 23.9 (standard deviation [SD], 15) and 23.5 (SD, 14.1), respectively (adjusted mean difference, -0.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.9 to 2.8). Because the lower limit of the 95% CI was not greater than the predefined noninferiority limit, the HEM approach was declared noninferior to the HSM approach. There were no differences in secondary outcomes of platelet counts, transfusion requirements, and bleeding events. Adequate 1-hour PCI was more frequently observed, with a mean number of 3.2 epitope mismatches, compared with 5.5 epitope mismatches for inadequate 1-hour increments. For every additional epitope mismatch, the likelihood of an adequate PCI decreased by 15%. Epitope-matched platelets should be considered to support HLA alloimmunized patients. This trial was registered at www.isrctn.com as #ISRCTN23996532.

Randomized Trial of Platelet-Transfusion Thresholds in Neonates.

BACKGROUND: Platelet transfusions are commonly used to prevent bleeding in preterm infants with thrombocytopenia. Data are lacking to provide guidance regarding thresholds for prophylactic platelet transfusions in preterm neonates with severe thrombocytopenia. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned infants born at less than 34 weeks of gestation in whom severe thrombocytopenia developed to receive a platelet transfusion at platelet-count thresholds of 50,000 per cubic millimeter (high-threshold group) or 25,000 per cubic millimeter (low-threshold group). Bleeding was documented prospectively with the use of a validated bleeding-assessment tool. The primary outcome was death or new major bleeding within 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 660 infants (median birth weight, 740 g; and median gestational age, 26.6 weeks) underwent randomization. In the high-threshold group, 90% of the infants (296 of 328 infants) received at least one platelet transfusion, as compared with 53% (177 of 331 infants) in the low-threshold group. A new major bleeding episode or death occurred in 26% of the infants (85 of 324) in the high-threshold group and in 19% (61 of 329) in the low-threshold group (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 2.32; P=0.02). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to rates of serious adverse events (25% in the high-threshold group and 22% in the low-threshold group; odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.67). CONCLUSIONS: Among preterm infants with severe thrombocytopenia, those randomly assigned to receive platelet transfusions at a platelet-count threshold of 50,000 per cubic millimeter had a significantly higher rate of death or major bleeding within 28 days after randomization than those who received platelet transfusions at a platelet-count threshold of 25,000 per cubic millimeter. (Funded by the National Health Service Blood and Transplant Research and Development Committee and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN87736839 .).

The effect of variation in donor platelet function on transfusion outcome: a semirandomized controlled trial.

The effect of variation in platelet function in platelet donors on patient outcome following platelet transfusion is unknown. This trial assessed the hypothesis that platelets collected from donors with highly responsive platelets to agonists in vitro assessed by flow cytometry (high-responder donors) are cleared more quickly from the circulation than those from low-responder donors, resulting in lower platelet count increments following transfusion. This parallel group, semirandomized double-blinded trial was conducted in a single center in the United Kingdom. Eligible patients were those 16 or older with thrombocytopenia secondary to bone marrow failure, requiring prophylactic platelet transfusion. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a platelet donation from a high- or low-responder donor when both were available, or when only 1 type of platelet was available, patients received that. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to group assignment. The primary end point was the platelet count increment 10 to 90 minutes following transfusion. Analysis was by intention to treat. Fifty-one patients were assigned to receive platelets from low-responder donors, and 49 from high-responder donors (47 of which were randomized and 53 nonrandomized). There was no significant difference in platelet count increment 10 to 90 minutes following transfusion in patients receiving platelets from high-responder (mean, 21.0 × 109/L; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.9-37.2) or low-responder (mean, 23.3 × 109/L; 95% CI, 7.8-38.9) donors (mean difference, 2.3; 95% CI, -1.1 to 5.7; P = .18). These results support the current policy of not selecting platelet donors on the basis of platelet function for prophylactic platelet transfusion.

Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease in 2 Plasma Product Recipients, United Kingdom.

Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD) has not been previously reported in patients with clotting disorders treated with fractionated plasma products. We report 2 cases of sCJD identified in the United Kingdom in patients with a history of extended treatment for clotting disorders; 1 patient had hemophilia B and the other von Willebrand disease. Both patients had been informed previously that they were at increased risk for variant CJD because of past treatment with fractionated plasma products sourced in the United Kingdom. However, both cases had clinical and investigative features suggestive of sCJD. This diagnosis was confirmed in both cases on neuropathologic and biochemical analysis of the brain. A causal link between the treatment with plasma products and the development of sCJD has not been established, and the occurrence of these cases may simply reflect a chance event in the context of systematic surveillance for CJD in large populations.

Restrictive versus liberal blood transfusion for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (TRIGGER): a pragmatic, open-label, cluster randomised feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion thresholds for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding are controversial. So far, only three small, underpowered studies and one single-centre trial have been done. Findings from the single-centre trial showed reduced mortality with restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. We aimed to assess whether a multicentre, cluster randomised trial is a feasible method to substantiate or refute this finding. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label, cluster randomised feasibility trial, done in six university hospitals in the UK, we enrolled all patients aged 18 years or older with new presentations of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, irrespective of comorbidity, except for exsanguinating haemorrhage. We randomly assigned hospitals (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation sequence (random permuted block size of 6, without stratification or matching) to either a restrictive (transfusion when haemoglobin concentration fell below 80 g/L) or liberal (transfusion when haemoglobin concentration fell below 100 g/L) RBC transfusion policy. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate, protocol adherence, haemoglobin concentration, RBC exposure, selection bias, and information to guide design and economic evaluation of the phase 3 trial. Main exploratory clinical outcomes were further bleeding and mortality at day 28. We did analyses on all enrolled patients for whom an outcome was available. This trial is registered, ISRCTN85757829 and NCT02105532. FINDINGS: Between Sept 3, 2012, and March 1, 2013, we enrolled 936 patients across six hospitals (403 patients in three hospitals with a restrictive policy and 533 patients in three hospitals with a liberal policy). Recruitment rate was significantly higher for the liberal than for the restrictive policy (62% vs 55%; p=0·04). Despite some baseline imbalances, Rockall and Blatchford risk scores were identical between policies. Protocol adherence was 96% (SD 10) in the restrictive policy vs 83% (25) in the liberal policy (difference 14%; 95% CI 7-21; p=0·005). Mean last recorded haemoglobin concentration was 116 (SD 24) g/L for patients on the restrictive policy and 118 (20) g/L for those on the liberal policy (difference -2·0 [95% CI -12·0 to 7·0]; p=0·50). Fewer patients received RBCs on the restrictive policy than on the liberal policy (restrictive policy 133 [33%] vs liberal policy 247 [46%]; difference -12% [95% CI -35 to 11]; p=0·23), with fewer RBC units transfused (mean 1·2 [SD 2·1] vs 1·9 [2·8]; difference -0·7 [-1·6 to 0·3]; p=0·12), although these differences were not significant. We noted no significant difference in clinical outcomes. INTERPRETATION: A cluster randomised design led to rapid recruitment, high protocol adherence, separation in degree of anaemia between groups, and non-significant reduction in RBC transfusion in the restrictive policy. A large cluster randomised trial to assess the effectiveness of transfusion strategies for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is both feasible and essential before clinical practice guidelines change to recommend restrictive transfusion for all patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. FUNDING: NHS Blood and Transplant Research and Development.

A no-prophylaxis platelet-transfusion strategy for hematologic cancers.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of platelet transfusions to prevent bleeding in patients with hematologic cancers remains unclear. This trial assessed whether a policy of not giving prophylactic platelet transfusions was as effective and safe as a policy of providing prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted this randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial at 14 centers in the United Kingdom and Australia. Patients were randomly assigned to receive, or not to receive, prophylactic platelet transfusions when morning platelet counts were less than 10×10(9) per liter. Eligible patients were persons 16 years of age or older who were receiving chemotherapy or undergoing stem-cell transplantation and who had or were expected to have thrombocytopenia. The primary end point was bleeding of World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, 3, or 4 up to 30 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 600 patients (301 in the no-prophylaxis group and 299 in the prophylaxis group) underwent randomization between 2006 and 2011. Bleeding of WHO grade 2, 3, or 4 occurred in 151 of 300 patients (50%) in the no-prophylaxis group, as compared with 128 of 298 (43%) in the prophylaxis group (adjusted difference in proportions, 8.4 percentage points; 90% confidence interval, 1.7 to 15.2; P=0.06 for noninferiority). Patients in the no-prophylaxis group had more days with bleeding and a shorter time to the first bleeding episode than did patients in the prophylaxis group. Platelet use was markedly reduced in the no-prophylaxis group. A prespecified subgroup analysis identified similar rates of bleeding in the two study groups among patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study support the need for the continued use of prophylaxis with platelet transfusion and show the benefit of such prophylaxis for reducing bleeding, as compared with no prophylaxis. A significant number of patients had bleeding despite prophylaxis. (Funded by the National Health Service Blood and Transplant Research and Development Committee and the Australian Red Cross Blood Service; TOPPS Controlled-Trials.com number, ISRCTN08758735.).

A randomized noninferiority crossover trial of corrected count increments and bleeding in thrombocytopenic hematology patients receiving 2- to 5- versus 6- or 7-day-stored platelets.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial screening offers the possibility of extending platelet (PLT) storage to Day 7. We conducted a noninferiority, crossover trial comparing PLTs stored for 6 or 7 days versus 2 to 5 days. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Stable hematology patients were allocated to receive blocks of 2- to 5- and 6- or 7-day PLTs in random order. The primary outcome was the proportion of successful transfusions during the first block, defined as a corrected count increment (CCI) of more than 4.5 at 8 to 24 hours posttransfusion. RESULTS: Of 122 patients with an evaluable first block, 87 (71%) and 84 (69%) had successful transfusions after 2- to 5- and 6- or 7-day PLTs of mean (SD) ages of 3.8 (1.0) and 6.4 (0.5) days, respectively. Six- or 7-day PLTs were declared noninferior to 2- to 5-day PLTs since the upper confidence interval (CI) limit was less than the predefined noninferiority margin of 10% (95% CI, -14.0% to 9.1%; p = 0.766). Logistic regression analysis gave an adjusted odds ratio of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.47-1.58; p = 0.625). Mean (SD) 8- to 24-hour CCIs were 9.4 (7.9) and 7.7 (7.1) after transfusion with 2- to 5- or 6- or 7-day PLTs (95% CI, -3.31 to 0.03; p = 0.054). The proportions of days with bleeding scores of WHO Grade 2 or higher were 13% (38/297 days) and 11% (32/296 days; 95% CI, -3.2 to 7.2; p = 0.454). Median interval to next PLT transfusion (2 days) was unaffected (95% CI, -10.5 to 5.4; p = 0.531). CONCLUSION: In hematology patients, there was no evidence that 6- or 7-day PLTs were inferior to 2- to 5-day PLTs, as measured by proportion of patients with successful transfusions, bleeding events, or interval to next transfusion.

The Transfusion Alternatives Preoperatively in Sickle Cell Disease (TAPS) study: a randomised, controlled, multicentre clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: No consensus exists on whether preoperative blood transfusions are beneficial in patients with sickle-cell disease. We assessed whether perioperative complication rates would be altered by preoperative transfusion. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised trial. Eligible patients were aged at least 1 year, had haemoglobin SS or Sß(0)thalassaemia sickle-cell-disease subtypes, and were scheduled for low-risk or medium-risk operations. Patients were randomly assigned no transfusion or transfusion no more than 10 days before surgery. The primary outcome was the proportion of clinically important complications between randomisation and 30 days after surgery. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: 67 (96%) of 70 enrolled patients-33 no preoperative transfusion and 34 preoperative transfusion-were assessed. 65 (97%) of 67 patients had the haemoglobin SS subtype and 54 (81%) were scheduled to undergo medium-risk surgery. 13 (39%) of 33 patients in the no-preoperative-transfusion group had clinically important complications, compared with five (15%) in the preoperative-transfusion group (p=0.023). Of these, 10 (30%) and one (3%), respectively, had serious adverse events. The unadjusted odds ratio of clinically important complications was 3.8 (95% CI 1.2-12.2, p=0.027). 10 (91%) of 11 serious adverse events were acute chest syndrome (nine in the no-preoperative-transfusion group and one in the preoperative-transfusion group). Duration of hospital stay and readmission rates did not differ between study groups. INTERPRETATION: Preoperative transfusion was associated with decreased perioperative complications in patients with sickle-cell disease in this trial. This approach could, therefore, be beneficial for patients with the haemoglobin SS subtype who are scheduled to undergo low-risk and medium-risk surgeries. FUNDING: NHS Blood and Transplant.

Impact of prophylactic platelet transfusions on bleeding events in patients with hematologic malignancies: a subgroup analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomized trial compared a policy of no prophylaxis with a policy of prophylactic platelet (PLT) transfusions at counts of fewer than 10 × 10(9) /L in patients with hematologic malignancies. The results suggested the effectiveness of prophylactic PLT transfusions may vary according to patient diagnosis and treatment plan. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This article presents full subgroup analyses and compares treatment effects between autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHSCT; n = 421) and chemotherapy/allogeneic HSCT (chemo/alloHSCT; n = 179) patients. RESULTS: Prespecified subgroup analysis found that the reduction in proportion of patients experiencing WHO Grade 2 to 4 bleeds (main trial outcome) seen in the prophylaxis arm was of greater magnitude in chemo/alloHSCT than autoHSCT patients (interaction p = 0.04). Analysis of secondary outcomes showed a shorter time to first bleeding episode with no prophylaxis in the chemo/alloHSCT group (hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.21-2.79; p = 0.004) compared to the autoHSCT group (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.85-1.48; p = 0.4; interaction p = 0.08). The increased number of days with Grade 2 to 4 bleeds with a no-prophylaxis policy was similar in chemo/alloHSCT (rate ratio, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.10-3.26) and in autoHSCT patients (rate ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.04-1.97). Both subgroups showed significant reductions in PLT transfusions with a no-prophylaxis strategy. CONCLUSION: There is evidence that the effectiveness of prophylactic PLT transfusions may differ between subgroups, with chemo/alloHSCT patients receiving prophylactic PLT transfusions appearing to show a greater reduction in bleeding outcomes compared to patients following a no-prophylaxis policy.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions in patients with blood malignancies: cost analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This cost analysis uses data from a randomized trial comparing a no prophylaxis versus prophylactic platelet (PLT) transfusion policy (counts <10 × 10(9) /L) in adult patients with hematologic malignancies. Results are presented for all patients and separately for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) (autoHSCT) and chemotherapy/allogeneic HSCT (chemo/alloHSCT) patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were collected to 30 days on PLT and red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, major bleeds, serious adverse events, critical care, and hematology ward stay. Data were costed using 2011 to 2012 UK unit costs and converted into US$. Sensitivity analyses were performed on uncertain cost variables. RESULTS: Across the whole trial no prophylaxis saved costs compared to prophylaxis: -$1760 per patient (95% confidence interval [CI], -$3250 to -$249; p < 0.05). For autoHSCT patients there was no cost difference between arms: -$110 per patient (95% CI, -$1648 to $1565; p = 0.89). For chemo/alloHSCT patients no prophylaxis cost significantly less than prophylaxis: -$5686 per patient (95% CI, -$8580 to -$2853; p < 0.01). The cost impact of no prophylaxis differed significantly between subgroups. Sensitivity analyses varying daily treatment costs and ward stay for chemo/alloHSCT patients reduced cost differences to -$941 per patient (p = 0.21) across the whole trial and -$2927 per patient (p < 0.05) in chemo/alloHSCT subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: It is unclear whether a no-prophylaxis policy saves costs overall. In chemo/alloHSCT patients cost savings are apparent but their magnitude is sensitive to a number of variables and must be considered alongside clinical data showing increased bleeding rates. In autoHSCT patients savings generated through lower PLT use in no-prophylaxis arm were offset by cost increases elsewhere, for example, additional RBC transfusions. Cost-effectiveness analyses of alternative PLT transfusion policies simultaneously considering costs and patient-reported outcomes are warranted.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of preoperative transfusion in patients with sickle cell disease using evidence from the TAPS trial.

The study's objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of preoperative transfusion compared with no preoperative transfusion in patients with sickle cell disease undergoing low- or medium-risk surgery. Seventy patients with sickle cell disease (HbSS/Sß(0) thal genotypes) undergoing elective surgery participated in a multicentre randomised trial, Transfusion Alternatives Preoperatively in Sickle Cell Disease (TAPS). Here, a cost-effectiveness analysis based on evidence from that trial is presented. A decision-analytic model is used to incorporate long-term consequences of transfusions and acute chest syndrome. Costs and health benefits, expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), are reported from the 'within-trial' analysis and for the decision-analytic model. The probability of cost-effectiveness for each form of management is calculated taking into account the small sample size and other sources of uncertainty. In the range of scenarios considered in the analysis, preoperative transfusion was more effective, with the mean improvement in QALYs ranging from 0.018 to 0.206 per patient, and also less costly in all but one scenario, with the mean cost difference ranging from -£813 to £26. All scenarios suggested preoperative transfusion had a probability of cost-effectiveness >0.79 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY.

Transfusion of prion-filtered red cells does not increase the rate of alloimmunization or transfusion reactions in patients: results of the UK trial of prion-filtered versus standard red cells in surgical patients (PRISM A).

This study, conducted for the UK Blood Transfusion Services (UKBTS), evaluated the clinical safety of red cells filtered through a CE-marked prion removal filter (P-Capt™). Patients requiring blood transfusion for elective procedures in nine UK hospitals were entered into a non-randomized open trial to assess development of red cell antibodies to standard red cell (RCC) or prion-filtered red cell concentrates (PF-RCC) at eight weeks and six months post-transfusion. Patients who received at least 1 unit of PF-RCC were compared with a control cohort given RCC only. About 917 PF-RCC and 1336 RCC units were transfused into 299 and 291 patients respectively. Twenty-six new red cell antibodies were detected post-transfusion in 10 patients in each arm, an overall alloimmunization rate of 4.4%. Neither the treatment arm [odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3, 2.5] nor number of units transfused (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.8, 1.1) had a significant effect on the proportion of patients who developed new alloantibodies. No pan-reactive antibodies or antibodies specifically against PF-RCC were detected. There was no difference in transfusion reactions between arms, and no novel transfusion-related adverse events clearly attributable to PF-RCC were seen. These data suggest that prion filtration of red cells does not reduce overall transfusion safety. This finding requires confirmation in large populations of transfused patients.

Two-year outcomes following a randomised platelet transfusion trial in preterm infants.

OBJECTIVE: Assess mortality and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 2 years of corrected age in children who participated in the PlaNeT-2/MATISSE (Platelets for Neonatal Transfusion - 2/Management of Thrombocytopenia in Special Subgroup) study, which reported that a higher platelet transfusion threshold was associated with significantly increased mortality or major bleeding compared to a lower one. DESIGN: Randomised clinical trial, enrolling from June 2011 to August 2017. Follow-up was complete by January 2020. Caregivers were not blinded; however, outcome assessors were blinded to treatment group. SETTING: 43 level II/III/IV neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) across UK, Netherlands and Ireland. PATIENTS: 660 infants born at less than 34 weeks' gestation with platelet counts less than 50×109/L. INTERVENTIONS: Infants were randomised to undergo a platelet transfusion at platelet count thresholds of 50×109/L (higher threshold group) or 25×109/L (lower threshold group). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Our prespecified long-term follow-up outcome was a composite of death or neurodevelopmental impairment (developmental delay, cerebral palsy, seizure disorder, profound hearing or vision loss) at 2 years of corrected age. RESULTS: Follow-up data were available for 601 of 653 (92%) eligible participants. Of the 296 infants assigned to the higher threshold group, 147 (50%) died or survived with neurodevelopmental impairment, as compared with 120 (39%) of 305 infants assigned to the lower threshold group (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.17, p=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Infants randomised to a higher platelet transfusion threshold of 50×109/L compared with 25×109/L had a higher rate of death or significant neurodevelopmental impairment at a corrected age of 2 years. This further supports evidence of harm caused by high prophylactic platelet transfusion thresholds in preterm infants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN87736839.

The granulocytes in neutropenia 1 (GIN 1) study: a safety study of granulocytes collected from whole blood and stored in additive solution and plasma.

OBJECTIVE/AIM: To evaluate the safety of transfusing pooled, whole blood-derived granulocytes in additive solution and plasma (GASP) in 30 recipients. BACKGROUND: Demand for granulocytes in England has increased five-fold. With the advantages of reduced red cell, plasma and overall volume, GASP maintains function in vitro. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Observations were recorded prior to and post transfusion. Increments were recorded at 1 h and the following morning. Leucocyte antibody screening was undertaken prior to and at 1-6 months following transfusion. RESULTS: Thirty patients aged between 8 months and 68 years received 221 GASP in 148 transfusion episodes. GASP contained an average of 1.0 × 10(10) granulocytes in 207 mL. Adults usually received two packs and children 10-20 mL kg(-1). Children and adults received a median [interquartile range (IQR)] dose of 12.5 (9.1-25.3) and 19.7 (12.0-25.8) × 10(9) granulocytes per transfusion, respectively. There was one episode of transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO) in a patient with chronic cardiac failure following 600 mL of unpooled granulocytes, other fluids and one GASP. New leucocyte alloimmunisation occurred in 3/30 recipients 10%. No other significant reactions were reported. Median peripheral blood neutrophil increments at 1 h post transfusion were 0.06 (IQR, 0.01-0.17) in children and (0.03) (IQR, 0-0.16) in adults. CONCLUSION: GASP has a similar safety profile to other sources of granulocytes for patients with refractory infection or in need of secondary prophylactic transfusion. Further studies are required to clarify the role of GASP in the treatment of neutropenic patients.

Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in a transfusion recipient: coincidence or cause?

BACKGROUND: To date there have been four instances of infection transmitted through blood transfusions derived from individuals who later developed variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). The identification of further transmission of vCJD through this route would have important implications for risk assessment and public health. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Through the UK Transfusion Medicine Epidemiology Review (TMER) the fate of blood donations from individuals who develop vCJD is traced and recipients of labile components are identified. The details of recipients are cross-checked with the register of vCJD cases held at the National CJD Surveillance Unit (NCJDSU) to identify any linkage between donors and recipients. In the reverse study, when individuals with vCJD are found to have a history of blood transfusion the donors of the transfused blood components are traced and their details cross-checked with the vCJD register to identify any missed or unrecognized linkage between donors and recipients. CASE REPORT: A case of vCJD has been identified with a history of blood transfusion in infancy. The donors who provided the components transfused cannot be identified, but a blood donor known to have donated blood to another individual who subsequently developed vCJD could have been a donor to the index case. RESULTS: The at-risk donor is alive 20 years after the relevant donation and continued to donate for some years, until identified as at risk, with 27 other blood components issued for use in patients, none of whom are known to have developed vCJD. CONCLUSION: Circumstantial evidence has raised the possibility that the case in this report represents a further instance of transfusion transmission of vCJD. However, detailed investigation indicates that the pattern of events may have occurred by chance and disease in this individual may have been caused by transmission of bovine spongiform encephalopathy infection, as is the presumed cause in other primary cases of vCJD.

Restrictive vs liberal blood transfusion for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: rationale and protocol for a cluster randomized feasibility trial.

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is the commonest reason for hospitalization with hemorrhage in the UK and the leading indication for transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs). Observational studies suggest an association between more liberal RBC transfusion and adverse patient outcomes, and a recent randomised trial reported increased further bleeding and mortality with a liberal transfusion policy. TRIGGER (Transfusion in Gastrointestinal Bleeding) is a pragmatic, cluster randomized trial which aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of implementing a restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion policy in adult patients admitted with AUGIB. The trial will take place in 6 UK hospitals, and each centre will be randomly allocated to a transfusion policy. Clinicians throughout each hospital will manage all eligible patients according to the transfusion policy for the 6-month trial recruitment period. In the restrictive centers, patients become eligible for RBC transfusion when their hemoglobin is <8 g/dL. In the liberal centers patients become eligible for transfusion once their hemoglobin is <10 g/dL. All clinicians will have the discretion to transfuse outside of the policy but will be asked to document the reasons for doing so. Feasibility outcome measures include protocol adherence, recruitment rate, and evidence of selection bias. Clinical outcome measures include further bleeding, mortality, thromboembolic events, and infections. Quality of life will be measured using the EuroQol EQ-5D at day 28, and the costs associated with hospitalization for AUGIB in the UK will be estimated. Consent will be sought from participants or their representatives according to patient capacity for use of routine hospital data and day 28 follow up. The study has ethical approval for conduct in England and Scotland. Results will be analysed according to a pre-defined statistical analysis plan and disseminated in peer reviewed publications to relevant stakeholders. The results of this study will inform the feasibility and design of a phase III randomized trial.

Do all patients with hematologic malignancies and severe thrombocytopenia need prophylactic platelet transfusions? Background, rationale, and design of a clinical trial (trial of platelet prophylaxis) to assess the effectiveness of prophylactic platelet transfusions.

Although considerable advances have been made in many aspects of platelet transfusion therapy in the last 30 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, including the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding in patients with bone marrow failure. We have designed a randomized controlled trial to compare prophylactic platelet use with a threshold of a platelet count of 10 x 10(9)/L with no prophylaxis in adult thrombocytopenic patients with hematologic malignancies. The trial question is whether a no-prophylactic policy for the use of platelet transfusions in patients with hematologic malignancies is not inferior to a threshold prophylactic policy at 10 x 10(9)/L, for bleeding at World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, 3, or 4, up to 30 days from randomization. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients who have a significant clinical bleed, defined as WHO grade 2 or higher up to 30 days from randomization. Subsidiary clinical outcome measures include time to first bleed and a descriptive analysis of all severe bleeds. A bleeding assessment form is completed daily for all study subjects until day 30 from randomization. Minor modifications were made to the definitions at WHO grades 1 and 2 for petechiae and duration of nose bleeds, after piloting of the bleeding assessment forms. This study has been designed as a 2-stage randomized trial with an interim analysis planned after a minimum of 100 patients had been randomized and had completed their period of observation. Patients have initially been enrolled through 3 United Kingdom hematology centers. The interim analysis has been completed, and the results have confirmed a final sample size of 600 patients. Recruitment is now being extended to other centers in United Kingdom and Australia. Local research nurses are not blinded to treatment allocation, but a number of measures to reduce risk of assessment bias include repeated education around standard operating procedures, common definitions, and duplication of assessments. The expected completion date for the 5-year study is December 2011.

Preoperative transfusion in sickle cell disease: a survey of practice in England.

OBJECTIVES: To gather data on current preoperative transfusion practice and postoperative complications in sickle cell disease (SCD) as a prelude to a randomised trial. METHODS: A prospective one year survey of 114 SCD patients undergoing elective surgery in 31 English hospitals was undertaken. RESULTS: 43%, 39% and 23% of patients respectively [corrected] received no transfusion, top-up and exchange transfusion preoperatively. Overall postoperative complication rates were 18%, 26% and 17%, with SCD related complications of 12%, 8% and 0% respectively. 85% of patients with [corrected]HbSC/HbSss(+)thalassaemia and 71% of obstetric and gynaecology patients were not transfused preoperatively, whereas 59% patients undergoing ENT procedures and 83% of hip replacements had top-up and exchange transfusions respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that having moderate/high risk procedures was a predictor of postoperative complications (OR 4.9 (95% CL: 1.3 to 18), P = 0.017) [corrected] while preoperative transfusion was not (OR 1.7, (95% CL: [corrected] 0.5 to 6), P = 0.41). CONCLUSION: The lack of clear benefit of transfusion confirms the need for a randomised controlled trial of transfusion vs. no transfusion in patients with HbSS and HbSss(0)thalassaemia.

The effect of universal leukoreduction on postoperative infections and length of hospital stay in elective orthopedic and cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: A before and after study was undertaken to investigate the effect of universal leukoreduction (ULR) in the UK on postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS) and infections. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting or total hip and/or knee replacement in 11 hospitals received non-WBC-reduced RBCs before implementation of ULR (T1, n=997) or WBC-reduced RBCs after implementation of ULR (T2, n=1098). RESULTS: Patients in T1 and T2 were comparable except patients in T2 received on average more units of RBCs but had lower discharge Hct levels. Postoperative LOS (T1, 10 +/- 8.9 days; T2, 9.6 +/- 6.9 days) and the proportion of patients with suspected and proven postoperative infections (T1, 21.0%; T2, 20.0%) were unchanged before and after ULR (LOS, hazard ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.92-1.10; infections, OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77-1.02). Subgroup analysis showed no significant interaction between storage age or dose of blood on responsiveness of primary outcomes to ULR. Secondary outcomes were unchanged overall. Analysis by surgical procedure gave conflicting results with both increased mortality (p=0.031) and an increased proportion of cardiac patients with proven infections (p=0.004), whereas the proportion of orthopedic patients with proven infections was reduced (p=0.002) after ULR. CONCLUSION: Implementation of ULR had no major impact on postoperative infection or LOS in patients undergoing elective surgical procedures who received transfusion(s). Smaller effects, either detrimental or beneficial of ULR, cannot be excluded.