Predicting donor-related factors for high platelet yield donations by classification and regression tree analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Collecting high-dose (HD) or double-dose (DD) apheresis platelets units from a single collection offers significant benefit by improving inventory logistics and minimizing the cost per unit produced. Platelet collection yield by apheresis is primarily influenced by donor factors, but the cell separator used also affects the collection yield. OBJECTIVES: To predict the cutoff in donor factors resulting in HD and DD platelet collections between Trima/Spectra Optia and MCS+ apheresis equipment using Classification and Regression Trees (CART) analysis. METHODS: High platelet yield collections (target ≥ 4.5 × 1011 platelets) using MCS+, Trima Accel and Spectra Optia were included. Endpoints were ≥ 6 × 1011 platelets for DD and ≥ 4.5 to < 6 × 1011 for HD collections. The CART, a tree building technique, was used to predict the donor factors resulting in high-yield platelet collections in Trima/Spectra Optia and MCS+ equipment by R programming. RESULTS: Out of 1,102 donations, the DDs represented 60% and the HDs, 31%. The Trima/Spectra Optia predicted higher success rates when the donor platelet count was set at ≥ 205 × 103/µl and ≥ 237 × 103/µl for HD and DD collections. The MCS+ predicted better success when the donor platelet count was ≥ 286 × 103/µl for HD and ≥ 384 × 103/µl for DD collections. Increased donor weight helped counter the effects of lower donor platelet counts only for HD collections in both the equipment. CONCLUSIONS: The donor platelet count and weight formed the strongest criteria for predicting high platelet yield donations. Success rates for collecting DD and HD products were higher in the Trima/Spectra Optia, as they require lower donor platelet count and body weight than the MCS+.

Predicting donor-related factors for high platelet yield donations by classification and regression tree analysis

Introduction Collecting high-dose (HD) or double-dose (DD) apheresis platelets units from a single collection offers significant benefit by improving inventory logistics and minimizing the cost per unit produced. Platelet collection yield by apheresis is primarily influenced by donor factors, but the cell separator used also affects the collection yield. Objectives To predict the cutoff in donor factors resulting in HD and DD platelet collections between Trima/Spectra Optia and MCS+ apheresis equipment using Classification and Regression Trees (CART) analysis. Methods High platelet yield collections (target ≥ 4.5 × 1011 platelets) using MCS+, Trima Accel and Spectra Optia were included. Endpoints were ≥ 6 × 1011 platelets for DD and ≥ 4.5 to < 6 × 1011 for HD collections. The CART, a tree building technique, was used to predict the donor factors resulting in high-yield platelet collections in Trima/Spectra Optia and MCS+ equipment by R programming. Results Out of 1,102 donations, the DDs represented 60% and the HDs, 31%. The Trima/Spectra Optia predicted higher success rates when the donor platelet count was set at ≥ 205 × 103/µl and ≥ 237 × 103/µl for HD and DD collections. The MCS+ predicted better success when the donor platelet count was ≥ 286 × 103/µl for HD and ≥ 384 × 103/µl for DD collections. Increased donor weight helped counter the effects of lower donor platelet counts only for HD collections in both the equipment. Conclusions The donor platelet count and weight formed the strongest criteria for predicting high platelet yield donations. Success rates for collecting DD and HD products were higher in the Trima/Spectra Optia, as they require lower donor platelet count and body weight than the MCS+.

Comparison of abo antibody levels in apheresis platelets suspended in platelet additive solution and plasma

ABSTRACT Background Transfusion of platelets (PLTs) with high ABO antibody titres can pose a risk of hemolysis if the unit crosses the ABO type. The PLTs stored in the platelet additive solution (PAS) remove asubstantial fraction of plasma and replace it with an isotonicbuffered solution.We aimed to assess the difference in anti-A/B antibody levels in Groups O, A and B apheresis platelets (APs) suspended in plasma and PAS. Methodology Apheresis donors are categorized into two groups, Plasma (Group I) and PAS (Group II), each blood group (A, B and O) had 20 samples. The anti-A/B(IgM)antibody levels were recorded from the AP donor (Group II) and from the AP units for both groups. The reduction in the anti-A/B(IgM) antibody levels in the APs suspended in the PAS for each blood group was determined. Results The median anti-A titres in blood Groups B (p = 0.009) and O (p = 0.005) was significantly lower in Group II. However, the difference in anti-B levels was not significant in the blood groups A (p = 0.057) and O (p = 0.205). The median level of reduction in IgM antibody titres across donor samples and the PAS-stored platelets was two-fold. The regression showed a level of reduction in antibody titres which can be explained by baseline donor antibody titres in blood groups A and B compared to blood group O. Conclusion The medianABO antibody titres were lower in APs suspended in PAS than in plasma. Addition of the PAS significantly lowered the IgM antibody titres by twofold, compared to plasma.

Comparison of abo antibody levels in apheresis platelets suspended in platelet additive solution and plasma.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion of platelets (PLTs) with high ABO antibody titres can pose a risk of hemolysis if the unit crosses the ABO type. The PLTs stored in the platelet additive solution (PAS) remove asubstantial fraction of plasma and replace it with an isotonicbuffered solution.We aimed to assess the difference in anti-A/B antibody levels in Groups O, A and B apheresis platelets (APs) suspended in plasma and PAS. METHODOLOGY: Apheresis donors are categorized into two groups, Plasma (Group I) and PAS (Group II), each blood group (A, B and O) had 20 samples. The anti-A/B(IgM)antibody levels were recorded from the AP donor (Group II) and from the AP units for both groups. The reduction in the anti-A/B(IgM) antibody levels in the APs suspended in the PAS for each blood group was determined. RESULTS: The median anti-A titres in blood Groups B (p = 0.009) and O (p = 0.005) was significantly lower in Group II. However, the difference in anti-B levels was not significant in the blood groups A (p = 0.057) and O (p = 0.205). The median level of reduction in IgM antibody titres across donor samples and the PAS-stored platelets was two-fold. The regression showed a level of reduction in antibody titres which can be explained by baseline donor antibody titres in blood groups A and B compared to blood group O. CONCLUSION: The medianABO antibody titres were lower in APs suspended in PAS than in plasma. Addition of the PAS significantly lowered the IgM antibody titres by twofold, compared to plasma.

Modeling predonation testing strategies in platelet donations - Approach from low throughput apheresis blood center from India.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-based blood centers in India adopt pre-donation testing for transfusion-transmitted infections (TTI) before plateletpheresis donations. However, the WHO emphasizes on TTI tests be performed on samples collected during the donation process. The study objective was to determine whether cost implications by adopting product testing along with predonation testing or only product testing strategy in platelet donation in Indian blood centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study on registered plateletpheresis donors, strategy-1 with predonation testing using rapid tests and product testing using chemiluminescence (CLIA) were compared with alternate models: Strategy-2 (predonation test using CLIA and product testing with rapid test) and strategy-3 (product testing). For strategy-1 and 2, donors wait for predonation test to complete or visit blood center twice, while strategy-3 donors donate plateletpheresis immediately. The cost implications of these strategies were compared among registered plateletpheresis donors. RESULTS: Out of 560 donors registered with strategy-1, three donors were reactive in predonation tests and six platelet units were discarded at product testing. After modeling, for strategy-2, nine donors would be identified as sero-reactive at pre-donation test only, while in strategy-3, nine units would be discarded in product testing. Only 506 donations were completed in strategy 1 after donor attrition. Recoverable costs was greater for strategy-3 (INR 5,146,500) than strategy-2 (INR 5,120,000) and strategy-1 (INR 5,069,000). CONCLUSION: Strategy-3 appears cost-effective but requires regulatory changes in the Indian setting. Testing apheresis procedures using Strategy 2 had greater cost recovery, and also prevents infectious donations and thereby enhances blood safety with the present guidelines.