Use of an in-house trypsin-based method to resolve the interference of daratumumab.

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab (DARA) is a monoclonal antibody for treatment of plasma cell myeloma targeting CD38, a surface molecule expressed on plasma cells and red blood cells (RBCs). This complicates blood bank testing, requiring dithiothreitol (DTT) to remove DARA interference. A simple in-house method of removing DARA interference without use of DTT, a potentially hazardous chemical, is desirable. We demonstrate a trypsin-based method to remove interference in antibody testing at a medical center (MC), with parallel testing at an immunohematology reference laboratory (IRL). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Pre-DARA type and screen (T&S) samples were obtained from 61 patients for antibody testing and RBC phenotyping using untreated reagent RBCs. Subsequent post-DARA T&S testing was performed with untreated reagent RBCs to demonstrate interference and repeated after trypsin treatment. Positive trypsin-treated antibody screens were reflexed to antibody identification using trypsin-treated panel cells. Parallel testing was performed on the same post-DARA samples at IRL. RESULTS: DARA interference was detected in 61/61 (100%) samples by MC and IRL. After trypsin treatment, DARA interference was eliminated in 60/61 (98.4%) antibody screens by both institutions with an overall percent agreement of 96.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.7%-99.6%). Identification of known alloantibodies was confirmed in 3/3 patients with 100% concordant results between MC and IRL. There were no false-negative results demonstrated by IRL's functionally CD38-negative controls. CONCLUSION: Our in-house trypsin-based method enables pretransfusion testing of patients receiving DARA in an accurate and cost-effective manner without missing clinically significant alloantibodies. This presents an additional testing option where DTT use is undesirable.

Transfusion reactions associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma therapy for SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma (CP) for treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has shown preliminary signs of effectiveness in moderate to severely ill patients in reducing mortality. While studies have demonstrated a low risk of serious adverse events, the comprehensive incidence and nature of the spectrum of transfusion reactions to CP is unknown. We retrospectively examined 427 adult inpatient CP transfusions to determine incidence and types of reactions, as well as clinical parameters and risk factors associated with transfusion reactions. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed for 427 transfusions to 215 adult patients with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) within the Mount Sinai Health System, through the US Food and Drug Administration emergency investigational new drug and the Mayo Clinic Expanded Access Protocol to Convalescent Plasma approval pathways. Transfusions were blindly evaluated by two reviewers and adjudicated by a third reviewer in discordant cases. Patient demographics and clinical and laboratory parameters were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-five reactions from 427 transfusions were identified (12.9% incidence), and 13 were attributed to transfusion (3.1% incidence). Reactions were classified as underlying COVID-19 (76%), febrile nonhemolytic (10.9%), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (9.1%), and allergic (1.8%) and hypotensive (1.8%) reactions. Statistical analysis identified increased transfusion reaction risk for ABO blood group B or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores of 12 to 13, and decreased risk within the age group of 80 to 89 years. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of CP as a safe, therapeutic option from a transfusion reaction perspective, in the setting of COVID-19. Further studies are needed to confirm the clinical significance of ABO group B, age, and predisposing disease severity in the incidence of transfusion reaction events.

Convalescent plasma treatment of severe COVID-19: a propensity score-matched control study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a new human disease with few effective treatments1. Convalescent plasma, donated by persons who have recovered from COVID-19, is the acellular component of blood that contains antibodies, including those that specifically recognize SARS-CoV-2. These antibodies, when transfused into patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, are thought to exert an antiviral effect, suppressing virus replication before patients have mounted their own humoral immune responses2,3. Virus-specific antibodies from recovered persons are often the first available therapy for an emerging infectious disease, a stopgap treatment while new antivirals and vaccines are being developed1,2. This retrospective, propensity score-matched case-control study assessed the effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy in 39 patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19 at The Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. Oxygen requirements on day 14 after transfusion worsened in 17.9% of plasma recipients versus 28.2% of propensity score-matched controls who were hospitalized with COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.75-0.98; chi-square test P value = 0.025). Survival also improved in plasma recipients (adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.89; chi-square test P = 0.027). Convalescent plasma is potentially effective against COVID-19, but adequately powered, randomized controlled trials are needed.

How do we perform and bill for blood bank physician consultative services?

Transfusion medicine (TM) physicians provide medical services that benefit all patients such as providing 24-hour laboratory coverage, advising health care providers on test interpretation and selection, validating new methods, and supervising technical personnel. These services ensure delivery of accurate, reliable, and timely laboratory test results and blood products. TM physicians also provide consultations to individual patients by 1) interpreting and determining the clinical significance of test results (e.g., alloantibodies, direct antiglobulin tests), 2) recommending appropriate component therapy and approving deviations from laboratory policy, and 3) evaluating and recommending treatment of suspected transfusion reactions. The potential benefits of consultations are improved quality and cost of health care, enhanced provider education, and decreased inappropriate testing and product utilization. When physician services are delivered to individual patients, are appropriately requested, provide a diagnosis or recommendation, and are properly documented, TM physicians can receive professional reimbursement. While many TM physicians provide medical direction and oversight of apheresis procedures, billing in this area is sufficiently complex to be reviewed elsewhere. The objective of this article is for educational purposes to describe the 1) benefits of a consultative TM service, 2) development of reimbursement systems in the United States for professional component services and the current regulatory requirements, 3) current procedural terminology codes commonly used for TM physician services, and 4) examples of consultation documentation and daily workflow at tertiary care teaching hospitals. The information provided should help guide physicians to deliver and bill for these services.

G6PD Deficiency in an HIV Clinic Setting in the Dominican Republic.

Because human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients receive prophylaxis with oxidative drugs, those with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency may experience hemolysis. However, G6PD deficiency has not been studied in the Dominican Republic, where many individuals have African ancestry. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of G6PD deficiency in Dominican HIV-infected patients and to attempt to develop a cost-effective algorithm for identifying such individuals. To this end, histories, chart reviews, and G6PD testing were performed for 238 consecutive HIV-infected adult clinic patients. The overall prevalence of G6PD deficiency (8.8%) was similar in males (9.3%) and females (8.5%), and higher in Haitians (18%) than Dominicans (6.4%; P = 0.01). By logistic regression, three clinical variables predicted G6PD status: maternal country of birth (P = 0.01) and a history of hemolysis (P = 0.01) or severe anemia (P = 0.03). Using these criteria, an algorithm was developed, in which a patient subset was identified that would benefit most from G6PD screening, yielding a sensitivity of 94.7% and a specificity of 97.2%, increasing the pretest probability (8.8-15.1%), and halving the number of patients needing testing. This algorithm may provide a cost-effective strategy for improving care in resource-limited settings.

Acquired hemoglobin variants and exposure to glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficient red blood cell units during exchange transfusion for sickle cell disease in a patient requiring antigen-matched blood.

Red blood cell exchange (RBCEx) is frequently used in the management of patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) and acute chest syndrome or stroke, or to maintain target hemoglobin S (HbS) levels. In these settings, RBCEx is a category I or II recommendation according to guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis published by the American Society for Apheresis. Matching donor red blood cells (RBCs) to recipient phenotypes (e.g., C, E, K-antigen negative) can decrease the risk of alloimmunization in patients with multi-transfused SCD. However, this may select for donors with a higher prevalence of RBC disorders for which screening is not performed. This report describes a patient with SCD treated with RBCEx using five units negative for C, E, K, Fya, Fyb (prospectively matched), four of which were from donors with hemoglobin variants and/or glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency. Pre-RBCEx HbS quantification by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) demonstrated 49.3% HbS and 2.8% hemoglobin C, presumably from transfusion of a hemoglobin C-containing RBC unit during a previous RBCEx. Post-RBCEx HPLC showed the appearance of hemoglobin G-Philadelphia. Two units were G6PD-deficient. The patient did well, but the consequences of transfusing RBC units that are G6PD-deficient and contain hemoglobin variants are unknown. Additional studies are needed to investigate effects on storage, in-vivo RBC recovery and survival, and physiological effects following transfusion of these units. Post-RBCEx HPLC can monitor RBCEx efficiency and detect the presence of abnormal transfused units.

Quality monitoring of microbial contamination of cryopreserved parathyroid tissue.

Cryopreservation of parathyroid tissue (PT) provides patients undergoing parathyroidectomy with an option for delayed autologous heterotopic parathyroid transplantation. A standard protocol for quality monitoring of PT has not been established. This article describes a method for detecting the presence of bacterial contamination in PT tissue intended for autologous transplantation. PT was received in the tissue bank, processed under aseptic conditions, and placed into cryopreservation medium. Sterility testing was performed at 2 time points prior to cryopreservation. From January 2005 to October 2008, 47 PT samples were cryopreserved. The following bacteria were isolated from 11 PT specimens: Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus capitis subspecies ureolyticus, Staphylococcus lugdunensis, Bacillus pumilus, and corynebacteria (diphtheroids). 23% of PTs were contaminated at the time of collection, predominantly with indigenous bacteria. Quality monitoring using this protocol is a useful tool to identify tissues contaminated with bacteria.

Comparative outcome analysis of ABO-incompatible and positive crossmatch renal transplantation: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: ABO-incompatible (ABOi) and positive crossmatch (XM) renal transplants pose special immunologic challenges. It is important to compare outcomes, study resource utilization, and attempt to risk stratify patients in these higher risk transplant settings. METHODS: We compared apheresis utilization and transplant outcomes in ABOi, XM, and combined ABOi-XM renal transplants. We also analyzed multiple parameters, including patient and laboratory variables, to identify predictors of transplant outcome. RESULTS: Incidences of early (< or =30 days posttransplant) antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and acute cellular rejection (ACR) were similar among the three incompatible groups whereas they differed in allograft rejection for late (>30 days posttransplant) AMR and ACR. Notably, there were no episodes of late AMR among ABOi patients. Patients treated with more than four pretransplant plasmapheresis/intravenous immunoglobulin (PP/IVIg) had a greater likelihood of experiencing early AMR. The median number of posttransplant PP/IVIg treatments was greater than twofold higher in ABOi-XM and XM patients compared to ABOi patients. Patients who required more than five posttransplant PP/IVIg procedures and those with one or more prior renal transplants had higher incidences of late ACR. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis aids in defining apheresis resource utilization and helps in risk stratification of incompatible renal transplantation. It also aids in predicting allograft rejection and provides an opportunity for preemptive monitoring and treatment.