干细胞移植治疗重型再生障碍性贫血：研究应用与进展

文题释义：获得性再生障碍性贫血：是一种免疫介导的骨髓衰竭性疾病,主要表现为骨髓有核细胞增生低下、一系或多系血细胞减少及其所致的贫血、出血和感染。获得性再生障碍性贫血的发病机制尚未完全阐明,目前认为T淋巴细胞异常活化、功能亢进造成骨髓造血功能衰竭在获得性再生障碍性贫血发病机制中占主要地位。 人类白细胞抗原：即HLA,是人类主要组织相容性复合体的表达产物,HLA的研究最初是在器官移植研究推动下开展起来的,因此HLA又称移植抗原。在遗传学中,主要组织相容性复合体是作为一个单位孟德尔式传递的。因此,同胞之间可有HLA相同、半相同和不同3种情况。 背景：异基因造血干细胞移植仍然是获得性重型再生障碍性贫血患者的唯一治愈方法,如何选择适合移植的重型再生障碍性贫血患者进行治疗成为近年的研究热点。 目的：从HLA全相合无关供者造血干细胞移植、非血缘脐血移植和单倍体相合造血干细胞移植3个方面进行综述,阐述异基因造血干细胞移植的研究进展。 方法：检索2000至2018年期间收录在PubMed、中国知网期刊全文数据库及万方数据库中异基因造血干细胞移植治疗重型再生障碍性贫血的相关文献,检索词为“unrelated donor,haploidentical,unrelated cord blood,severe aplastic anemia”及“无关供者,单倍体相合,无血缘脐血,重型再生障碍性贫血”。 结果与结论：①HLA全相合同胞供者造血干细胞移植是治疗重型再生障碍性贫血的一线治疗方案,但鉴于HLA相合同胞供者不易寻找,HLA全相合无关供者造血干细胞移植作为重要的替代治疗手段,目前疗效已接近HLA全相合同胞供者造血干细胞移植,但移植物抗宿主病、严重感染的发生率仍高于HLA全相合同胞供者造血干细胞移植,在选择HLA全相合无关供者造血干细胞移植治疗时仍然需要多因素综合考虑;②脐血造血干细胞来源丰富且配型成功率高,使得非血缘脐血移植的应用变得普遍,预冻存总有核细胞量>3.9×10⁷/kg时非血缘脐血植入概率较高,但鉴于非血缘脐血植入延迟、免疫功能重建延迟等因素,临床治疗重型再生障碍性贫血时只有在其他移植方式不可行且第1个疗程免疫抑制治疗失败后才应考虑非血缘脐血移植;③单倍体相合造血干细胞移植具有供者易获得且依从性好等优点,疗效接近全相合移植,现已成为一种重要的替代移植选择;巴利昔单抗和(或)抗胸腺细胞球蛋白的使用有望降低移植物抗宿主病的发生率以拓展单倍体相合造血干细胞移植的临床应用范围。 ORCID: 0000-0003-3509-920X(丁宇斌) 中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：干细胞;骨髓干细胞;造血干细胞;脂肪干细胞;肿瘤干细胞;胚胎干细胞;脐带脐血干细胞;干细胞诱导;干细胞分化;组织工程     

父母供者外周血单倍体移植治疗儿童难治性重型再生障碍性贫血

背景：在中国,儿童患者获得人类白细胞抗原相合同胞供者较困难,而以父母供者较多。 目的：回顾性分析父母供者外周血单倍体造血干细胞移植治疗儿童复发难治性重型再生障碍性贫血的疗效及安全性。 方法：纳入17例无人类白细胞抗原相合同胞及相合非血缘供者,且免疫抑制疗效不佳的复发难治性儿童重型再生障碍性贫血患者,行父母供者外周血单倍体造血干细胞移植。采用“氟达拉滨+环磷酰胺＋兔抗人胸腺细胞球蛋白抗体”预处理方案,应用环孢素+吗替麦考酚酯+甲氨蝶呤三联短程预防移植物抗宿主病。 结果与结论：①患者17例中16例(94%)获得造血重建,中性粒细胞≥0.5×109 L-1和血小板≥20×109 L-1的中位时间分别为13(11-15) d和17(12-28) d。②急性移植物抗宿主病发生率47%(8/17),其中Ⅰ-Ⅱ度29%(5/17),Ⅲ-Ⅳ度18%(3/17)。慢性移植物抗宿主病发生率41%(7/17)。③中位随访268(43-753) d,12例存活,总生存率为71%(12/17),死亡5例(29%),均为移植相关死亡,其中1例植入失败死于皮肤真菌感染,1例死于移植物抗宿主病,3例死于肺部重症感染。无患儿移植后复发。④结果显示,无人类白细胞抗原相合同胞及相合非血缘供者,且免疫抑制疗效不佳的复发难治性儿童重型再生障碍性贫血患者,父母供者外周血单倍体造血干细胞移植是一种安全有效的挽救治疗方法。 中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：干细胞;骨髓干细胞;造血干细胞;脂肪干细胞;肿瘤干细胞;胚胎干细胞;脐带脐血干细胞;干细胞诱导;干细胞分化;组织工程     

异基因造血干细胞移植治疗24例重型再生障碍性贫血北大核心

背景:重型再生障碍性贫血病情重、病死率高,需快速恢复造血功能,目前异基因造血干细胞移植为一线治疗方案,同胞全相合异基因造血干细胞移植为首选,单倍体相合造血干细胞移植作为替代治疗方案也取得了较好的效果。目的:探讨异基因造血干细胞移植(包括同胞全相合造血干细胞移植及单倍体相合造血干细胞移植)治疗重型再生障碍性贫血的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2015年4月至2021年7月于徐州市中心医院接受异基因造血干细胞移植治疗24例重型再生障碍性贫血患者的临床资料,其中接受同胞全相合造血干细胞移植8例,接受单倍体相合造血干细胞移植16例。24例重型再生障碍性贫血患者预处理方案为氟达拉滨、环磷酰胺、抗淋巴细胞球蛋白方案。同胞全相合造血干细胞移植采用环孢素联合短程甲氨蝶呤预防移植物抗宿主病,单倍体相合造血干细胞移植在此基础上增加吗替麦考酚酯。结果与结论:①24例重型再生障碍性贫血患者中有2例患者预处理期间死于严重感染,其余22例均达造血重建;中性粒细胞植入中位时间为12.5(10-18)d,血小板植入中位时间为14.5(10-26)d;②22例植入成功患者发生急性移植物抗宿主病8例(36%),Ⅲ/Ⅳ度急性移植物抗宿主病2例,慢性移植物抗宿主病累计发生4例(18%),Ⅲ/Ⅳ度慢性移植物抗宿主病1例;③18例患者存活,6例患者死亡,5年预计总生存率为74%;④结果表明,异基因造血干细胞移植为重型再生障碍性贫血的有效治疗手段,同胞全合供者作为首选,无同胞全相合供者时可选择单倍体相合供者作为替代。     

儿童供者骨髓和外周血混合移植物组分对单倍型相合移植预后的影响

为探讨儿童供者移植物组分对单倍型相合造血干细胞移植(haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation,Haplo-HSCT)预后的影响,回顾性分析儿童供者骨髓(bone marrow, BM)和外周血(peripheral blood, PB)混合移植物组分对80例接受Haplo-HSCT的血液病患者预后的影响。80例患者中性粒细胞和血小板(platelet, PLT)的植入率分别为100%和96.4%,中位植入时间分别为13 d(范围为10～28 d)和18 d(范围为9～180 d)。所有患者随访3年的总生存(overall survival, OS)率为66.7%,无白血病生存(leukemia-free survival, LFS)率为60.7%,移植相关死亡(transplant-related mortality, TRM)率为17.7%,复发率为21.9%。多因素分析显示供/受者关系为同胞(P=0.02)和输注高剂量CD34~+细胞(P=0.014)能促进PLT植入,PLT植入(P0.001)和输注低剂量的CD14~+细胞(P=0.022)与LFS相关,PLT植入和发生慢性GVHD与OS(P0.001,P=0.03)和TRM(P0.001,P=0.004)相关。以上研究结果提示采用单倍型相合儿童供者来源的BM和PB混合移植物进行移植时,回输高剂量CD34~+细胞与促进PLT植入密切相关,而PLT快速植入与良好生存有关。     

非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植治疗重型再生障碍性贫血的有效性

文题释义：非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植：由于中华骨髓库的快速扩容,使得很多无HLA相合同胞供者的患者非血缘HLA配型成功,随着近期造血干细胞移植技术的不断完善,非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植治疗良性和恶性血液病的疗效已经取得与同胞相合造血干细胞移植相似的疗效。非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植治疗重型再生障碍性贫血：重型再生障碍性贫血如没有进行有效治疗,短期内死亡率高,强化免疫抑制治疗起效需要时间较长。虽然同胞相合造血干细胞移植是一线治疗方法,但多数患者无同胞相合供者,此类重型再生障碍性贫血患者非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植是有效可行的替代治疗方案。 背景：重型再生障碍性贫血患者获得同胞相合造血干细胞移植供者的概率低于30%,随着近期非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植技术的不断完善,其治疗良性和恶性血液病已经达到与同胞相合造血干细胞移植相似的疗效。目的：评价非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植治疗重型再生障碍性贫血的有效性和安全性。 方法：回顾性分析2014年3月至2019年9月期间接受非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植治疗的25例重型再生障碍性贫血(Ⅰ型和Ⅱ型)患者,均无同胞相合供者并且拒绝接受免疫抑制治疗。移植预处理方案为氟达拉滨+环磷酰胺+兔抗人胸腺细胞球蛋白抗体。移植物抗宿主病的预防方案为环孢素+吗替麦考酚酯+短程甲氨蝶呤。观察指标包括植入率及造血重建时间、移植物抗宿主病发生率、移植相关并发症发生率、5年预计总生存率、5年预计无病生存率。该临床研究的实施获得郑州大学第一附属医院伦理委员会批准,患者及亲属签署非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植相关知情同意书。结果与结论：①25例重型再生障碍性贫血患者中有3例移植后+28 d之内死亡,无法评价植入情况。剩余22例患者中有21例(95.4%)获得造血重建,植入成功;1例(4.6%)植入失败。中性粒细胞≥0.5×10⁹ L^-1和血小板≥20×10⁹ L^-1的中位时间分别为12 d(9-18 d)和13 d(10-32 d)。②植入成功的21例患者中,急性移植物抗宿主病发生率为28.6%(6/21),其中Ⅰ-Ⅱ度3例,Ⅲ-Ⅳ度3例。轻度慢性移植物抗宿主病患者仅有9.5%(2/21),无中度和重度慢性移植物抗宿主病发生。③中位随访396 d(15-1 886 d),18例(72.0%)存活,5年预计总生存率为71.1%,5年预计无病生存率为65.6%。7例(28.0%)死亡,其中3例(12.0%)患者死于感染,2例(8.0%)患者死于急性肠道移植物抗宿主病,1例(4.0%)患者死于颅内出血,1例(4.0%)患者死于多器官功能衰竭。④结果显示,对于无同胞相合供者的重型再生障碍性贫血患者,非血缘外周血造血干细胞移植是安全有效的治疗方法,是一项可行有益的替代治疗选择。 ORCID: 0000-0002-0880-309X(张素平) 中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：干细胞;骨髓干细胞;造血干细胞;脂肪干细胞;肿瘤干细胞;胚胎干细胞;脐带脐血干细胞;干细胞诱导;干细胞分化;组织工程     

HLA单倍体与全相合异基因造血干细胞移植治疗恶性血液病

背景：异基因造血干细胞移植是治疗恶性血液病的一种非常有效的方法。单倍体相合的造血干细胞移植扩大了移植的应用范围,是无HLA相合供者患者的一种重要选择。 目的：比较HLA单倍体相合与全相合异基因造血干细胞移植治疗恶性血液病的临床疗效。 方法：回顾性分析接受异基因造血干细胞移植79例恶性血液病患者的临床资料,其中HLA单倍体相合组26例、全相合组53例,对比两组受者移植物抗宿主病的发生率、复发率、2年生存率等。 结果与结论：78例受者获得完全、持久供者干细胞植入;1例受者在移植后28 d尚未植入,后因感染死亡。两组慢性移植物抗宿主病发生率、复发率和2年无病生存率差异无显著性意义(P > 0.05)。单倍体相合组急性移植物抗宿主病发生率高于全相合组(P < 0.05);2年总生存率低于全相合组(P < 0.05)。提示血缘HLA单倍体相合移植治疗恶性血液病的安全性及疗效接近于全相合移植,在缺乏HLA相合供者的情况下,行HLA单倍体相合造血干细胞移植治疗恶性血液病是切实可行的选择。     

供者特异性HLA抗体在配型不合Allo-SCT植入失败中的作用:现状与挑战

单倍型相合供者已经成为缺乏人类白细胞分化抗原(human leukocyte antigen, HLA)相合供者的移植候选患者的重要替代干细胞来源之一。然而,植入失败仍是单倍型相合移植、HLA不合无关供者和脐血移植后的主要并发症和死亡原因之一。近年来的研究发现,供者特异性抗HLA抗体(donor specific anti-HLA antibody, DSA)与HLA不合移植后的植入失败密切相关。了解DSA检测方法、流行病学以及处理手段对于减少植入失败、改善移植预后具有重要意义。     

无关供者异基因造血干细胞移植治疗骨髓增生异常综合征9例患者临床分析

目的探讨无关供者异基因造血干细胞移植(UD-HSCT)治疗骨髓增生异常综合征(MDS)的疗效和可行性。方法MDS患者9例,其中男性6例,女性3例;年龄7～46岁,中位年龄30岁。其中难治性贫血(RA)1例,难治性血细胞减少伴有多系发育异常(RCMD)2例,难治性贫血伴有原始细胞过多-2(RAEB-2)5例,MDS进展为急性髓系白血病(MDS-AML)1例。接受UD-HSCT治疗的MDS患者中外周血造血干细胞移植(PBSCT)8例,骨髓移植(BMT)1例。供受者HLA高分辨配型10/10位点相合4例、9/10位点相合4例、7/10位点相合1例。预处理方案为BU+CY+Flud+Ara-C+ATG 8例、BU+Mel+Flud+Ara-C+ATG 1例,移植物抗宿主病(GVHD)预防方案为FK506+MTX+MMF 8例、CsA+MTX+MMF 1例。结果9例患者均获得造血重建,中性粒细胞≥0.5×109/L和血小板≥20×109/L的中位时间分别为移植后15(11～20)d和23(8～32)d。6例患者发生急性GVHD(aGVHD),其中Ⅰ度4例,Ⅱ度2例,5例患者发生局限型慢性GVHD(cGVHD)。中位随访20.3(6.4～50.0)个月,1例患者移植后14个月复发死亡,其余8例患者中位随访27.9(6.4～50.0)个月,均无病存活,总体生存率(OS)及无病生存率(DFS)均为85.7%±13.2%。结论UD-HSCT治疗MDS安全有效,在无同胞全合供者时,无关供者也可以作为此类患者有效治疗选择。     

父母供者外周血单倍体干细胞移植治疗儿童复发难治急性白血病

背景:儿童复发难治急性白血病单纯化学治疗效果极差,异基因造血干细胞移植是治愈该类疾病的惟一有效方法。研究显示单倍体移植与同胞相合及非亲缘全相合造血干细胞移植的治疗效果接近,甚至优于后者,且父母作为供者单倍体造血干细胞移植依从性好,能够保证移植干细胞数量及预防原发病复发,明显提高了患者移植成功率及长期无白血病生存率。目的:回顾分析父母供者单倍体外周血造血干细胞移植治疗儿童复发难治急性白血病的疗效。方法:入选35例父母供者外周血单倍体造血干细胞移植治疗儿童复发难治急性白血病。均采用"改良1,4-丁二醇二甲磺酸酯/环磷酰胺+胸腺细胞免疫球蛋白"预处理方案和环孢素、吗替麦考酚酯及甲氨蝶呤三联短程预防移植物抗宿主病。结果与结论:35例父母供者外周血单倍体造血干细胞移植治疗儿童复发难治急性白血病均植入成功。135例患儿回输单个核细胞中位数为5.82(3.23-8.45)×108/kg,其中CD34+细胞中位数为4.52(2.37-11.51)×106/kg。2干细胞回输后100 d内,移植相关死亡率为14.3%。33-Ⅱ度急性移植物抗宿主病发生率为34.3%,Ⅲ-Ⅳ度急性移植物抗宿主病发生率为37.1%,慢性移植物抗宿主病总发生率为42.9%。42年无白血病生存率为42.9%,2年总生存率为51.4%,2年原发病复发率为34.3%,中位生存时间为24个月。提示对于无人类白细胞抗原相合同胞供者及不能及时寻找到非血缘人类白细胞抗原相合供者的儿童复发难治急性白血病,父母供者外周血单倍体造血干细胞移植是一种高效可行的治疗方法。     

亲缘间单倍体造血干细胞移植治疗白血病4例

背景:建立及维持非血缘供者库需要大量投资,而亲属部分相合的供者则不需要特殊费用,有更强的可操作性。目的:评估亲缘间半相合造血干细胞移植治疗白血病的疗效。方法:选取2002-11/2008-03中南大学湘雅医学院附属海口市人民医院血液科住院患者4例,均进行HLA单倍体相合亲缘供者造血干细胞移植。采用改良的Bu/CY预处理方案:阿糖胞苷2.0~3.0g/(m2?d)×2d,持续24h静滴;马利兰4mg/(kg?d)×3d;环磷酰胺50mg/(kg?d)×2d;甲基环已亚硝脲25mg/(m2?d)×1d;抗胸腺细胞球蛋白25mg/(kg?d)×4d。在改良方案的基础上加大阿糖胞苷剂量1倍,且改为持续24h静滴,使预处理强度增加,促进造血干细胞持久植入。移植物抗宿主病预防:在经典的甲氨蝶呤方案基础上将环孢素A及霉酚酸酯提前至-7d(回输干细胞前为-)使用。患者移植前后进行ABO血型及DNA检测。结果与结论:①移植后造血重建检测:4例患者均获得造血重建,未发生预处理相关死亡。造血于细胞移植后-3~+7d白细胞降为0,并持续2~14d,+12~+20d白细胞1.0×109L-1,+20~+51d血小板20×109L-1。②移植物抗宿主病的发病情况:4例患者移植物抗宿主病Ⅳ级(肠道)1例,出现急性移植物抗宿主病Ⅱ级(肠道)1例,急性移植物抗宿主病Ⅱ级(皮肤)1例。提示随着预处理方案、移植物抗宿主病预防方案的优化,亲缘间单倍相合造血干细胞移植治疗白血病安全有效。     

An attempt to reconstruct children's donor concept: a comparison between children's and lesbian parents' attitudes towards donor anonymity

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the donor concept of children who were born by means of donor insemination (DI), and their lesbian parents. METHODS: A total of 41 children aged between 7 and 17 years, and 45 parents, took part in the follow-up study. In-depth topic interviews were used to reconstruct how DI children and their mothers perceived the donor. Data were collected about the birth story, about children's conversations with their mothers concerning donor characteristics and about children's and parents' attitudes towards the status of the donor. RESULTS: 54% of these children preferred donor anonymity at this point in their life, whereas 46% wanted to know more about the donor. The majority of the latter group would have liked to know the donor's identity, with boys outnumbering girls. The remaining children of this group were content with non-identifying information. Children wanted to know more about the donors whereas the majority of the mothers preferred the donor to remain anonymous. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that among DI children in general and among members of the same family, unit opinions differ on the status of the donor. A flexible system offering different types of donors seems to be necessary in order to meet the needs of each family.     

Keeping the blood flowing

The transfusion procedure is the last step in a multi‐process supply chain. The task of matching supply with demand requires donor managers to consider average consumption rates on a weekly or monthly basis, but to also have insight into variability in order distribution and possible attribute (blood groups) requirements. Since hospitals and blood banks are usually not deeply interwoven and often only ex‐post data are available, forecasting methods should be implemented. A thorough analysis of order pattern to set weekly target inventories and safety levels is required to close the information gap. A collection plan needs to identify possible bottlenecks which can be prevented through the planning of inter‐shipping, changes in message urgency and building of reserve donor pools. Constant analysis of collection and mobilization KPIs allows donor managers to implement the rolling‐wave planning approach and continually adapt to changing requirements, unexpected events and overall systematic variability. The variability happens on the demand side, as order quantities and their attributes, such as blood group distribution, are subject to change. However, also the supply is subject to significant variation, as donor response rates, attrition, deferrals and overall availability of donors are not constant. Unfavourable combinations of variable factors often lead to bottlenecks if only long‐term average values find their way into the planning process.     

A new Dutch Law regulating provision of identifying information of donors to offspring: background, content and impact

In 2004 a law was introduced in The Netherlands, which gives offspring conceived by semen or oocyte donation the right to know the identity of the donor. The law also regulates the provision of other information concerning the donor to the offspring, their parents or their general practitioner. With the introduction of this law, a choice has been made in which the wish of offspring prevails above others involved. Donors can no longer claim absolute anonymity; they are anonymous at the time of donation, but if a child aged > or =16 years requests information the donor may now be traced. During 15 years of debate on the abolition of donor anonymity the number of donors decreased by >70% and the number of semen banks by 50%. We describe the debate which led to the law, the characteristics of the law itself and note some of the probable and possible consequences for donor offspring, parents, donors and semen banks.     

Disclosure of donor insemination to the child: the impact of Swedish legislation on couples' attitudes

The question whether or not parents of children conceived after donor insemination (DI) tell their offspring about its biological background was addressed. Swedish legislation from 1985 gives the child born after DI the right, when grown up, to receive identifying information about the sperm donor. Until now no information about compliance with the law has been available. All parents who gave birth to a child by DI after the new legislation in two major Swedish fertility centres (Stockholm and Umea) received a questionnaire containing questions about the issue of informing the child. The response rate was 80%. The majority of parents (89%) had not informed their children, whereas 59% had told someone else. As a response to an open question, 105/132 parents chose to comment on their answer about not having informed their child. Of these families, 61 intended to tell their child later, 16 were not sure and 28 were not going to inform the child. Compliance with the law must be regarded as low since only 52% of the parents had told or intended to tell their child. In addition, concern is raised about the children who run the risk of being informed by someone other than their parents.     

Donor selection for recipient safety

Before the introduction of testing for transfusion transmissible agents, donor selection criteria made a critical contribution to recipient safety. Currently, for some pathogens, screening questions alone identify donors at risk, whereas for others, questions identify an at-risk population that will undergo selective testing. For many pathogens, such as HIV, HBV and HCV, universal donor testing is done, but deferral criteria developed in the pretesting era are still in place. Ideally, the steps in the donor selection process and specific donor criteria should be evidence based, to avoid deferral of safe donors. Although obtaining evidence to assess criteria is challenging, several approaches have been taken to evaluate actual or potential changes to criteria. The donor selection process and specific criteria should be reassessed over time, as donor testing and pathogen reduction make increasingly important contributions to blood safety.     

An evaluation of couples with failure of fertilization in vitro.

Attempts at in-vitro fertilization (IVF) may be used as a method of evaluating whether in a given couple, the inability of the sperm to fertilize the oocyte may be the cause of infertility. We evaluated all IVF patients in our practice who had at least one cycle with no fertilization to determine how often this was an isolated event or was repeated in multiple cycles; would poor semen quality be found as a frequent cause; and how well can a donor sperm or oocyte 'probe' uncover which of the two is the problem? Of 35 couples who used their own gametes exclusively, 30 (85.7%) had at least one cycle with zero fertilization; 42.5% of those failing to fertilize in cycle 1 and 35% of those failing in cycle 2 had a subnormal concentration of motile spermatozoa, morphology or hypo-osmotic swelling test scores. The pregnancy rate per cycle with both husband's and wife's gametes was only 2.3% (3/130), but was 8.3% for those using donor spermatozoa (3/36) and 18.2% (2/11) for donor oocytes. Thus, failing to fertilize in a given cycle does not necessarily predict failure to fertilize in a subsequent cycle, but does predict a poor fertility outcome unless donor gametes are used.     

Donor vigilance: progress and challenges

Background Internationally, there is increased interest in reporting, treating and attempting to reduce complications of blood donation. Donor haemovigilance is the systematic monitoring of adverse reactions and incidents in the whole chain of blood donor care, with a view to improving quality and safety for blood donors. International Developments Several studies have described the risk factors for vasovagal reactions – female donors, young age, first-time status, low body weight, etc. A water drink before donation, use of applied muscle tension and social support during donation have been found effective in reducing minor vasovagal reactions and/or increasing the likelihood of donors returning for subsequent donations. Haematomas and other venepuncture-related complications are frequent and are the predominant cause of long-term morbidity from complications of blood donation. International surveillance data on donor complications are captured in ‘ISTARE’ International Surveillance database for Transfusion-associated Adverse Reactions and Events, which is being developed by the International Hemovigilance Network. Experience in The Netherlands: Better Monitoring of Donor Complications, Where Next? All donor complications and procedural problems are routinely recorded in the computer system eProgesa. Since 2009, the results have been monitored. An improved coding list was introduced in 2010 in order to record more details and cover new procedures such as Rhesus immunizations. The overall rate of donor complications increased from 0·64 in 2009 to 0·80 per 1000 whole blood collections (second half of 2010) and from 1·34 to 1·40 per 1000 plasmaphereses; there were no changes in donor demographics or procedures to explain this, so better recording is presumed. The recorded complications and procedural problems are regularly presented in team leaders’ and regional directors’ meetings. The data have been used to analyse the effect of a procedural modification: increasing the concentration of citrate solution used in plasmapheresis. The rate of terminating procedures because of citrate reactions was 0·14 per 1000 collections [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·018–0·27] before and 0·09 (95% CI 0·018–0·17) after the modification, signifying no relevant change. It is hoped that in 2012 a revised donor information brochure with instructions on avoiding vasovagal reactions will be piloted and subsequently tested. Nevertheless, only immediate and short-term complications can be effectively addressed by the recording and analysis of complications. Longer term issues such as whole blood donor iron status are the subject of research in our country and abroad. Conclusion In our country as well as elsewhere, recording and monitoring the incidence of complications of blood donation has become the norm. Knowledge of risk factors and evidence-based interventions will enable blood establishments worldwide to reduce donor complications. As yet, longer term complications are not well addressed.     

Allocation to Matched Related or Unrelated Donor Results in Similar Clinical Outcomes without Increased Risk of Failure to Proceed to Transplant among Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Retrospective Analysis from the Time of Transplant Approval

Clinical outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) from unrelated donors (URDs) approach those of matched related donor (MRD) transplants in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Yet, available data fail to account for differences in pretransplantation outcomes between these donor selection strategies. In this regard, URD allo-HSCT is associated with longer waiting times to transplantation, potentially resulting in higher probabilities of failure to reach transplant. We retrospectively analyzed 108 AML patients accepted for first allo-HSCT from the time of approval to proceed to transplant. Fifty-eight (54%) patients were initially allocated to MRD, while URD search was initiated in 50 (46%) patients. Time to transplant was longer in patients allocated to a URD when compared with patients assigned to an MRD (median 142 days versus 100 days; p < .001). Forty-three of 58 (74%) patients in the MRD group and 35 of 50 (70%) patients in the URD group underwent transplantation (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; p?=?.63). Advanced disease status at the time of allo-HSCT approval was the only predictor of failure to reach transplantation in the multivariate analysis (OR, 4.78; p?=?.001). Disease progression was the most common cause of failure to reach allo-HSCT (66.7%) in both the MRD and URD groups. With a median follow-up from transplantation of 14.5 (interquartile range, 5 to 29) months, the 2-year estimate of overall survival (OS) from allo-HSCT was 46% in the MRD group and 57% in the URD group (p?=?.54). There were no differences in OS according to donor type allocation in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 1.01; p?=?.83). When including patients from the time of transplant approval, 2-year OS was 39% in the MRD group versus 42% in the URD group. Our study suggests that allocation of AML patients to URDs may result in comparable clinical outcomes to MRD assignment without a significant increase in the risk of failure to reach transplant.     

Reporting of delayed adverse donor reactions in whole blood donors: Just the tip of an iceberg!

Background and objectivesThe study was planned to determine the incidence and analyze how various epidemiological factors tend to be associated with delayed adverse donor reactions (ADR).Material and methodsThe prospective observational study was conducted in Department of Transfusion Medicine of tertiary care hospital from January to December 2019. Eligible blood donors were observed for any adverse reactions after 15 minutes of removal of phlebotomy needle. Further, telephonic calls were made to each enrolled blood donor on day-2 and day-7 of the whole blood donation. For each day, two calls were made at an interval of 4 hours before declaring the participant to be non-responder.ResultsA total of 1540 (84.1%) blood donors responded on day-2 and 1610 (87.9%) responded on day-7 of follow-up. Total 180 (11.2%) blood donors experienced delayed ADRs. Two donors (1.1%) experienced on-site while 178 (98.89%) reported off-site delayed ADRs when followed-up telephonically. The commonest delayed ADRs reported were bruise (n = 72; 30.9%), arm-pain (n = 61; 26.2%) and generalised weakness (n = 44; 18.9%). Female donors (27.3% vs. 11.2%; P = 0.004), first time donors (15.2 vs. 9.9%; P = 0.002), donors with low body-weight (range of 45–60 kg; 15.9% vs. 11.5% vs. 6.1%; P = 0.011) and body mass index < 18.5 (24% vs. 12.5% vs. 9.7% vs. 11.3%; P = 0.028) experienced more delayed ADRs.ConclusionBlood donors do experience delayed ADRs but these are not reported to the blood centers as these are usually mild. However, it is important to capture these delayed adverse donor reactions and report it to National Hemovigilance Program so that strategies can be formulated to prevent their occurrence and recurrence.