Prospective randomized and crossover comparison of two apheresis machines for peripheral blood stem cell collection: a multicenter study

被引:13
|
作者
Ikeda, Kazuhiko [1 ,6 ]
Minakawa, Keiji [1 ]
Muroi, Kazuo [2 ,6 ]
Fujiwara, Shin-ichiro [3 ]
Yamada-Fujiwara, Minami [4 ]
Fujimori, Yoshihiro [5 ,6 ]
Tanosaki, Ryuji [6 ]
Ohto, Hitoshi [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Fukushima Med Univ, Dept Blood Transfus & Transplantat Immunol, 1 Hikariga Oka, Fukushima, Fukushima 9601295, Japan
[2] Jichi Med Univ Hosp, Div Cell Transplantat & Transfus, Dept Med, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, Japan
[3] Jichi Med Univ Hosp, Div Hematol, Dept Med, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, Japan
[4] Tohoku Univ Hosp, Div Blood Transfus & Cell Therapy, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan
[5] Hyogo Coll Med, Dept Transfus Med & Cellular Therapy, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan
[6] Japan Soc Transfus Med & Cell Therapy, Cell Therapy Comm, Tokyo, Japan
关键词
PROGENITOR CELLS; HEMATOPOIETIC STEM; SEPARATORS; FLOW; TRANSPLANTATION; PROGRAMS; SPECTRA; SYSTEMS; COUNTS;
D O I
10.1111/trf.13777
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Improving apheresis technology may lead to an efficient and safe peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection. Recently, the Spectra Optia (Optia, Terumo BCT) was introduced as an automated apheresis instrument, but comparisons with other instruments have been few. This is the first randomized multicenter and crossover comparison of the Optia with the automated program of the established apheresis instrument, the Spectra (Spectra-Auto, Terumo BCT). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 233 apheresis procedures performed in 46 autologous patients and 108 allogeneic donors were investigated. Apheresis performed in the first day for all subjects using the Spectra-Auto (n = 79) and the Optia (n = 75) were evaluated as first-day analysis. Seventy-nine subjects, who required another session on the second day, underwent apheresis using the other instrument than the first-day instrument and were compared with each other in a paired crossover analysis. RESULTS: The two instruments processed similar volumes with comparable run times and volumes of acid-citrate-dextrose used. The volumes of collected products were greater in the Optia. Yields of mononuclear cells and CD34+ cells were not different, but collection efficiencies were higher in the Optia (p = 0.008 in CE1 of crossover analysis). Spectra-Auto-collected products contained more contaminating red blood cells (RBCs), whereas there was a trend of more contaminating platelets (PLTs) in the Optia-collected products. Slight reductions were noted in the RBC or PLT counts of subjects who underwent apheresis with the Spectra-Auto or the Optia, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Optia is safe and more efficient in the PBSC collection compared with the Spectra-Auto.
引用
收藏
页码:2839 / 2847
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Allogeneic donor peripheral blood "stem cell" apheresis: prospective comparison of two apheresis systems
    Brauninger, Susanne
    Bialleck, Heike
    Thorausch, Kristin
    Felt, Tom
    Seifried, Erhard
    Bonig, Halvard
    TRANSFUSION, 2012, 52 (05) : 1137 - 1145
  • [2] Comparison of Two Apheresis Systems of COBE and Optia for Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Collection
    Lee, Se-Na
    Sohn, Ji Yeon
    Kong, Jung Hee
    Eom, Hyeon Seok
    Lee, Hyewon
    Kong, Sun-Young
    ANNALS OF LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2017, 37 (04) : 327 - 330
  • [3] Peripheral blood stem cell collection in low-weight children: retrospective comparison of two apheresis devices
    Cherqaoui, Bilade
    Rouel, Nadege
    Auvrignon, Anne
    Defachelles, Anne-Sophie
    Demeocq, Francois
    Kanold, Justyna
    Merlin, Etienne
    TRANSFUSION, 2014, 54 (05) : 1371 - 1378
  • [4] A prospective randomized trial of two popular mononuclear cell collection sets for autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection in multiple myeloma
    Cooling, Laura
    Hoffmann, Sandra
    Herrst, Michelle
    Muck, Charles
    Armelagos, Heidi
    Davenport, Robertson
    TRANSFUSION, 2010, 50 (01) : 100 - 119
  • [5] Performance assessment and benchmarking of autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection with two different apheresis devices
    Wuchter, P.
    Hundemer, M.
    Schmitt, A.
    Witzens-Harig, M.
    Pavel, P.
    Hillengass, J.
    Goldschmidt, H.
    Ho, A. D.
    Lisenko, K.
    TRANSFUSION MEDICINE, 2017, 27 (01) : 36 - 42
  • [6] Retrospective comparison of two different cell separators for autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection: Single center experience
    Keklik, Muzaffer
    HEMATOLOGY TRANSFUSION AND CELL THERAPY, 2024, 46 (04) : 335 - 339
  • [7] Screening of related donors and peripheral blood stem cell collection practices at different Italian apheresis centres
    Coluccia, Paola
    Crovetti, Giovanni
    Del Fante, Claudia
    Dallavalle, Franco Maria
    Laszlo, Daniele
    Ferremi, Piero
    Marenchino, Daniele
    Santoleri, Luca
    De Filippo, Concetto
    Mattana, Flavia
    Mariani, Luigi
    Perseghin, Paolo
    Ravagnani, Fernando
    BLOOD TRANSFUSION, 2012, 10 (04) : 440 - 447
  • [8] Automated CD34+cell isolation of peripheral blood stem cell apheresis product
    Spohn, Gabriele
    Wiercinska, Eliza
    Karpova, Darja
    Bunos, Milica
    Huemmer, Christiane
    Wingenfeld, Eva
    Sorg, Nadine
    Poppe, Carolin
    Huppert, Volker
    Stuth, Juliane
    Reck, Kristina
    Essl, Mike
    Seifried, Erhard
    Boenig, Halvard
    CYTOTHERAPY, 2015, 17 (10) : 1465 - 1471
  • [9] Comparing peripheral blood stem cell collection using the COBE Spectra, Haemonetics MCS plus , and Baxter Amicus
    Wu, Fei-yi
    Heng, Kee Khiang
    Salleh, Rohani Binte
    Soh, Teck Guan
    Lee, Jing Jing
    Mah, Joanna
    Linn, Yeh Ching
    Loh, Yvonne
    Hwang, William
    Tan, Lip Kun
    Law, Ping
    Goh, Yeow Tee
    TRANSFUSION AND APHERESIS SCIENCE, 2012, 47 (03) : 345 - 350
  • [10] Comparison of three mobilization protocols for peripheral blood stem cell apheresis with Spectra Optia continuous mononuclear cell protocol in healthy dogs
    Kim, Sangho
    Hosoya, Kenji
    Kobayashi, Ayumi
    Okumura, Masahiro
    VETERINARY AND COMPARATIVE ONCOLOGY, 2019, 17 (01) : 61 - 68