Literature DB >> 27491794

Variable resistance to freezing and thawing of CD34-positive stem cells and lymphocyte subpopulations in leukapheresis products.

Christina Berens1, Annkristin Heine2, Jens Müller1, Stefanie Andrea Erika Held2, Karin Mayer2, Peter Brossart2, Johannes Oldenburg1, Bernd Pötzsch1, Dominik Wolf2, Heiko Rühl3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AIMS: Leukapheresis products for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation can be cryopreserved for various indications. Although it is known that CD34(+) cells tolerate cryopreservation well, a significant loss of CD3(+) cells has been observed, which has been ascribed to several factors, including transport, storage conditions and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration.
METHODS: To assess the tolerance of CD34(+) cells and lymphocyte subpopulations for cryopreservation and thawing, the post-thaw recoveries of CD34(+) cells, CD3(+)CD4(+) cells, CD3(+)CD8(+) cells, CD19(+) cells and CD16(+)CD56(+) cells were determined in 90 cryopreserved apheresis products, among which 65 were from G-CSF-mobilized donors, and 34 from unrelated donors that underwent transport before cryopreservation at our center. A controlled rate freezer and 5% dimethyl sulfoxide were used for cryopreservation.
RESULTS: We could detect statistically significant differences for CD34(+) cell recovery (93.0 ± 20.7%) when compared to CD3(+)CD4(+) cell (83.1 ± 15.4%, P = 0.014), and CD3(+)CD8(+) cell recovery (83.3 ± 13.9%, P = 0.001). Similarly, CD19(+) cell recovery (98.6 ± 15.1%) was higher than CD3(+)CD4(+) cell (P = 2.5 × 10(-7)) and CD3(+)CD8(+) cell recovery (P = 1.2 × 10(-8)). Post-thaw recovery rates of all cell populations were not impaired in G-CSF-mobilized products compared with non-mobilized products nor in unrelated compared with related donor products. DISCUSSION: Our data suggest a lower tolerance of CD3(+) cells for cryopreservation and demonstrate that freezing-thawing resistance thawing is cell-specific and independent from other factors that affect post-thaw recovery of cryopreserved cells. Thus, a clinical consequence may be the monitoring of post-thaw CD3(+) cell doses of cryopreserved products, such as donor lymphocyte infusions.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  B cells; NK cells; T cells; cryopreservation; donor lymphocyte infusion; hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27491794     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2016.06.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cytotherapy        ISSN: 1465-3249            Impact factor:   5.414


  10 in total

1.  Effect of Cryopreservation on Autologous Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Characteristics.

Authors:  Sandhya R Panch; Sandeep K Srivastava; Nasha Elavia; Andrew McManus; Shutong Liu; Ping Jin; Steven L Highfill; Xiaobai Li; Pradeep Dagur; James N Kochenderfer; Terry J Fry; Crystal L Mackall; Daniel Lee; Nirali N Shah; David F Stroncek
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 11.454

Review 2.  Best practices for cryopreserving, thawing, recovering, and assessing cells.

Authors:  John M Baust; Lia H Campbell; John W Harbell
Journal:  In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 2.416

3.  Cytokine Responses to Rhinovirus and Development of Asthma, Allergic Sensitization, and Respiratory Infections during Childhood.

Authors:  Adnan Custovic; Danielle Belgrave; Lijing Lin; Eteri Bakhsoliani; Aurica G Telcian; Roberto Solari; Clare S Murray; Ross P Walton; John Curtin; Michael R Edwards; Angela Simpson; Magnus Rattray; Sebastian L Johnston
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 4.  Preservation of cell-based immunotherapies for clinical trials.

Authors:  Rui Li; Rachel Johnson; Guanglin Yu; David H McKenna; Allison Hubel
Journal:  Cytotherapy       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 5.414

5.  Improving Clinical Manufacturing of IL-15 Activated Cytokine-Induced Killer (CIK) Cells.

Authors:  Melanie Bremm; Lisa-Marie Pfeffermann; Claudia Cappel; Verena Katzki; Stephanie Erben; Sibille Betz; Andrea Quaiser; Michael Merker; Halvard Bonig; Michael Schmidt; Thomas Klingebiel; Peter Bader; Sabine Huenecke; Eva Rettinger
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 7.561

6.  Variable CD34+ recovery of cryopreserved allogeneic HPC products: transplant implications during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Duncan Purtill; Vicki Antonenas; Paul Chiappini; Daochen Tong; Elizabeth O'Flaherty; Ashish Bajel; Karieshma Kabani; Stephen Larsen; Suikeat Tan; Cheryl Hutchins; David J Curtis; Glen A Kennedy; Anne-Marie Watson; LiJun Bai; Matthew Greenwood; David J Gottlieb; Nada Hamad
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2020-09-08

7.  Related versus unrelated allogeneic HPC graft cryopreservation: a single-center experience in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  B Mfarrej; C Lemarié; A Granata; T Pagliardini; C Malenfant; P Lignée; M Fays; D Blaise; C Chabannon; B Calmels
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2021-04-12       Impact factor: 5.174

Review 8.  Cryopreservation as a Key Element in the Successful Delivery of Cell-Based Therapies-A Review.

Authors:  Julie Meneghel; Peter Kilbride; G John Morris
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-11-26

Review 9.  Cryostorage of Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Biomedical Cell-Based Products.

Authors:  Daria D Linkova; Yulia P Rubtsova; Marfa N Egorikhina
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 7.666

10.  Assessment of the Impact of Post-Thaw Stress Pathway Modulation on Cell Recovery following Cryopreservation in a Hematopoietic Progenitor Cell Model.

Authors:  John M Baust; Kristi K Snyder; Robert G Van Buskirk; John G Baust
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 6.600

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.