Joseph Aziz1, Gail Morris2, Mina Rizk1, Risa Shorr3, Dena Mercer2, Kimberly Young2, David Allan1,2,4,5. 1. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 2. OneMatch Stem Cell & Marrow Network, Canadian Blood Services, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 3. Library Services, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 4. Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 5. Centre for Transfusion Research, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The frequency of cryopreserving blood stem or progenitor products from unrelated donors is not known and the underlying reasons are poorly documented. Greater insight is needed to develop policies on cryopreservation that balance donor safety with patient needs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cryopreservation requests between January 1, 2014, and May 31, 2016, at the OneMatch Stem Cell and Marrow Network at Canadian Blood Services were reviewed and a systematic review of the literature was performed. RESULTS: Thirty products of 719 (4.2%) unrelated donor collections facilitated by OneMatch were cryopreserved. Patient-related reasons were most common and included the need to delay transplant for continued antimicrobial treatment (six patients), patient too deconditioned to proceed with scheduled transplant (five patients), and/or need for more treatment for relapsed disease (three patients). Donor-related issues leading to cryopreservation requests were less common (five cases), mainly due to lack of donor availability after attempting to reschedule. Cryopreservation of a product that was never infused occurred infrequently (two cases, 7%). In our systematic review of the literature, 993 cases were identified in 32 published reports. Both patient-related and donor-related reasons were cited but not specifically reported, precluding quantitative insight regarding the relative frequency of causes. The impact of cryopreservation on hematopoietic engraftment appears negligible when compared to controls in a subset of studies; however, reporting of outcomes was inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Future studies with standard outcome measures are needed to clarify the impact of cryopreservation on engraftment and other transplant outcomes. International guidelines that consider the ethical framework surrounding requests for donor product cryopreservation are needed.
BACKGROUND: The frequency of cryopreserving blood stem or progenitor products from unrelated donors is not known and the underlying reasons are poorly documented. Greater insight is needed to develop policies on cryopreservation that balance donor safety with patient needs. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cryopreservation requests between January 1, 2014, and May 31, 2016, at the OneMatch Stem Cell and Marrow Network at Canadian Blood Services were reviewed and a systematic review of the literature was performed. RESULTS: Thirty products of 719 (4.2%) unrelated donor collections facilitated by OneMatch were cryopreserved. Patient-related reasons were most common and included the need to delay transplant for continued antimicrobial treatment (six patients), patient too deconditioned to proceed with scheduled transplant (five patients), and/or need for more treatment for relapsed disease (three patients). Donor-related issues leading to cryopreservation requests were less common (five cases), mainly due to lack of donor availability after attempting to reschedule. Cryopreservation of a product that was never infused occurred infrequently (two cases, 7%). In our systematic review of the literature, 993 cases were identified in 32 published reports. Both patient-related and donor-related reasons were cited but not specifically reported, precluding quantitative insight regarding the relative frequency of causes. The impact of cryopreservation on hematopoietic engraftment appears negligible when compared to controls in a subset of studies; however, reporting of outcomes was inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Future studies with standard outcome measures are needed to clarify the impact of cryopreservation on engraftment and other transplant outcomes. International guidelines that consider the ethical framework surrounding requests for donor product cryopreservation are needed.
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
Authors: Jack W Hsu; Nosha Farhadfar; Hemant Murthy; Brent R Logan; Stephanie Bo-Subait; Noelle Frey; Steven C Goldstein; Mary M Horowitz; Hillard Lazarus; Joshua D Schwanke; Nirali N Shah; Stephen R Spellman; Galen E Switzer; Steven M Devine; Bronwen E Shaw; John R Wingard Journal: Transplant Cell Ther Date: 2021-03-22
Authors: David S Allan; Meagan Green; Gail Morris; Jason Weiss; Nicholas Dibdin; Dena Mercer; Matthew Seftel Journal: Vox Sang Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 2.996