Comparison of Two Continuous-Flow Systems for the Collection of Peripheral Progenitor Cells

Retrospective comparison of two different cell separators for autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection: Single center experience

INTRODUCTION

Autologous peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation has become a standard treatment option for certain hematological malignancies. The collection of PBSCs for transplantation is a well-established process and the effectiveness can vary depending on the cell separator.  We aimed to compare the effectivity of two  devices, the Spectra Optia and the Amicus for autologous PBSC collection. We also evaluated the effect of the peripheral white blood cell (WBC) count on the CD34+ collection efficiency (CE2).

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 262 apheresis procedures performed in patients between 2015 and 2021 at the Apheresis Unit of our transplantation center. The PBSCs were collected by the Spectra Optia cell separator with continuous Mononuclear Collection (cMNC) (128 procedures) or the Amicus (MNC) (134 procedures). In addition to the apheresis parameters and product characteristics, we also evaluated the effect of the pre-apheresis peripheral WBC count on the CE2.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the CD34+ CE2 between the Spectra Optia and Amicus devices (median 65.06% and 68.24%, respectively, p = 0.070). In the Amicus group, the CE2 ratio was found to be statistically significantly higher in patients with a pre-apheresis peripheral WBC count of 15 × 10⁹/L (median 81.70%, 68.06%, 61.35% and 58.13%, respectively, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

While both devices collected autologous PBSC effectively and safely, the Amicus provided a higher rate of CE2 at low pre-apheresis WBC counts. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the CE2 in autologous PBSC collection devices based on pre-apheresis WBC counts.

Comparison of spectra optia and amicus cell separators for autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection

INTRODUCTION

Autologous peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation has become a standard treatment option for many oncology patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of two cell separators, Spectra Optia (Terumo BCT, Japan) and Amicus (Fresenius-Kabi) for autologous PBSC collection.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 56 apheresis by Spectra Optia with Continuous Mononuclear Cell Collection (cMNC) from 20 patients, and 50 apheresis by Amicus from 27 patients between December 2018 and December 2019. CD34+ collection efficiency (CE2) and platelet (PLT) loss were evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in CD34+ CE2 between Spectra Optia with cMNC (median, 28.8%) and Amicus (median, 33.1%; P = 0.537). PLT loss was significantly lower in Amicus (median, 28.6%) than in Spectra Optia with cMNC (median, 37.8%; P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

CD34+ CE2 was comparable between Spectra Optia and Amicus, and PLT loss was significantly lower in Amicus. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report comparing autologous PBSC collection of the Spectra Optia and Amicus. These results may provide general guidance with regard to device selection to apheresis clinics that use both separators for optimal outcomes depending on each patient's characteristics.

Comparison of the Fenwal Amicus and Fresenius Com.Tec cell separators for autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell collection

Peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) are commonly used as a stem cell source for autologous transplantation. This study was undertaken to evaluate blood cell separators with respect to separation results and content of the harvest. Forty autologous PBPC collections in patients with hematological malignancies were performed with either the Amicus or the COM.TEC cell separators. The median product volume was lower with the Amicus compared to the COM.TEC (125 mL vs. 300 mL; p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the median number of CD34+ cell/kg in product between the Amicus and the COM.TEC (3.0 x 10(6) vs. 4.1 x 10(6); p = 0.129). There was a statistically higher mean volume of ACD used in collections on the Amicus compared to the COM.TEC (1040 +/- 241 mL vs. 868 +/- 176 mL; p = 0.019). There was a statistical difference in platelet (PLT) contamination of the products between the Amicus and the COM.TEC (0.3 x 10(11) vs. 1.1 x 10(11); p < 0.001). The median % decrease in PB PLT count was statistically higher in the COM.TEC compared to the Amicus instruments (18.5% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.028). In conclusion, both instruments collected PBPCs efficiently. However, Amicus has the advantage of lower PLT contamination in the product, and less decrease in PB platelet count with lower product volume in autologous setting.