Willingness of blood donors in Australia to provide additional data and blood sample for health research

Equity in blood transfusion precision services

BACKGROUND

Blood collection agencies are integrating precision medicine techniques to improve and individualise blood donor and recipient outcomes. These organisations have a role to play in ensuring equitable application of precision medicine technologies for both donors and transfusion recipients. BODY: Precision medicine techniques, including molecular genetic testing and next generation sequencing, have been integrated in transfusion services to improve blood typing and matching with the aim to reduce a variety of known transfusion complications. Internationally, priorities in transfusion research have aimed to optimise services through the use of precision medicine technologies and consider alternative uses of genomic information to personalise transfusion experiences for both recipients and donors. This has included focusing on the use of genomics when matching blood products for transfusion recipients, to personalise a blood donor's donation type or frequency, and longitudinal donor research utilising blood donor biobanks.

CONCLUSION

Equity in precision services and research must be of highest importance for blood collection agencies to maintain public trust, especially when these organisations rely on volunteer donors to provide transfusion services. The investment in implementing equitable precision medicine services, including development of blood donor biobanks, has the potential to optimise and personalise services for both blood donors and transfusion recipients.

Research partnerships between blood services and public health authorities: An international, cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the fore how blood services can partner with public health (PH) authorities to inform decisions. Yet the scope of partnerships between blood services and PH authorities is inadequately documented. We explored how blood services partner with PH authorities outside the scope of COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

On 19 January 2022, survey was sent to employees of blood services located throughout the world. Survey questions mainly pertained to partnerships with PH authorities, including how blood specimens are used and collected.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven recipients-4 (14.8%) in Africa, 3 (11.1%) in Asia, 9 (33.3%) in Europe, 6 (22.2%) in North America, 2 (7.4%) in Oceania and 3 (11.1%) in South America-completed the survey. Fifteen recipients (55.6%) indicated their blood service was directly or indirectly supervised by PH authorities. Twenty-four recipients (88.9%) indicated currently using or planning to use blood donor data or samples for PH research or pathogen surveillance. A substantial proportion of respondents reported using samples or results from non-routine tests for the surveillance of non-transfusion-transmitted infectious disease pathogens (n = 13 [48.1%]); samples or results of non-routine tests for PH research unrelated to pathogens (n = 10 [37.0%]); donor data for PH research unrelated to pathogens (n = 12 [44.4%]) and donor data for PH research unrelated to transfusion safety (n = 11 [40.7%]). Fourteen (51.9%) had established (or planned to establish) longitudinal cohorts and 19 (70.4%) biobanks.

CONCLUSION

The majority of responding blood services were already involved in or planned to be involved in PH research or pathogen surveillance.

How do we decide how representative our donors are for public health surveillance?

BACKGROUND

Surveillance of blood donors is fundamental to safety of the blood supply. Such data can also be useful for public health policy but tend to be underutilized. When the COVID-19 pandemic arrived, blood centers around the world measured blood donor SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence to inform public health policy. There is now a movement toward blood centers becoming more involved in public health research and surveillance post-pandemic. However, blood donors are a healthy population and not representative of all segments of the general population. In this article, we explain how blood centers can evaluate their donor base to understand which part of the general population they are representative of.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Methodologic approaches for evaluating samples relative to the target population were reviewed. Blood donor data that are available to most blood centers were identified and application to assess representativeness of blood donors was evaluated.

RESULTS

Key aspects of blood donor data to compare with general population data include donor selection criteria, health indicators, geography, and demographics. In some cases, statistical adjustment can improve representativeness.

DISCUSSION

Comparing key blood donor data with corresponding general population data can define the subset of the general population for which a particular blood center's donors may be representative of. We suggest that donors are an ideal convenience population for surveillance of infectious agents which are frequently asymptomatic and main routes of transmission are not deferrable, for studying the natural history of disease in an initially well population, and for vaccination serology surveillance.

Assessment of Biobanking Knowledge and Attitudes towards Biospecimen Donation among Healthcare Providers in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Biobanking is a critical cornerstone of the global shift towards precision medicine (PM). This transformation requires smooth and informed interaction between a range of stakeholders involved in the healthcare system. In Saudi Arabia, there is still insufficient awareness of the importance of biobanking and its potential benefits for patients, the healthcare system, and society as a whole. The purpose of this study was to determine the biobanking knowledge of Saudi healthcare providers and the potential factors that might influence their self-reported attitudes toward biospecimen donation and biobanking.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted targeting 636 healthcare providers in Makkah province using a structured, self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

The study had a response rate of 61%. The mean knowledge level about biobanks was 3.5 (±1.8) out of 7. About one-third of the participants were aware of the Human Genome Project (HGP) (35%) or the term "biobank" (34%). The mean rating of their attitude was 37.3 (±4.3) out of 55. Most participants (74%) had a positive attitude toward medical research. Job position, general health, previous blood tests, knowledge of biobanking, and attitudes toward biomedical research were significantly related and predictors of willingness to donate biospecimens (p < 0.05). However, concerns about biospecimen misuse and confidentiality were the main reasons for not donating biospecimens.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that healthcare providers mostly lack basic knowledge about HGP and biobanks and their roles and activities, and therefore are generally disinclined to actively participate in biospecimens' collection and management. It is recommended that medical trainees receive more education and awareness about biobanks and the latest personalized healthcare approaches to improve translational research outcomes and achieve precision medicine.

Serological testing of blood donors to characterise the impact of COVID-19 in Melbourne, Australia, 2020

Rapidly identifying and isolating people with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection has been a core strategy to contain COVID-19 in Australia, but a proportion of infections go undetected. We estimated SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody prevalence (seroprevalence) among blood donors in metropolitan Melbourne following a COVID-19 outbreak in the city between June and September 2020. The aim was to determine the extent of infection spread and whether seroprevalence varied demographically in proportion to reported cases of infection. The design involved stratified sampling of residual specimens from blood donors (aged 20-69 years) in three postcode groups defined by low (<3 cases/1,000 population), medium (3-7 cases/1,000 population) and high (>7 cases/1,000 population) COVID-19 incidence based on case notification data. All specimens were tested using the Wantai SARS-CoV-2 total antibody assay. Seroprevalence was estimated with adjustment for test sensitivity and specificity for the Melbourne metropolitan blood donor and residential populations, using multilevel regression and poststratification. Overall, 4,799 specimens were collected between 23 November and 17 December 2020. Seroprevalence for blood donors was 0.87% (90% credible interval: 0.25-1.49%). The highest estimates, of 1.13% (0.25-2.15%) and 1.11% (0.28-1.95%), respectively, were observed among donors living in the lowest socioeconomic areas (Quintiles 1 and 2) and lowest at 0.69% (0.14-1.39%) among donors living in the highest socioeconomic areas (Quintile 5). When extrapolated to the Melbourne residential population, overall seroprevalence was 0.90% (0.26-1.51%), with estimates by demography groups similar to those for the blood donors. The results suggest a lack of extensive community transmission and good COVID-19 case ascertainment based on routine testing during Victoria's second epidemic wave. Residual blood donor samples provide a practical epidemiological tool for estimating seroprevalence and information on population patterns of infection, against which the effectiveness of ongoing responses to the pandemic can be assessed.