A randomized controlled trial comparing standard- and low-dose strategies for transfusion of platelets (SToP) to patients with thrombocytopenia

Thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusions in ICU patients: an international inception cohort study (PLOT-ICU)

PURPOSE

Thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 150 × 109/L) is common in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and is likely associated with worse outcomes. In this study we present international contemporary data on thrombocytopenia in ICU patients.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study in adult ICU patients in 52 ICUs across 10 countries. We assessed frequencies of thrombocytopenia, use of platelet transfusions and clinical outcomes including mortality. We evaluated pre-selected potential risk factors for the development of thrombocytopenia during ICU stay and associations between thrombocytopenia at ICU admission and 90-day mortality using pre-specified logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

We analysed 1166 ICU patients; the median age was 63 years and 39.5% were female. Overall, 43.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 40.4-46.1) had thrombocytopenia; 23.4% (20-26) had thrombocytopenia at ICU admission, and 19.8% (17.6-22.2) developed thrombocytopenia during their ICU stay. Absence of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), non-cancer-related immune deficiency, liver failure, male sex, septic shock, and bleeding at ICU admission were associated with the development of thrombocytopenia during ICU stay. Among patients with thrombocytopenia, 22.6% received platelet transfusion(s), and 64.3% of in-ICU transfusions were prophylactic. Patients with thrombocytopenia had higher occurrences of bleeding and death, fewer days alive without the use of life-support, and fewer days alive and out of hospital. Thrombocytopenia at ICU admission was associated with 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.7; 95% CI 1.19-2.42).

CONCLUSION

Thrombocytopenia occurred in 43% of critically ill patients and was associated with worse outcomes including increased mortality. Platelet transfusions were given to 23% of patients with thrombocytopenia and most were prophylactic.

Life-Threatening Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Adult with ITP: Challenging Entity

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a rare and fatal complication of immune thrombocytopenia. ICH is more common in children than in the adult population. A 30-year-old male patient, a known case of immune thrombocytopenia, presented with sudden onset severe headache and vomiting. Computed tomography scan showed a large right frontal intracerebral hematoma. His platelet counts were low, and he received multiple transfusions. Though he was initially conscious, his neurological condition progressively deteriorated, so the decision was taken for an emergency craniotomy. Despite multiple transfusions, his platelet counts were 10,000/µL, so craniotomy was very risky. He underwent an emergency splenectomy and received one unit of single donor platelets. Subsequently, his platelets count increased a few hours after, and he underwent successful evacuation of intracerebral hematoma. He eventually had an excellent neurological outcome. Though intracranial hemorrhage carries significant morbidity and mortality, a timely decision of emergency splenectomy followed by craniotomy can result in an excellent clinical outcome.

Platelet transfusion in adults: An update

Many patients worldwide receive platelet components (PCs) through the transfusion of diverse types of blood components. PC transfusions are essential for the treatment of central thrombocytopenia of diverse causes, and such treatment is beneficial in patients at risk of severe bleeding. PC transfusions account for almost 10% of all the blood components supplied by blood services, but they are associated with about 3.25 times as many severe reactions (attributable to transfusion) than red blood cell transfusions after stringent in-process leukoreduction to less than 10⁶ residual cells per blood component. PCs are not homogeneous, due to the considerable differences between donors. Furthermore, the modes of PC collection and preparation, the safety precautions taken to limit either the most common (allergic-type reactions and febrile non-hemolytic reactions) or the most severe (bacterial contamination, pulmonary lesions) adverse reactions, and storage and conservation methods can all result in so-called PC "storage lesions". Some storage lesions affect PC quality, with implications for patient outcome. Good transfusion practices should result in higher levels of platelet recovery and efficacy, and lower complication rates. These practices include a matching of tissue ABH antigens whenever possible, and of platelet HLA (and, to a lesser extent, HPA) antigens in immunization situations. This review provides an overview of all the available information relating to platelet transfusion, from donor and donation to bedside transfusion, and considers the impact of the measures applied to increase transfusion efficacy while improving safety and preventing transfusion inefficacy and refractoriness. It also considers alternatives to platelet component (PC) transfusion.

The appropriateness of platelet transfusions in hematological patients and the potential for improvement

BACKGROUND

Hematology patients are intensive platelet users. In clinical practice, a substantial proportion of platelet (PLT) transfusions are routinely administered outside the guidelines despite compelling evidence for recommendations. Those unnecessary PLT transfusions are an unjustified extra burden on a scarce healthcare resource and may also be detrimental to the patients. This study aims to evaluate indications and assess the appropriateness of PLT transfusion, as well as to identify common discrepancies and propose modalities for better compliance with guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The audit of all PLT orders for adult hematological inpatients was conducted over 2 months. The assessment was performed using guidelines for PLT transfusion. Patient demographic, clinical, and transfusion data were collected from hospital electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Based on 286 PLT orders, 344 PCs were transfused to 67 patients: 235 (82.2%) prophylactical due to low PLT count, 34 (11.9%) preprocedural and 17 (5.9%) therapeutic. Overall, 105 (36.77%) PLT transfusions were inappropriate: 78 (33.2%) of all prophylactic PLT transfusions due to low PLT count, 17 (50%) off all preprocedural and 10 (58.8%) of all therapeutical transfusion. The major reason for PLT transfusion inappropriateness was transfusion above the recommended threshold. Double units of PCs were transfused in 36.7% of all PLT transfusions and 32.4% of them were considered inappropriate.

CONCLUSION

Our audit of PLT transfusion practice found a large proportion of inappropriate PLT transfusions. Based on the most common deviations from the guidelines a variety of targeted measures for improvement are proposed.

Transfusion outcomes between regular and low yield pathogen reduced platelets across different patient populations in a single institution

BACKGROUND

Pathogen reduction technology (PRT) effectively mitigates bacterial contamination in platelets but is more likely to produce low yield units. Although low dose transfusion using conventional platelets has not been associated with increased bleeding, these findings have not been reproduced with PRT-treated platelets.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Platelet transfusions in a tertiary adult hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Comparisons were made between PRT-treated regular (PRT-PR) and low (PRT-PL) yield platelets. Outcomes examined included the number of platelets and RBCs transfused, transfusion-free interval, and corrected count increment (CCI). Subgroup analyses were also performed on hematology-oncology inpatients and outpatients, as well as non-hematology-oncology patients.

RESULTS

Platelet utilization per patient remained mostly unchanged (mean 2.9-4.3 units per patient per month) even when the frequency of PRT-PL transfusion increased. Among 1402 patients examined, the number of platelets and RBCs transfused was not significantly different between patients first transfused with PRT-PR versus PRT-PL (mean number of platelet units = 2.8 vs. 3.1, p = 0.38; mean number of RBC units = 4.8 vs. 4.3, p = 0.93). Among 10,257 platelet transfusions examined, the transfusion-free interval (hazard ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.10) and CCI (10.2 vs. 11.0, p = 0.70) were comparable between PRT-PR and PRT-PL units. Similar findings were observed in all subgroups, except for shortened transfusion-free intervals among hematology-oncology inpatients.

CONCLUSION

PRT-PR and PRT-PL units may be used in an equivalent manner to maintain an adequate platelet inventory, since there was only a minor difference in time between transfusions.

Preoperative platelet transfusions: A retrospective review of pediatric patients with thrombocytopenia, 2011-2016

BACKGROUND

Thrombocytopenia is a common perioperative clinical problem and preoperative platelet transfusion prior to surgery is standard practice. Recent platelet trials and literature reviews have found no association between platelet count and bleeding incidence except when platelet count is extremely low. Our aim was to evaluate the bleeding risk and the overall platelet transfusion management among pediatric patients with severe thrombocytopenia based on whether they were preoperatively transfused versus transfused at time of incision.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of pediatric patients with a platelet count ≤50 × 10⁹/L in the 12 h prior to surgery at a single tertiary pediatric hospital from 2011 to 2016. Eligible patients were ≤21 years old. Patients with necrotizing enterocolitis and neonates were excluded. The primary outcome was postoperative bleeding complications. Additional outcomes were preoperative platelet change and weight adjusted transfusion volumes.

RESULTS

A total of 37 patients were included in this analysis of which 29 (78%) received preoperative platelet transfusions within 12 h prior to surgery. No postoperative bleeding complications occurred 30 days after operation, regardless of preoperative transfusion status. There was no significant difference in platelet change by preoperative transfusion status and preoperative transfusion volume was a poor predictor of change in preoperative platelet count (crude: r²=0.19, age/gender adjusted: r²=0.48).

CONCLUSION

Patients transfused at time of surgical procedure did not have an increased risk of bleeding over those preoperatively transfused. This finding is in agreement with previous studies in adult populations, supporting the safety of deferring platelet transfusions until the time of incision for thrombocytopenic pediatric surgical patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Recommended primary outcomes for clinical trials evaluating hemostatic blood products and agents in patients with bleeding: Proceedings of a National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and US Department of Defense Consensus Conference

ABSTRACT

High-quality evidence guiding optimal transfusion and other supportive therapies to reduce bleeding is needed to improve outcomes for patients with either severe bleeding or hemostatic disorders that are associated with poor outcomes. Alongside challenges in performing high-quality clinical trials in patient populations who are at risk of bleeding or who are actively bleeding, the interpretation of research evaluating hemostatic agents has been limited by inconsistency in the choice of primary trial outcomes. This lack of standardization of primary endpoints or outcomes decreases the ability of clinicians to assess the validity of endpoints and compare research results across studies, impairs meta-analytic efforts, and, ultimately, delays the translation of research results into clinical practice. To address this challenge, an international panel of experts was convened by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and the US Department of Defense on September 23 and 24, 2019, to develop expert opinion, consensus-based recommendations for primary clinical trial outcomes for pivotal trials in pediatric and adult patients with six categories in various clinical settings. This publication documents the conference proceedings from the workshop funded by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and the US Department of Defense that consolidated expert opinion regarding clinically meaningful outcomes across a wide range of disciplines to provide guidance for outcomes of future trials of hemostatic products and agents for patients with active bleeding.

Platelet transfusion for patients with platelet dysfunction: effectiveness, mechanisms, and unanswered questions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we discuss current clinical guidelines and potential underlying mechanisms regarding platelet transfusion therapy in patients at risk of bleeding, comparing management of patients with thrombocytopenia versus those with qualitative platelet disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Platelet transfusion therapy is highly effective in managing bleeding in patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. Clinical trials have demonstrated that platelet transfusion can be used at a lower trigger threshold and reduced platelet doses, and may be used therapeutically rather than prophylactically in some situations, although additional data are needed. In patients with inherited platelet disorders such as Glanzmann's Thrombasthenia or those with RASGRP2 mutations, platelet transfusion may be ineffective because of competition between transfused and endogenous platelets at the site of vascular injury. Successful management of these patients may require transfusion of additional platelet units, or mechanism-driven combination therapy with other pro-hemostatic agents. In patients on antiplatelet therapy, timing of transfusion and inhibitor mechanism-of-action are key in determining therapeutic success.

SUMMARY

Expanding our understanding of the mechanisms by which transfused platelets exert their pro-hemostatic function in various bleeding disorders will improve the appropriate use of platelet transfusion.

Platelet transfusion for cancer secondary thrombocytopenia: Platelet and cancer cell interaction

Chemoradiotherapy and autoimmune disorder often lead to secondary thrombocytopenia in cancer patients, and thus, platelet transfusion is needed to stop or prevent bleeding. However, the effect of platelet transfusion remains controversial for the lack of agreement on transfusion strategies. Before being transfused, platelets are stored in blood banks, and their activation is usually stimulated. Increasing evidence shows activated platelets may promote metastasis and the proliferation of cancer cells, while cancer cells also induce platelet activation. Such a vicious cycle of interaction between activated platelets and cancer cells is harmful for the prognosis of cancer patients, which results in an increased tumor recurrence rate and decreased five-year survival rate. Therefore, it is important to explore platelet transfusion strategies, summarize mechanisms of interaction between platelets and tumor cells, and carefully evaluate the pros and cons of platelet transfusion for better treatment and prognosis for patients with cancer with secondary thrombocytopenia.

Exploring the components of bleeding outcomes in transfusion trials for patients with hematologic malignancy

Clinically significant bleeding in patients with hematologic malignancies is a heterogeneous composite outcome currently defined as World Health Organization (WHO) bleeding Grades 2, 3, and 4. However, the clinical significance of some minor bleeds categorized as WHO Grades 1 and 2 remains controversial. We analyzed the number and frequency of individual signs and symptoms of WHO Grades 1 and 2 bleeds and explored their association with more severe incident bleeds graded as WHO Grades 3 and 4.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We aggregated daily bleeding assessment data from three randomized controlled trials conducted in patients with hematologic malignancies that used bleeding as an outcome. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to identify signs and symptoms categorized as WHO Grades 1 and 2 bleeds that were associated with more severe bleeds (Grades 3 and 4).

RESULTS

We collected data from 315 patients (n = 5476 daily bleeding assessments; 3383 [61.8%] with a bleed documented). A total of 98.3% (3326/3383) were Grade 1 and 2 bleeds and 1.7% (57/3383) were Grades 3 and 4. Grade 1 and 2 bleeds were composed of 20 different bleeding signs and symptoms. Hematuria (hazard ratio, 16.1; 95% confidence interval, 4.4-59.2; P < .0001) was associated with incident Grade 3 or 4 bleeds.

CONCLUSION

In patients with hematologic malignancy, only hematuria (microscopic and/or macroscopic) was associated with more severe incident bleeds. This findings require validation in independent data sets.

A systematic literature review on the use of platelet transfusions in patients with thrombocytopenia

Objective: Investigate globally, current treatment patterns, benefit-risk assessments, humanistic, societal and economic burden of platelet transfusion (PT). Methods: Publications from 1998 to June 27, 2018 were identified, based on databases searches including MEDLINE®; Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Data from studies meeting pre-specified criteria were extracted and validated by independent reviewers. Data were obtained for efficacy and safety from randomized controlled trials (RCTs); data for epidemiology, treatment patterns, effectiveness, safety, humanistic and societal burden from real-world evidence (RWE) studies; and economic data from both. Results: A total of 3425 abstracts, 194 publications (190 studies) were included. PT use varied widely, from 0%-100% of TCP patients; 1.7%-24.5% in large studies (>1000 patients). Most were used prophylactically rather than therapeutically. 5 of 43 RCTs compared prophylactic PT with no intervention, with mixed results. In RWE studies PT generally increased platelet count (PC). This increase varied by patient characteristics and hence did not always translate into a clinically significant reduction in bleeding risk. Safety concerns included infection risk, alloimmunization and refractoriness with associated cost burden. Discussion: In RCTs and RWE studies there was significant heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures. In RWE studies, patients receiving PT may have been at higher risk than those not receiving PT creating potential bias. There were limited data on humanistic and societal burden. Conclusion: Although PTs are used widely for increasing PC in TCP, it is important to understand the limitations of PTs, and to explore the use of alternative treatment options where available.

The epidemiology of platelet transfusions: an analysis of platelet use at 12 US hospitals

BACKGROUND

Using the Recipient and Donor Epidemiology Study-III (REDS-III) recipient and donor databases, we performed a retrospective analysis of platelet use in 12 US hospitals that were participants in REDS-III.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were electronically extracted from participating transfusion service and blood center computer systems and from medical records of the 12 REDS-III hospitals. All platelet transfusions from 2013 to 2016 given to patients aged 18 years and older were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

There were 28,843 inpatients and 2987 outpatients who were transfused with 163,719 platelet products (103,371 apheresis, 60,348 whole blood derived); 93.5% of platelets were leukoreduced and 72.5% were irradiated. Forty-six percent were transfused to patients with an International Classification of Diseases, 9th/10th Revision (ICD-9/10) diagnosis of leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), or lymphoma. The general ward and the intensive care unit (ICU) were the most common issue locations. Only 54% of platelet transfusions were ABO identical; and 60.6% of platelet transfusions given to Rh-negative patients were Rh positive. The most common pretransfusion platelet count range for inpatients was 20,000 to 50,000/μL, for outpatients it was 10,000 to 20,000/μL. Among ICU patients, 35% of platelet transfusion episodes had a platelet count of greater than 50,000/μL; this was only 8% for general ward and 2% for outpatients. The median posttransfusion increment, not corrected for platelet dose and/or patient size, ranged from 12,000 to 20,000/μL for inpatients, and from 17,000 to 27,000/μL for outpatients.

CONCLUSIONS

These data from one of the largest reviews of platelet transfusion practice to date provide guidance for where to focus future clinical research studies and platelet blood management programs.

The association between haemorrhage and markers of endothelial insufficiency and inflammation in patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia: a cohort study

In daily haematological practice, predicting bleeding in thrombocytopenic patients is difficult, and clinicians adhere to transfusion triggers to guide patients through the aplastic phase of chemotherapy. Platelet count is not the only determinant of bleeding and additional mechanisms for impending haemostasis are likely. Beside clot formation, platelets are essential for the maintenance of integrity of vascular beds. We therefore prospectively investigated associations between biomarkers for endothelial damage (urine albumin excretion) and inflammation (C‐reactive protein) and bleeding (WHO grading) in 88 patients with 116 on‐protocol episodes. We found an increase in grade 2 bleeding with a higher urine albumin/creatinine ratio one day after the measurement [odds ratio (OR) 1·24 for every doubling of the ratio, 95% CI 1·05–1·46, P‐value 0·01] and a 29% increase in the odds of grade 2 bleeding for every doubling of serum C‐reactive protein (CRP) (95% CI 1·04–1·60, P‐value 0·02) after correction for morning platelet count. The 24 h post‐transfusion corrected count increment (CCI₂₄) showed a significant association with these biomarkers: increasing urine albumin/creatinine ratio and CRP were associated with lower CCI_24. We report two inexpensive and easy‐to‐apply biomarkers that could be useful in designing a prediction model for bleeding risk in thrombocytopenic patients.

Comparison of efficacy of low and high dose prophylactic platelet transfusion therapy in thrombocytopenic haemato-oncology patients

INTRODUCTION

To determine an optimal platelet dose in thrombocytopenic patients is important for their judicious use. Transfusing platelets in different doses and comparing their post transfusion response can achieve this.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of low and high dose single donor apheresis platelets (SDAP) with standard dose transfusions in terms of Corrected Count Increment (CCI), Percent Platelet Recovery (PPR) and transfusion free interval.

METHOD

It was a prospective case control study done from January 2016 to April 2017. Twenty-eight hemato-oncology patients with CCI ≥5000 at 20-24 hours after standard dose (3 × 10¹¹/unit), received low dose (1.5 × 10¹¹ platelets/unit) and high dose (>4 × 10¹¹ platelets/unit) SDAP. CCI and PPR were calculated after 20 to 24 hours of transfusion. Transfusion free interval and bleeding episodes were also noted. Grading was done according to WHO bleeding scale.

RESULT

There was no statistical difference in CCI and PPR when standard dose was compared with low dose (CCI: p = 0.92, PPR: p = 0.89). When standard and high dose was compared, standard dose gave better results than the high dose in terms of CCI (p = 0.006) and PPR (p = 0.008) although the post transfusion increments were comparable (p = 0.938). High dose gave better (p = 0.005) platelet count increments than low dose but CCI (p = 0.04) and PPR (p = 0.05) was significantly less than the low dose. The difference in transfusion free intervals after three doses was not significant. Donor exposure to the patients was significantly (p = 0.000) reduced to 17.5%.

CONCLUSION

Possibility of low dose as an alternative to standard dose can be considered in view of comparable platelet response indicators and significantly reduced donor exposure.

A Quality Improvement Initiative to Decrease Platelet Ordering Errors and a Proposed Model for Evaluating Clinical Decision Support Effectiveness

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Clinical decision support (CDS) and computerized provider order entry have been shown to improve health care quality and safety, but may also generate previously unanticipated errors. We identified multiple CDS tools for platelet transfusion orders. In this study, we sought to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of those CDS tools while creating and testing a framework for future evaluation of other CDS tools.

METHODS

Using a query of an enterprise data warehouse at a tertiary care pediatric hospital, we conducted a retrospective analysis to assess baseline use and performance of existing CDS for platelet transfusion orders. Our outcome measure was the percentage of platelet undertransfusion ordering errors. Errors were defined as platelet transfusion volumes ordered which were less than the amount recommended by the order set used. We then redesigned our CDS and measured the impact of our intervention prospectively using statistical process control methodology.

RESULTS

We identified that 62% of all platelet transfusion orders were placed with one of two order sets (Inpatient Service 1 and Inpatient Service 2). The Inpatient Service 1 order set had a significantly higher occurrence of ordering errors (3.10% compared with 1.20%). After our interventions, platelet transfusion order error occurrence on Inpatient Service 1 decreased from 3.10 to 0.33%.

CONCLUSION

We successfully reduced platelet transfusion ordering errors by redesigning our CDS tools. We suggest that the use of collections of clinical data may help identify patterns in erroneous ordering, which could otherwise go undetected. We have created a framework which can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of other similar CDS tools.

One-unit compared to two-unit platelet transfusions for adult oncology outpatients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Platelet dosing has been studied in adult oncology inpatients, but there is almost no published evidence to guide platelet dosing for adult outpatients. We evaluated transfusion indices after 1 unit and 2 unit apheresis platelet transfusions at our hospital to determine whether a benefit to 2-unit transfusions could be detected.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of all adult oncology patients who received an outpatient platelet transfusion over a 16-month period (July 2016-November 2017). Pre- and post-transfusion platelet count, and chronology of subsequent platelet transfusions were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 8467 platelet transfusions were administered to 602 patients during the study period. 59·8% of patients (n = 360) were transfused interchangeably with one or two platelets throughout the study period. The primary study population were comprised of these patients. On average, a 2-unit platelet transfusions resulted in a higher immediate post-transfusion platelet count (43 vs. 37 x 10³ /μl, P < 0·001) and a lower corrected count increment (9707 vs. 14 060, P < 0·001). Transfusion with 2 platelets did not increase the number of days between outpatient transfusions (median; 4 vs. 4, P = 0·959) or the platelet count at the time of next transfusion (11 vs. 11 x 10³ /μl, P = 0·147).

CONCLUSION

Among adult, oncology outpatients that were transfused interchangeably with one or two units of platelets, transfusion with two platelets did not offer a durable improvement in platelet count or impact the subsequent transfusion schedule.

Prediction of bleeding by thromboelastography in ICU patients with haematological malignancy and severe sepsis

: ICU patients with haematological malignancy have an increased risk of bleeding. Recently, global haemostatic methods such as thromboelastography (TEG) have gained impact in evaluating coagulation. The aim of this study was to observe whether TEG could predict bleeding in haematological ICU patients with severe sepsis. Post-hoc single-centre analysis of patients with haematological malignancy included in the Scandinavian Starch for Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock (6S) trial. Clinical characteristics, TEG measurements and details regarding bleeding complications were retrieved from the 6S database. The association between TEG and bleeding were analysed by Cox regression and receiver operating characteristic curves. A total of 202 patients with severe sepsis were admitted to the ICU of Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen and included in the 6S trial. Forty-one had haematological malignancy and were analysed in the current study. During ICU stay, 20 patients (49%) had bleeding complications and 13 (32%) patients bled within the first 5 ICU days. We observed no associations between TEG and subsequent bleeding in Cox regression models. TEG variables at baseline had low predictive value for bleeding. Baseline TEG variables did not add value in identifying patients with high risk of bleeding in ICU patients with haematological malignancy and severe sepsis.

Hypoplastic thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusion: therapeutic goals

Platelet transfusions consist a major part of the management of hypoplastic thrombocytopenia, the latter occurring mainly among patients with hematological malignancies. Platelet transfusions have led to a reduction of deaths attributable to thrombocytopenia-induced bleeding, despite their possible complications; nonetheless, prophylactic administration of platelets to patients with severe thrombocytopenia or before invasive procedures should be based on specific criteria, as well as therapeutic administration during active bleeding. Recently developed ex-vivo procedures have resulted in producing safer blood products, yet it remains unclear whether these pathogen-inactivated products have sufficient efficacy. What is more, another significant problem that remains to be more effectively addressed is the developing refractoriness to platelet transfusions.

The identification of cases of major hemorrhage during hospitalization in patients with acute leukemia using routinely recorded healthcare data

INTRODUCTION

Electronic health care data offers the opportunity to study rare events, although detecting these events in large datasets remains difficult. We aimed to develop a model to identify leukemia patients with major hemorrhages within routinely recorded health records.

METHODS

The model was developed using routinely recorded health records of a cohort of leukemia patients admitted to an academic hospital in the Netherlands between June 2011 and December 2015. Major hemorrhage was assessed by chart review. The model comprised CT-brain, hemoglobin drop, and transfusion need within 24 hours for which the best discriminating cut off values were taken. External validation was performed within a cohort of two other academic hospitals.

RESULTS

The derivation cohort consisted of 255 patients, 10,638 hospitalization days, of which chart review was performed for 353 days. The incidence of major hemorrhage was 0.22 per 100 days in hospital. The model consisted of CT-brain (yes/no), hemoglobin drop of ≥0.8 g/dl and transfusion of ≥6 units. The C-statistic was 0.988 (CI 0.981-0.995). In the external validation cohort of 436 patients (19,188 days), the incidence of major hemorrhage was 0.46 per 100 hospitalization days and the C-statistic was 0.975 (CI 0.970-0.980). Presence of at least one indicator had a sensitivity of 100% (CI 95.8-100) and a specificity of 90.7% (CI 90.2-91.1). The number of days to screen to find one case decreased from 217.4 to 23.6.

INTERPRETATION

A model based on information on CT-brain, hemoglobin drop and need of transfusions can accurately identify cases of major hemorrhage within routinely recorded health records.

[Comparative study on platelet transfusion in Lorraine-Champagne and Alsace in 2015]

OBJECTIVES

To find explanations for the observed differences of platelets concentrates (PC) deliveries between 2 French regions, Lorraine-Champagne (LOCH) and Alsace (ALSA).

METHODS

This is a non-interventional prospective study, performed during 30 days in 2015 in intensive care, cardiovascular surgery and onco-hematological wards of 8 LOCH and ALSA hospitals. Questionnaires listing clinical and biological parameters were attached to the prescription forms and filled in at each PC prescription.

RESULTS

In all, 290 patients, 1093 prescriptions and 1093 deliveries of PC were analyzed. The pre-transfusional context (patient weight, prophylactic or curative situation, pre-transfusional platelet count) were homogenous. The phasing of the prescription forms wording had a direct impact on the doses' formulation : 100 % of the LOCH forms were expressed in platelet quantity (PQ), vs 22 % in ALSA. The mean interval between 2 transfusions was 2.9 days in ALSA vs 4.9 days in LOCH. The mean PQ/delivery was higher in ALSA (5.6.10¹¹ vs 4.0.10¹¹ in LOCH). The delivered PQs were compared to the 2003 French recommendations that were in force in 2015. Twenty-seven percent of the LOCH delivered PQs were in the recommended interval, vs Forty-nine percent in ALSA. Due to the systematic delivery of a single PC unit, including weights>80Kg, LOCH presented 63 % insufficient PQ deliveries. Twenty-two percent of the deliveries in ALSA were over the recommended interval, mostly linked with the simultaneous delivery of a second PC.

CONCLUSION

This study identifies disparities in terms of prescription and delivery between LOCH and ALSA, which may explain their respective PC consumption levels.

Platelet transfusion: Current challenges

Since the late sixties, platelet concentrates are transfused to patients presenting with severe thrombocytopenia, platelet function defects, injuries, or undergoing surgery, to prevent the risk of bleeding or to treat actual hemorrhage. Current practices differ according to the country or even in different hospitals and teams. Although crucial advances have been made during the last decades, questions and debates still arise about the right doses to transfuse, the use of prophylactic or therapeutic strategies, the nature and quality of PC, the storage conditions, the monitoring of transfusion efficacy and the microbiological and immunological safety of platelet transfusion. Finally, new challenges are emerging with potential new platelet products, including cold stored or in vitro produced platelets. The most debated of these points are reviewed.

[Adaptation of platelet concentrates delivery to HAS/ANSM requirements evolution in EFS Grand-Est]

Evolution of French HAS/ANSM guidelines in 2015 about optimal platelet transfusion dose for patients brought us to review about our practices for platelet concentrates delivery in EFS Grand-Est region. In addition, pathogen inactivation in platelet concentrates has been implemented all over the country and transfusion centers have merged. All these changes required harmonization. In this context, our major issue was to answer patient's requirements, according to the new guidelines keeping in mind the cost effectiveness on public finances. We report here on the changes in our practices and their impacts.

Hemostatic efficacy of pathogen-inactivated vs untreated platelets: a randomized controlled trial

Pathogen-inactivated platelets were noninferior in preventing bleeding only in intention-to-treat analysis. In contrast to animal models, alloimmunization could not be prevented when using pathogen-inactivated platelets.

Thrombocytopenia and bleeding in myelosuppressed transfusion-dependent patients: a simulation study exploring underlying mechanisms

Background

Hematology–oncology patients often become severely thrombocytopenic and receive prophylactic platelet transfusions when their platelet count drops below 10×10⁹ platelets/L. This so-called “platelet count trigger” of 10×10⁹ platelets/L is recommended because currently available evidence suggests this is the critical concentration at which bleeding risk starts to increase. Yet, exposure time and lag time may have biased the results of studies on the association between platelet counts and bleeding risks.

Methods

We performed simulation studies to examine possible effects of exposure time and lag time on the findings of both randomized trials and observational data.

Results

Exposure time and lag time reduced or even reversed the association between the risk of clinically relevant bleeding and platelet counts. The frequency of platelet count measurements influenced the observed bleeding risk at a given platelet count trigger. A transfusion trigger of 10×10⁹ platelets/L resulted in a severely distorted association, which closely resembled the association reported in the literature. At triggers of 0, 5, 10, and 20×10⁹ platelets/L the observed percentages of patients experiencing bleeding were 18, 19, 19, and 18%. A trigger of 30×10⁹ platelets/L showed an observed bleeding risk of 16% and triggers of 40 and 50×10⁹ platelets/L both resulted in observed bleeding risks of 13%.

Conclusion

The results from our simulation study show how minimal exposure times and lag times may have influenced the results from previous studies on platelet counts, transfusion strategies, and bleeding risk and caution against the generally recommended universal trigger of 10×10⁹ platelets/L.

Prediction of bleeding and thrombosis by standard biochemical coagulation variables in haematological intensive care patients

PURPOSE

We assessed the value of standard biochemical coagulation parameters in predicting bleeding, thrombosis and mortality in adult Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients with haematological malignancies.

METHODS

We screened all patients with acute leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome admitted to a university hospital ICU during 2008-2012. Data were obtained from the clinical chemistry laboratory database and patient files. We graded bleeding according to the World Health Organisation (WHO)-system within 24-h, within 5-days and during the whole ICU stay. We analysed the predictive values of laboratory parameters using multiple logistic regression and receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curves. As we previously have established that platelet count at admission was associated with bleeding, we focused on International Normalised Ratio (INR), activated pro-thrombin time (APTT), anti-thrombin, D-dimer and fibrinogen, and markers of infection (C-reactive protein, pro-calcitonin), kidney function (creatinine) and tissue damage (lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)).

RESULTS

We included 116 patients; 66 (57%) had at least one bleeding episode and 11 (9%) patients had at least one thrombotic event. The differences in coagulation values when bleeding compared to baseline values were minor. INR was the only variable we found associated with subsequent bleeding within 24 h from admission to ICU (odds ratio 2.91, 95% CI: 1.01-8.43, P = 0.048). ROC analyses did not show predictive value of any of the other variables with regards to bleeding and none of the variables were associated with thrombosis in adjusted analyses. Increased levels of LDH at admission were associated with increased 7-day and 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased INR at admission was associated with a higher rate of bleeding in ICU patients with haematological malignancies. No other biochemical coagulation or other parameter had any association with bleeding, thrombosis or mortality except increased LDH, which at ICU admission was associated with increased 30-day mortality.

Risks of bleeding and thrombosis in intensive care unit patients with haematological malignancies

Background

Patients with malignant haematological disease and especially those who require intensive care have an increased risk of bleeding and thrombosis, but none of these data were obtained in ICU patients only. We assessed the incidence of bleeding and thrombotic complications, use of blood products and risk factors for bleeding in an adult population of ICU patients with haematological malignancies.

Methods

We screened all patients with acute leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome admitted to a university hospital ICU during 2008–2012. Bleeding in ICU was scored according to the WHO grading system, and risk factors were evaluated using unadjusted and adjusted analyses.

Results

In total, 116 of 129 ICU patients were included; their median length of stay was 7 (IQR 2–16) days. Of these, 66 patients (57%) had at least one bleeding episode in ICU; they bled for 3 (2–6) days and most often from lower and upper airways and upper GI tract. Thirty-nine (59%) of the 66 patients had severe or debilitating (WHO grade 3 or 4) bleeding. The median platelet count on the day of grade 3 or 4 bleeding was 23 × 10⁹ per litre (IQR 13–39). Nine patients (8%) died in ICU following a bleeding episode; five of these had intra-cerebral haemorrhage. Platelet count on admission was associated with subsequent bleeding (adjusted odds ratio 1.18 (95% CI 1.03–1.35) for every 10 × 10⁹ per litre drop in platelet count, p = 0.016). Eleven of the 116 patients (9%) developed a clinically significant thrombosis in ICU, which was the cause of death in four patients. The median platelet count was 20 × 10⁹ per litre (15–48) at the time of thrombosis. The patients received a median of 6 units of red blood cells, 1 unit of fresh frozen plasma and 8 units of platelet concentrates in ICU.

Conclusions

Severe and debilitating bleeding complications were frequent in our ICU patients with haematological malignancies, but thrombosis also occurred in spite of low platelet counts. Platelet count on ICU admission was associated with subsequent bleeding.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-017-0341-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Audit of appropriate use of platelet transfusions: validation of adjudication criteria

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Platelet (PLT) transfusions must be used appropriately, as they are in chronic short supply, costly and risky to patients. The goals of this audit were to: (1) validate preset adjudication criteria through an audit of appropriateness at four large academic hospitals; (2) identify variability in appropriateness across medical services, physician specialties or hospital locations; and (3) inform logistical or educational interventions that may reduce inappropriate use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A chart review of two hundred patients receiving PLT transfusions was performed. Fifty consecutive transfusion episodes per site were audited in detail. Each transfusion episode was independently adjudicated as appropriate or inappropriate by two transfusion specialists based on predetermined criteria.

RESULTS

The adjudication criteria performed well with simple agreement of 95% (kappa statistic 0·83) between reviewers. Overall, 78% (95% CI: 72-84%) of PLT transfusions were adjudicated as appropriate, with results varying significantly by hospital site (range 62-94%). Prophylactic transfusions for non-bleeding patients had the highest proportion of appropriateness (85%, n = 80), and therapeutic transfusions for bleeding patients had the lowest (73%, n = 99). The lowest levels of appropriate platelet transfusions were observed in the operating rooms (60%) and when ordered by the general surgery service (55%).

CONCLUSIONS

One in five platelet transfusions may be unnecessary, suggesting that interventions to improve PLT transfusion practice are warranted.

Platelet dysfunction contributes to bleeding complications in patients with probable leptospirosis

BACKGROUND

Severe leptospirosis is frequently complicated by a hemorrhagic diathesis, of which the pathogenesis is still largely unknown. Thrombocytopenia is common, but often not to the degree that spontaneous bleeding is expected. We hypothesized that the hemorrhagic complications are not only related to thrombocytopenia, but also to platelet dysfunction, and that increased binding of von Willebrand factor (VWF) to platelets is involved in both platelet dysfunction and increased platelet clearance.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

A prospective study was carried out in Semarang, Indonesia, enrolling 33 hospitalized patients with probable leptospirosis, of whom 15 developed clinical bleeding, and 25 healthy controls. Platelet activation and reactivity were determined using flow cytometry by measuring the expression of P-selectin and activation of the αIIbβ3 integrin by the binding of fibrinogen in unstimulated samples and after ex vivo stimulation by the platelet agonists adenosine-diphosphate (ADP) and thrombin-receptor activating peptide (TRAP). Platelet-VWF binding, before and after VWF stimulation by ristocetin, as well as plasma levels of VWF, active VWF, the VWF-inactivating enzyme ADAMTS13, thrombin-antithrombin complexes (TAT) and P-selectin were also measured. Bleeding complications were graded using the WHO bleeding scale. Our study revealed that platelet activation, with a secondary platelet dysfunction, is a feature of patients with probable leptospirosis, especially in those with bleeding manifestations. There was a significant inverse correlation of bleeding score with TRAP-stimulated P-selectin and platelet-fibrinogen binding (R = -0.72, P = 0.003 and R = -0.66, P = 0.01, respectively) but not with platelet count. Patients with bleeding also had a significantly higher platelet-VWF binding. Platelet counts were inversely correlated with platelet-VWF binding (R = -0.74; P = 0.0009. There were no correlations between platelet-VWF binding and the degree of platelet dysfunction, suggesting that increased platelet-VWF binding does not directly interfere with the platelet αIIbβ3 signaling pathway in patients with probable leptospirosis.

CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE

Platelet dysfunction is common in probable leptospirosis patients with manifest bleeding. Increased VWF-platelet binding may contribute to the activation and clearance of platelets.

Laboratory predictors of bleeding and the effect of platelet and RBC transfusions on bleeding outcomes in the PLADO trial

Bleeding remains a significant problem for many thrombocytopenic hematology/oncology patients in spite of platelet transfusions. Factors that might contribute to bleeding were analyzed for 16 320 patient-days on or after their first platelet transfusion in 1077 adult patients enrolled in the Platelet Dose (PLADO) trial. All patients had a greatly increased risk of bleeding at platelet counts of ≤5 × 10⁹/L (odds ratio [OR], 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-4.8) compared with platelet counts ≥81 × 10⁹/L. Platelet counts between 6 × 10⁹/L and 80  × 10⁹/L were also associated with a somewhat elevated bleeding risk in patients receiving allogeneic stem cell transplants (SCTs) or chemotherapy but not in those undergoing autologous SCTs. Other significant laboratory predictors of bleeding were hematocrit ≤25% (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.11-1.49), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) 30 to ≤50 seconds (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.08-1.81; P = .01), aPTT >50 seconds (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.54-3.56), international normalized ratio (INR) 1.2 to 1.5 (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.17-1.83), and INR >1.5 (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.43-2.95). Transfusion of either platelets or red blood cells (RBCs) on days with bleeding was often not sufficient to change bleeding outcomes on the following day. Because bleeding occurred over a wide range of platelet counts among patients undergoing allogeneic SCT or chemotherapy and because platelet transfusions may not prevent bleeding, other risk factors may be involved. These may include low hematocrit and coagulation abnormalities. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00128713.

Extended Small-Dose Platelet Transfusions in Multitransfused Hemato-Oncological Patients: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Refractoriness to platelet transfusion, prevalent among 15-20% of hemato-oncological patients, is associated with multitransfusions and inferior outcomes. We evaluated the effectiveness of extended slow-dose transfusion (ESDT) in increasing platelet increments in multitransfused patients.

METHODS

Patients treated after the implementation of ESDT were compared with historical controls treated with standard single-donor platelet (SDP) transfusions. Cohorts of early and late recipients were assembled for comparison, i.e. the 8th or 9th and 11th platelet unit per patient, respectively. Patients in the ESDT group received transfusions equal to half an SDP unit, administered over 4 h. Effectiveness was defined as a higher corrected count increment (CCI) at 1, 12, and 24 h after transfusion.

RESULTS

In the early-recipients cohort, 24-h-posttransfusion increments were available for 29 ESDT patients and 6 standard patients, and did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.078). The 24-h-posttransfusion increment was available for 20 ESDT patients and 7 standard patients in the late-recipients cohort. The CCI was significantly higher in the ESDT group (p = 0.042). ABO compatibility improved the CCI (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

ESDT demonstrated slightly higher increments at 24 h after transfusion in late recipients, suggesting this could be a cost-effective approach for the treatment of thrombocytopenic multitransfused hemato-oncological patients.

Rationale and design of platelet transfusions in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: the PATH pilot study

INTRODUCTION

In patients with transient thrombocytopenia being treated with high-dose chemotherapy followed by stem cell rescue-haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), prophylactic transfusions are standard therapy to prevent bleeding. However, a recent multicentre trial suggests that prophylactic platelet transfusions in HSCT may not be necessary. Additionally, the potential overuse of platelet products places a burden on a scarce healthcare resource. Moreover, the benefit of prophylactic platelet transfusions to prevent clinically relevant haemorrhage is debatable. Current randomised data compare different thresholds for administering prophylactic platelets or prophylactic versus therapeutic platelet transfusions. An alternative strategy involves prescribing prophylactic antifibrinolytic agents such as tranexamic acid to prevent bleeding.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This report describes the design of an open-labelled randomised pilot study comparing the prophylactic use of oral tranexamic acid with platelet transfusions in the setting of autologous HSCT. In 3-5 centres, 100 patients undergoing autologous HSCT will be randomly assigned to either a prophylactic tranexamic acid or prophylactic platelets bleeding prevention strategy-based daily platelet values up to 30 days post-transplant. The study will be stratified by centre and type of transplant. The primary goal is to demonstrate study feasibility while collecting clinical outcomes on (1) WHO and Bleeding Severity Measurement Scale (BSMS), (2) transplant-related mortality, (3) quality of life, (4) length of hospital stay, (5) intensive care unit admission rates, (6) Bearman toxicity scores, (7) incidence of infections, (8) transfusion requirements, (9) adverse reactions and (10) economic analyses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is funded by a peer-reviewed grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (201 503) and is registered on Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02650791. It has been approved by the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board. Study results will presented at national and international conferences. Importantly, the results of this trial will inform the feasibility and conduct of a larger study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02650791; Pre-results.

Alternatives, and adjuncts, to prophylactic platelet transfusion for people with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people with thrombocytopenia. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy since the mid-1970s, some areas continue to provoke debate especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether agents that can be used as alternatives, or adjuncts, to platelet transfusions for people with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation are safe and effective at preventing bleeding.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 11 bibliographic databases and four ongoing trials databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE (OvidSP, 1946 to 19 May 2016), Embase (OvidSP, 1974 to 19 May 2016), PubMed (e-publications only: searched 19 May 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) ICTRP and the ISRCTN Register (searched 19 May 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in people with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation who were allocated to either an alternative to platelet transfusion (artificial platelet substitutes, platelet-poor plasma, fibrinogen concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII, desmopressin (DDAVP), or thrombopoietin (TPO) mimetics) or a comparator (placebo, standard care or platelet transfusion). We excluded studies of antifibrinolytic drugs, as they were the focus of another review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened all electronically derived citations and abstracts of papers identified by the review search strategy. Two review authors assessed risk of bias in the included studies and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 16 eligible trials. Four trials are ongoing and two have been completed but the results have not yet been published (trial completion dates: April 2012 to February 2017). Therefore, the review included 10 trials in eight references with 554 participants. Six trials (336 participants) only included participants with acute myeloid leukaemia undergoing intensive chemotherapy, two trials (38 participants) included participants with lymphoma undergoing intensive chemotherapy and two trials (180 participants) reported participants undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Men and women were equally well represented in the trials. The age range of participants included in the trials was from 16 years to 81 years. All trials took place in high-income countries. The manufacturers of the agent sponsored eight trials that were under investigation, and two trials did not report their source of funding.No trials assessed artificial platelet substitutes, fibrinogen concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII or desmopressin.Nine trials compared a TPO mimetic to placebo or standard care; seven of these used pegylated recombinant human megakaryocyte growth and differentiation factor (PEG-rHuMGDF) and two used recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO).One trial compared platelet-poor plasma to platelet transfusion.We considered that all the trials included in this review were at high risk of bias and meta-analysis was not possible in seven trials due to problems with the way data were reported.We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce the number of participants with any bleeding episode (odds ratio (OR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.62, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce the risk of a life-threatening bleed after 30 days (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.06 to 33.14, three trials, 209 participants, very low quality evidence); or after 90 days (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 16.37, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce platelet transfusion requirements after 30 days (mean difference -3.00 units, 95% CI -5.39 to -0.61, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). No deaths occurred in either group after 30 days (one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce all-cause mortality at 90 days (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.24 to 4.20, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). No thromboembolic events occurred for participants treated with TPO mimetics or control at 30 days (two trials, 209 participants, very low quality evidence). We found no trials that looked at: number of days on which bleeding occurred, time from randomisation to first bleed or quality of life.One trial with 18 participants compared platelet-poor plasma transfusion with platelet transfusion. We are very uncertain whether platelet-poor plasma reduces the number of participants with any bleeding episode (OR 16.00, 95% CI 1.32 to 194.62, one trial, 18 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether platelet-poor plasma reduces the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding (OR 4.00, 95% CI 0.56 to 28.40, one trial, 18 participants, very low quality evidence). We found no trials that looked at: number of days on which bleeding occurred, time from randomisation to first bleed, number of platelet transfusions, all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to determine if platelet-poor plasma or TPO mimetics reduce bleeding for participants with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. To detect a decrease in the proportion of participants with clinically significant bleeding from 12 in 100 to 6 in 100 would require a trial containing at least 708 participants (80% power, 5% significance). The six ongoing trials will provide additional information about the TPO mimetic comparison (424 participants) but this will still be underpowered to demonstrate this level of reduction in bleeding. None of the included or ongoing trials include children. There are no completed or ongoing trials assessing artificial platelet substitutes, fibrinogen concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII or desmopressin in people undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies.

Current Status of Platelet Transfusion in Pediatric Patients

Outside the neonatal period, most platelets that are transfused to pediatric patients are given to those who are thrombocytopenic secondary to malignancy and associated therapy and/or hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant, or to those with significant bleeding associated with surgery, especially cardiac surgery. Indications for platelet transfusion, doses, and other practices for children largely mimic adult platelet transfusion protocols because there are few pediatric-specific studies in this area. Pediatric platelet transfusion practices would benefit from focused pediatric research. The appropriate indications and doses for platelet transfusions in oncology, hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant, and cardiac surgery patients need to be determined.

A study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating clinical effects of platelet transfusion products: the Pathogen Reduction Evaluation and Predictive Analytical Rating Score (PREPAReS) trial

INTRODUCTION

Patients with chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopaenia frequently experience minor and sometimes severe bleeding complications. Unrestrictive availability of safe and effective blood products is presumed by treating physicians as well as patients. Pathogen reduction technology potentially offers the opportunity to enhance safety by reducing bacterial and viral contamination of platelet products along with a potential reduction of alloimmunisation in patients receiving multiple platelet transfusions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

To test efficacy, a randomised, single-blinded, multicentre controlled trial was designed to evaluate clinical non-inferiority of pathogen-reduced platelet concentrates treated by the Mirasol system, compared with standard plasma-stored platelet concentrates using the percentage of patients with WHO grade ≥ 2 bleeding complications as the primary endpoint. The upper limit of the 95% CI of the non-inferiority margin was chosen to be a ≤ 12.5% increase in this percentage. Bleeding symptoms are actively monitored on a daily basis. The adjudication of the bleeding grade is performed by 3 adjudicators, blinded to the platelet product randomisation as well as by an automated computer algorithm. Interim analyses evaluating bleeding complications as well as serious adverse events are performed after each batch of 60 patients. The study started in 2010 and patients will be enrolled up to a maximum of 618 patients, depending on the results of consecutive interim analyses. A flexible stopping rule was designed allowing stopping for non-inferiority or futility. Besides analysing effects of pathogen reduction on clinical efficacy, the Pathogen Reduction Evaluation and Predictive Analytical Rating Score (PREPAReS) is designed to answer several other pending questions and translational issues related to bleeding and alloimmunisation, formulated as secondary and tertiary endpoints.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained in all 3 participating countries. Results of the main trial and each of the secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR2106; Pre-results.

Comparison of different platelet count thresholds to guide administration of prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people who are thrombocytopenic due to bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: prophylactic versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. This review has now been split into four smaller reviews looking at these questions individually; this review compares prophylactic platelet transfusion thresholds.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether different platelet transfusion thresholds for administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect the efficacy and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6, 23 July 2015), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people with haematological disorders (receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT) that compared different thresholds for administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions (low trigger (5 x 10(9)/L); standard trigger (10 x 10(9)/L); higher trigger (20 x 10(9)/L, 30 x 10(9)/L, 50 x 10(9)/L); or alternative platelet trigger (for example platelet mass)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials met our predefined inclusion criteria and were included for analysis in the review (499 participants). All three trials compared a standard trigger (10 x 10(9)/L) versus a higher trigger (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L). None of the trials compared a low trigger versus a standard trigger or an alternative platelet trigger. The trials were conducted between 1991 and 2001 and enrolled participants from fairly comparable patient populations.The original review contained four trials (658 participants); in the previous update of this review we excluded one trial (159 participants) because fewer than 80% of participants had a haematological disorder. We identified no new trials in this update of the review.Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the included studies had some threats to validity.Three studies reported the number of participants with at least one clinically significant bleeding episode within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no evidence of a difference in the number of participants with a clinically significant bleeding episode between the standard and higher trigger groups (three studies; 499 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.90; low-quality evidence).One study reported the number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event (adjusted for repeated measures). There was no evidence of a difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between the standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 255 participants; relative proportion of days with World Health Organization Grade 2 or worse bleeding (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.48, P = 0.162; authors' own results; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding. There was no evidence of any difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a standard trigger level and a higher trigger level (two studies; 421 participants; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.88; low-quality evidence).Only one study reported the time to first bleeding episode. There was no evidence of any difference in the time to the first bleeding episode between a standard trigger level and a higher trigger level (one study; 255 participants; hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.91; low-quality evidence).Only one study reported on all-cause mortality within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no evidence of any difference in all-cause mortality between standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 255 participants; RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.83 to 3.81; low-quality evidence).Three studies reported on the number of platelet transfusions per participant. Two studies reported on the mean number of platelet transfusions per participant. There was a significant reduction in the number of platelet transfusions per participant in the standard trigger group (two studies, mean difference -2.09, 95% CI -3.20 to -0.99; low-quality evidence).One study reported on the number of transfusion reactions. There was no evidence to demonstrate any difference in transfusion reactions between the standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 79 participants; RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.09).None of the studies reported on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with haematological disorders who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT, we found low-quality evidence that a standard trigger level (10 x 10(9)/L) is associated with no increase in the risk of bleeding when compared to a higher trigger level (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L). There was low-quality evidence that a standard trigger level is associated with a decreased number of transfusion episodes when compared to a higher trigger level (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L).Findings from this review were based on three studies and 499 participants. Without further evidence, it is reasonable to continue with the current practice of administering prophylactic platelet transfusions using the standard trigger level (10 x 10(9)/L) in the absence of other risk factors for bleeding.

Different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people who are thrombocytopenic due to bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: prophylactic versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. This review has now been split into four smaller reviews; this review compares different platelet transfusion doses.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect their efficacy and safety in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy with or without haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people with malignant haematological disorders or undergoing HSCT that compared different platelet component doses (low dose 1.1 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%, standard dose 2.2 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%, high dose 4.4 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (1814 participants) in this review; six were conducted during one course of treatment (chemotherapy or HSCT).Overall the methodological quality of studies was low to moderate across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the included studies had some threats to validity.Five studies reported the number of participants with at least one clinically significant bleeding episode within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no difference in the number of participants with a clinically significant bleeding episode between the low-dose and standard-dose groups (four studies; 1170 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.13; moderate-quality evidence); low-dose and high-dose groups (one study; 849 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence); or high-dose and standard-dose groups (two studies; 951 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence).Three studies reported the number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event per participant. There was no difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between the low-dose and standard-dose groups (two studies; 230 participants; mean difference -0.17, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.17; low quality evidence). One study (855 participants) showed no difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between high-dose and standard-dose groups, or between low-dose and high-dose groups (849 participants).Three studies reported the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding. There was no difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a low-dose and a standard-dose platelet transfusion policy (three studies; 1059 participants; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.92; low-quality evidence); low-dose and high-dose groups (one study; 849 participants; RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.77; low-quality evidence); or high-dose and standard-dose groups (one study; 855 participants; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.68; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported the time to first bleeding episodes; we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Both studies (959 participants) individually found that the time to first bleeding episode was either the same, or longer, in the low-dose group compared to the standard-dose group. One study (855 participants) found that the time to the first bleeding episode was the same in the high-dose group compared to the standard-dose group.Three studies reported all-cause mortality within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no difference in all-cause mortality between treatment arms (low-dose versus standard-dose: three studies; 1070 participants; RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.70 to 5.93; low-quality evidence; low-dose versus high-dose: one study; 849 participants; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.54; low-quality evidence; and high-dose versus standard-dose: one study; 855 participants; RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 5.81; low-quality evidence).Six studies reported the number of platelet transfusions; we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Two studies (959 participants) out of three (1070 participants) found that a low-dose transfusion strategy led to more transfusion episodes than a standard-dose. One study (849 participants) found that a low-dose transfusion strategy led to more transfusion episodes than a high-dose strategy. One study (855 participants) out of three (1007 participants) found no difference in the number of platelet transfusions between the high-dose and standard-dose groups.One study reported on transfusion reactions. This study's authors suggested that a high-dose platelet transfusion strategy may lead to a higher rate of transfusion-related adverse events.None of the studies reported quality-of-life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In haematology patients who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT, we found no evidence to suggest that a low-dose platelet transfusion policy is associated with an increased bleeding risk compared to a standard-dose or high-dose policy, or that a high-dose platelet transfusion policy is associated with a decreased risk of bleeding when compared to a standard-dose policy.A low-dose platelet transfusion strategy leads to an increased number of transfusion episodes compared to a standard-dose strategy. A high-dose platelet transfusion strategy does not decrease the number of transfusion episodes per participant compared to a standard-dose regimen, and it may increase the number of transfusion-related adverse events.Findings from this review would suggest a change from current practice, with low-dose platelet transfusions used for people receiving in-patient treatment for their haematological disorder and high-dose platelet transfusion strategies not being used routinely.

The association between platelet transfusion and idiopathic pneumonia syndrome is unaffected by platelet product type

BACKGROUND

Methods used to produce platelet (PLT) components, pooling of PLT-rich plasma (PRP-PLT) and apheresis (AP-PLT), may variably contribute to the pathogenesis and severity of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome (IPS).

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 906 allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients to examine associations between PLT product type and risks of developing IPS and dying after IPS onset. Proportional hazards models included separate terms for the sum of all PLT transfusions and the sum of PRP-PLT units received in the 3 or 7 days before IPS onset. Similarly constructed models analyzed the outcome of time to death after IPS onset. All analyses were adjusted for known IPS risk factors.

RESULTS

Patients received a median of three PRP-PLT transfusions (interquartile range [IQR], 0-6) and five AP-PLT transfusions (IQR, 1-13) while at risk for IPS. Seventy-five patients (8%) developed IPS by Posttransplant Day 120. The proportion of PRP-PLT transfusions was not associated with risk of developing IPS (3-day hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.74-1.29, p = 0.86; 7-day HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.15, p = 0.95) or dying after IPS onset (3-day HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.75-1.31, p = 0.97; 7-day HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78-1.12, p = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

The association between PLT transfusions and risk of developing IPS or dying after IPS onset does not differ according to PLT product type. Further research is required to identify potentially modifiable steps in PLT component production that contribute to IPS.

A therapeutic-only versus prophylactic platelet transfusion strategy for preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in thrombocytopenic patients with bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004 and updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: therapeutic-only versus prophylactic platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. We have now split this review into four smaller reviews looking at these questions individually; this review is the first part of the original review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy (platelet transfusions given when patient bleeds) is as effective and safe as a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding, usually when the platelet count falls below a given trigger level) in patients with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent or treat bleeding in patients with malignant haematological disorders receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven RCTs that compared therapeutic platelet transfusions to prophylactic platelet transfusions in haematology patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT. One trial is still ongoing, leaving six trials eligible with a total of 1195 participants. These trials were conducted between 1978 and 2013 and enrolled participants from fairly comparable patient populations. We were able to critically appraise five of these studies, which contained separate data for each arm, and were unable to perform quantitative analysis on one study that did not report the numbers of participants in each treatment arm.Overall the quality of evidence per outcome was low to moderate according to the GRADE approach. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the studies identified had some threats to validity. We deemed only one study to be at low risk of bias in all domains other than blinding.Two RCTs (801 participants) reported at least one bleeding episode within 30 days of the start of the study. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis due to considerable statistical heterogeneity between studies. The statistical heterogeneity seen may relate to the different methods used in studies for the assessment and grading of bleeding. The underlying patient diagnostic and treatment categories also appeared to have some effect on bleeding risk. Individually these studies showed a similar effect, that a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion strategy was associated with an increased risk of clinically significant bleeding compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy. Number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event per participant was higher in the therapeutic-only group than in the prophylactic group (one RCT; 600 participants; mean difference 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.90; moderate-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was any difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a therapeutic-only transfusion policy and a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 801 participants; risk ratio (RR) 4.91, 95% CI 0.86 to 28.12; low-quality evidence). Two RCTs (801 participants) reported time to first bleeding episode. As there was considerable heterogeneity between the studies, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Both studies individually found that time to first bleeding episode was shorter in the therapeutic-only group compared with the prophylactic platelet transfusion group.There was insufficient evidence to determine any difference in all-cause mortality within 30 days of the start of the study using a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 629 participants). Mortality was a rare event, and therefore larger studies would be needed to establish the effect of these alternative strategies. There was a clear reduction in the number of platelet transfusions per participant in the therapeutic-only arm (two RCTs, 991 participants; standardised mean reduction of 0.50 platelet transfusions per participant, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.37; moderate-quality evidence). None of the studies reported quality of life. There was no evidence of any difference in the frequency of adverse events, such as transfusion reactions, between a therapeutic-only and prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 991 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.68), although the confidence intervals were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to moderate-grade evidence that a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy is associated with increased risk of bleeding when compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy in haematology patients who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT. There is insufficient evidence to determine any difference in mortality rates and no evidence of any difference in adverse events between a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy and a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy. A therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy is associated with a clear reduction in the number of platelet components administered.

Alternative agents versus prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To determine whether alternative agents (e.g. artificial platelet substitutes, platelet-poor plasma, fibrinogen, rFVIIa, thrombopoietin mimetics) are as effective and safe as the use of platelet transfusions for the prevention of bleeding (prophylactic platelet transfusion) in patients with haematological disorders who are undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. Antifibrinolytics (lysine analogues) will not be included in this review because they have been the focus of another Cochrane review (Wardrop 2013).