Comparison of automated platelet counts and potential effect on transfusion decisions in cancer patients

Alinity hq platelet results are equivalent with the international reference method in thrombocytopenic samples

INTRODUCTION

Accurate and precise platelet (PLT) count is critical for the appropriate management of patients with thrombocytopenia. This study evaluated the performance of PLT counting with the Abbott Alinity hq hematology analyzer, which utilizes multi-dimensional optical technology.

METHODS

Imprecision, linearity, and accuracy were assessed per CLSI guidelines. Alinity hq PLT results were compared to the international flow cytometry reference method (IRM) in the concentration range of 6.3 to 103.0 × 10⁹ /L. Additional comparisons were made with Sysmex XN-3000 PLT counts: impedance (PLT-I), optical (PLT-O), and optical fluorescent (PLT-F) methods.

RESULTS

The average within-run %CV was 4.7% on patient samples with PLT concentrations ranging from 13.1 to 41.7 × 10⁹ /L, and the within-laboratory %CV was 3.6% at the level of 68.2 × 10⁹ /L. Linearity evaluation indicated a maximum deviation of 3.1% from the linear fit in the range of 0.1 to 316.8 × 10⁹ /L. Comparison between Alinity hq and the IRM PLT counts yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.99 and predicted bias of 0.0 and -0.5 × 10⁹ /L at 10.0 and 20.0 × 10⁹ /L transfusion thresholds, respectively. Alinity hq PLT counts also correlated well with Sysmex PLT counts, with strongest correlation obtained with PLT-F and PLT-O (r = .99) methods.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated excellent analytical performance of Alinity hq PLT counting in thrombocytopenic samples, equivalency with the IRM and strong agreement with Sysmex PLT-F and PLT-O methods. The Alinity hq multi-dimensional optical PLT count is available with every CBC without additional reagents and may help promote efficiency in clinical laboratories.

Analytical performance of automated platelet counts and impact on platelet transfusion guidance in patients with acute leukemia

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of automated impedance platelet counts by Beckman Coulter LH780 (PLT-LH), Sysmex XN-3000 (PLT-XNi) and fluorescence method by Sysmex XN-3000 (PLT-F) in patients with acute leukemia. Blood specimens were subjected to platelet measurements by evaluated methods and then compared against the international reference method (IRM). Eighty-two blood specimens were included. Bland-Altman plots of the differences between the evaluated methods and IRM demonstrated mean biases of PLT-LH, PLT-XNi and PLT-F of 9 × 10⁹/L, 11 × 10⁹/L and 2 × 10⁹/L, respectively. For platelet transfusion guidance, all evaluated methods had acceptable accuracy. For platelet transfusion guidance, the sensitivities of PLT-LH, PLT-XNi and PLT-F were 33.3, 25.0 and 83.3%, respectively, at a transfusion threshold of 10 × 10⁹/L, and 73.1, 61.5 and 84.6%, respectively, at transfusion threshold of 20 × 10⁹/L. High blast count was associated with inaccurate PLT-LH and PLT-XNi. In conclusion, the PLT-F demonstrated excellent performance for diagnosis of thrombocytopenia and for platelet transfusion guidance in the evaluated specimens from acute leukemia patients. With respect to clinical relevance, careful blood smear review is necessary in case of high blast counts.

Comparative evaluation of platelet counts in two hematology analyzers and potential effects on prophylactic platelet transfusion decisions

BACKGROUND

Decisions on prophylactic platelet (PLT) transfusions are generally based on the recipient's PLT count, but few clinicians are aware of precision and accuracy of the PLT counting methods used by the clinical laboratory. Each PLT counting technology has its specific inaccuracy, especially in thrombocytopenic samples and therefore may impact decisions on PLT transfusions.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Five routine PLT counting methods available in two hematology analyzers (Sysmex XN-2000 and Abbott CELL-DYN Sapphire) were investigated (impedance and optical on both analyzers and fluorescent on XN-2000), using the CD61 immunologic PLT method as a reference. The impact of counting inaccuracy on imaginary transfusion decisions was examined at various common PLT thresholds.

RESULTS

In total 341 samples were analyzed, 178 of which had PLT counts of less than 35 × 10⁹ /L. Despite excellent overall correlation with the reference method (r > 0.99), thrombocytopenic samples showed only modest correlation for impedance and XN-2000 optical methods. Sapphire optical and XN-2000 fluorescent methods correlated very well with the reference, albeit with bias in the very low range. We noticed potential risk of undertransfusion (ranging from 2% to 90%), depending on the threshold used. The risk of overtransfusion was small (<10%).

CONCLUSIONS

The XN-2000 fluorescent PLT counting method showed excellent correlation with the CD61 reference count, closely followed by the CELL-DYN Sapphire optical method. XN-2000 impedance and optical and Sapphire impedance methods are not accurate enough for basing transfusion decisions on. Only XN-2000 fluorescent, Sapphire optical, and CD61 methods are sufficiently accurate for making appropriate clinical decisions in patients with severe thrombocytopenia.

Reproducibility of Manual Platelet Estimation Following Automated Low Platelet Counts

OBJECTIVES

Manual platelet estimation is one of the methods used when automated platelet estimates are very low. However, the reproducibility of manual platelet estimation has not been adequately studied. We sought to assess the reproducibility of manual platelet estimation following automated low platelet counts and to evaluate the impact of the level of experience of the person counting on the reproducibility of manual platelet estimates.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, peripheral blood films of patients with platelet counts less than 100 × 10⁹/L were retrieved and given to four raters to perform manual platelet estimation independently using a predefined method (average of platelet counts in 10 fields using 100× objective multiplied by 20). Data were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as a method of reproducibility assessment.

RESULTS

The ICC across the four raters was 0.840, indicating excellent agreement. The median difference of the two most experienced raters was 0 (range: -64 to 78). The level of platelet estimate by the least-experienced rater predicted the disagreement (p = 0.037). When assessing the difference between pairs of raters, there was no significant difference in the ICC (p = 0.420).

CONCLUSIONS

The agreement between different raters using manual platelet estimation was excellent. Further confirmation is necessary, with a prospective study using a gold standard method of platelet counts.

Evaluation of the risks of chemotherapy in dogs with thrombocytopenia

Thrombocytopenia is commonly encountered in veterinary oncology. Currently, there are no standard guidelines regarding the administration of chemotherapy to the patients with thrombocytopenia. This observational epidemiological cohort study aimed to determine whether thrombocytopenic dogs were at increased risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects (vomiting, diarrhoea, inappetence) or haemorrhage following administration of standard doses of chemotherapy. The adverse effects following 77 prospectively identified episodes of thrombocytopenia (platelet count, <200 000 µL^-1 ) were compared with the adverse effects experienced in a retrospective cohort (platelet count >200 000 µL^-1 ), and evaluated by statistical analysis. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse effects or haemorrhage between thrombocytopenic and control dogs. The control group of dogs with lymphoma were statistically more likely to experience vomiting as an adverse effect of chemotherapy (P = 0.028). The results presented here showed no evidence for an increased risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects or haemorrhage in thrombocytopenic dogs after receiving standard doses of chemotherapy.