Six-Year, Real-World Use of Prophylaxis with Recombinant Factor IX-Albumin Fusion Protein (rIX-FP) in Persons with Hemophilia B: A Single-Center Retrospective-Prospective Study

Background: Extended half-life (EHL) factor IX (FIX) concentrates allow for prophylaxis with prolonged dosing intervals and high bleeding protection in persons with hemophilia B. Long-term real-world studies are lacking. Methods: In a retrospective-prospective study, the six-year use of prophylaxis with the EHL recombinant FIX-albumin fusion protein (rIX-FP) was analyzed, comparing outcomes with previous standard half-life (SHL) FIX in patients already on prophylaxis. Results: Prophylaxis with rIX-FP was prescribed in 15 patients (10 severe, 5 moderate; follow-up: 57 ± 17 months). Based on a pharmacokinetic assessment and clinical needs, the first regimen was 47 ± 7 IU/Kg every 9 ± 2 days. All but one patient remained on rIX-FP prophylaxis, adjusting infusion frequency and/or dose; the last prescribed frequency was ≥10 days in 10/13 patients, being reduced in seven and increased in four vs. the first regimen. The weekly FIX dose was unchanged; FIX trough levels were >5% in all patients. The annual infusion number and FIX IU/Kg significantly decreased (~60%) in eight patients previously on SHL FIX prophylaxis, with similar concentrate costs. Very low bleeding rates (most traumatic bleeds and the last quartile of the infusion interval), improved orthopedic and pain scores, unchanged HEAD-US scores and problem joints, and high treatment adherence (>90%) and satisfaction were registered. Conclusions: Personalized, carefully adjusted rIX-FP regimens contribute to the diffusion and optimization of prophylaxis in persons with severe and moderate hemophilia B, with long-term favorable bleeding, joint, and patient-reported outcomes.

Multicentric evaluation of analytical performances digital morphology with respect to the reference methods by manual optical microscopy

AIMS

Optical microscopic (OM) evaluation of peripheral blood (PB) cells is still a crucial step of the laboratory haematological workflow. The morphological cell analysis is time-consuming and expensive and it requires skilled operator. To address these challenges, automated image-processing systems, as digital morphology (DM), were developed in the last few years. The aim of this multicentre study, performed according to international guidelines, is to verify the analytical performance of DM compared with manual OM, the reference method.

METHODS

Four hundred and ninety PB samples were evaluated. For each sample, two May Grunwald-stained and Giemsa-stained smears were performed and the morphological evaluation of cells was analysed with both DM and OM. In addition, the assessment times of both methods were recorded.

RESULTS

Comparison of DM versus OM methods was assessed with Passing-Bablok and Deming fit regression analysis: slopes ranged between 0.17 for atypical, reactive lymphocytes and plasma cells (LY(AT)) and 1.24 for basophils, and the intercepts ranged between -0.09 for blasts and 0.40 for LY(AT). The Bland-Altman bias ranged between -6.5% for eosinophils and 21.8% for meta-myemielocytes. The diagnostic agreement between the two methods was 0.98. The mean of assessment times were 150 s and 250 s for DM and OM, respectively.

CONCLUSION

DM shows excellent performance. Approximately only 1.6% of PB smears need the OM revision, giving advantages in terms of efficiency, standardisation and assessment time of morphological analysis of the cells. The findings of this study may provide useful information regarding the use of DM to improve the haematological workflow.

Multicenter evaluation of analytical performances of platelet counts and platelet parameters: Carryover, precision, and stability

INTRODUCTION

The correctness of the results of automated platelet analysis is still highly debated. The aim of this multicenter study, conducted according to international guidelines, was to verify the analytical performance of nine different types of hematology analyzers (HAs) in the automated platelet analysis.

METHODS

Four hundred eighty-six peripheral blood samples (PB), collected in K₃ EDTA tubes, were analyzed by ABX Pentra, ADVIA2120i, BC-6800, BC-6800 Plus, Cell-DYN Sapphire, DxH800, XE-2100, XE-5000, XN-20 with PLT-F App. Within-run imprecision and between-run imprecision were carried out using PB and material control, respectively. The carryover, low limit of quantification (LoQ), and the PB stability were evaluated.

RESULTS

The carryover was absent for all HAs. The LoQ of PLT ranged between 2.0 (Cell-Dyn Sapphire) and 25.0 × 10⁹ /L (ADVIA 2120i), while immature platelet fraction (IPF) ranged between 1.0 (XN-20) and 12.0 × 10⁹ /L (XE-5000). The imprecision (%CV) increases as the platelet count decreases. No HAs showed desirable CV_APS for PLT counts less than 50.0 × 10⁹ /L, with the exception of Cell-DYN Sapphire (CV 3.0% with PLT-O mean value of 26.7 × 10⁹ /L), XN-20 (CV 2.4% with PLT-F mean value of 21.5 × 10⁹ /L), and BC-6800 Plus (CV 1.9% with PLT-O mean value of 26.5 × 10⁹ /L). The sample stability ranged between under two hours for MPV by ADVIA2120i and 8 hours for other PLT parameters and HAs.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study may provide useful information regarding carryover, precision, and stability of platelet counts and parameters, especially in thrombocytopenic samples. Moreover, the stability of sample for platelet analysis is conditioned by the HA and by temperature and storage time.

Performance evaluation of the automated nucleated red blood cell count of five commercial hematological analyzers

INTRODUCTION

Recent automated hematology analyzers (HAs) can identify and report nucleated red blood cells (NRBC) count as a separate population out of white blood cells (WBC). The aim of this study was to investigate the analytical performances of NRBC enumeration on five top of the range HAs.

METHODS

We evaluated the within-run and between-day precision, limit of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD), and limit of quantitation (LoQ) of XE-2100 and XN-module (Sysmex), ADVIA 2120i (Siemens), BC-6800 (Mindray), and UniCel DxH 800 (Beckman Coulter). Automated NRBC counts were also compared with optical microscopy (OM).

RESULTS

The limits of detection for NRBC of the BC-6800, XN-module, XE-2100, UniCel DxH 800, and ADVIA 2120i are 0.035×10⁹ /L, 0.019×10⁹ /L, 0.067×10⁹ /L, 0.038×10⁹ /L, and 0.167×10⁹ /L, respectively. Our data indicated excellent performance in terms of precision. The agreement with OM was excellent for BC-6800, XN-module, and XE-2100 (Bias 0.023, 0.019, and 0.033×10⁹ /L, respectively). ADVIA 2120i displayed a significant constant error and UniCel DxH 800 both proportional and small constant error.

CONCLUSION

Regards to NRBC counting, the performances shown by BC-6800, XN-module, and XE-2100 are excellent also a low count, ADVIA 2120i and UniCel DxH 800 need to be improved.