Abstract

Pathogen reduction (PR) technologies for blood components have been established to reduce the residual risk of known and emerging infectious agents. THERAFLEX UVPlatelets, a novel UVC light-based PR technology for platelet concentrates, works without photoactive substances. This randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter, noninferiority trial was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of UVC-treated platelets to that of untreated platelets in thrombocytopenic patients with hematologic-oncologic diseases. Primary objective was to determine non-inferiority of UVC-treated platelets, assessed by the 1-hour corrected count increment (CCI) in up to eight per-protocol platelet transfusion episodes. Analysis of the 171 eligible patients showed that the defined non-inferiority margin of 30% of UVC-treated platelets was narrowly missed as the mean differences in 1-hour CCI between standard platelets versus UVC-treated platelets for intention-to-treat and perprotocol analyses were 18.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.4%; 30.1) and 18.7% (95% CI: 6.3%; 31.1%), respectively. In comparison to the control, the UVC group had a 19.2% lower mean 24-hour CCI and was treated with an about 25% higher number of platelet units, but the average number of days to next platelet transfusion did not differ significantly between both treatment groups. The frequency of low-grade adverse events was slightly higher in the UVC group and the frequencies of refractoriness to platelet transfusion, platelet alloimmunization, severe bleeding events, and red blood cell transfusions were comparable between groups. Our study suggests that transfusion of pathogen-reduced platelets produced with the UVC technology is safe but non-inferiority was not demonstrated. (The German Clinical Trials Register number: DRKS00011156).

Abstract

BACKGROUND Nucleic acid-targeted pathogen inactivation technology using amustaline (S-303) and glutathione (GSH) was developed to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted infectious disease and transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease with red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A randomized, double-blind, controlled study was performed to assess the in vitro characteristics of amustaline-treated RBCs (test) compared with conventional (control) RBCs and to evaluate safety and efficacy of transfusion during and after cardiac surgery. The primary device efficacy endpoint was the postproduction hemoglobin (Hb) content of RBCs. Exploratory clinical outcomes included renal and hepatic failure, the 6-minute walk test (a surrogate for cardiopulmonary function), adverse events (AEs), and the immune response to amustaline-treated RBCs. RESULTS A total of 774 RBC unis were produced. Mean treatment difference in Hb content was -2.27 g/unit (95% confidence interval, -2.61 to -1.92 g/unit), within the prespecified equivalence margins (+/-5 g/unit) to declare noninferiority. Amustaline-treated RBCs met European guidelines for Hb content, hematocrit, and hemolysis. Fifty-one (25 test and 26 control) patients received study RBCs. There were no significant differences in RBC usage or other clinical outcomes. Observed AEs were within the spectrum expected for patients of similar age undergoing cardiovascular surgery requiring RBCs transfusion. No patients exhibited an immune response specific to amustaline-treated RBCs. CONCLUSION Amustaline-treated RBCs demonstrated equivalence to control RBCs for Hb content, have appropriate characteristics for transfusion, and were well tolerated when transfused in support of acute anemia. Renal impairment was characterized as a potential efficacy endpoint for pivotal studies of RBC transfusion in cardiac surgery.