Amustaline-glutathione pathogen-reduced red blood cell concentrates for transfusion-dependent thalassaemia
British journal of haematology. 2019
Transfusion-dependent thalassaemia (TDT) requires red blood cell concentrates (RBCC) to prevent complications of anaemia, but carries risk of infection. Pathogen reduction of RBCC offers potential to reduce infectious risk. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of pathogen-reduced (PR) Amustaline-Glutathione (A-GSH) RBCC for TDT. Patients were randomized to a blinded 2-period crossover treatment sequence for six transfusions over 8-10 months with Control and A-GSH-RBCC. The efficacy outcome utilized non-inferiority analysis with 90% power to detect a 15% difference in transfused haemoglobin (Hb), and the safety outcome was the incidence of antibodies to A-GSH-PR-RBCC. By intent to treat (80 patients), 12.5 +/- 1.9 RBCC were transfused in each period. Storage durations of A-GSH and C-RBCC were similar (8.9 days). Mean A-GSH-RBCC transfused Hb (g/kg/day) was not inferior to Control (0.113 +/- 0.04 vs. 0.111 +/- 0.04, P = 0.373, paired t-test). The upper bound of the one-sided 95% confidence interval for the treatment difference from the mixed effects model was 0.005 g/kg/day, within a non-inferiority margin of 0.017 g/kg/day. A-GSH-RBCC mean pre-transfusion Hb levels declined by 6.0 g/l. No antibodies to A-GSH-RBCC were detected, and there were no differences in adverse events. A-GSH-RBCCs offer potential to reduce infectious risk in TDT with a tolerable safety profile.
Red blood cells treated with the amustaline (S-303) pathogen reduction system: a transfusion study in cardiac surgery
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.