1 result
Filters • 4
Sort By
Results Per Page
1 result
Download the following citations:
Email the following citations:
Print the following citations:
Editor's Choice
  • Koepsell SA
  • Stolla M
  • Sedjo RL
  • Carson J
  • Knudson M
  • et al.
Transfusion. 2024 Mar;64(3):457-465 doi: 10.1111/trf.17720.

Participants with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia requiring platelet transfusions, enrolled in the MiPLATE trial (n= 297).


Mirasol-treated plasma-stored apheresis platelets (Mirasol group, n= 145).


Conventional plasma-stored apheresis platelets (Control group, n= 152).


The novel primary endpoint was days of ≥Grade 2 bleeding with a non-inferiority margin of 1.6. Participants in the Mirasol group had more days of grade ≥2 bleeding than participants in the Control group (RR 2.74; 95% CI [1.66, 4.53]), the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints showed a similar proportion of participants in each group with days of grade ≥2 bleeding and no difference in red blood cell transfusion despite a higher rate of participants with platelets refractoriness, platelet transfusions, and lower corrected count increments in the Mirasol group.


The Mirasol® Pathogen Reduction Technology System was developed to reduce transfusion-transmitted diseases in platelet (PLT) products.


MiPLATE trial was a prospective, multicenter, controlled, randomized, non-inferiority (NI) study of the clinical effectiveness of conventional versus Mirasol-treated Apheresis PLTs in participants with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. The novel primary endpoint was days of ≥Grade 2 bleeding with an NI margin of 1.6.


After 330 participants were randomized, a planned interim analysis of 297 participants (145 MIRASOL, 152 CONTROL) receiving ≥1 study transfusion found a 2.79-relative rate (RR) in the MIRASOL compared to the CONTROL in number of days with ≥Grade 2 bleeding (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-4.67). The proportion of subjects with ≥Grade 2 bleeding was 40.0% (n = 58) in MIRASOL and 30.3% (n = 46) in CONTROL (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.97-1.81, p = .08). Corrected count increments were lower (p < .01) and the number of PLT transfusion episodes per participant was higher (RR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.41) in MIRASOL. There was no difference in the days of PLT support (hazard ratio = 0.86, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) or total number of red blood cell transfusions (RR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.91-1.37) between MIRASOL versus CONTROL. Transfusion emergent adverse events were reported in 119 MIRASOL participants (84.4%) compared to 133 (82.6%) participants in CONTROL (p = NS).


This study did not support that MIRASOL was non-inferior compared to conventional platelets using the novel endpoint number of days with ≥Grade 2 bleeding in MIRASOL when compared to CONTROL.