Comparison of the platelet activation status of single‐donor platelets obtained with two different cell separator technologies

Abstract

Background The microparticle content (MP%) of apheresis platelets—a marker of platelet activation—is influenced by donor factors and by external stressors during collection and storage. This study assessed the impact of apheresis technology and other factors on the activation status (MP%) of single‐donor apheresis platelets. Study Design and Methods Data from six US hospitals that screened platelets by measuring MP% through dynamic light scattering (ThromboLUX) were retrospectively analyzed. Relative risks (RRs) were derived from univariate and multivariable regression models, with activation rate (MP% ≥15% for plasma‐stored platelets; ≥10% for platelet additive solution [PAS]‐stored platelets) and MP% as outcomes. Apheresis platform (Trima Accel vs Amicus), storage medium (plasma vs PAS), pathogen reduction, storage time, and testing location were used as predictors. Results Data were obtained from 7511 platelet units collected using Trima (from 16 suppliers, all stored in plasma, 20.0% were pathogen‐reduced) and 2456 collected using Amicus (from four different collection facilities of one supplier, 65.0% plasma‐stored, 35.0% PAS‐stored, none pathogen‐reduced). Overall, 30.0% of Trima platelets were activated compared to 45.6% of Amicus platelets (P < .0001). Multivariable analysis identified apheresis platform as significantly associated with platelet activation, with a lower activation rate for Trima than Amicus (RR: 0.641, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.578; 0.711, P < .0001) and a 6.901% (95% CI: 5.926; 7.876, P < .0001) absolute reduction in MP%, when adjusting for the other variables. Conclusion Trima‐collected platelets were significantly less likely to be activated than Amicus‐collected platelets, irrespective of the storage medium, the use of pathogen reduction, storage time, and testing site.

Comparison of platelet quality and function across apheresis collection platforms

“…2 Three platforms for apheresis PLT collections are currently in use in the US: the MCS ® + 9000 (Haemonetics), the Trima Accel ® 7 (Terumo), and the Amicus Cell Separator (Fresenius Kabi). However, comparative studies of platelet quality across platforms are uncommon and largely limited to collection performance or biochemical assessment alone, [3][4][5][6][7] with no analyses comparing functional differences across apheresis platforms.…”

Emerging gene therapies for enhancing the hemostatic potential of platelets

“…A proportion of platelets will inevitably become activated during storage, preparation, and handling. [68][69][70][71] When platelet transfusions are used to manage acute hemorrhage, activated platelets F I G U R E 2 Schematic depicting the current strategies in utilizing modified platelet precursor cells to produce modified platelets. MKs or their progenitors, grown in culture, are modified either via viral transduction or extracellular protein uptake, whereby (i) modified platelets are produced and can be harvested for transfusion, or (ii) the modified MKs can be directly infused to produce modified platelets in vivo in the lungs may be more acceptable and contribute to hemostasis, similar to the transfusion of chilled platelets that have higher percentages of activated platelets.…”

“…While ex vivo or in vitro manipulation of platelets offers a flexible and facile platform for altering platelet physiology, one of the main concerns with these methods is unintentional platelet activation. A proportion of platelets will inevitably become activated during storage, preparation, and handling 68–71 . When platelet transfusions are used to manage acute hemorrhage, activated platelets may be more acceptable and contribute to hemostasis, similar to the transfusion of chilled platelets that have higher percentages of activated platelets 19,72 .…”