German Red Cross Blood Service Baden-Wuerttemberg-Hessen, Institute Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Department of Regional Evaluation and Accounting, Hessian Cancer Registry, Office of State Examination and Examination in the Health Service, Frankfurt, Germany.
J Transl Med. 2020 Dec 18;18(1):487. doi: 10.1186/s12967-020-02634-z.
Healthy volunteer registry donors have become the backbone of stem cell transplantation programs. While most registrants will never become actual donors, a small minority are called upon twice, most commonly for the same patient because of poor graft function. Anecdotal evidence provides no hard reasons to disallow second-time mobilized apheresis, but few centers have treated enough two-time donors for definitive conclusions. Moreover, for reasons unknown, the efficiency of G-CSF varies greatly between donations.
Comparison of outcomes of first vs. second donations can formally confirm G-CSF responsiveness as intrinsically, likely genetically, determined. In our database, we identified 60 donors (1.3%) who received two cycles of G-CSF 24 days to 4 years apart and systematically compared mobilization outcomes.
First and second mobilization and collection proceeded without severe or unusual adverse effects. First-time mobilization efficiency was highly predictive of second-time mobilization. Neither mobilization efficiency nor time lag between donations affected the similarity of first- and second-time mobilization outcomes.
With the caveat that only donors with an unremarkable first donation were cleared for a second, our data indicate that a second donation is feasible, equally tolerable as a first donation, and efficient. Moreover, the data strongly support the notion of donor-intrinsic variables dictating mobilization response and argue against relevant damage to the stem cell compartment during mobilization with rhG-CSF.
健康志愿者登记捐献者已成为干细胞移植项目的骨干。虽然大多数登记捐献者永远不会成为实际的捐献者,但一小部分人会被两次召唤,最常见的情况是因为移植物功能不良而需要为同一患者提供两次。没有确凿的理由不允许第二次动员后的单采,但很少有中心治疗过足够数量的两次捐献者来得出明确的结论。此外,由于未知的原因,G-CSF 在两次捐献之间的效率差异很大。
比较第一次和第二次捐献的结果可以正式确认 G-CSF 的反应性是内在的,可能是遗传决定的。在我们的数据库中,我们确定了 60 名(1.3%)接受了两次 G-CSF 动员的捐献者,两次动员之间相隔 24 天至 4 年,并系统地比较了动员结果。
第一次和第二次动员和采集没有严重或异常的不良反应。第一次动员效率高度预测第二次动员效率。动员效率和两次捐献之间的时间间隔都不影响第一次和第二次动员结果的相似性。
在仅允许第一次捐献无异常的捐献者进行第二次捐献的前提下,我们的数据表明第二次捐献是可行的,与第一次捐献同样耐受,且有效。此外,这些数据强烈支持了动员反应受供体内在变量决定的观点,并反对在使用 rhG-CSF 动员期间对干细胞池造成相关损伤的观点。