Effect of cord blood processing on transplantation outcomes after single myeloablative umbilical cord blood transplantation.

Abstract

Variations in cord blood manufacturing and administration are common, and the optimal practice is not known. We compared processing and banking practices at 16 public cord blood banks (CBB) in the United States and assessed transplantation outcomes on 530 single umbilical cord blood (UCB) myeloablative transplantations for hematologic malignancies facilitated by these banks. UCB banking practices were separated into 3 mutually exclusive groups based on whether processing was automated or manual, units were plasma and red blood cell reduced, or buffy coat production method or plasma reduced. Compared with the automated processing system for units, the day 28 neutrophil recovery was significantly lower after transplantation of units that were manually processed and plasma reduced (red cell replete) (odds ratio, .19; P = .001) or plasma and red cell reduced (odds ratio, .54; P = .05). Day 100 survival did not differ by CBB. However, day 100 survival was better with units that were thawed with the dextran-albumin wash method compared with the "no wash" or "dilution only" techniques (odds ratio, 1.82; P = .04). In conclusion, CBB processing has no significant effect on early (day 100) survival despite differences in kinetics of neutrophil recovery.

Department

Description

Provenance

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.12.017

Publication Info

Ballen, Karen K, Brent R Logan, Mary J Laughlin, Wensheng He, Daniel R Ambruso, Susan E Armitage, Rachel L Beddard, Deepika Bhatla, et al. (2015). Effect of cord blood processing on transplantation outcomes after single myeloablative umbilical cord blood transplantation. Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 21(4). pp. 688–695. 10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.12.017 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/24651.

This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.