4.0 Article

Peripheral blood stem cell apheresis for allogeneic transplants:: Ibni Sina experience

Journal

TRANSFUSION AND APHERESIS SCIENCE
Volume 30, Issue 3, Pages 189-191

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.transci.2004.02.004

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The rate of utilizing peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) as a source for allogeneic stem cells is growing rapidly. We aimed to demonstrate our 4 years experience as the largest apheresis center in Turkey and analyzed the content of the apheresis material. Patients and Methods: From 1998 to the end of April 2002, 151 leukopheresis procedures were performed on 116 healthy donors (M/F:66/50) with a median age of 30 years (14-53). The HLA identical sibling donors received rhG-CSF 10 mug/kg/day sc. for 4 days and at the 5th day leukopheresis was started until collecting >4 x 10e6/kg CD34+ cells. Two times the donors' total blood volume was processed in 195 min (178-245) on continuous flow cell separators using peripheral venous access. Results: Preapheresis WBC was 51.5 x 10e9/L (range, 13.11-91.3). Mono nuclear cell, CD34 and CD3 quantity of the harvest material were 5.35 x 10e8/kg (range, 0.45-23.46), 6.4 x 10e6/kg (range, 2.49-33.27) and 2.79 x 10e8/kg (range, 0.46-30.95), respectively. We were able to reach the target CD34 count after 1st cycle in 39% and 2nd cycle 61% of the procedures. In all donors with a peripheral blood CD34 count >80/mcl we succeeded to collect enough stem cells with only one leukopheresis. Conclusion: Collection of peripheral blood stem cells with continuous flow cell separators is well tolerated, with no mobilization failures or poor mobilizers. We collected high values of CD34+ cells (med. 6.4 x 10e6/kg) at the expense of high CD3 + lymphocytes (med. 2.79 x 10e8/kg), which may increase the risk of acute and chronic GVHD after allogeneic hemapoietic cell transplantation. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available