Background: Although automated programs have been increasingly used to collect peripheral blood (PB) progenitor cells (PBPCs), differences among them remain unclear. The automated programs of Amicus (Baxter Healthcare) and Spectra (software Version 6.1, Gambro BCT) apheresis machines were compared in a crossover study.
Study design and methods: The patients for autologous and donors for allogeneic PBPC transplantation mobilized with granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor were randomly assigned into two groups. PBPCs were collected by the Amicus on the first day and the Spectra on the second of 2 consecutive days in Group I, and the reverse order was used in Group II. Of 39 patients or donors enrolled, 17 reached their collection goal with only one procedure and did not participate in the paired study. Thus, 44 paired procedures of the remaining 22 subjects were evaluated.
Results: The product yields of white blood cells (WBCs; p < 0.005), mononuclear cells (MNCs; p < 0.02), and CD34+ PBPCs (p < 0.0002) from patients or donors were higher in the Amicus collections than those in the Spectra collections. The collection efficiencies of WBCs (p < 0.03), MNCs (p < 0.02), and CD34+ PBPCs (p < 0.03) were higher in the Amicus collections. The numbers of contaminating platelets (PLTs) in the Amicus collections were lower than those in the Spectra collections (p < 0.05) with a greater decrease in PB PLT counts after apheresis with the Spectra (p < 0.01). The Amicus had a longer running time than the Spectra for processing similar volumes (p < 0.005).
Conclusion: The automated program of the Amicus may be better than that of the Spectra for collecting MNCs and CD34+ PBPCs and avoiding apheresis-induced thrombocytopenia.