Assessment of needs for plasma for fractionation in Europe

In the early 1990s, a series of outbreaks of hepatitis C (HCV) infections clustering among recipients of certain lots of plasma-derived medicinal products (PDMP) alarmed regulatory authorities, manufacturers and the public alike. Also, a few episodes of Hepatitis A (HAV) infections occurred in haemophiliacs receiving solvent-detergent-treated factor VIII concentrates. Thus, several measures were brought into effect to reestablish the safety of the incriminated products and to further increase the margin of safety of PDMP in general. Therefore, intramuscular immunoglobulins had to be free of HCV RNA as shown by nucleic acid amplification technology (NAT) in the final products. Furthermore, the manufacturing process of PDMP had to be validated for both viral inactivation and elimination. Finally, HCV-NAT was to be standardised and implemented as a validated test of plasma pool samples. In 1994, a joint meeting of EPFA, EAPPI and Regulatory Authorities was held in Brussels to outline the state of the art and to delineate the actions to be taken. Five years later, in 1999, the incidence rates of HIV, HBV and HCV in unpaid blood donors have been minimized, especially in European countries. With probabilities for window period donations as low as 0.6 in 1 million for both HIV and HCV and 2.1 in 1 million for HBV in Switzerland, labile blood products have reached extreme, but not absolute safety. The introduction of HCV-NAT roughly doubles this safety resulting in a 1 in 3 million probability of a window donation.Concomittantly, extensive viral validation studies document effective inactivation and removal of viruses in PDMP. The demonstrated margins of safety, expressed as logarithmical reduction factors (LRF), range from 4 to over 20 log(10), depending on product, virus, and inactivation procedure used. Further progress to even safer PDMP shall be acomplished by consolidating the GMP processes, abandoning of obsolete requirements and harmonising national regulations within Europe. Before introducing new measures for additional agents such as HAV or Parvovirus B 19, gains and risks and even potential new threats have to be carefully assessed. Alternative efforts for the safeguard of patients, e.g. vaccination for HAV, need to be balanced against the risks of changing established and validated manufacturing procedures of PDMP with long-lasting safety records.