Australasian CD34+ quality assurance program and rationale for the clinical utility of the single-platform method for...

Enumeration of CD34(+) cells should be accurate and comparable between institutions, particularly when making clinical decisions, evaluating data, and in clinical trials. An Australasian CD34(+) quality assurance program (QAP) has been established to compare CD34(+) cell results and method (Part 1). Unexpected variation in WBCCs led to Part 2 of this report.

Part 1: Methods reagents and results were evaluated for 12 QAP samples analyzed by 36-43 centers. Part 2: The effects of different anticoagulants on WBCC of 12 peripheral blood samples (PBs) were compared using three cell counters. To test the validity of applying the conclusions to clinical samples, the WBCCs of leukapheresed products and BM harvest were also compared.

Part 1: In some samples, WBCCs determined by certain cell-counter groups were significantly different. Results for percentage of CD34(+) and CD34(+)/microL suggest that standardization on the lyse-no-wash and single platform (SP) method reduces variation of results between institutions. Part 2: Using different counters, PB WBCC in ACD-A showed greater variation than the same PB in EDTA. For PB in different anticoagulants, the extent of difference in WBCC for the same PB is dependent on the counter used.

This CD34 QAP has identified ACD-A as an additional factor that contributes to the disparate WBCCs, which may further compromise the accuracy of CD34(+) cell counts obtained by the dual platform (DP) method, especially for leukapheresed products. In order to achieve greater accuracy within individual institutions, as well as permitting more reliable inter-institutional comparisons, our data supports the adoption of the SP as the standard method for CD34(+) cell enumeration.