Journal of Translational Medicine (Aug 2020)

Ischemia considerations for the development of an organ and tissue donor derived bone marrow bank

  • Erik J. Woods,
  • Aubrey M. Sherry,
  • John R. Woods,
  • James W. Hardin,
  • Michael LaFontaine,
  • Gerald Brandacher,
  • Brian H. Johnstone

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02470-1
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 18, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Deceased organ donors represent an untapped source of therapeutic bone marrow (BM) that can be recovered in 3–5 times the volume of that obtained from living donors, tested for quality, cryopreserved, and banked indefinitely for future on-demand use. A challenge for a future BM banking system will be to manage the prolonged ischemia times that are inevitable when bones procured at geographically-dispersed locations are shipped to distant facilities for processing. Our objectives were to: (a) quantify, under realistic field conditions, the relationship between ischemia time and the quality of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) derived from deceased-donor BM; (b) identify ischemia-time boundaries beyond which HSPC quality is adversely affected; (c) investigate whole-body cooling as a strategy for preserving cell quality; and (d) investigate processing experience as a variable affecting quality. Methods Seventy-five bones from 62 donors were analyzed for CD34+ viability following their exposure to various periods of warm-ischemia time (WIT), cold-ischemia time (CIT), and body-cooling time (BCT). Regression models were developed to quantify the independent associations of WIT, CIT, and BCT, with the viability and function of recovered HSPCs. Results Results demonstrate that under “real-world” scenarios: (a) combinations of warm- and cold-ischemia times favorable to the recovery of high-quality HSPCs are achievable (e.g., CD34+ cell viabilities in the range of 80–90% were commonly observed); (b) body cooling prior to bone recovery is detrimental to cell viability (e.g., CD34+ viability 89% without body cooling); (c) vertebral bodies (VBs) are a superior source of HSPCs compared to ilia (IL) (e.g., %CD34+ viability > 80% when VBs were the source, vs. < 74% when IL were the source); and (d) processing experience is a critical variable affecting quality. Conclusions Our models can be used by an emerging BM banking system to formulate ischemia-time tolerance limits and data-driven HSPC quality-acceptance standards.

Keywords