Advertisement

Authors’ Reply to Mintz: “Economic Implications of Pathogen Reduced and Bacterially Tested Platelet Components: A US Hospital Budget Impact Model”

  • Laura T. PizziEmail author
  • Katherine M. Prioli
  • Jay H. Herman
Letter to the editor

Dear Editor,

We appreciate the detailed comments provided by Dr. Paul Mintz regarding our paper “Economic Implications of Pathogen Reduced and Bacterially Tested Platelet Components: A US Hospital Budget Impact Model [1].” To provide a brief context, the purpose of this model is to estimate the financial impact of adopting new approaches to reduce bacterial contamination of platelet components, from a hospital perspective. These techniques include pathogen reduction (PR-PC), rapid bacterial testing (RT-PC), and secondary culture [2, 3]. It should be noted that the latter is among the acceptable techniques included in US Food and Drug Administration guidance and is built into our model but was not reported in the paper scenarios because, as of this writing, it is not commonly used. The model itself was constructed in an adaptable software platform, with model scenarios described and presented in the paper.

The reader’s first comment is that our model “falsely presumes a significantly...

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

No funding was received for the preparation of this letter.

Conflict of interest

Laura T. Pizzi and Katherine M. Prioli report CERUS Corporation’s sponsorship of the project to Rutgers University covered model development as disclosed in the paper “Economic Implications of Pathogen Reduced and Bacterially Tested Platelet Components: A US Hospital Budget Impact Model.” Katherine M. Prioli and Laura T. Pizzi received travel expenses for presenting model results at the Society for the Advancement of Blood Management 2017 Annual Conference. Jay H. Herman has no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the contents of this letter.

References

  1. 1.
    Comment on: “Economic Implications of Pathogen Reduced and Bacterially Tested Platelet Components: A US Hospital Budget Impact Model”. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 10.1007/s40258-018-00459-y.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bacterial Risk Control Strategies for Blood Collection Establishments and Transfusion Services to Enhance the Safety and Availability of Platelets for Transfusion, FDA Draft Guidance for Industry, December 2018. https://www.fda.gov/ucm/groups/fdagov-public/@fdagov-bio-gen/documents/document/ucm627407.pdf. Accessed 13 Dec 2018.
  3. 3.
    Summary of Recommendations in Dec 2018 FDA Draft Guidance. AABB. December 2018. http://www.aabb.org/advocacy/regulatorygovernment/bloodcomponents/platelets/Documents/Bacterial-Risk-Control-Strategies-Dec-2018.pdf. Accessed 13 Dec 2018.
  4. 4.
    Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. Transcript of the FDA Blood Product Advisory Committee Meeting, November 30, 2017. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/BloodVaccinesandOtherBiologics/BloodProductsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM590282.pdf. Accessed 3 Jan 2019.
  5. 5.
    PGD user survey results. Data on file. 2018.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hong H, Xiao W, Lazarus HM, Good CE, Maitta RW, Jacobs MR. Detection of septic transfusion reactions to platelet transfusions by active and passive surveillance. Blood. 2016;127(4):496–502.  https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-07-655944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    SwissMedic. Haemovigilance annual reports, 2010–2015. https://www.swissmedic.ch/swissmedic/en/home/humanarzneimittel/market-surveillance/haemovigilance/publications.html. Accessed 4 Jan 2017.
  8. 8.
    Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé/French National Agency for Medicine and Health Product Safety. Rapports d’activité hémovigilance/hemovigilance activity reports, 2006-2015. http://ansm.sante.fr/Mediatheque/Publications/Bilans-Rapports-d-activite-Bilans-et-rapports-d-activite#folder_26762. Accessed 4 Jan 2017.
  9. 9.
    Benjamin RJ, Braschler T, Weingand T, Corash LM. Hemovigilance monitoring of platelet septic reactions with effective bacterial protection systems. Transfusion. 2017;57(12):2946–57.  https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.14284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pathogen Reduction Technologies for Blood Safety; Public Workshop, 29–30 Nov 2018. Workshop details. https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/ucm620519.htm. Accessed 3 Jan 2019.
  11. 11.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HCUPNet. http://hcupnet.ahrq.gov. Accessed 27 Nov 2016.
  12. 12.
    Eddy DM, Hollingworth W, Caro JJ, Tsevat J, McDonald KM, Wong JB. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):733–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura T. Pizzi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Katherine M. Prioli
    • 1
  • Jay H. Herman
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Health Outcomes, Policy, and EconomicsRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  2. 2.Transfusion Medicine, Department of Pathology, Anatomy, and Cell BiologyThomas Jefferson University HospitalPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations