Knowledge | Can cord blood save lives? The reality is more complex than it seems
Lisa Taner, 34, had hoped that when she gave birth, she could both welcome a new life and help another child by donating cord blood. But when she tried to arrange the donation, she found there was nowhere to donate—not because no one needed it, but because no facility would accept it.
Once treated as medical waste, cord blood is now valued because it is rich in hematopoietic stem cells. It has achieved meaningful results, particularly in treating childhood leukemia, other blood cancers, and congenital genetic disorders. Compared with more invasive bone-marrow transplantation, cord-blood transplantation may offer children a less intensive treatment option with higher success rates.
In practice, however, people like Taner who hope to donate face major barriers. She called a public cord-blood bank in the San Francisco area, the Cord Blood Foundation, but was told that it had suspended sample collection indefinitely because of insufficient federal funding. When she contacted public banks in other regions, they declined because they accepted donations only from local births. The remaining option was costly private banking, which preserves cord blood for the family and did not fit her goal of donating it to a child in need.
‘I just wanted to do something good that would not take much time but might save a life,’ Taner said. ‘Instead, I was told it simply could not be done.’ She ultimately decided against private storage and left disappointed by a field she had once considered highly promising.
Few public banks and costly private banks: The practical challenges of cord blood
Over the past two years, parents in the United States believed that a broad national network of public cord-blood banks had been established. In reality, creating a bank costs $1–2 million, stable funding is lacking, and public banks remain scarce and difficult to operate.
In contrast, private cord-blood banks have proliferated. They market the concept of ‘biological insurance,’ encouraging families to store their newborn’s cord blood to prepare for the child’s future health needs.
According to Stephen Grant, vice president of Cord Blood Registry, more than 20,000 families have stored cord blood with the organization. They believe these stem cells may be used to treat 75 diseases, including leukemia, although actual use remains extremely rare.
Collection costs as much as $1,500, with annual storage fees of nearly $100, making it a substantial expense for many families. Insurers generally cover the cost only when a family member has been diagnosed and needs immediate treatment; otherwise, families pay out of pocket.
Who should consider private storage? Experts say it is not necessary for everyone
The medical community has long taken a cautious view of private cord-blood storage. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) states that a child’s chance of using their own cord blood is only between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 100,000. In addition, cord blood from a child with leukemia or sickle cell disease often carries the same disease-related factors, limiting its value for treating that child.
‘For families that already have a child with an illness, we strongly recommend storing cord blood from the next child in case it is needed for transplantation,’ said Dr. John Fraser, director of the UCLA Cord Blood Bank. These high-risk families are the ones with a true indication for private storage.
The challenge of building public banks: Diverse inventories, high costs, and inadequate funding
A public bank that can truly serve the population must overcome another challenge: it needs a sufficiently large and diverse inventory to meet the matching needs of people from different racial backgrounds. Heidi Patterson, national director of the American Red Cross cord-blood program, estimated that each bank needs 2,000–5,000 cord-blood units to have a realistic chance of finding clinical matches. This alone requires an investment of at least $3 million.
To address this, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) invested $30 million in a five-year research program assessing the efficacy and feasibility of cord blood in broader populations. The government may fund a national public-bank system only if stem cells are shown to work effectively for more diseases.
Parents’ perspective: Do not let a lifesaving resource go to waste
Although science and policy are still evolving, parents like Taner are unwilling simply to wait. They have begun writing to the media, legislators, and television stations, urging the government to include cord blood in the public healthcare system. ‘If the country can fund bone-marrow registries, why can it not fund cord-blood banks?’ Taner asked. ‘This is simpler, safer, and less costly than bone-marrow transplantation. We could save more people.’
The reality is that while policy changes are pending, countless cord-blood units that could potentially save lives are still discarded as medical waste in delivery rooms every day.
Knowledge | Can cord blood save lives? The reality is more complex than it seems
Knowledge | Can cord blood save lives? The reality is more complex than it seems
Lisa Taner, 34, had hoped that when she gave birth, she could both welcome a new life and help another child by donating cord blood. But when she tried to arrange the donation, she found there was nowhere to donate—not because no one needed it, but because no facility would accept it.
Once treated as medical waste, cord blood is now valued because it is rich in hematopoietic stem cells. It has achieved meaningful results, particularly in treating childhood leukemia, other blood cancers, and congenital genetic disorders. Compared with more invasive bone-marrow transplantation, cord-blood transplantation may offer children a less intensive treatment option with higher success rates.
In practice, however, people like Taner who hope to donate face major barriers. She called a public cord-blood bank in the San Francisco area, the Cord Blood Foundation, but was told that it had suspended sample collection indefinitely because of insufficient federal funding. When she contacted public banks in other regions, they declined because they accepted donations only from local births. The remaining option was costly private banking, which preserves cord blood for the family and did not fit her goal of donating it to a child in need.
‘I just wanted to do something good that would not take much time but might save a life,’ Taner said. ‘Instead, I was told it simply could not be done.’ She ultimately decided against private storage and left disappointed by a field she had once considered highly promising.
Few public banks and costly private banks: The practical challenges of cord blood
Over the past two years, parents in the United States believed that a broad national network of public cord-blood banks had been established. In reality, creating a bank costs $1–2 million, stable funding is lacking, and public banks remain scarce and difficult to operate.
In contrast, private cord-blood banks have proliferated. They market the concept of ‘biological insurance,’ encouraging families to store their newborn’s cord blood to prepare for the child’s future health needs.
According to Stephen Grant, vice president of Cord Blood Registry, more than 20,000 families have stored cord blood with the organization. They believe these stem cells may be used to treat 75 diseases, including leukemia, although actual use remains extremely rare.
Collection costs as much as $1,500, with annual storage fees of nearly $100, making it a substantial expense for many families. Insurers generally cover the cost only when a family member has been diagnosed and needs immediate treatment; otherwise, families pay out of pocket.
Who should consider private storage? Experts say it is not necessary for everyone
The medical community has long taken a cautious view of private cord-blood storage. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) states that a child’s chance of using their own cord blood is only between 1 in 1,000 and 1 in 100,000. In addition, cord blood from a child with leukemia or sickle cell disease often carries the same disease-related factors, limiting its value for treating that child.
‘For families that already have a child with an illness, we strongly recommend storing cord blood from the next child in case it is needed for transplantation,’ said Dr. John Fraser, director of the UCLA Cord Blood Bank. These high-risk families are the ones with a true indication for private storage.
The challenge of building public banks: Diverse inventories, high costs, and inadequate funding
A public bank that can truly serve the population must overcome another challenge: it needs a sufficiently large and diverse inventory to meet the matching needs of people from different racial backgrounds. Heidi Patterson, national director of the American Red Cross cord-blood program, estimated that each bank needs 2,000–5,000 cord-blood units to have a realistic chance of finding clinical matches. This alone requires an investment of at least $3 million.
To address this, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) invested $30 million in a five-year research program assessing the efficacy and feasibility of cord blood in broader populations. The government may fund a national public-bank system only if stem cells are shown to work effectively for more diseases.
Parents’ perspective: Do not let a lifesaving resource go to waste
Although science and policy are still evolving, parents like Taner are unwilling simply to wait. They have begun writing to the media, legislators, and television stations, urging the government to include cord blood in the public healthcare system. ‘If the country can fund bone-marrow registries, why can it not fund cord-blood banks?’ Taner asked. ‘This is simpler, safer, and less costly than bone-marrow transplantation. We could save more people.’
The reality is that while policy changes are pending, countless cord-blood units that could potentially save lives are still discarded as medical waste in delivery rooms every day.
Source:
Collected online