Beyond solute removal: is extracorporeal circuit exposure itself therapeutic in apheresis?
- 1Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin–Madison , , ,
Abstract
Therapeutic apheresis is conventionally understood through what it removes: pathogenic antibodies, immune complexes, cytokines, or lipoproteins. This framework treats the extracorporeal circuit as a biologically inert delivery mechanism. I propose and evaluate an alternative hypothesis: that circuit exposure itself, independent of any solute or cell removed, is immunomodulatory, and that this effect contributes additively to the clinical response seen in some apheresis indications. This idea has a documented history in bioengineering, dating to observations of complement-mediated leukopenia in early hemodialysis and the 1980s concept of “procedurally induced immunomodulation.” I synthesize supporting evidence across three lines: direct biocompatibility data showing that blood-membrane contact alone induces immunomodulation; a candidate molecular mechanism, soluble HLA class I adsorption to circuit surfaces, reported in a small study of modern apheresis procedures in patients and healthy donors; and incidental findings from the sham arms of two rheumatoid arthritis trials, in which circuit exposure without net removal was accompanied by immunological change, with inconsistent clinical response. I situate this evidence against the better-characterized precedent of circuit-induced immune activation in ECMO and cardiopulmonary bypass, while accounting for the substantial dose difference and anticoagulant differences between these modalities and apheresis. I propose a threshold model in which circuit-driven immunomodulation should vary by disease and immune activation state, and I outline a direct empirical test: prospective collection of immune biomarkers in both arms of future sham-controlled apheresis trials. This hypothesis is falsifiable within existing trial infrastructure and could inform how apheresis’ therapeutic mechanism, and its appropriate sham controls, are understood.
Related
- Therapeutic Apheresis in Nigeria: A Multi‐Center Summary of Abstracts From the Inaugural Nigerian Society for Apheresis Scientific Meeting
- The Place of Therapeutic Apheresis in Severe Immune-Related Adverse Events: A Scoping Review of Literature.
- Evaluation of Two Non-Invasive Extracorporeal Strategies for Enhancing Protein-Bound Uremic Toxin Removal During Hemodialysis.
- Effects of pre-membrane acidification on extracorporeal CO2 removal compared with conventional ECCO2R in mechanically ventilated animal models: a preclinical systematic review protocol.
- Extracorporeal kidney support in neonates and infants: therapeutic perspectives and outcomes in multiple organ dysfunction syndrome—a structured narrative review
BibTeX
@article{raymond2026beyond,
title = {{Beyond solute removal: is extracorporeal circuit exposure itself therapeutic in apheresis?}},
author = {Caitlin Raymond},
journal = {Frontiers in medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fmed.2026.1944215},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13719427},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Beyond solute removal: is extracorporeal circuit exposure itself therapeutic in apheresis?
AU - Caitlin Raymond
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/16
JO - Frontiers in medicine
DO - 10.3389/fmed.2026.1944215
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13719427
AB - Therapeutic apheresis is conventionally understood through what it removes: pathogenic antibodies, immune complexes, cytokines, or lipoproteins. This framework treats the extracorporeal circuit as a biologically inert delivery mechanism. I propose and evaluate an alternative hypothesis: that circuit exposure itself, independent of any solute or cell removed, is immunomodulatory, and that this effect contributes additively to the clinical response seen in some apheresis indications. This idea has a documented history in bioengineering, dating to observations of complement-mediated leukopenia in early hemodialysis and the 1980s concept of “procedurally induced immunomodulation.” I synthesize supporting evidence across three lines: direct biocompatibility data showing that blood-membrane contact alone induces immunomodulation; a candidate molecular mechanism, soluble HLA class I adsorption to circuit surfaces, reported in a small study of modern apheresis procedures in patients and healthy donors; and incidental findings from the sham arms of two rheumatoid arthritis trials, in which circuit exposure without net removal was accompanied by immunological change, with inconsistent clinical response. I situate this evidence against the better-characterized precedent of circuit-induced immune activation in ECMO and cardiopulmonary bypass, while accounting for the substantial dose difference and anticoagulant differences between these modalities and apheresis. I propose a threshold model in which circuit-driven immunomodulation should vary by disease and immune activation state, and I outline a direct empirical test: prospective collection of immune biomarkers in both arms of future sham-controlled apheresis trials. This hypothesis is falsifiable within existing trial infrastructure and could inform how apheresis’ therapeutic mechanism, and its appropriate sham controls, are understood.
SN - 2296-858X
ER -