Good Samaritan Hospital v. Ohio Department of Health

642 N.E.2d 1160, 95 Ohio App. 3d 556, 1994 Ohio App. LEXIS 2842
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 30, 1994
DocketNos. 93APH09-1335, 93APH09-1336.
StatusPublished

This text of 642 N.E.2d 1160 (Good Samaritan Hospital v. Ohio Department of Health) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Good Samaritan Hospital v. Ohio Department of Health, 642 N.E.2d 1160, 95 Ohio App. 3d 556, 1994 Ohio App. LEXIS 2842 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994).

Opinions

Deshler, Judge.

This is an appeal by appellants, Good Samaritan Hospital and Response Technologies, Inc., from an order of the Certificate of Need Review Board *557 (“CONRB”), affirming a decision of the Director of the Ohio Department of Health (“ODH”), in which the director determined that a procedure known as peripheral stem cell reinfusion is a reviewable activity pursuant- to R.C. 3702.51(R)(3)(a).

By letter dated November 13, 1992, the Director of ODH informed Response Technologies, Inc. that the performance of peripheral stem cell reinfusion is a reviewable activity under certificate of need (“CON”) laws. The director sent Good Samaritan Hospital a similar letter on December 29, 1992. Both appellants subsequently filed an appeal with the CONRB, challenging the director’s ruling. A joint motion to consolidate the cases was granted, and the matter was scheduled for a hearing before a CONRB hearing examiner.

Three physicians testified at the hearing. Appellants presented the testimony of Dr. Gary Nicholson, an internist who practices in the Dayton area. ODH presented the testimony of Dr. Edward Copelan and Dr. Hillard Lazarus. Dr. Copelan is an associate professor of internal medicine at the Ohio State University College of Medicine and the acting director of the bone marrow transplant division at the Ohio State University Hospital. Dr. Lazarus serves as the director of the bone marrow transplantation program for Case Western Reserve University and the medical director of the in-patient bone marrow transplant unit at University Hospitals of Cleveland.

All three physicians were in general agreement concerning the basic procedures involved in performing peripheral stem cell reinfusion. The following facts regarding these procedures are derived from the testimony of the three medical witnesses and from exhibits admitted at the hearing.

Peripheral stem cell reinfusion is a supportive care technique used in the treatment of certain advanced forms of cancer. Stem cell reinfusion came about as an outgrowth of research in the field of bone marrow transplantation. Generally, bone marrow transplantation is used in the treatment of cancer patients who require high dosages of chemotherapy in an attempt to arrest tumor cells. The problem with utilizing such high dosages, however, is that non-tumor cells, including blood forming cells, are damaged along with the tumor cells, resulting in a dose-limiting toxicity. The aim of bone marrow transplantation (and peripheral stem cell reinfusion) is to enable patients to receive higher than normal dosages of. chemotherapy and then to follow up the treatment with bone marrow reinfusion in order to circumvent toxicity to the bone marrow.

Initial bone marrow transplants often involved procurement of bone marrow from the sibling of a patient because of greater likelihood of compatibility between the donor and patient. The process of transferring bone marrow from a donor to a patient is termed allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Because of limitations in this process, researchers began investigating the possibility of *558 collecting a patient’s own (autologous) bone marrow, preserving it, and then reinfusing the marrow after eliminating the toxic drugs from the patient’s system. Utilizing a patient’s own bone marrow has been demonstrated to be effective in treating such diseases as lymphomas, Hodgkin’s disease, acute leukemia and breast cancer.

Further research revealed that hematopoietic stem cells, 1 the cells obtained from the bone marrow and reinfused after the patient has received drug therapy, are also present in the peripheral blood in relatively small numbers. Studies eventually led to procedures for procuring stem cells from the peripheral blood. In order to collect a sufficient number of stem cells for reinfusion, the cells are artificially forced out of the bone marrow and into the peripheral blood.

In general, the peripheral stem cell reinfusion procedure involves the removal and freezing of a patient’s own stem cells, treating the patient with high dosages of chemotherapy, and then reinfusing the stem cells, with the intent of restoring the patient’s blood producing and immune systems. The witnesses basically described peripheral stem cell reinfusion as a four-step procedure. The first step of the process involves “mobilization” of the stem cells. At this stage, chemotherapy is given to the patient to mobilize or force marrow cells into the patient’s bloodstream. The patient is then given growth factors to stimulate the stem cells to grow and appear in the peripheral blood.

The next step involves the collection or “harvesting” of the stem cells. During this stage, the patient’s blood is extracted through a catheter. A pheresis machine separates the various types of blood cells (a process referred to as centrifugation), with the ultimate purpose of gathering the stem cells contained within the white blood cells. The rest of the blood, including red blood cells and plasma, is immediately returned to the patient. The number of pheresis procedures varies with each individual patient. In general, a patient undergoes between three and seven pheresis procedures in order to collect enough cells for reinfusion.

After the stem cells are collected, the cells are placed in a sterile collection chamber, processed and then frozen (“cryopreservation”) in preparation for reinfusion. The patient then receives high doses of chemotherapy in an effort to destroy the cancer cells.

The final stage involves reinfusion of the stem cells. As with the procurement of the stem cells, a catheter is utilized to infuse the marrow cells back into the patient.

*559 While the witnesses were in general agreement as to the procedures involved in peripheral stem cell reinfusion, appellants’ witness and ODH’s witnesses presented conflicting testimony on the determinative issue of whether the process constitutes an organ transplantation service.

Appellants’ expert, Dr. Nicholson, testified that bone marrow is an organ which serves the purpose of producing blood cells. 2 He described a stem cell as “a cell that’s a very primitive early cell that has the capability of not only reproducing itself * * * but also of — through a series of progressive maturation steps giving rise to the various cell lines that make up the blood.” He later stated that, “technically, I think the stem cell is an organ component.”

Dr. Nicholson defined “transplantation” as “taking an organ or something from one part of the body to another party of the body, or I suppose, from one person’s body and putting it in someone else’s body.” He testified that stem cell reinfusion does not involve taking the stem cells from one part of the body and putting them in another part of the body. Rather, he stated, “you’re taking them out through a catheter in the vein and you’re actually putting them back through the same catheter.” He testified that the cells “migrate back to where they first came from,” ie., the marrow.

In contrast to the testimony of Dr. Nicholson, both of the experts testifying on behalf of ODH, Dr. Copelan and Dr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Cleveland Clinic Foundation
640 N.E.2d 900 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
642 N.E.2d 1160, 95 Ohio App. 3d 556, 1994 Ohio App. LEXIS 2842, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/good-samaritan-hospital-v-ohio-department-of-health-ohioctapp-1994.