Comparable engraftment kinetics following peripheral-blood stem-cell infusion mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with or without cyclophosphamide in multiple myeloma.

Division of Hematology/Oncology of the Arkansas Cancer Research Center, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock 72205, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 04/1998; 16(4):1547-53.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare, in the setting of tandem autotransplantations for multiple myeloma (MM), two established methods of peripheral-blood stem-cell (PBSC) procurement with chemotherapy or hematopoietic growth factor alone.
Between June 1994 and July 1995, 44 patients with MM were randomized to PBSC mobilization with either granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 16 microg/kg (group 1; n = 22) or high-dose cyclophosphamide (HDCTX) 6 g/m2 plus G-CSF 5 microg/kg (group 2; n = 22). All 44 patients received melphalan 200 mg/m2 with their first autograft and 32 patients proceeded to a second transplantation.
Group 2 required a significantly longer time interval for completion of PBSC collection than group 1 (median, 22 v 8 days; P = .0001), greater frequency of hospitalization (100% v 32%; P = .0001), and increased transfusion of platelets (86% v 18%; P = .0001) and packed RBCs (86% v 55%; P = .02). Likewise, the incidence of fever and pneumonia/sepsis were higher in group 2 (P = .02 and P = .04, respectively). Surprisingly, despite greater CD34 cell quantities infused in group 2, median recovery times of granulocytes (both > 500/microL and 2,500/microL) and platelets (both > 50,000/microL and > 100,000/microL) were similar (all P > .7). Posttransplant toxicities were also similar.
Compared with HDCTX plus G-CSF, high-dose G-CSF alone is associated with lower morbidity, shorter duration of PBSC mobilization, and comparable hematopoietic recovery after transplantation, which should result in significant cost reduction. Considering the relatively limited antitumor activity of HDCTX (10% with > or = 50% tumor cytoreduction), PBSC mobilization with HDCTX should be limited to selected patients with persistent MM despite induction chemotherapy.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The safety, kinetics and efficacy of plerixafor+pegfilgrastim for hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell (HSPC) mobilization are poorly understood. We treated 12 study patients (SP; lymphoma n=10 or myeloma n=2) with pegfilgrastim (6 mg SC stat D1) and plerixafor (0.24 mg/kg SC nocte from D3). Six SP were 'predicted poor-mobilizers' and six were 'predicted adequate-mobilizers'. Peripheral blood (PB) CD34(+) monitoring commenced on D3. Apheresis commenced on D4. Comparison was with 22 historical controls (HC; lymphoma n=18, myeloma n=4; poor mobilizers n=4), mobilized with pegfilgrastim alone. Eight (67%) SP had PB CD34(+) count ⩽5 × 10(6)/L D3 post pegfilgrastim; all SP surpassed this threshold the morning after plerixafor. In SP, PBCD34(+) counts peaked D4 6/12 (50%), remaining ⩾5 × 10(6)/L for 4 days in 8/12 (67%). All SP successfully yielded target cell numbers (⩾2 × 10(6)/kg) within four aphereses. After maximum four aphereses, median total CD34+ yield was higher in SP than HC; 8.0 (range 2.4-12.9) vs 4.8 (0.4-14.0) × 10(6)/kg (P=0.04). Seven of twelve (58%) SP achieved target yield after one apheresis. Flow cytometry revealed no tumor cells in PB or apheresis product of SP. Plerixafor+pegfilgrastim was well tolerated with bone pain (n=2), diarrhoea (n=2) and facial paraesthesiae (n=3). Plerixafor+pegfilgrastim is a simple, safe and effective HSPC mobilization regimen in myeloma and lymphoma, in both poor and good mobilizers, and is superior to pegfilgrastim alone.Bone Marrow Transplantation advance online publication, 2 June 2014; doi:10.1038/bmt.2014.112.
    Bone Marrow Transplantation 06/2014; 49(8). DOI:10.1038/bmt.2014.112 · 3.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Autologous haematopoietic SCT with PBSCs is regularly used to restore BM function in patients with multiple myeloma or lymphoma after myeloablative chemotherapy. Twenty-eight experts from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation developed a position statement on the best approaches to mobilising PBSCs and on possibilities of optimising graft yields in patients who mobilise poorly. Choosing the appropriate mobilisation regimen, based on patients' disease stage and condition, and optimising the apheresis protocol can improve mobilisation outcomes. Several factors may influence mobilisation outcomes, including older age, a more advanced disease stage, the type of prior chemotherapy (e.g., fludarabine or melphalan), prior irradiation or a higher number of prior treatment lines. The most robust predictive factor for poor PBSC collection is the CD34(+) cell count in PB before apheresis. Determination of the CD34(+) cell count in PB before apheresis helps to identify patients at risk of poor PBSC collection and allows pre-emptive intervention to rescue mobilisation in these patients. Such a proactive approach might help to overcome deficiencies in stem cell mobilisation and offers a rationale for the use of novel mobilisation agents.Bone Marrow Transplantation advance online publication, 31 March 2014; doi:10.1038/bmt.2014.39.
    Bone marrow transplantation 03/2014; DOI:10.1038/bmt.2014.39 · 3.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Peg-filgrastim (PEG-FIL), a polyethylene glycol-conjugated form of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), has been introduced in clinical practice and is effective in shortening the time of neutropenia after cytotoxic chemotherapy. G-CSF has emerged as the preferred cytokine for hematopoietic progenitor cells' (HPC) mobilization. Nevertheless, data on the ability of PEG-FIL in this field have been published. Areas covered: We review publications in the field with the goal of providing an overview of this approach. Expert opinion: PEG-FIL may be able to mobilize CD34(+) cells in a more timely fashion than G-CSF, with the advantages of only a single-dose administration, an earlier start and a reduction in the number of apheresis procedures. The main controversies concern the dosage of the drug and the optimal dose. In the context of chemo-mobilization, a single dose of 6 mg PEG-FIL seems effective in terms of HPC's mobilization and there is no increase in this effect if the dose is doubled to 12 mg. Steady-state mobilization requires higher doses of PEG-FIL and this approach is not cost-effective when compared with G-CSF. The experiences with PEG-FIL in the healthy donor setting are very limited.
    Expert opinion on biological therapy 03/2014; DOI:10.1517/14712598.2014.895809 · 3.65 Impact Factor


1 Download
Available from