[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) has been extensively used for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases for over 20 years and has a consistent and predictable safety profile with long-term use. Documenting the efficacy of ECP as therapeutic treatment has long been a matter of importance for physicians. AREAS COVERED: The authors reviewed publications in this field with the goal of providing an overview of this therapeutic approach. EXPERT OPINION: ECP is efficacious in a high percentage of those cutaneous T-cell lymphoma patients who have circulating malignant T cells in the context of a still-near-normal immune competence. From the side of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), the use of ECP showed a clinical benefit in patients with steroid-refractory acute GVHD (aGVHD) and it is believed that ECP deserves to be evaluated as part of a combination strategy in first-line therapy of aGVHD. In chronic GHVD, the published data show that ECP can be effective in extensive and long-standing disease even when treatment is initiated at an advanced stage after conventional immunosuppressive and corticosteroid therapy has failed. ECP should be considered most beneficial for patients with predominantly mucocutaneous chronic GVHD. The fields of application of the procedure could be vast, and could also include autoimmune and metabolic diseases. The most important methodological issues which affect ECP evaluation is that the large majority of data about ECP result from single-arm observational series and the significant efficacy is mainly based on small and retrospective studies. ECP has never been proved to offer any survival advantage in a context of a randomized trial and the above-mentioned limitation also affects the accuracy of many biological modifications observed during ECP. Starting from these considerations, the need of a prospective randomized study becomes increasingly urgent.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Healthy donors (HDs) who were mobilized using lenograstim (LENO) and who were undergoing peripheral haematopoietic progenitor cell collection with apheresis (HPC-A) were enrolled in a surveillance protocol. In all, 184 HDs have been assessed with a median follow-up of 62 months (range 2-155). HDs received LENO at a median dose of 10 microg/kg (range 5-15). Bone pain was reported as the most frequent short-term adverse event (71.2%). Other commonly observed short-term symptoms included fatigue (19.0%), fever (5.4%), headache (27.7%), nausea (12.0%) and insomnia (22.3%). Spleen size increased in 4.3% of the donors. No vascular disorders or cardiac disease occurred. Long-term follow-up included monitoring of adverse events, neoplastic disease or other pathologies. Transit ischaemic attack occurred in one donor (39 months post-donation). One autoimmune event was reported at 28 months post-recombinant human granulocyte (rhG)-CSF (ankylosing spondylitis); one donor with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease developed secondary polyglobulia (50 months post-rhG-CSF). One donor was diagnosed with lung cancer at 19 months post-donation. No haematological disease was observed. In conclusion, the short-term safety appears to be verified, whereas, although the study identified no increased risks of malignancy among HDs who received rhG-CSF, long-term safety requires more complete data sets, especially a longer follow-up and a larger number of HDs.
Bone marrow transplantation 03/2009; 44(3):163-8. · 3.00 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Mobilization of CD34+ into peripheral blood is attained by either glycosylated (lenograstim) or non-glycosylated recombinant G-CSF (filgrastim). 101 donors, 57 males, median age 42 years (range 16-63) entered this retrospective study. Group I (55 cases) received filgrastim and group II lenograstim subcutaneously for 5-6 days. The peak number of CD34+ cells/microl blood observed on day 4 and 5 was not significantly different in the two groups. No differences were shown in terms of both circulating CFU-GM at the time of harvesting and CD34+ target of collection. The most frequent side effects were bone pain (18.2% grade I; 36.4% grade II, 7.3% grade III), headache (18.2%), nausea (9.1%), fever (5.5%) and a mild splenomegaly (> 2 cm) (5.5%) in filgrastim group, and bone pain (37.0% grade I, 26.1% grade II, 2.2% grade III), headache (17.4%), nausea (15.2%), fever (4.4%) and a mild splenomegaly (4.3%) in lenograstim group, respectively. CD34+ collection was associated with thrombocytopenia, which was not significantly different between the two groups. No donor in either group developed long-term adverse effects. We conclude that both G-CSFs are comparable in terms of CD34+ cell collection, safety and tolerability.
Journal of Clinical Apheresis 11/2005; 20(3):129-36. · 2.27 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Extracorporeal phototherapy (ECP) is an immunotherapeutic modality that has demonstrated clinical efficacy in cutaneous T cell lymphoma/Sezary syndrome (CTCL), scleroderma, in patients with refractory acute and chronic gvhd after bone marrow transplantation and other autoimmune disorders. ECP involves extracorporeal exposure of peripheral blood mononuclear cells to photoactivated 8-methoxypsoralen (8-MOP), followed by reinfusion of the treated cells. 8-MOP is a naturally occurring furocourarin that is biologically inert, unless exposed to ultraviolet A light, whereupon it becomes photoactivated and covalently binds and crosslinks DNA, leading to initiation of apoptosis. During a single treatment cycle of ECP, approximately 240 cc of buffy coat and 300 ml of plasma are collected into a buffy coat bag from six collection cycles. The cells are exposed to UVA at 2 Jcm2/cell beginning immediately after the first cells are collected.18 Examination of the cells after UVA exposure and prior to reinfusion demonstrates that about 2–5% of the total circulating peripheral blood mononuclear cells undergo apoptosis.18 An intravenous formulation of 8-MOP, UVADEX, allows direct instillation of the photosensitising agent into the collected plasma and buffy coat ex vivo prior to UVA exposure. The implications of these immunomodulatory effects of ECP on pathogenesis and clinical outcome remain a fertile area for future research
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Primary aldosteronism is a disorder characterized by hypertension and hypokalemia due to aldosterone secretion out of renin-angiotensin control. It is generally caused by aldosterone-producing adenoma or adrenocortical hyperplasia but, in some cases, it is due to genetic alterations. Familial type I hyperaldosteronism is the result of anomalous regulation of aldosterone secretion from ACTH (which normally regulates cortisol synthesis). Aldosterone hypersecretion can be suppressed by exogenous glucocortcoids such as dexamethasone. This autosomal dominant disorder is caused by unequal cross-over between two genes with wide sequence homology: CYP11B1 and CYP11B2. The hybrid gene is the product of fusion between the ACTH-responsive regulatory portion of the 11b-hydroxylase gene (CYP11B1) and the coding region of the aldosterone synthase gene (CYP11B2). Familial type I hyperaldosteronism is a disease with incomplete penetration and variable expressivity, especially in relation to hypertension. The marked variability in hypertension severity can mirror an interaction between the hybrid gene and other hereditary factors involved in the regulation of blood pressure. Familial type II hyperaldosteronism is another autosomal dominant form of hyperaldosteronism due to aldosterone hyper-secretion not suppressible by dexamethasone. This disorder is unrelated to mutation of the hybrid gene. The genetic cause of type II hyperaldosteronism is presently unknown, but a genome-wide search has revealed that the disorder is linked with a locus on chromosome 7 in a region that corresponds to cytogenetic band 7p22.
Giornale italiano di nefrologia: organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di nefrologia 01/2004; 21(2):139-43.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The number of allogeneic transplants of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) is rapidly increasing. Collection of PBSC in healthy subjects currently implies the administration of G-CSF or GM-CSF and, of course, the use of apheretic devices. These procedures involve potential risks, in particular the risk of leukemia secondary to growth-factor treatment. To evaluate the current practice of PBSC mobilization and collection, and initially assess the short-term side effects and efficiency of procedures, the GITMO (Gruppo Italiano Trapianti di Midollo Osseo) promoted a retrospective cooperative study among the Italian centers.
Seventy-six healthy individuals donating to their HLA-identical or partially matched sibling recipients in seven Italian centers form the basis of the present analysis. The data were retrospectively collected by proper forms, pooled and analyzed by means of a commercially available statistical soft package.
All donors received G-CSF as mobilizing agent with different schedules according to each single center policy. A median of 2.5 (range 1-4) aphereses per donor were run. The most frequent side effect was bone pain. In no case did the medium term follow-up reveal subjective complaints or laboratory modifications. After G-CSF mobilization, WBC and lymphocytes counts increased to a maximum of (mean +/- SD) 48.1 +/- 15.6 x 10(9)/L and 4.2 +/- 1.5 x 10(9)/L, respectively. The peak was reached on day 5 in both cases. Platelets decreased after the apheretic procedures, reaching a minimum of (mean +/- SD) 77 +/- 26 x 10(9)/L on day 8 and returning to normal values on day 11. Overall, the apheretic collection yielded (mean +/- SD) 18.6 +/- 19.2 x 10(8)/kg donor body weight MNC; 10.4 +/- 5.7 x 10(6)/kg CD34+ cells; 90.6 +/- 75.9 x 10(4)/kg CFU-GM and 4.3 +/- 1.8 x 10(8)/kg CD3+ cells. The target dose of 4 x 10(6)/kg CD34+ cells was harvested in 51.3% donors after a single apheresis, in 85.5% after the second, and in nearly 100% after a maximum of 3 aphereses.
These data demonstrate that collection of adequate numbers of circulating progenitors is feasible and well tolerated in healthy donors. However, only careful monitoring of donors and international cooperation will help to definitively assess the long-term safety of G-CSF for mobilization of PBSC.