Just-in-time rescue plerixafor in combination with chemotherapy and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization

Analysis of apheresis outcomes in a cohort of Chilean patients treated with autologous stem cell transplantation: A single center real-world experience

Adequate stem cell harvesting is required for autologous hematopoietic transplantation. In deficient mobilizer patients, the collection of stem cells can be challenging because of the impossibility of achieving satisfactory CD34 cell counts with GCSF + - chemotherapy. Plerixafor is a potent and expensive drug that promotes the release of stem cells from the medullary niche to the peripheral blood and allows satisfactory harvests. We performed a retrospective analysis of 370 patients with myeloma and lymphoma harvested at our institution. 99 % of patients achieved satisfactory apheresis using Plerixafor in 45 %. Satisfactory harvests were obtained in patients mobilized with GCSF or plerixafor. In patients who used plerixafor, it was necessary to perform fewer apheresis procedures (P = 0.05). In multivariate analysis, the only factor that predicted the need for plerixafor was the presence of less than 30,000 CD34 / ul on the day of apheresis (OR 0.3. p < 0.001). Since we adopted the plerixafor protocol guided by CD34 counts, the number of patients with harvest failure has decreased. In conclusion, the rational and standardized use of plerixafor favors satisfactory harvest in patients who require autologous transplantation in South-American patients.

Economic evaluation of plerixafor addition in the mobilization and leukapheresis of hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Although plerixafor in association with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) can improve mobilization and collection of hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) by leukapheresis, cost may limit its clinical application. The present study systematically reviews economic evaluations of plerixafor plus G-CSF usage compared to G-CSF alone and compares different strategies of plerixafor utilization in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients eligible for autologous HSC transplantation.

AREAS COVERED

Relevant economic evaluations, partial or complete, were searched on PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for a period ending 30 June 2021. This systematic review was reported following the PRISMA Statement. Six economic evaluations were included, considering the use of upfront or just-in-time plerixafor compared to G-CSF alone or other plerixafor strategies. Most comparisons showed both increased cost and health benefits with the addition of plerixafor. Most analyses favored just-in-time plerixafor compared to upfront plerixafor, with a probable preference for broader cutoffs for just-in-time plerixafor initiation.

EXPERT OPINION

Plerixafor is a potentially cost-effective technology in the mobilization of HSC in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphomas eligible for autologous HSC transplantation. There is a decreased number of leukapheresis sessions and remobilizations and a higher yield of CD34+ cells.

MEdical Database AnaLysIS of Japanese multiple myeloma patienTs with apheresis #2 (MEDALIST-2): the impact of plerixafor use on costs and healthcare resources during mobilization and stem cell transplantation

Treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) can involve apheresis to mobilize hematopoietic stem cells for later autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), which can become costly over time. This retrospective claims database study examined healthcare resource use and medical costs associated with plerixafor, a selective CXCR4 inhibitor that mobilizes hematopoietic stem cells and minimizes apheresis times. Medical data were sampled from Japanese MM patients between April 2017 and September 2019, after the Japanese launch of plerixafor. The study population (190 plerixafor users and 180 non-users) was identified from the Medical Data Vision database, and further stratified into those using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor in monotherapy or in combination with cyclophosphamide to trigger apheresis. A descriptive comparison of patient characteristics, healthcare resource use, and medical costs across the mobilization and ASCT phases indicated plerixafor is associated with higher average total medical costs. However, plerixafor-treated patients received fewer concomitant medications and spent less time in apheresis than non-users. A comparison of non-users with a similar analysis conducted pre-plerixafor launch (2013-2017) showed general improvements to treatment independent of plerixafor. The results of this research can inform guidelines for the role of plerixafor in balancing cost-effectiveness and drug efficacy in MM treatment.

A Review of Advances in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization and the Potential Role of Notch2 Blockade

Hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation can be a potential cure for hematological malignancies and some nonhematologic diseases. Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) collected from peripheral blood after mobilization are the primary source to provide HSC transplantation. In most of the cases, mobilization by the cytokine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with chemotherapy, and in some settings, with the CXC chemokine receptor type 4 antagonist plerixafor, can achieve high yield of hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). However, adequate mobilization is not always successful in a significant portion of donors. Research is going on to find new agents or strategies to increase HSC mobilization. Here, we briefly review the history of HSC transplantation, current mobilization regimens, some of the novel agents that are under investigation for clinical practice, and our recent findings from animal studies regarding Notch and ligand interaction as potential targets for HSPC mobilization.

Mobilization of Hematopoietic Stem Cells into Peripheral Blood for Autologous Transplantation Seems Less Efficacious in Poor Mobilizers with the Use of a Biosimilar of Filgrastim and Plerixafor: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis

Introduction

Biosimilars of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) have shown similar efficacy to originator filgrastim (Neupogen® [NEU]; Amgen Inc.) as prophylaxis in neutropenia and in the mobilization of stem cells in patients receiving combination chemotherapy with G-CSF.

Methods

This was a retrospective study in which the characteristics of stem cell mobilization treated with a G-CSF alone were compared in 216 patients and 56 donors. The two G-CSF compared were NEU and the biosimilar filgrastim Zarzio® (Sandoz GmbH) (referred to hereafter as BIO). Primary objectives were mobilization rate (minimum of 10 × 10³/ml CD34+ on day 4 of treatment [day +4]) and use of the immunostimulant plerixafor (PLEX) in each group.

Results

The general characteristics of the patients receiving NEU (n = 138) and those receiving BIO (n = 78) did not differ significantly. PLEX was used in 24% of BIO patients and in 25.7% of NEU patients. The median CD34+ cell count on day +4 was significantly lower in BIO patients who needed PLEX than in those who did not (2.4 vs. 4.8 × 10³/ml; p = 0.002), as was the final CD34+ cell count (2.5 vs. 3.3 × 10⁶/kg; p 0.03). Mobilization failure rate was higher in the BIO group than in the NEU group (20 vs. 0%; p = 0.01). With respect to donors, more than one apheresis was needed in three BIO donors, one of them with PLEX. The use of BIO was the only risk factor for mobilization failure in patients who needed PLEX (hazard ratio 10.3; 95% confidence interval 1.3–77.8).

Conclusion

The study revealed that BIO had a lower efficacy for stem cell mobilization when the only treatment was G-CSF, especially in poor mobilizers needing PLEX.

Impact of Plerixafor Use at Different Peripheral Blood CD34+ Thresholds on Autologous Stem Cell Collection in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) scheduled for autologous stem cell transplantation must undergo autologous stem cell mobilization; unfortunately, however, many do not obtain an adequate collection yield. Despite the availability of plerixafor, its widespread and uniform use is limited by its cost, and consequently, many institutions have adopted various risk-adapted algorithms. We report our mobilization experience as we have modified our plerixafor algorithm to a more liberal one, with the expectation of greater collection efficiency and mobilization success with higher plerixafor use. A total of 344 mobilization attempts were analyzed over 3 time periods and using 3 different peripheral blood CD34⁺ cell counts to guide plerixafor use: <15/µL (n = 66), <20/µL (n = 130), and <40/µL (n = 148). The primary endpoints were evaluation of changes in mean plerixafor utilization and apheresis days and assessment of the impact on overall mobilization costs. Secondary endpoints were a description of the impact of lenalidomide use on mobilization and evaluation of the rate of mobilization failure. We found that mean plerixafor use increased from 1.32 to 1.65 to 1.74 doses per mobilization (P = .026) and the mean days of apheresis decreased from 2.15 to 2.17 to 1.89 days per mobilization for the <15/µL, <20/µL, and <40/µL cohorts, respectively (P = .011). The combined cost of plerixafor and apheresis procedures at a threshold of 40/µL is close to that at a threshold of 15/µL, while saving 26 apheresis days per 100 patients. In general, there were low rates of mobilization failure across all thresholds. Patients who received more than 6 cycles of lenalidomide demonstrated impaired mobilization and required more apheresis sessions (P < .013) and greater plerixafor use (P < .001) to achieve target stem cell yields. Overall, using plerixafor in patients with MM, with a day 4 pCD34 count of <40/µL is a reasonable and cost-effective strategy to optimize apheresis utilization.

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: Growth factors or chemotherapy?

High-dose therapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplant is considered standard of care for eligible patients with multiple myeloma. The optimal collection strategy should be effective in procuring sufficient HSC while maintaining a low toxicity profile. Currently available mobilization strategies include growth factors alone, growth factors in combination with chemotherapy, or growth factors in combination with chemokine receptor antagonists; however, the optimal strategy has yet to be elucidated. Herein, we review the risks and benefits of each approach.

Plerixafor as preemptive strategy results in high success rates in autologous stem cell mobilization failure

Plerixafor in combination with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is approved for autologous stem cell mobilization in poor mobilizing patients with multiple myeloma or malignant lymphoma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of plerixafor in an immediate rescue approach, administrated subsequently to G-CSF alone or chemotherapy and G-CSF in patients at risk for mobilization failure. Eighty-five patients mobilized with G-CSF alone or chemotherapy were included. Primary endpoint was the efficacy of the immediate rescue approach of plerixafor to achieve ≥2.0 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg for a single or ≥5 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg for a double transplantation and potential differences between G-CSF and chemotherapy-based mobilization. Secondary objectives included comparison of stem cell graft composition including CD34⁺ cell and lymphocyte subsets with regard to the mobilization regimen applied. No significant adverse events were recorded. A median 3.9-fold increase in CD34⁺ cells following plerixafor was observed, resulting in 97% patients achieving at least ≥2 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg. Significantly more differentiated granulocyte and monocyte forming myeloid progenitors were collected after chemomobilization whereas more CD19⁺ and natural killer cells were collected after G-CSF. Fifty-two patients underwent transplantation showing rapid and durable engraftment, irrespectively of the stem cell mobilization regimen used. The addition of plerixafor in an immediate rescue model is efficient and safe after both, G-CSF and chemomobilization and results in extremely high success rates. Whether the differences in graft composition have a clinical impact on engraftment kinetics, immunologic recovery, and graft durability have to be analysed in larger prospective studies.

Plerixafor for autologous stem-cell mobilization and transplantation for patients in Ontario

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation (asct) is an accepted part of standard therapy for patients with hematologic malignancies. Usually, stem-cell mobilization uses granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (g-csf); however, some patients are not able to be mobilized with chemotherapy and g-csf, and such patients could be at higher risk of failing mobilization. Plerixafor is a novel mobilization agent that is absorbed quickly after subcutaneous injection and, at the recommended dose of 0.24 mg/kg, provides a sustained increase in circulating CD34+ cells for 10-18 hours. The main purpose of the present report was to evaluate the most current evidence on the efficacy of plerixafor in enhancing hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization and collection before asct for patients in Ontario so as to make recommendations for clinical practice and to assist Cancer Care Ontario in decision-making with respect to this intervention.

METHODS

The medline and embase databases were systematically searched for evidence from January 1996 to March 2015, and the best available evidence was used to draft recommendations relevant to the efficacy of plerixafor in enhancing hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization and collection before asct. Final approval of this practice guideline report was obtained from both the Stem Cell Transplant Steering Committee and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care.

RECOMMENDATIONS

These recommendations apply to adult patients considered for asct: ■ Adding plerixafor to g-csf is an option for initial mobilization in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma who are eligible for asct when chemotherapy cannot be used and only g-csf mobilization is available.■ For patients with a low peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (for example, <10/μL) at the time of anticipated stem-cell harvesting, or with an inadequate first-day apheresis collection, it is recommended that plerixafor be added to the mobilization regimen to maximize stem-cell collection and to prevent the need for remobilization.■ It is recommended that patients who have failed a previous mobilization attempt undergo remobilization with g-csf and plerixafor, with or without chemotherapy.

Autologous Stem Cell Mobilization in the Age of Plerixafor

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplantation remains important in the treatment of myeloma and relapsed lymphoma. Plerixafor has been shown to significantly enhance stem cell mobilization but is very expensive.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated plerixafor use in the 3-year period after its approval in December 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 277 patients with myeloma and lymphoma had stem cell mobilization; 97.5% were successfully mobilized, including 41.5% who received plerixafor. Plerixafor was generally used for rescue after suboptimal granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilization ("just in time") or for remobilization after an unsuccessful attempt with chemotherapy plus G-CSF. In addition, 10% of patients received planned G-CSF plus plerixafor because of high risk factors for inadequate collection. Rescue plerixafor was more effective in patients with myeloma than lymphoma as after 1 dose of plerixafor; 85% versus 55% collected a minimum number of stem cells (2 × 10E6 CD34 cells/kg) for 1 transplant and 51% versus 15% collected > 5 × 10E6 CD34 cells/kg. After transplantation, there were no significant differences in engraftment as a consequence of plerixafor use. Among all patients, there were less platelet transfusions in patients provided ≥ 3.5 × 10E6 CD34(+) cells/kg.

CONCLUSION

With the judicious use of plerixafor, nearly all patients can collect enough stem cells to proceed to transplantation. Further studies, including hematologic tolerance to posttransplantation therapy, are required to determine the cost-effectiveness of using plerixafor to convert adequate to more optimal mobilizers.

Upfront plerixafor plus G-CSF versus cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF for stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: efficacy and cost analysis study

Cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF (C+G-CSF) is one of the most widely used stem cell (SC) mobilization regimens for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Plerixafor plus G-CSF (P+G-CSF) has demonstrated superior SC mobilization efficacy when compared with G-CSF alone and has been shown to rescue patients who fail mobilization with G-CSF or C+G-CSF. Despite the proven efficacy of P+G-CSF in upfront SC mobilization, its use has been limited, mostly due to concerns of high price of the drug. However, a comprehensive comparison of the efficacy and cost effectiveness of SC mobilization using C+G-CSF versus P+G-CSF is not available. In this study, we compared 111 patients receiving C+G-CSF to 112 patients receiving P+G-CSF. The use of P+G-CSF was associated with a higher success rate of SC collection defined as ⩾5 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg (94 versus 83%, P=0.013) and less toxicities. Thirteen patients in the C+G-CSF arm were hospitalized owing to complications while none in the P+G-CSF group. C+G-CSF was associated with higher financial burden as assessed using institutional-specific costs and charges (P<0.001) as well as using Medicare reimbursement rates (P=0.27). Higher rate of hospitalization, increased need for salvage mobilization, and increased G-CSF use account for these differences.

A novel hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization and collection algorithm based on preemptive CD34 enumeration

BACKGROUND

The collection of autologous peripheral blood (PB) stem cells can be challenging in the subgroup of patients deemed "poor mobilizers" with granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor. Plerixafor, a CXCR-4 antagonist, is an alternative mobilizing agent, but is costly, and the optimal mobilization algorithm has yet to be determined.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

To address the question we developed a protocol measuring PB CD34 on Day 4 of mobilization. We examined 26 patients before initiating the protocol versus 24 patients after initiation.

RESULTS

Significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) included fewer days of collection (1.25 days vs. 2.42 days), lower total blood volume processed (25.9 L vs. 57.2 L), lower total product volume (324 mL vs. 691 mL), lower RBC content (9 mL vs. 18 mL), and lower granulocyte percentage per collection (35% vs. 11%). There were no significant differences between the two groups in demographics, baseline platelet count, total CD34, or CD34/kg harvested.

CONCLUSION

Use of a protocol to assess PB CD34 1 day before collection allows for preemptive administration of plerixafor to augment mobilization. Subsequently, days of collection and processed blood volume are reduced while there is less RBC and granulocyte contamination in the collected stem cell product.

Efficacy of vinorelbine plus granulocyte colony-stimulation factor for CD34+ hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma

We aimed to assess the efficacy of vinorelbine plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for chemo-mobilization of CD34(+) hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPC) in patients with multiple myeloma and to identify adverse risk factors for successful mobilization. Vinorelbine 35 mg/m(2) was administered intravenously on day 1 in an outpatient setting. Filgrastim 5 μg/kg body weight (BW) was given twice daily subcutaneously from day 4 until the end of the collection procedure. Leukapheresis was scheduled to start on day 8 and be performed for a maximum of 3 consecutive days until at least 4 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells per kg BW were collected. Overall, 223 patients were mobilized and 221 (99%) patients proceeded to leukapheresis. Three (1.5%) patients required an unscheduled hospitalization after chemo-mobilization because of neutropenic fever and renal failure (n = 1), severe bone pain (n = 1), and abdominal pain with constipation (n = 1). In 211 (95%) patients, the leukaphereses were started as planned at day 8, whereas in 8 (3%) patients the procedure was postponed to day 9 and in 2 (1%) patients to day 10. In the great majority of patients (77%), the predefined amount of HPC could be collected with 1 leukapheresis. Forty-four (20%) patients needed a second leukapheresis, whereas only 6 (3%) patients required a third leukapheresis procedure. The median number of CD34(+) cells collected was 6.56 × 10(6) (range, .18 to 25.9 × 10(6)) per kg BW at the first day of leukapheresis and 7.65 × 10(6) (range, .18 to 25.9 × 10(6)) per kg BW in total. HPC collection was successful in 212 (95%) patients after a maximum of 3 leukaphereses. Patient age (P = .02) and prior exposition to lenalidomide (P < .001) were independent risk factors for a lower HPC amount collected in multiple regression analysis. Vinorelbine plus G-CSF enables a very reliable prediction of the timing of leukapheresis and results in successful HPC collection in 95% of the patients.

The role of CXCR4 in highly malignant human gliomas biology: current knowledge and future directions

Given the extensive histomorphological heterogeneity of high-grade gliomas, in terms of extent of invasiveness, angiogenesis, and necrosis and the poor prognosis for patients despite the advancements made in therapeutic management. The identification of genes associated with these phenotypes will permit a better definition of glioma heterogeneity, which may ultimately lead to better treatment strategies. CXCR4, a cell surface chemokine receptor, is implicated in the growth, invasion, angiogenesis and metastasis in a wide range of malignant tumors, including gliomas. It is overexpressed in glioma cells according to tumor grade and in glioma tumor initiating cells. There have been various reports suggesting that CXCR4 is required for tumor proliferation, invasion, angiogenesis, and modulation of the immune response. It may also serve as a prognostic factor in characterizing subsets of glioblastoma multiforme, as patients with CXCR4-positive gliomas seem to have poorer prognosis after surgery. Aim of this review was to analyze the current literature on biological effects of CXCR4 activity and its role in glioma pathogenesis. A better understanding of CXCR4 pathway in glioma will lead to further investigation of CXCR4 as a novel putative therapeutic target.

Efficacy of just-in-time plerixafor rescue for Hodgkin's lymphoma patients with poor peripheral blood stem cell mobilization

BACKGROUND

Plerixafor is a Food and Drug Administration-approved agent for improving peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization in filgrastim (granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF])-stimulated patients with multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Limited information is available on its use in Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) patients. We describe our experience with plerixafor as an immediate rescue agent in HL patients with poor PBSC mobilization.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the collection data of 27 consecutive HL patients at our center in whom plerixafor was added to rescue a failing PBSC collection after G-CSF and chemotherapy (26) or G-CSF alone (1). Plerixafor was added in 11 patients due to peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ counts that persisted below the threshold (>10 × 10(6) /L) to initiate collection (median, 1.47 × 10(6) ; range 0 × 10(6) -6.28 × 10(6) /L) and in 16 patients due to low collection yields, who had a median yield of 0.33 × 10(6) (0.14 × 10(6) -0.65 × 10(6) ) CD34+ cells/kg on the last collection before plerixafor administration.

RESULTS

After a median of 2 (range, 2-4) collections with plerixafor, the patients collected a median of 1.82 × 10(6) (0.52 × 10(6) -11.14 × 10(6) ) CD34+ cells/kg. The addition of plerixafor enabled 20 patients (74.1%) to reach the 2.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg minimum required for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) during the same collection cycle. Subsequent remobilization in three patients with plerixafor enabled all three to reach this goal.

CONCLUSION

Plerixafor can be used in HL patients with poor mobilization as a rescue agent and boosts mobilization sufficiently in most patients in the same collection attempt, thus not only permitting ASCT, but also avoiding remobilization and the associated costs, treatment delays, and patient inconvenience.

Advances in stem cell mobilization

Use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)-mobilized peripheral blood hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) has largely replaced bone marrow (BM) as a source of stem cells for both autologous and allogeneic cell transplantation. With G-CSF alone, up to 35% of patients are unable to mobilize sufficient numbers of CD34 cells/kg to ensure successful and consistent multi-lineage engraftment and sustained hematopoietic recovery. To this end, research is ongoing to identify new agents or combinations which will lead to the most effective and efficient stem cell mobilization strategies, especially in those patients who are at risk for mobilization failure. We describe both established agents and novel strategies at various stages of development. The latter include but are not limited to drugs that target the SDF-1/CXCR4 axis, S1P agonists, VCAM/VLA-4 inhibitors, parathyroid hormone, proteosome inhibitors, Groβ, and agents that stabilize HIF. While none of the novel agents have yet gained an established role in HPC mobilization in clinical practice, many early studies exploring these new pathways show promising results and warrant further investigation.

Plerixafor on-demand combined with chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: significant improvement in peripheral blood stem cells mobilization and harvest with no increase in costs

To date, no prospective study on Plerixafor 'on-demand' in combination with chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been reported. We present an interim analysis of the first prospective study in which Plerixafor was administered on-demand in patients affected by multiple myeloma and lymphoma who received high dose cyclophosphamide or DHAP (dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin) plus G-CSF to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC). One hundred and two patients were evaluable for response. A cohort of 240 patients receiving the same mobilizing chemotherapy was retrospectively studied. Failure to mobilize CD34(+) cells in peripheral blood was reduced by 'on-demand' strategy compared to conventional mobilization; from 13·0 to 3·0% (P = 0·004). Failure to harvest CD34(+) cells 2 × 10(6) /kg decreased from 20·9 to 4·0% (P = 0·0001). The on-demand Plerixafor strategy also resulted in a lower rate of mobilization failure (P = 0·03) and harvest failure (P = 0·0008) when compared to a 'bias-adjusted set of controls'. Evaluation of economic costs of the two strategies showed that the overall cost of the two treatments were comparable when salvage mobilizations were taken into account. When in combination with cyclophosphamide or DHAP plus G-CSF, the 'on-demand' use of Plerixafor showed, in comparison to conventionally treated patients, a significant improvement in mobilization of PBSC with no increase in overall cost.

Current clinical indications for plerixafor

Autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation are considered the standard of care for many malignancies including lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and some leukemias. In many cases, mobilized peripheral blood has become the preferred source for HSCs. Plerixafor, an inhibitor of the interaction between CX chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) and stromal derived factor-1 alpha (SDF-1), has been evaluated in clinical trials and approved by the FDA and EMA. This agent has very modest toxicity and appears to be quite potent at HSC mobilization. Current clinical indications for the use of plerixafor are the subject of this review.