Cost-effectiveness of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization strategies including plerixafor in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients

Autologous peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and apheresis in pediatric patients with cancer: A single-center report of 64 procedures

BACKGROUND

The published experience concerning autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection in children is very limited.

METHODS

The data of pediatric patients who underwent autologous stem cell mobilization and apheresis between January 2011 and April 2020 were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

We studied retrospectively 64 mobilization and apheresis procedures in 48 pediatric patients (34 males, 14 females), mean age of 7.31 ± 5.38 (range, 1.5-19.7) years, the underlying disease was mostly neuroblastoma (NBL). The body weight of 21 patients (43.75%) was 15 kg or less. The targeted autologous peripheral stem cell apheresis (APSCA) was successfully achieved in 98% of patients. Neuroblastoma patients were younger than the rest of the patients and underwent apheresis after receiving fewer chemotherapy cycles than others and all of them mobilized within the first session successfully. Plerixafor was added to mobilization in nine heavily pretreated patients (18.7%), median two doses (range, 1-4 doses). 11 patients (22.9%) underwent radiotherapy (RT) before mobilization with doses of median 24 Gy (range, 10.8-54.0 Gy). Patients with RT were older at the time of apheresis and had received more chemotherapy courses than patients without RT. As a result, patients with a history of RT had significantly lower peripheral CD34+ cells and CD34+ yields than those without RT. In 17 patients (35.4%), 22 different complications were noted. The most common complications were catheter-related infections (n:10, 20.8%), followed by catheter-related thrombosis in eight patients (16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who had far less therapy before apheresis were more likely to mobilize successfully. Our study provides a detailed practice approach including complications during APSCA aiming to increase the success rates of apheresis in transplantation centers.

An evidence-based and risk-adapted GSF versus GSF plus plerixafor mobilization strategy to obtain a sufficient CD34+ cell yield in the harvest for autologous stem cell transplants

BACKGROUND

Plerixafor is a bicyclam molecule with the ability to reversibly bind to receptor CXCR-4 thus leading to an increased release of stem cells (SC) into the circulation. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of G-CSF plus plerixafor versus G-CSF alone mobilizing regimens on the basis of CD34+ cell yield and engraftment kinetics following hematopoietic SC transplants.

METHODS

The study incorporated 173 patients with plasma cell neoplasms (PCN), Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), undergoing mobilization and following autologous SC-transplant. For patients with mobilization failure and those predicted to be at risk of harvesting inadequate CD34+ yields (poor-responders), plerixafor was administered. Data was collected and compared in relation to the harvesting protocols used, cell quantification, cell-engraftment potential and overall clinical outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients received plerixafor (58.4 %) and the median CD34+increase was 312 %. Chemotherapy-mobilized PCN-patients required less plerixafor administration (p = 0.01), no difference was observed in lymphoma groups (p = 0.46). The median CD34+cell yield was 7.8 × 106/kg bm. Patients requiring plerixafor achieved lower, but still comparable cell yields. Total cell dose infused was in correlation with engraftment kinetics. Patients requiring plerixafor had delayed platelet engraftment (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Adequately selected plerixafor administration reduces "mobilization-related-failure" rate and assure a high-level cell dose for SC transplants, with superior "therapeutic-potential" and safety profile. The mobilization strategy that incorporates "just-in-time" plerixafor administration, also leads to a reduction of hospitalization days and healthcare resource utilization. For definitive conclusions, further controlled/larger clinical trials concerning correlation of CD34+ cell count/yield, with hematopoietic reconstitution are required.

Pharmacoeconomic issues in stem cell mobilization

BACKGROUND

recently, stem cell mobilization has made dramatic progress, that ended up in an increasing number of aphereses at target for autologous peripheral stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The aim of this research is investigating the cost-effectiveness of stem cell mobilization.

METHODS

a narrative review of the literature was carried out, searching for primary contributions written in English and published during 2000-2023 on cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of stem cell mobilization in patients entitled to ASCT. The PubMed database was searched with the following sets of keywords: cost-effectiveness AND apheresis AND myeloma (PubMed_1); cost-effectiveness AND stem cell mobilization (PubMed_2). Articles included in the analysis were assessed via two different checklists.

RESULTS

sixty-six entries were retrieved. Five out of 66 (PubMed_1: 4 out 17; PubMed_2: 1 out of 49), 4 CEAs and 1 cost-utility analysis (CUA) fit the research goal. Four out of 5 contributions proved to be in line with most of the items included in the two assessment grids. However, the most relevant missing features in some of the included contributions were: study perspective, healthcare resources valuation, and sensitivity analyses.

DISCUSSION

most of the articles included in this research show that chemotherapy-free stem cell mobilization is cost-effective according to different standpoints. Future health economic research on this topic should establish local threshold values for incremental apheresis at target and explore the heterogeneity of CEA (and CUA) to determine oncohaematological diseases and patient categories for which chemotherapy-free stem cell mobilization is cost-effective in different healthcare systems, given local budget constraints.

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.

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization: Current Collection Approaches, Stem Cell Heterogeneity, and a Proposed New Method for Stem Cell Transplant Conditioning

Hematopoietic stem cells naturally traffic out of their bone marrow niches into the peripheral blood. This natural trafficking process can be enhanced with numerous pharmacologic agents - a process termed "mobilization" - and the mobilized stem cells can be collected for transplantation. We review the current state of mobilization with an update on recent clinical trials and new biologic mechanisms regulating stem cell trafficking. We propose that hematopoietic mobilization can be used to answer questions regarding hematopoietic stem cell heterogeneity, can be used for non-toxic conditioning of patients receiving stem cell transplants, and can enhance gene editing and gene therapy strategies to cure genetic diseases.

Machine learning-based scoring models to predict hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in allogeneic donors

Mobilized peripheral blood has become the primary source of hematopoietic stem cells for both autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) is currently the standard agent used in the allogeneic setting. Despite the high mobilization efficacy in most donors, G-CSF requires 4-5 days of daily administration, and a small percentage of the donors fail to mobilize an optimal number of stem cells necessary for a safe allogeneic stem cell transplant. In this study, we retrospectively reviewed 1361 related allogeneic donors who underwent stem cell mobilization at Washington University. We compared the standard mobilization agent G-CSF with five alternative mobilization regimens, including GM-CSF, G-CSF+GM-CSF, GM-CSF + Plerixafor, Plerixafor and BL-8040. Cytokine-based mobilization strategies (G-CSF or in combination with GM-CSF) induce higher CD34 cell yield after 4-5 consecutive days of treatment, while CXCR4 antagonists (plerixafor and BL-8040) induce significantly less but rapid mobilization on the same day. Next, using a large dataset containing the demographic and baseline laboratory data from G-CSF-mobilized donors, we established machine learning (ML)-based scoring models that can be used to predict patients who may have less than optimal stem cell yields after a single leukapheresis session. To our knowledge, this is the first prediction model at the early donor screening stage, which may help identify allogeneic stem cell donors who may benefit from alternative approaches to enhance stem cell yields thus insuring safe and effective stem cell transplantation.

Chemotherapy-based versus chemotherapy-free stem cell mobilization (± plerixafor) in multiple myeloma patients: an Italian cost-effectiveness analysis

Given the availability and efficacy of the mobilizing agent plerixafor in augmenting hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), there is a strong case for comparing the cost-effectiveness of mobilization with G-CSF + cyclophosphamide versus G-CSF alone. This study investigated the cost and effectiveness (i.e., successful 4 million-CD34⁺ collection) of G-CSF alone versus high-dose cyclophosphamide (4 g/m²) + G-CSF mobilization (± on-demand plerixafor) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eligible for autograft in Italy. A decision tree-supported cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) model in MM patients was developed from the societal perspective. The CEA model compared G-CSF alone with cyclophosphamide 4 g/m² + G-CSF (± on-demand plerixafor) and was populated with demographic, healthcare and non-healthcare resource utilization data collected from a questionnaire administered to six Italian oncohematologists. Costs were expressed in Euro (€) 2019. The CEA model showed that G-CSF alone was strongly dominant versus cyclophosphamide + G-CSF ( ± on-demand plerixafor), with incremental savings of €1198.59 and an incremental probability of a successful 4 million-CD34⁺ apheresis (+0.052). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base-case results. In conclusion, chemotherapy-free mobilization (± on-demand plerixafor) is a “good value for money” option for MM patients eligible for autograft.

UM171 promotes expansion of autologous peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cells from poorly mobilizing lymphoma patients

BACKGROUND

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is an effective therapeutic strategy for lymphoma patients. However, some patients have to give up receiving transplantation because of failing to obtain sufficient CD34⁺ cells yields. Therefore, we ex vivo expanded HSCs of lymphoma patients using UM171 to solve the problem of HSCs deficiency.

METHODS

Mobilized peripheral blood-derived CD34⁺ cells from lymphoma patients were cultured for 10 days with or without UM171. The fold of cell expansion and the immunophenotype of expanded cells were assessed by flow cytometry. RNA-seq experiment was performed to identify the mechanism by which UM171 promoted HSCs expansion.

RESULTS

UM171 treatment increased the proportion of CD34⁺ (68.97 ± 6.91%), CD34⁺ CD38^- cells (44.10 ± 9.20%) and CD34⁺CD38^-CD45RA^-CD90⁺ LT-HSCs (3.05 ± 2.08%) compared to vehicle treatment (36.08 ± 11.14%, 18.30 ± 9.49% and 0.56 ± 0.45%, respectively). UM171 treatment led to an 85.08-fold increase in LT-HSC numbers relative to initial cells. Importantly, UM171 promoted expansion of LT-HSCs achieved 138.57-fold in patients with poor mobilization. RNA-seq data showed that UM171 upregulated expression of HSC-, mast cell-specific genes and non-canonical Wnt signaling related genes, and inhibited genes expression of erythroid, megakaryocyte and inflammatory mediated chemokine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that UM171 can efficiently promote ex vivo expansion of HSCs from lymphoma patients, especially for poorly mobilizing patients. In terms of mechanism, UM171 upregulate HSC-specific genes expression and suppress erythroid and megakaryocytic differentiation, as well as activate non-classical Wnt signaling.

Cost burden of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common non-Hodgkin lymphoma and is a clinically heterogeneous disease. Treatment pathways for DLBCL are diverse and integrate established and novel therapies.Areas covered: We review the cost burden of DLBCL and the cost-effectiveness of DLBCL management including precision and cellular medicine. We utilized Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords to search the National Library of Medicine online MEDLINE database (PubMed) for articles related to cost, cost burden, and cost-of-illness of DLBCL and cost-effectiveness of DLBCL management strategies published in English as of June 2019.Expert commentary: Available and developing DLBCL therapies offer improved outcomes and often curative treatment at considerable financial expense, and the total cost burden for DLBCL management is substantial for patients and the healthcare system. In the era of personalized medicine, CAR T cells and targeted therapies provide exciting avenues for current and future DLBCL care and can further increase treatment cost. Determinations of cost and cost-effectiveness in DLBCL treatment pathways should continue to guide care providers and systems in identifying cost reduction strategies to provide appropriate therapies to the greatest number of patients in treating DLBCL.

Plerixafor for patients who fail cytokine-or chemotherapy-based stem cell mobilization: Results of a prospective study by the Polish Lymphoma Research Group (PLRG)

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHSCT) requires collection of sufficient number of hematopoietic stem cells. The goal of this study was to evaluate efficacy of plerixafor used in patients with lymphoid malignancies failing conventional stem cell mobilization.

This was a prospective, non-interventional study. All consecutive patients (n = 109) treated with plerixafor in 11 centers were reported. The drug was used either in case of previous mobilization failure (n = 67) or interventionally, in case of insufficient CD34+ cell output during current mobilization (n = 42). Successful mobilization was defined as resulting in collection of ≥ 2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg for single autoHSCT or ≥ 4 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg for double procedure.

The overall rate of successful mobilization was 55% (55% for single and 56% for double autoHSCT). The median total number of collected CD34+ cells/kg was 2.4 (range, 0-11.5) for patients intended for a single transplantation while 4.0 (0.6-16.9) for double procedure. The number of circulating CD34+ cells increased after the use of plerixafor regardless of baseline values. The median fold increase was 3.3 (0.3-155). Data from this observational study confirm high efficacy of plerixafor used in routine clinical practice as salvage for patients with lymphoid malignancies failing conventional stem cell mobilization.

Plerixafor in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients: a German analysis of time, effort and costs

Mobilization and collection of peripheral blood stem cells is part of the standard treatment procedure for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. Mobilization is usually achieved with chemotherapy and/or cytokines, but plerixafor might be added in case of poor mobilization. Due to the high cost several institutions have developed their own management pathway to optimize use of plerixafor. Such models are however rarely generalizable; in a multi-center, European, non-interventional study, evaluating the impact of plerixafor in poor mobilizers, country specific differences in patient treatment and cost structure were obvious. For German centers, there was a non-significant reduction in the number of apheresis sessions carried out and in apheresis costs. In contrast to other European countries the majority of German Plerixafor patients were very poor mobilizing patients with initial CD34+ cell count ≤ 10/µl (40/51). In this group the number of apheresis sessions decreased from 2.1 to 1.6 sessions per patient (p = 0.01) and costs decreased from €6246 to €4758 (p = 0.01). Our results show that preemptive plerixafor use has a strong effect in poor mobilizers with an initial CD34+ cell count ≤ 10 cells/µl.

Plerixafor for mobilization of blood stem cells in autologous transplantation: an update

INTRODUCTION

About 99% of all autologous transplants are now performed with blood stem cells. G-CSF alone or combined with chemotherapy have been used to mobilize CD34(+) cells. Plerixafor is a novel drug used for mobilization purposes.

AREAS COVERED

We have evaluated recent data in regard to plerixafor use in predicted or proven poor mobilizers. In addition, we have looked for preemptive strategies to optimize the use of this expensive drug. Also cost-efficacy issues and effects of plerixafor on graft composition and post-transplant outcomes will be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Plerixafor added to G-CSF is superior than G-CSF alone for mobilization of CD34(+) cells. This combination is also efficient in patients who have failed a previous mobilization attempt with other methods or in patients with risk factors for poor mobilization. Addition of plerixafor to G-CSF or chemotherapy plus G-CSF mobilization in patients who appear to mobilize poorly is under active investigation and algorithms for a preemptive use of this expensive agent have been proposed. Grafts collected after plerixafor appear to contain more lymphoid cells than the grafts collected without it. Whether this affects post-transplant outcomes such as immune reconstitution and risk of relapse needs to be evaluated.