Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Risk-Adapted Algorithm of Plerixafor Use for Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization

Mobilization strategies with and without plerixafor for autologous stem cell transplant in patients with multiple myeloma

Autologous stem cell transplantation is a standard treatment strategy for patients with multiple myeloma that requires effective mobilization and apheresis of peripheral blood progenitor cells; however, in the current era of novel myeloma induction therapies, the optimal mobilization regimen to enhance stem cell yield while limiting toxicity and resource utilization remains unknown. In this multicenter retrospective study, we assessed apheresis and transplant outcomes in myeloma patients mobilized with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone (n = 62), G-CSF with chemotherapy (n = 43), or G-CSF with the CXCR4 antagonist plerixafor (n = 417). Compared to patients treated with G-CSF alone, the plerixafor group required significantly fewer median apheresis sessions (1 vs 2, p = 0.0023) with higher CD34+ stem cell yield (9.9 vs 5.8 × 106 cells/kg, p < 0.001) and had significantly faster engraftment of neutrophils (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.17-2.03) and platelets (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.69-2.96) after transplant. Additionally, the plerixafor group showed a significantly better toxicity profile and lower adverse event rate than patients treated with G-CSF alone (p = 0.0028) or chemomobilization (p < 0.0001), with a trend toward reduced survival in chemomobilization patients. Taken together, these data support the routine use of plerixafor-based mobilization to increase apheresis efficiency and reduce toxicity in myeloma patients undergoing transplant.

Autologous peripheral blood stem cell harvest timing by absolute neutrophil count in children and young adult patients: Single-institute experience

BACKGROUND

Myeloablative, high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) improves outcome in some high-risk malignant solid tumors and lymphomas in children and young adults.

METHODS

We performed 16 peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) harvests in 12 children and 2 young adult patients with a high-risk malignant solid tumor or refractory/relapsed Hodgkin's lymphoma from August 2015 to December 2020. In our chemotherapy mobilization protocol, we used an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of >1 × 109/L following the nadir after chemotherapy as the criterion for undertaking the apheresis.

RESULTS

The median CD34+ cell count per kg body weight of the 33 apheresis products was 4.92 × 106 cells/kg (range, 0.34-22.53 × 106 cells/kg). Thirteen of the 14 patients (93%) had successful PBSC collections that met their goals for PBSCT. Three patients did not receive PBSCT due to disease progression prior to transplantation. Prompt engraftment occurred in all the remaining 11 patients with 17 PBSCTs.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that ANC can be helpful as a surrogate parameter in clinical decision-making when the peripheral blood CD34+ count is unavailable.

Predictive factors for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma in the era of novel therapies: A single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the leading indication of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of mobilization failure and characterize the risk factors associated with poor mobilization (PM) of MM patients in novel therapies era.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 211 MM patients who received their first peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) mobilization at our single center. The following data were collected: age, gender, clinical stage, disease status, complete blood cell count, induction regimen, CD34+ cell count in peripheral blood (PB), and PBSC collections.

RESULTS

In addition to conventional drugs, 22 (10.4%) patients received daratumumab containing induction, and 33 (15.6%) patients used plerixafor for poor mobilization (pre-apheresis PB CD34+ cells <20/μL). Failure of collection occurred in 24 (11.4%) patients and was correlated with low white blood cell (WBC), ≥3 cycles of lenalidomide treatment before mobilization, steady-state mobilization and nouse of plerixafor are associated with mobilization failure. Daratumumab-based induction treatment ≥2 courses, albumin >41 g/L before mobilization, and steady-state mobilization were risk factors for PM in subgroups of patients treated with lenalidomide for <3 courses. In addition, Hepatitis B virus infection at baseline, thalassemia and measurable residual disease positivity were recognized as predictive factors for PM in subset of chemo-mobilization patients.

CONCLUSION

In addition to some well-recognized risk factors, baseline WBC count and daratumumab exposure ≥2 courses before mobilization were revealed as the predictive factors of mobilization failure, providing consultation for preemptive use of plerixafor.

Impact of plerixafor use in the mobilization of blood grafts for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation

Plerixafor (PLER), a reversible antagonist of the CXC chemokine receptor type 4, has been in clinical use for mobilization of blood grafts for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) for about 15 years. Initially PLER was investigated in placebo-controlled trials with the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) filgrastim. It has also been used in combination with chemotherapy plus G-CSF in patients who had failed a previous mobilization attempt or appeared to mobilize poorly with current mobilization (preemptive use). This review summarizes what is known regarding addition of PLER to standard mobilization regimens. PLER increases mobilization of CD34+ cells, decreases the number of apheresis sessions needed to achieve collection targets and increases the proportion of patients who can proceed to AHCT. It appears also to increase the amount of various lymphocyte subsets in the grafts collected. In general, hematologic recovery after AHCT has been comparable to patients mobilized without PLER, although slower platelet recovery has been observed in some studies of patients who mobilize poorly. In phase III studies, long-term outcome has been comparable to patients mobilized without PLER. This also appears to be the case in patients receiving plerixafor for poor or suboptimal mobilization of CD34+ cells. In practice, PLER is safe and has not been shown to increase tumor cell mobilization.

Overview on novel strategies and current guidelines for hematopoietic stem cell mobilisation and collection

The success of the autologous stem cell transplantation is strictly related to an adequate hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and collection. The minimum threshold for a successful mobilization is currently defined as 2 × 106/kg CD34+ cells. However, the optimal stem cell mobilization strategy is still controversial. The availability of plerixafor, a selective and reversible CXCR4 inhibitor, has been associated with an higher use of chemo-free protocols by many centres. In the near future, it is conceivable that artificial intelligence may became more accurate and comprehensive, possibly guiding clinicians in choosing the optimal mobilisation treatment for the various patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Machine learning-based scoring models may be the basis for the development of "intelligent" mobilisation algorithms.

Failure of mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells associated with elevated serum levels of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody

Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 antibody that is increasingly incorporated in induction regimens for treating patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Previous reports have demonstrated a lower yield of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) after induction with daratumumab; however, none of them reported a failure to collect an adequate number of HSCs. We describe a case of adequate HSC mobilization failure in a patient who inadvertently received excessive doses of daratumumab and was confirmed by higher-than-expected circulating levels of daratumumab by mass spectrometry. Eventual clearance of circulating daratumumab was associated with the successful mobilization and harvesting of HSCs.

Outcomes of Older Adults with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation: A Mayo Clinic Cohort Analysis

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an important treatment that can offer a cure for patients with lymphoma. However, advanced age is an important factor that determines eligibility and outcomes after ASCT. Over the past decade, attributed to improved supportive care, ASCT for older patients has become more feasible. In this study, we report the single-center outcomes of older patients with lymphoma undergoing ASCT at Mayo Clinic Rochester to highlight its interval improvement over time and to help redefine the implications of ASCT in the chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy era. This single-center retrospective study evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of older patients with lymphoma who underwent ASCT between 2000 and 2021. We report various relevant transplantation-related outcomes, including progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), relapse incidence, and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) in older patients with various lymphoma histologic subtypes. The main outcome was NRM, defined as the time from ASCT to non-lymphoma-related death, with relapse as a competing event. Of 492 patients age ≥65 years were analyzed. The median age at ASCT was 68.8 years. The most common indication for ASCT was diffuse large B cell lymphoma, accounting for 59.3% of cases. In multivariate analyses, patients undergoing ASCT in 2009 to 2021, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 0, and low Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index (HCT-CI) (0 to 3) had a significantly lower NRM. Factors associated with OS included age, lactate dehydrogenase level, and HCT-CI. The 1-year NRM in older patients was low at 6.0%, in concordance with previous reports. Age should not be the sole factor determining a patient's ASCT eligibility. With the proper patient selection, ASCT remains a reasonable option for older patients with lymphoma.

The effect of preemptive use of plerixafor on stem cell mobilization in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of the preemptive use of plerixafor in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma which was administered as a preemptive single dose to the patients who were determined to have a CD34+ cell count of

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.

Plerixafor strategies for autologous hematopoietic cell transplant mobilization: A comparison of efficacy and cost

Addition of plerixafor (P) to granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) during peripheral blood mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) increases the number of patients meeting collection goals prior to autologous stem cell transplant (aSCT). However, use of P is not universal among transplant centers due to cost. This study aims to compare clinical and financial impacts of using an algorithm-based P mobilization strategy versus use in all patients. This was a single center, retrospective analysis of adult patients with myeloma or amyloidosis receiving aSCT who received apheresis of their HSC between 3/1/2017 and 3/1/2019. Patients prior to 3/1/2018 were classified as receiving P "per algorithm" and those after this date were classified as "up-front" P. For the per-algorithm group, P was given for a pre-apheresis CD34+ cell count of <20 cells/μL on mobilization day 5 and patients returned on day 6 for apheresis. Of the 129 patients included, 55 received P per-algorithm and 74 received up-front P. There was a reduction in median number of apheresis days (1.5 vs 1 day, p < 0.001) and an increase in median number of CD34+ cells collected (6.6 vs 8.5 × 10⁶ cells/kg, p < 0.001) with up-front P. Up-front P increased drug cost but reduced apheresis costs, which resulted in a net savings of $121 per patient in total mobilization costs. These findings suggest that use of up-front P for mobilization significantly reduces apheresis days and increases HSC collection yield without increasing overall cost per patient.

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.

Low-Dose Cyclophosphamide versus Intermediate-High-Dose Cyclophosphamide versus Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Alone for Stem Cell Mobilization in Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Novel Agents: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

The optimal stem cell (SC) mobilization strategy for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) remains a matter of debate. Possible approaches include low or high doses of cyclophosphamide (Cy), other chemotherapeutic agents, or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone. The scope of the study was to compare low-dose Cy plus G-CSF versus intermediate-high-dose Cy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone for SC mobilization in MM, in terms of efficacy and safety. We retrospectively analyzed 422 MM patients undergoing SC mobilization in 6 Italian centers, including 188 patients who received low-dose Cy (LD-Cy group, defined as 2 g/m²), 163 patients who received intermediate-high-dose Cy (HD-Cy group, defined as ≥ 3 g/m²), and 71 patients who received G-CSF alone (G-CSF group). The median peak of circulating CD34+ cells was 77/µL in the LD-Cy group, 92/µL in the HD-Cy group, and 55/µL in the G-CSF group (P = .0001). The median amount of SCs collected was 9.1 × 10⁶/kg, 9.7 × 10⁶/kg, and 5.6 × 10⁶/kg in the 3 groups, respectively (P = .0001). The rate of mobilization failure (defined as failure to collect ≥2 × 10⁶/kg) was 3.7% in the LD-Cy group, 3.4% in the HD-Cy group, and 4.3% in the G-CSF group (P = .9). The target SC dose of at least 4 × 10⁶/kg was reached in 90.4%, 91.1%, and 78.6% of the patients in these 3 groups, respectively (P = .014). The "on demand" use of plerixafor was higher in the G-CSF group (76%) compared with the LD-Cy group (19%) and the HD-Cy group (6%). In multivariate analysis, G-CSF mobilization and previous use of melphalan or radiotherapy were independently associated with failure to collect the target SC dose of ≥4 × 10⁶/kg. No impacts of age, blood counts, or previous treatment with lenalidomide, bortezomib, or carfilzomib were observed. Our results suggest that LD-Cy may be considered for successful SC mobilization in patients with MM.

Multiple Myeloma-Effect of Induction Therapy on Transplant Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) aged ≤ 65 to 70 years, with a good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and no major comorbid conditions, are considered potential candidates for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and will be treated with novel agent-based induction therapy for 4 to 6 cycles before ASCT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed the data from 326 patients with MM who had received novel agent-based induction before ASCT at our center to evaluate the effect of induction therapy on ASCT response, stem cell mobilization, engraftment characteristics, and survival. The median age was 52 years (range, 29-72 years), 216 patients were men (66.3%), 32.7% had stage III using the Revised Multiple Myeloma International Staging System, and 15.8% had high-risk cytogenetics. Of the 326 patients, 75 (23.0%) had undergone ASCT in second remission after salvage therapy for relapse. Also, 194 patients (59.5%) had received doublet induction therapy and 132 (40.5%) had received triplet induction therapy.

RESULTS

Triplet-based induction therapy was superior to doublet-based therapy for response (95.4% vs. 84.02%; P < .003), stem cell mobilization (CD34⁺ ≥ 2 × 10⁶/kg; 88.6% vs. 76.8%; P < .005), and lower 100-day transplant-related mortality (P < .001). The ≥100 day post-ASCT overall response (97.4% vs. 91.7%; P = .124) and complete response (72.5% vs. 68.0%; P = .38) rates were similar. At a median follow-up of 62.5 months, the overall survival (97.5 months vs. 100.0 months; P = .606) and progression-free survival (54.5 months vs. 57 months; P = .515) were similar between the triplet and doublet induction groups.

CONCLUSION

An initial response (chemosensitivity) to induction therapy will prepare patients better for subsequent consolidation therapy and ASCT, leading to favorable outcomes.

Optimized peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation in children with high-risk and refractory malignancies

BACKGROUND

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) using hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) has become an important therapeutic modality for patients with high-risk malignancies. Current literature on standardized method for HPC apheresis in children is sparse and failure rate reported as high as 30%.

PATIENTS/METHODS

A retrospective study of 125 pediatric patients with high-risk malignancies undergoing aHSCT in Western Australia between 1997 and 2016 was conducted.

RESULTS

Mobilization was achieved by means of chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Patients underwent apheresis the day after CD34⁺ counts reached ≥20/µL and an additional dose of G-CSF. Peripheral arterial and intravenous lines were inserted in pediatric intensive care unit under local anesthetic and/or sedation, omitting the need for general anesthesia as well as facilitating an uninterrupted apheresis flow. Larger apheresis total blood volumes were processed in patients weighing ≤20 kg. The minimal dose of ≥2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg was successfully collected in 98.4% of all patients. The optimal dose of 3-5 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg was collected in 96% of patients scheduled for a single aHSCT, 87.5% for tandem, and 100% for triple aHSCT. All HPC collections were completed in one apheresis session. Mobilization after ≤3 chemotherapy cycles and cycles including cyclophosphamide resulted in a significantly higher yield of CD34⁺ cells.

CONCLUSION

Our approach to HPC mobilization by means of chemotherapy and single myeloid growth factor combined with optimal collection timing facilitated by continuous apheresis flow resulted in highly effective HPC harvest in children and adolescents with high-risk cancers.

Clinical outcomes of multiple myeloma patients who undergo autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant with G-CSF or G-CSF and plerixafor mobilized grafts

Impact of Plerixafor (P) mobilized stem cells on immune reconstitution, such as absolute lymphocyte count at day 30 (ALC30), and on long-term outcomes of Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) has not been well established. We evaluated total of 469 patients mobilized with G-CSF (G) alone, and 141 patients mobilized with G-CSF plus plerixafor (G+ P). Patients only received plerixafor if they had peripheral blood CD34⁺   blood count <20/μL on first planned day of collection. Primary endpoint, ALC30, was 1.3 K/μL (range, 0.1-4.5) and 1.2 K/μL (range, 0.1-5.1) for G and G + P, respectively (P =. 61). The median PFS was 2.5 years (95% CI, 2.1-3.2) and 2.8 years (95% CI, 2.0-3.3) for G and G + P, respectively (HR: 1.13; 95% CI, 0.84-1.50; P = .42). The median OS was 6.1 years (95% CI, 4.6-NR) for G group compared to 3.7 years (95% CI, 3.2-NR) for the G + P group (HR: 1.64; 95% CI, 1.12-2.40; P = .01). The median follow-up time for OS was 2.53 years (95% CI, 2.13-2.99) and 1.59 years (95% CI, 1.17-2.02) for G and G+ P group, respectively. In this large retrospective analysis of MM patients mobilized with G-CSF vs G-CSF + P, there was no significant difference in lymphocyte recovery or PFS. There was an overall survival difference in patients who were poor mobilizers and could not be mobilized with G-CSF alone.

Results from a multicenter, noninterventional registry study for multiple myeloma patients who received stem cell mobilization regimens with and without plerixafor

Plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) enhances the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) for collection and subsequent autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). This international, multicenter, noninterventional registry study (NCT01362972), evaluated long-term outcomes for MM patients who received plerixafor versus other mobilization regimens. The comparisons were: G-CSF + plerixafor (G-CSF + P) versus G-CSF-; G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + chemotherapy (G-CSF + C); and G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C. Propensity score matching was used to balance groups. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) after transplantation. After propensity matching, 77 versus 41 patients in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF cohorts, 129 versus 129 in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + C cohorts, and 117 versus 117 in the G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C cohorts were matched, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in a smaller sample size and imbalances were not completely overcome. For both PFS and OS, the upper limits of the hazard ratio 95% confidence intervals exceeded prespecified boundaries; noninferiority was not demonstrated. CIR rates were higher in the plerixafor cohorts. G-CSF + P remains an option for the mobilization of HSCs in poor mobilizers with MM with no substantial differences in PFS, OS, and CIR in comparison with other regimens.

Low baseline platelet count predicts poor response to plerixafor in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing autologous stem cell mobilization

BACKGROUND AIMS

Baseline platelet count has been shown to be a sensitive predictor of autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell collection yield in patients with multiple myeloma mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Patients who mobilize poorly with G-CSF are often treated with plerixafor to enhance mobilization. There are no surrogate markers available to predict response to plerixafor.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 73 patients with multiple myeloma who did not have adequate mobilization with G-CSF alone and were treated with plerixafor as a rescue agent.

RESULTS

We found that baseline platelet count directly correlated with peripheral blood CD34⁺ (PB-CD34⁺) count after plerixafor treatment (r = 0.36, P < 0.0001) and the number of PB-CD34⁺ cells collected on the first day of apheresis and inversely correlated with the number of apheresis sessions needed to collect the target number of PB-CD34⁺ cells (P = 0.0015). Baseline platelet count of 153 000/µL or less was associated with 90% specificity of predicting poor response to plerixafor with a sensitivity of 33%.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline platelet count is a good predictor of mobilization response to plerixafor in patients with multiple myeloma.

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.

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.

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.

Mobilization of Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells for Autologous Transplantation Using Pegfilgrastim and Plerixafor: Efficacy and Cost Implications

Filgrastim (FIL) is the most common growth factor combined with plerixafor for autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization, but requires daily, multi-injection administration. We adopted a standardized mobilization regimen with pegfilgrastim (PEG) and upfront plerixafor, allowing for a single injection given the long half-life and slow elimination of PEG. Between 2015 and 2017, a total of 235 patients with lymphoma or plasma cell dyscrasias underwent mobilization with PEG 6 mg on day 1 and upfront plerixafor 24 mg on day 3, followed by apheresis on day 4 regardless of peripheral blood CD34⁺ cells. The median CD34⁺ cells/mm³ in peripheral blood on first day of collection was 48 and median collection yield was 7.27 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg (range, 0.32 to 39.6 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg) after a mean of 1.6 apheresis collections. Overall, 83% of patients achieved the mobilization target, and 95% reached the minimum necessary CD34⁺ cell yield to proceed with transplantation (2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg). Because FIL is weight-based and dosed daily, the cost comparison with PEG is influenced by patient weight and number of apheresis sessions required. A cost simulation using actual patient data indicates that PEG is associated with lower cost than FIL for the majority of patients. Autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with PEG and plerixafor is practical, effective, and not associated with increased cost compared with FIL 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.

Predicting failure of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization before it starts: the predicted poor mobilizer (pPM) score

Predicting mobilization failure before it starts may enable patient-tailored strategies. Although consensus criteria for predicted PM (pPM) are available, their predictive performance has never been measured on real data. We retrospectively collected and analyzed 1318 mobilization procedures performed for MM and lymphoma patients in the plerixafor era. In our sample, 180/1318 (13.7%) were PM. The score resulting from published pPM criteria had sufficient performance for predicting PM, as measured by AUC (0.67, 95%CI: 0.63-0.72). We developed a new prediction model from multivariate analysis whose score (pPM-score) resulted in better AUC (0.80, 95%CI: 0.76-0.84, p < 0001). pPM-score included as risk factors: increasing age, diagnosis of NHL, positive bone marrow biopsy or cytopenias before mobilization, previous mobilization failure, priming strategy with G-CSF alone, or without upfront plerixafor. A simplified version of pPM-score was categorized using a cut-off to maximize positive likelihood ratio (15.7, 95%CI: 9.9-24.8); specificity was 98% (95%CI: 97-98.7%), sensitivity 31.7% (95%CI: 24.9-39%); positive predictive value in our sample was 71.3% (95%CI: 60-80.8%). Simplified pPM-score can "rule in" patients at very high risk for PM before starting mobilization, allowing changes in clinical management, such as choice of alternative priming strategies, to avoid highly likely mobilization failure.

Plerixafor in poor mobilizers with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a multi-center time-motion analysis

High-dose chemotherapy alongside peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) infusion has become the standard of care in different hematologic malignancies. The goal of PBSC mobilization is to allow collection of sufficient CD34+ cells to proceed to transplantation. The current mobilization regimen with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), alone or in combination with chemotherapy, still fails in 10-25% of patients. Plerixafor is able to rescue most of these patients from mobilization failure. In this study, we investigated the impact of plerixafor on the cost and time spent on apheresis in patients who were considered poor mobilizers, with <20 × 10⁶/µl peripheral CD34+ cells after mobilization but prior to apheresis. Patient hospital records from ten centers in three European countries were reviewed and compared during two time periods, namely prior and after plerixafor introduction to the market. During the plerixafor period, patients spent less time on apheresis (350 vs. 461  min). Poor mobilizers given plerixafor collected more CD34+ cells during the first apheresis session, leading to a decrease in the average number of apheresis sessions needed. The total apheresis yield was unaffected. This analysis shows that the use of plerixafor lessens the time-effort associated with the management of poor mobilizers and reduces apheresis costs.

Dose capping of plerixafor in patients weighing more than 100 kg at one vial led to successful mobilization outcomes and significant cost savings

BACKGROUND

Plerixafor is frequently used as an adjunct agent to improve mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells in many clinical settings. However, its high cost (>$8000 per single-use 24-mg vial) is a significant concern. The manufacturer-recommended dose is 0.24 mg/kg. Therefore, patients weighing more than 100 kg would require a second vial, thus doubling the drug cost per dose. We implemented a policy of capping the dose of plerixafor at 24 mg, or one vial, for patients weighing more than 100 kg. This retrospective study compares the mobilization of patients more than 100 kg who received capped doses, with historical control patients who received full, uncapped doses.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Consecutive, eligible patients weighing more than 100 kg who received capped (n = 47) and full doses of plerixafor (n = 40) were identified. Plerixafor was given up-front, as a rescue agent due to suboptimal mobilization, or during remobilization. Baseline characteristics and mobilization data were collected and compared.

RESULTS

Patients in the two groups showed comparable baseline characteristics. They collected similar total numbers of CD34+ cells/kg (median, 4.08 × 10⁶ vs. 3.36 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg; p = 0.86) and achieved comparable collection success rates as defined by collecting more than 2.0 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg (98% vs. 90%, p = 0.21). However, patients who received capped doses required only half of the number of vials of plerixafor (median, 3 vials vs. 6 vials; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Dose capping plerixafor at 24 mg for patients more than 100 kg is a cost-effective strategy, which achieved comparable mobilization outcomes and reduced the total number of vials of plerixafor used by half.

Management of mobilization failure in 2017

In contemporary clinical practice, almost all allogeneic transplantations and autologous transplantations now capitalize on peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) as opposed to bone marrow (BM) for the source of stem cells. In this context, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) plays a pivotal role as the most frequently applied frontline agent for stem cell mobilization. For patients classified as high-risk, chemotherapy based mobilization regimens can be preferred as a first choice and it is notable that this also used for remobilization. Mobilization failure occurs at a rate of 10%-40% with traditional strategies and it typically leads to low-efficiency practices, resource wastage, and delayed in treatment intervention. Notably, however, several factors can impact the effectiveness of CD34⁺ progenitor cell mobilization, including patient age and medical history (prior chemotherapy or radiotherapy, disease and marrow infiltration at the time of mobilization). In recent years, main (yet largely ineffective) approach was to increase G-CSF dose and add SCF, but novel and promising pathways have been opened up by the synergistic impact of a reversible inhibitor of CXCR4, plerixafor, with G-CSF. The literature shows to its favorable results in upfront and failed mobilizers, and it is necessary to use plerixafor (or equivalent agents) to optimize HSC harvest in poor mobilizers. Different CXCR4 inhibitors, growth hormone, VLA4 inhibitors, and parathormone, have been cited as new agents for mobilization failure in recent years. In view of the above considerations, the purpose of this paper is to examine the mobilization of PBSC while focusing specifically on poor mobilizers.

Autologous Stem Cell Mobilization and Collection

Peripheral blood stem cell collection is an effective approach to obtain a hematopoietic graft for stem cell transplantation. Developing hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell (HSPC) mobilization methods and collection algorithms have improved efficiency, clinical outcomes, and cost effectiveness. Differences in mobilization mechanisms may change the HSPC content harvested and result in different engraftment kinetics and complications. Patient-specific factors can affect mobilization. Incorporating these factors in collection algorithms and improving assays for evaluating mobilization further extend the ability to obtain sufficient HSPCs for hematopoietic repopulation. Technological advance and innovations in leukapheresis have improved collection efficiency and reduced adverse effects.

Evaluation of the ASCO Value Framework for Anticancer Drugs at an Academic Medical Center

BACKGROUND

Anticancer drug prices have increased by an average of 12% each year from 1996 to 2014. A major concern is that the increasing cost and responsibility of evaluating treatment options are being shifted to patients. This research compared 2 value-based pricing models that were being considered for use at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Medical Center to address the growing burden of high-cost cancer drugs while improving patient-centered care.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Medication Outcomes Center (MOC) in the Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), School of Pharmacy focuses on assessing the value of medication-related health care interventions and disseminating findings to the UCSF Medical Center. The High Cost Oncology Drug Initiative at the MOC aims to assess and adopt tools for the critical assessment and amelioration of high-cost cancer drugs. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Value Framework (2016 update) and a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) framework were identified as potential tools for adoption. To assess 1 prominent value framework, the study investigators (a) asked 8 clinicians to complete the ASCO Value Framework for 11 anticancer medications selected by the MOC; (b) reviewed CEAs assessing the drugs; (c) generated descriptive statistics; and (d) analyzed inter-rater reliability, convergence validity, and ranking consistency.

OBSERVATIONS

On the scale of -20 to 180, the mean ASCO net health benefit (NHB) total score across 11 drugs ranged from 7.6 (SD = 7.8) to 53 (SD = 9.8). The Kappa coefficient (κ) for NHB scores across raters was 0.11, which is categorized as "slightly reliable." The combined κ score was 0.22, which is interpreted as low to fair inter-rater reliability. Convergent validity indicates that the correlation between NHB scores and CEA-based incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) was low (-0.215). Ranking of ICERs, ASCO scores, and wholesale acquisition costs indicated different results between frameworks.

IMPLICATIONS

The ASCO Value Framework requires further specificity before use in a clinical setting, since it currently results in low inter-rater reliability and validity. Furthermore, ASCO scores were unable to discriminate between drugs providing the most and least value.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The evaluation provides specific areas of weakness that can be addressed in future updates of the ASCO framework to improve usability. Meanwhile, the UCSF Medical Center should rely on CEAs, which are highly accessible for the highlighted cancer drugs. The MOC role can include summarizing and disseminating available CEA studies for interpretation by clinicians and financial counselors around drug value.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this research was contributed by the University of California, San Francisco, Medical Center Campus Strategic Initiative Program. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by Wilson, along with Wang and Patel. Kim, Dacey, and Yuen collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by Wilson and Lin. The manuscript was written by Wilson, Lin, Wang, and Tran and revised by Lin, Redondi, Brodowy, and Kroon.

How to manage poor mobilizers for high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation?

Today, peripheral blood stem cells are the preferred source of stem cells over bone marrow. Therefore, mobilization plays a crutial role in successful autologous stem cell transplantation. Poor mobilization is generally defined as failure to achieve the target level of at least 2×10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg body weight. There are several strategies to overcome poor mobilization: 1) Larger volume Leukapheresis (LVL) 2) Re-mobilization 3) Plerixafor 4) CM+Plerixafor (P)+G-CSF and 5) Bone Marrow Harvest. In this review, the definitions of successful and poor mobilization are discussed. Management strategies for poor mobilization are defined. The recent research on new agents are included.

How do we mobilize and collect autologous peripheral blood stem cells?

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) with mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) has become a widely applied therapeutic approach for many hematologic and nonhematologic diseases. Adequate PBSC mobilization is critical to the success of ASCT. However, many factors can contribute to poor mobilization. Plerixafor is an effective yet costly adjunct agent that has been increasingly used to improve mobilization in a variety of diagnoses and clinical settings. However, to achieve both optimal cell collection yields and cost-effectiveness, the role of plerixafor in PBSC mobilization needs to be well defined in terms of triggers for initiating its use and criteria for monitoring response. As one of the largest hematopoietic transplant centers in the country, we have developed an approach to PBSC mobilization and collection that incorporates patient laboratory assessments, monitoring of the collection yields, and judicious use of plerixafor as well as various patient support and education programs. These measures have resulted in an increase in our collection success rate and a decrease in the mean number of collection days. In this article we describe our approach to autologous PBSC mobilization and collection. Pertinent reports in the literature are also reviewed and discussed.

Clinical approach to diffuse large B cell lymphoma

Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common subtype of lymphoma. We now recognize that DLBCL corresponds to a biologically heterogeneous family of diseases. Given the potential for cure for most DLBCL patients, appropriate diagnostic and staging evaluation and therapy are essential. Here we review areas of consensus as well as controversy in the evaluation, treatment and monitoring of patients with DLBCL and its related subtypes.

Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with "just-in-time" plerixafor approach is a cost-effective alternative to routine plerixafor use

BACKGROUND AIMS

Hematopoietic cell mobilization with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor results in superior CD34+ cell yield compared with G-CSF alone in patients with myeloma and lymphoma. However, plerixafor-based approaches may be associated with high costs. Several institutions use a "just-in-time" plerixafor approach, in which plerixafor is only administered to patients likely to fail mobilization with G-CSF alone. Whether such an approach is cost-effective is unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated 136 patients with myeloma or lymphoma who underwent mobilization with 2 approaches of plerixafor utilization. Between January 2010 and October 2012, 76 patients uniformly received mobilization with G-CSF and plerixafor. Between November 2012 and June 2014, 60 patients were mobilized with plerixafor administered only to those patients likely to fail mobilization with G-CSF alone.

RESULTS

The routine plerixafor group had a higher median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (62 versus 29 cells/μL, P < 0.001) and a higher median day 1 CD34+ yield (2.9 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg versus 2.1 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, P = 0.001). The median total CD34+ collection was higher with routine plerixafor use (5.8 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg versus 4.5 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, P = 0.007). In the "just-in-time" group, 40% (n = 24) completed adequate collection without plerixafor. There was no difference in mobilization failure rates. The mean plerixafor doses used was lower with "just-in-time" approach (1.3 versus 2.1, P = 0.0002). The mean estimated cost in the routine plerixafor group was higher (USD 27,513 versus USD 23,597, P = 0.01).

DISCUSSION

Our analysis demonstrates that mobilization with a just-in-time plerixafor approach is a safe, effective, and cost-efficient strategy for HPC collection.

Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization for autologous transplantation - a literature review

The use of high-dose chemotherapy with autologous support of hematopoietic progenitor cells is an effective strategy to treat various hematologic neoplasms, such as non-Hodgkin lymphomas and multiple myeloma. Mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells are the main source of support for autologous transplants, and collection of an adequate number of hematopoietic progenitor cells is a critical step in the autologous transplant procedure. Traditional strategies, based on the use of growth factors with or without chemotherapy, have limitations even when remobilizations are performed. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor is the most widely used agent for progenitor cell mobilization. The association of plerixafor, a C-X-C Chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4) inhibitor, to granulocyte colony stimulating factor generates rapid mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells. A literature review was performed of randomized studies comparing different mobilization schemes in the treatment of multiple myeloma and lymphomas to analyze their limitations and effectiveness in hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization for autologous transplant. This analysis showed that the addition of plerixafor to granulocyte colony stimulating factor is well tolerated and results in a greater proportion of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphomas or multiple myeloma reaching optimal CD34⁺ cell collections with a smaller number of apheresis compared the use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor alone.

Optimizing mobilization strategies in difficult-to-mobilize patients: The role of plerixafor

Peripheral blood stem cell collection is currently the most widely used source for hematopoietic autologous transplantation. Several factors such as advanced age, previous chemotherapy, disease and marrow infiltration at the time of mobilization influence the efficacy of CD34(+) progenitor cell mobilization. Despite the safety and efficiency of the standard mobilization protocols (G-CSF ± chemotherapy), there is still a significant amount of mobilization failure rate (10-40%), which necessitate novel agents for effective mobilization. Plerixafor, is a novel agent, has been recently approved for mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). The combination of Plerixafor with G-CSF provides the collection of large numbers of stem cells in fewer apheresis sessions and can salvage those who fail with standard mobilization regimens. The development and optimization of practical algorithms for the use Plerixafor is crucial to make hematopoietic stem cell mobilization more efficient in a cost-effective way. This review is aimed at summarizing how to identify poor mobilizers, and define rational use of Plerixafor for planning mobilization in hard-to-mobilize patients.

Tbo-Filgrastim versus Filgrastim during Mobilization and Neutrophil Engraftment for Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

There are limited data available supporting the use of the recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), tbo-filgrastim, rather than traditionally used filgrastim to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) or to accelerate engraftment after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We sought to compare the efficacy and cost of tbo-filgrastim to filgrastim in these settings. Patients diagnosed with lymphoma or plasma cell disorders undergoing G-CSF mobilization, with or without plerixafor, were included in this retrospective analysis. The primary outcome was total collected CD34(+) cells/kg. Secondary mobilization endpoints included peripheral CD34(+) cells/μL on days 4 and 5 of mobilization, adjunctive use of plerixafor, CD34(+) cells/kg collected on day 5, number of collection days and volumes processed, number of collections reaching 5 million CD34(+) cells/kg, and percent reaching target collection goal in 1 day. Secondary engraftment endpoints included time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment, number of blood product transfusions required before engraftment, events of febrile neutropenia, and length of stay. A total of 185 patients were included in the final analysis. Patients receiving filgrastim (n = 86) collected a median of 5.56 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg, compared with a median of 5.85 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg in the tbo-filgrastim group (n = 99; P = .58). There were no statistically significant differences in all secondary endpoints with the exception of apheresis volumes processed (tbo-filgrastim, 17.0 liters versus filgrastim, 19.7 liters; P < .01) and mean platelet transfusions (tbo-filgrastim, 1.7 units versus filgrastim, 1.4 units; P = .04). In conclusion, tbo-filgrastim demonstrated similar CD34(+) yield compared with filgrastim in mobilization and post-transplantation settings, with no clinically meaningful differences in secondary efficacy and safety endpoints. Furthermore, tbo-filgrastim utilization was associated with cost savings of approximately $1406 per patient utilizing average wholesale price.

G-CSF plus preemptive plerixafor vs hyperfractionated CY plus G-CSF for autologous stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: effectiveness, safety and cost analysis

The optimal stem cell mobilization regimen for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) remains undefined. We retrospectively compared our experience in hematopoietic cell mobilization in 83 MM patients using fractionated high-dose CY and G-CSF with G-CSF plus preemptive plerixafor. All patients in the CY group (n=56) received fractionated high-dose CY (5 g/m(2) divided into five doses of 1 g/m(2) every 3 h) with G-CSF. All patients in the plerixafor group (n=27) received G-CSF and plerixafor preemptively based on an established algorithm. Compared with plerixafor, CY use was associated with higher total CD34+ cell yield (7.5 × 10(6) vs 15.5 × 10(6) cells/kg, P=0.005). All patients in both groups yielded ⩾4 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg. Conversely, CY use was associated with high frequency of febrile neutropenia, blood and platelet transfusions need and hospitalizations. The average total cost of mobilization in Lebanon was slightly higher in the plerixafor group ($7886 vs $7536; P=0.16). Our data indicate robust stem cell mobilization in MM patients with either fractionated high-dose CY and G-CSF or G-CSF alone with preemptive plerixafor. The chemo-mobilization approach was associated with twofold stem cell yield, slightly lower cost but significantly increased toxicity.

Plerixafor prescription modalities in autologous haematopoietic stem cell mobilization in Belgium

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy and safety of plerixafor, an antagonist of the CXCR4 receptor, in combination with G-CSF has been demonstrated in patients suffering from Iymphoma and multiple myeloma (MM) eligible for autologous haematopoietic stem cell collection. However, different reimbursement criteria have been applied in different countries to select patients eligible for treatment with plerixafor. The objective of this observational study was to describe the plerixafor prescription modalities in daily practice in Belgium.

METHODS

This open-label, prospective, observational study was conducted in 11 Belgian centres in 114 patients with lymphoma (Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma) or MM who were treated with plerixafor according to the SmPC between April 2011 and October 2012. Patients included in another clinical trial with plerixafor were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

The use of plerixafor in patients with MM or lymphoma was effective, with a success rate (defined as a total yield >2×10(6) CD34+ cells/kg) of 77%, and well tolerated (one SAE reported). Optimal collection (defined as a total yield >4×10(6) CD34+ cells/kg) was obtained for 43% of the study population (31% in lymphoma patients, compared to 61% in patients with MM). The use of plerixafor was in line with the SmPC and the Belgian reimbursement criteria for all patients.

CONCLUSION

This study is showing that the use of plerixafor according to Belgian reimbursement criteria results in similar efficacy and safety as in other centres and countries worldwide.

Concise review: Sowing the seeds of a fruitful harvest: hematopoietic stem cell mobilization

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the only curative option for a number of malignant and nonmalignant diseases. As the use of hematopoietic transplant has expanded, so too has the source of stem and progenitor cells. The predominate source of stem and progenitors today, particularly in settings of autologous transplantation, is mobilized peripheral blood. This review will highlight the historical advances which led to the widespread use of peripheral blood stem cells for transplantation, with a look toward future enhancements to mobilization strategies.

Mobilization and transplantation patterns of autologous hematopoietic stem cells in multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma

BACKGROUND

The mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells can be a limiting factor for transplantation, yet little is known about how the availability of novel mobilizing agents has affected the practices of oncologists and transplant specialists.

METHODS

US-based oncologists (n = 48) and transplant specialists (n = 46) were separately surveyed with a partial overlap of assessed information.

RESULTS

More transplant specialists than oncologists believed that the time between referral and first consultation is adequate (89.1% vs 54.2%; P < .001). The presence of comorbidities was the most common reason for patients not being referred for transplantation. Among oncologists, 31.3% avoided cyclophosphamide and 16.7% avoided lenalidomide to prevent mobilization impairment in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Chemotherapy mobilization for MM was used by 23.9% of transplant specialists due to higher CD34+ yields and by 21.7% due to its anti-MM effect. In non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), 26.1% of transplant specialists used chemotherapy mobilization due to higher CD34+ yields, and 26.1% collected hematopoietic stem cells on the rebound prior to chemotherapy. With regard to plerixafor use in MM, 36.9% of transplant specialists reported that they did not use it, and 28.3% said they reserved it for second mobilization. In NHL, 4.3% of transplant specialists reported not using plerixafor, and 39.1% reserved it for second mobilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational needs were identified to promote adequate referral for transplantation as well as successful and cost-effective methods for the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells.