Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF vs G-CSF alone

Mobilization Strategies in Myeloma Patients Intended for Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Background

Multiple myeloma is currently the leading indication for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT). A prerequisite for AHCT is mobilization and collection of adequate blood graft to support high-dose therapy. Current mobilization strategies include granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone or in combination with chemotherapy most commonly cyclophosphamide (CY). More recently, plerixafor has become into agenda especially in patients who mobilize poorly. In the selection of a mobilization method, several factors should be considered.

Summary

Preplanned collection target is important as G-CSF plus plerixafor is more effective in the mobilization of CD34+ cells than G-CSF alone. On the other hand, CY plus G-CSF is superior to G-CSF only mobilization. Previous therapy and age of the patients are important considerations as G-CSF alone may not be effective enough in patients with risk factors for poor mobilization. These factors include extensive lenalidomide exposure, irradiation to bone marrow-bearing sites, higher age, or a previous mobilization failure. Also, local preferences and experiences as well as the number of apheresis needed are important issues as well as cost-effectiveness considerations. Mobilization method used may have implication for cellular composition of collected grafts, which might have an impact on posttransplant events such as hematologic and immune recovery in addition to also potential long-term outcomes.

Key Message

Currently, G-CSF alone and preemptive plerixafor if needed might be considered as a standard mobilization strategy in MM patients intended for AHCT.

A comparison of peripheral blood stem cell collection outcomes for multiple myeloma; mobilization matters in the era of IMiD induction

Collection of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) requires mobilization from the bone marrow. There is variation in mobilization choice; during the COVID-19 pandemic BSBMT&CT guidelines recommended using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone to minimize the use of chemotherapy. We report on the impact of mobilization regimen on stem cell collection, and whether IMiD-containing induction therapy impacts on mobilization and consequently transplant engraftment times for 83 patients undergoing ASCT at Leeds Teaching Hospitals. Cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF (cyclo-G) mobilization yielded more CD34+ cells (8.94 vs. 4.88 ×106/kg, p = < 0.0001) over fewer days (1.6 vs. 2.4 days, p = 0.007), and required fewer doses of salvage Plerixafor than G-CSF only (13.6% vs. 35%, p = 0.0407). IMiD-containing induction impaired all of these factors. CD34+ doses > 8×106/kg were more frequent with Cyclo-G (62% vs. 11%, p = 0.0001), including for those receiving IMiD 1st line induction (50% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.0381). Note that 92.6% of those receiving IMiD-free inductions were mobilized with Cyclo-G. The novel agents used in modern induction regimens (e.g Daratumumab) have been shown to impair yields, increasing the importance of optimizing mobilization regimens in the first instance. Furthermore, as cellular therapies become established in the management of multiple myeloma emerging data highlights the potential benefits of stem cell top up in the management of the haematological toxicities of these therapies. Our findings support re-adoption of Cyclo-G as the gold standard for mobilization to optimize PBSC harvesting and ensure sufficient cells for subsequent ASCTs.

Are we choosing mobilization regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma wisely: A single center comparison of GCSF+/-plerixafor vs cyclophosphamide/GCSF+/-plerixafor

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a standard consolidation treatment for eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). There is no standardized mobilization regimen for collection of CD34+ stem cells, which is crucial to the success of ASCT. Cyclophosphamide/GCSF is an effective regimen, although reported associated toxicities include risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Since plerixafor was introduced in Canada, this mobilization agent has been increasingly used as needed with GCSF at Kingston Health Science Centre (KHSC), with elimination of cyclophosphamide. This single center, retrospective, quality improvement study evaluates mobilization and ASCT outcomes of MM patients who had undergone stem cell mobilization at KHSC with cyclophosphamide/GCSF+/-plerixafor without antibiotics, cyclophosphamide/GCSF+/-plerixafor with antibiotics, and GCSF+/-plerixafor without antibiotics.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted evaluating 137 patients. The primary outcome measure was FN rates with mobilization. Balancing measures include CD34+ cell collected, plerixafor usage, days of apheresis and transplant outcomes. Chi-square, ANOVA, or Kruskal-Wallis methods were used to test statistical significance where appropriate.

RESULTS

Our study noted a higher total and day one CD34+ count in the two groups utilizing cyclophosphamide in mobilization. All nine cases of FN occurred in these two groups (P < .05). Addition of antibiotics decreased, but did not eliminate risk of FN. There were no significant differences in the rate of plerixafor usage and number of apheresis days. Difference in transplant outcomes, including engraftment and transfusion support, were statistically but not clinically significant. A larger sample size may be needed to explore this fully. There was no significant difference in length of transplant hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

The elimination of cyclophosphamide from mobilization regimens for MM appears to significantly reduce FN rates, without increasing balancing measures such as total number of apheresis days, plerixafor usage, duration of transplant hospitalization or mortality outcomes.

Hematopoietic stem cell mobilization strategies to support high-dose chemotherapy: A focus on relapsed/refractory germ cell tumors

High-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has been explored and has played an important role in the management of patients with high-risk germ cell tumors (GCTs) who failed to be cured by conventional chemotherapy. Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) collected from the peripheral blood, after appropriate pharmacologic mobilization, have largely replaced bone marrow as the principal source of HSCs in transplants. As it is currently common practice to perform tandem or multiple sequential cycles of HDCT, it is anticipated that collection of large numbers of HSCs from the peripheral blood is a prerequisite for the success of the procedure. Moreover, the CD34+ cell dose/kg of body weight infused after HDCT has proven to be a major determinant of hematopoietic engraftment, with patients who receive > 2 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg having consistent, rapid, and sustained hematopoietic recovery. However, many patients with relapsed/refractory GCTs have been exposed to multiple cycles of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, which compromises the efficacy of HSC mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with or without chemotherapy. Therefore, alternative strategies that use novel agents in combination with traditional mobilizing regimens are required. Herein, after an overview of the mechanisms of HSCs mobilization, we review the existing literature regarding studies reporting various HSC mobilization approaches in patients with relapsed/refractory GCTs, and finally report newer experimental mobilization strategies employing novel agents that have been applied in other hematologic or solid malignancies.

The Efficacy and Safety of Chemotherapy-Based Stem Cell Mobilization in Multiple Myeloma Patients Who Are Poor Responders to Induction: The Mayo Clinic Experience

We report the outcomes of 117 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who received novel agent induction, had a poor response to induction, and were mobilized using intravenous intermediate-dose cyclophosphamide (82%) or VD-PACE (18%) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and on-demand plerixafor. The median progression-free survival and overall survival of the chemo-mobilized cohort were 21 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-71) and 58 months (95% CI, 47-80), respectively. We compared our cohort to a 117-patient cohort matched by the level of response at pretransplant evaluation. The matched patients were mobilized with G-CSF and on-demand plerixafor without chemotherapy. Patients receiving chemo-mobilization had higher stem cell yields than the growth-factor-only cohort (median, 10.7 × 10⁶ cells/kg vs. 8.77 × 10⁶ cells/kg, respectively; P < .001). The safety profile of chemo-mobilization was favorable, and there was no difference between the two groups in length of hospitalization during autologous stem cell transplantation (P = .95), days to neutrophil engraftment (P = .22), days to platelet engraftment (P = .27), or risk of bacteremia (P = .52). Twenty-nine percent of the chemo-mobilized cohort and 65% of the matched cohort required plerixafor for adequate mobilization (P < .001). Chemo-mobilization enhances stem cell collection without adversely impacting the post-transplant clinical course.

Plerixafor added to G-CSF allows mobilization of a sufficient number of hematopoietic progenitors without impacting the efficacy of TCR-alpha/beta depletion in pediatric haploidentical and genoidentical donors failing to mobilize with G-CSF alone

BACKGROUND

Collection of a large number of early hematopoietic progenitors is essential for allogeneic apheresis products intended for TCR-alpha/beta depletion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We added plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg body weight (bw) on day 4 of high-dose filgrastim mobilization 10 hours prior to apheresis in 16 (30.5%) pediatric allogeneic donors who failed to recover a sufficient number of CD34+ cells.

RESULTS

On day 4 of G-CSF, the median CD34+ cell count in peripheral blood was 6 per μL (range 4-9 per μL) in 6 poor mobilizers and 16 per μL (range 12-19 per μL) in insufficient mobilizers. In all donors, the threshold of 50 CD34+ cells/μL was achieved, and the median increase was 14.8-fold in poor mobilizers and 6.5-fold in insufficient mobilizers, whereas it was 3.45-fold increase in those mobilized with G-CSF alone.

DISCUSSION

In all donors, a predefined number of >10 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg of recipient bw before depletion was reached in the apheresis product. The use of plerixafor did not affect the purity of further TCR-alpha/beta depletion. Side effects were mild to moderate and consisted of nausea and vomiting.

CONCLUSION

Thus, the safety and high efficacy of plerixafor was proven in healthy pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic cell donors.

Getting blood out of a stone: Identification and management of patients with poor hematopoietic cell mobilization

Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) has become a primary treatment for many cancers. Nowadays, the primary source of hematopoietic cells is by leukapheresis collection of these cells from peripheral blood, after a forced egress of hematopoietic cells from marrow into blood circulation, a process known as "mobilization". In this process, mobilizing agents disrupt binding interactions between hematopoietic cells and marrow microenvironment to facilitate collection. As the first essential step of HCT, poor mobilization, i.e. failure to obtain a desired or required number of hematopoietic cell, is one of the major factors affecting engraftment or even precluding transplantation. This review summarizes the available mobilization regimens using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor, as well as the current understanding of the factors that are associated with poor mobilization. Strategies to mobilize patients or healthy donors who failed previous mobilization are discussed. Multiple novel agents are under investigation and some of them have shown the potential to enhance the mobilization response to G-CSF and/or plerixafor. Further investigation of the risk factors including genetic factors will offer an opportunity to better understand the molecular mechanism of mobilization and help develop new therapeutic strategies for successful mobilizations.

Medical database analysis of japanese multiple myeloma patients with planned stem cell transplantation (MEDALIST) - a focus on healthcare resource utilization and cost

This study explored the burden associated with stem cell mobilization, with or without cyclophosphamide (CPA), in patients who intended to receive autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). A Japanese health care claims database (MDV) was used to analyze the health care resource utilization patterns and medical cost between 2013 and 2016 (pre-plerixafor launch). The patients were further categorized into groups who received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone or G-CSF + CPA group and analyzed in both mobilization and ASCT phases of treatment. Overall, there were more MM patients who were treated with G-CSF + CPA combination therapy than G-CSF alone. Length-of-stay was 1.6 times longer in the combination group during the mobilization phase. A reverse trend was observed during the ASCT phase. Direct cost was approximately 1.2 million yen during the mobilization phase and 2.3 million yen during the ASCT phase, with hospitalization basic fee accounting for the highest proportion in both groups and phases. A substantial amount of healthcare resource and cost was consumed in both phases. This study may serve as a basic reference for further health technology assessment of new medicines such as plerixafor. Further investigation of differences between treatment groups is warranted.

The comparison of effectiveness and safety between different biosimilars of G-CSF in the mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) for autologous transplantation (autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation, auto-PBSCT)

BACKGROUND

Autologous peripheral blood marrow stem cell transplantation (auto-PBSCT) preceded by high-dose chemotherapy is a well-known method of treatment for patients with hematological cancers. Performing the procedure entails obtaining from the patient their own stem cells from peripheral blood using G-CSF. Currently, various filgrastim biosimilars are widely used.

AIM OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of three different biosimilars of filgrastim in PBSC mobilization in patients with hematological malignancies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of 282 patients (118 women and 164 men) who underwent stem cells mobilization for auto-PBSCT in the Department of Hematology in Wroclaw in 2012-2014. Three filgrastim biosimilars were used: Tevagrastim (95), Nivestim (92), and Zarzio (95). Ninety patients (32%) were diagnosed with multiple myeloma, 55 (19%) with Hodgkin's lymphoma, 90 (32%) with NHLs, 20 (7%) with acute myeloid leukemia, and 27 (10%) with another hematological cancer.

RESULTS

The mean number of CD34+ cells collected during the first leukapheresis was 5.95 × 10⁶ /kg for Tevagrastim, 7.08 × 10⁶ /kg for Nivestim, and 6.8 × 10⁶ /kg for Zarzio (P > .05). The necessary number of leukapheresis for patients receiving Zarzio, Nivestim, and Tevagrastim was 1.32, 1.37, and 1.66, respectively (P > .05). The percentage of effective mobilizations was 88.2% for Zarzio, 86.2% for Nivestim, and 84.9% for Tevagrastim. The side effects included bone pain and headache.

CONCLUSION

All tested biosimilars demonstrated similar effectiveness and safety profiles in patients with hematological tumors undergoing PBSC mobilization; therefore, they can be used interchangeably.

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.

Mobilization and Collection of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells in Adults: Focus on Timing and Benchmarking

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) are preferentially used as a hematopoietic stem cell source for autologous blood stem cell transplantation (ABSCT) upon high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) in a variety of hemato-oncologic diseases. As a prerequisite, hematopoietic stem cells have to be mobilized into the peripheral blood (PB) and collected by leukapheresis (LP). Despite continuous improvements, e.g., the introduction of plerixafor, current challenges are the further optimization regarding the leukapheresis procedure, preventing collection failures, as well as benchmarking and harmonization of mobilization approaches between institutions.This chapter summarizes the current PBSC mobilization and collection approaches and is focusing on timely orchestration of mobilization therapy, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) application, and peripheral blood (PB) CD34⁺ cell assessment. Moreover, strategies for prediction and performance assessment of the PBSC collection yield are discussed.

The effect of the dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin (DHAP) regimen on stem cell mobilization and transplant outcomes of patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who are candidates for up-front autologous stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Data on dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin (DHAP) as a mobilization regimen, compared to high-dose cyclophosphamide (HDC), for up-front autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) is limited.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with aggressive NHL treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) or rituximab-CHOP who underwent chemomobilization using HDC or DHAP plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for up-front ASCT were enrolled from three institutions between 2004 and 2014.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients (57 men) were included. Sixty-five patients (67.7%) received HDC; and 31 (32.3%), DHAP. The total CD34+ cells mobilized were significantly higher in patients receiving DHAP (16.1 vs. 6.1 × 106/kg, p = 0.001). More patients achieved successful mobilization with DHAP (CD34+ cells ≥ 5.0 × 106/kg) compared to HDC (87.1% vs. 61.5%, respectively; p = 0.011), particularly within the first two sessions of apheresis (64.5% vs. 32.3%, respectively; p = 0.003). Mobilization failure rate (CD34+ cells < 2.0 × 106/kg) was significantly higher in patients receiving HDC (20.0% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.032). On multivariate analysis, the DHAP regimen (odds ratio, 4.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 15.17) was an independent predictor of successful mobilization. During chemomobilization, patients receiving HDC experienced more episodes of febrile neutropenia compared to patients receiving DHAP (32.3% vs. 12.9%, p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

The DHAP regimen was associated with a significantly higher efficacy for stem cell mobilization and lower frequency of febrile neutropenia. Therefore, DHAP plus G-CSF is an effective for mobilization in patients with aggressive NHL who were candidates for up-front ASCT.

Orchestration of Chemomobilization and G-CSF Administration for Successful Hematopoietic Stem Cell Collection

Successful collection of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) depends on the optimal orchestration of mobilization chemotherapy, granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) application, and CD34⁺ cell number assessment in the peripheral blood (PB). However, determining the optimal timing in accordance to the applied chemomobilization regimen can be challenging. Although most centers apply their own local timing schedules, a reliable timetable including the currently most often used mobilization regimens is lacking. We present a comprehensive analysis of the timing modalities for 11 of the most commonly used chemomobilization regimens. A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical and PBSC collection parameters (including duration of G-CSF application, time point of CD34⁺ assessment, PB CD34⁺ cell count, number of leukapheresis [LP] sessions, processed blood volume, and CD34⁺ collection results) of 91 representatively selected patients who had undergone stem cell mobilization at 2 collection centers. Six to 10 patients were analyzed per regimen with a variety of diagnoses, including multiple myeloma, malignant lymphoma, and sarcoma. No collection failures (<2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg body weight) were observed. All analyzed patients successfully reached their individual collection goal in adherence to the given schedule of chemotherapy, application of G-CSF, measurement of CD34⁺ cells, and subsequent LP. The presented data on the timing of chemomobilization, G-CSF application, and stem cell collection may be helpful in clinical decision making and contribute to a more transparent and predictable treatment process.

Neutropenic fever during peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization is associated with decreased CD34+ cell collection and increased apheresis collection days

BACKGROUND

Peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) mobilization with chemotherapy in addition to Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) improves cell collection compared to G-CSF alone; however, it is associated with increased risk of neutropenic fever (NF).

METHODS

We analyzed risk factors for post-priming NF and NF association with autologous stem cell transplant outcomes. Between 1998 and 2008, 593 adult patients with lymphoma underwent PBPC mobilization with etoposide and G-CSF.

RESULTS

Median age was 51 years (range 18-77) and 372 (63%) were male. Diagnoses were 457 (77%) non-Hodgkin lymphoma and 136 (23%) Hodgkin lymphoma. Of 554 (93%) transplanted patients, majority were in complete or partial remission at time of transplant (88%). Overall, 141 (24%) patients were hospitalized for NF. Nine patients (6%) had bacteremia, 4 (3%) had pneumonia, 2 (<1%) had herpes simplex viral infections, and the remaining 126 (90%) had no identified infection source. NF patients had lower likelihood of proceeding to transplant (86% vs. 96%, P < .001), lower CD34+ cell dose collection (median 7.23 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg vs. 8.98 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg, P = .002), and were more likely to require > 4 days of apheresis (48% vs. 37%, P < .001). NF was associated with a higher 30-day readmission rate following transplant hospitalization (17% vs. 9%, P = .012).

CONCLUSION

NF during etoposide priming is associated with lower likelihood of proceeding to transplant, lower CD34+ cell dose collection, more apheresis days required for collection and a higher 30-day readmission rate following transplant discharge.

Efficacy and safety of plerixafor for the mobilization/collection of peripheral hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation in Japanese patients with multiple myeloma

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plerixafor for the mobilization/collection of peripheral hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) for autologous transplantation in Japanese patients with multiple myeloma (MM). In a randomized study, patients received G-CSF (filgrastim, 400 µg/m²/day) for 4 days prior to the first dose of plerixafor. Starting on Day 4 evening and for up to 4 days, patients received either plerixafor (240 µg/kg/day) + G-CSF group (PG group) or G-CSF alone (G group). Daily apheresis started on Day 5 for up to 4 days, or until ≥6 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg were collected. A total of 7 patients were randomized in each treatment group. Five patients in PG group and no patients in G group achieved a collection of ≥6 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg in ≤2 days of apheresis [difference of 71.4% (90%CI 29-100%)]. These results were supported by the shorter median time to collect ≥6 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg (2 days in PG group; no patient in G group). The incidence of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was higher in PG group than in G group. Plerixafor was well tolerated, and effective for the mobilization/collection of peripheral HSCs for autologous transplantation in Japanese patients with MM.

Is it feasible to use granulocyte-colony stimulating factor alone to mobilize progenitor cells in multiple myeloma patients induced with a cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone regimen?

BACKGROUND

Cyclophosphamide plus thalidomide as induction for multiple myeloma patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation may be a limiting factor for cell mobilization. The minimum acceptable mobilized peripheral blood stem cell count to prevent deleterious effects during transplantation is 2.0×10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg. Combining other treatments to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, such as cyclophosphamide, could overcome the mobilization limitation. The objective of this study was to assess the number of CD34⁺ cells mobilized using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor with and without cyclophosphamide after induction with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed of a cohort of multiple myeloma patients submitted to autologous stem cell transplantations at two Brazilian centers between May 2009 and July 2013. The oral cyclophosphamide and thalidomide induction doses used were 1500mg/month and 100-200mg/day, respectively. Mobilization doses were 10-15mcg/kg granulocyte-colony stimulating factor with 2-4g/m² cyclophosphamide, or 15-20mcg/kg granulocyte-colony stimulating factor alone for 5 days. Collection of >2.0×10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg was considered sufficient.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were analyzed; only 18 received cyclophosphamide. The median age was 58 years old (range: 51-62) for the granulocyte-colony stimulating factor group and 56.5 years old (range: 54-60) for granulocyte-colony stimulating factor plus cyclophosphamide group. Fifty-two patients were male. Eighty cases (90.9%) were Durie-Salmon Staging System III-A/B and 38 (44.7%) and 20 cases (23.5%) were International Staging System 2 and 3, respectively. The group that received cyclophosphamide collected a higher median number of progenitor cells [3.8 (range: 3.1-4.4) vs. 3.2 (range: 2.3-3.8)] (p-value=0.008). No correlation was observed between better responses or number of induction cycles and the number of cells collected.

CONCLUSION

The number of cells mobilized with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor plus cyclophosphamide was higher. However, in both groups, the median number of CD34⁺ cells was sufficient to perform a single autologous stem cell transplantation; no deleterious effects were reported during harvesting.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in secondary prophylaxis for advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma treated with ABVD chemotherapy: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly administered to patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) with neutropenia. We constructed a decision-analytic model to compare the cost-effectiveness of secondary prophylaxis with G-CSF to a strategy of 'no G-CSF' in response to severe neutropenia for adults with advanced-stage HL treated with ABVD. A Canadian public health payer's perspective was considered and costs were presented in 2013 Canadian dollars. The quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) attained with the G-CSF and 'no G-CSF' strategies were 1.403 and 1.416, respectively. Costs for the strategies with and without G-CSF were $38,971 and $33,982, respectively. In the base case analysis, the 'no G-CSF' strategy was associated with cost savings and improved QALYs; therefore, 'no G-CSF' was the dominant approach. For patients with severe neutropenia during ABVD chemotherapy for advanced-stage HL, a strategy without G-CSF support is associated with improved quality-adjusted outcomes, cost savings, and is the preferred approach.

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.

Cyclophosphamide-based hematopoietic stem cell mobilization before autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

High-dose cyclophosphamide (Cy) is frequently employed for peripheral blood mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells before high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM). The benefit of mobilization with Cy over filgrastim (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; G-CSF) alone is unclear. Between 2000 and 2008, 167 patients with newly diagnosed MM underwent single ASCT after melphalan conditioning at our institution. Seventy-three patients were mobilized with G-CSF alone, and 94 patients with Cy plus G-CSF (Cy+G-CSF). We retrospectively analyzed Cy's impact on both toxicity and efficacy. Mobilization efficiency was augmented by Cy; a mean total of 12 versus 5.8 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg were collected from patients mobilized with Cy+G-CSF versus G-CSF, respectively, (P < 0.01), over a mean of 1.6 versus 2.2 days of peripheral blood apheresis (p = 0.001). Mobilization-related toxicity was also, however, augmented by Cy; 14% of Cy+G-CSF patients were hospitalized because of complications versus none receiving G-CSF (P < 0.0001). Toxicity, including death, related to ASCT was similar between cohorts. Regarding long-term outcomes, multivariate analysis revealed no difference for Cy+G-CSF versus G-CSF (hazard ratio 0.8 for event-free survival [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.57-1.25] and 0.96 for overall survival [95% CI 0.61-1.54]). In summary, we show that mobilization with Cy increases toxicity without positively impacting long-term outcomes in MM. Our findings place into question Cy's benefit as a routine component of stem cell mobilization regimens in MM. Randomized trials are needed to elucidate the risks and benefits of Cy more definitively.