Plerixafor in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma: effectiveness in cases with very low circulating CD34+ cell levels and preemptive intervention vs remobilization

G-CSF + plerixafor versus G-CSF alone mobilized hematopoietic stem cells in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The combination of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor is one of the approaches for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), and Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the ability of G-CSF + plerixafor to mobilize peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ cells and examine its safety profile.

METHODS

We performed a database search using the terms 'granulocyte colony stimulating factor', 'G-CSF', 'AMD3100', and 'plerixafor', published up to May 1, 2023. The methodology is described in further detail in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023425760).

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. G-CSF + plerixafor resulted in more patients achieving the predetermined apheresis yield of CD34+ cells than G-CSF alone (OR, 5.33; 95%, 4.34-6.55). It was further discovered that G-CSF + plerixafor could mobilize more CD34+ cells into PB, which was beneficial for the next transplantation in both randomized controlled (MD, 18.30; 95%, 8.74-27.85) and single-arm (MD, 20.67; 95%, 14.34-27.00) trials. Furthermore, G-CSF + plerixafor did not cause more treatment emergent adverse events than G-CSF alone (OR, 1.25; 95%, 0.87-1.80).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the combination of G-CSF and plerixafor, resulted in more patients with MM, NHL, and HL, achieving the predetermined apheresis yield of CD34+ cells, which is related to the more effective mobilization of CD34+ cells into PB.

Impact of Daratumumab on Stem Cell Mobilization and Transplant in Patient with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Real Word Single-Centre Study

Not applicable.

Pharmacoeconomic issues in stem cell mobilization

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

Stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: challenges, strategies, and current developments

Among hematological malignancies, multiple myeloma (MM) represents the leading indication of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT). Auto-HCT is predominantly performed with peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs), and the mobilization and collection of PBSCs are essential steps for auto-HCT. Despite the improved success of conventional methods with the incorporation of novel agents for PBSC mobilization in MM, mobilization failure is still a concern. The current review comprehensively summarizes various mobilization strategies for mobilizing PBSCs in MM patients and the evolution of these strategies over time. Moreover, existing evidence substantiates that the mobilization regimen used may be an important determinant of graft content. However, limited data are available on the effects of graft characteristics in patient outcomes other than hematopoietic engraftment. In this review, we discussed the effect of graft characteristics on clinical outcomes, mobilization failure, factors predictive of poor mobilization, and potential mobilization regimens for such patients.

Past, Present, and a Glance into the Future of Multiple Myeloma Treatment

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a challenging hematological cancer which typically grows in bone marrow. MM accounts for 10% of hematological malignancies and 1.8% of cancers. The recent treatment strategies have significantly improved progression-free survival for MM patients in the last decade; however, a relapse for most MM patients is inevitable. In this review we discuss current treatment, important pathways for proliferation, survival, immune suppression, and resistance that could be targeted for future treatments.

Evaluation of CD34+ Cell Count at Different Time Points Following Plerixafor Administration in Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Background: In apheresis, collecting an adequate number of CD34+ cells is required for successful autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) procedure. It is difficult to harvest a sufficient number of stem cells in certain patients due to their old age and history of intensive chemotherapy. Plerixafor could mobilize stem cells and facilitate peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cell collection. However, not enough information is available on the appropriate time intervals from plerixafor administration to apheresis. Objectives: In this study, we aimed at evaluating the level of peripheral blood CD34+ cells at plerixafor administration time and every three hours to identify the peak time of circulating CD34+ cells. Methods: Circulating CD34+ cells were enumerated by flow cytometry on day 4 post mobilization. Plerixafor was administered to patients with poor mobilization based on the count of peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cells. The number of circulating CD34+ cells was evaluated before and 3, 6, 9, and 12 hours after plerixafor administration to assess the time it takes for stem cells to reach their peak level. Results: The highest level of stem cell concentration was found in 9 hours after plerixafor administration with an increasing trend. A statistically significant relationship was also observed between factors including platelet count on the first day of GCSF injection and the day of stem cell infusion, leukocyte count on admission, and basal levels of CD34+ cells in peripheral blood and the amount of harvested stem cells. Conclusions: We demonstrated that plerixafor causes an incremental trend in CD34+ cells mobilization, reaching its peak after 9 hours. Further research should be performed to provide insights into graft cells’ population and hematologic and immunological recovery.

Developing Novel Anticancer Drugs for Targeted Populations: An Update

BACKGROUND

Due to higher failure rates, lengthy time and high cost of the traditional de novo drug discovery and development process, the rate of opportunity to get new, safe and efficacious drugs for the targeted population, including pediatric patients with cancer, becomes sluggish.

OBJECTIVES

This paper discusses the development of novel anticancer drugs focusing on the identification and selection of targeted anticancer drug development for the targeted population.

METHODS

Information presented in this review was obtained from different databases, including PUBMED, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Various keywords were used as search terms.

RESULTS

The pharmaceutical companies currently are executing drug repurposing as an alternative means to accelerate the drug development process that reduces the risk of failure, time and cost, which take 3-12 years with almost 25% overall probability of success as compared to de novo drug discovery and development process (10- 17 years) which has less than 10% probability of success. An alternative strategy to the traditional de novo drug discovery and development process, called drug repurposing, is also presented.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, to continue with the progress of developing novel anticancer drugs for the targeted population, identification and selection of target to specific disease type is important. Considering the aspects of the age of the patient and the disease stages such as each cancer types are different when we study the disease at a molecular level. Drug repurposing technique becomes an influential alternative strategy to discover and develop novel anticancer drug candidates.

Engraftment after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients mobilized with Plerixafor: A retrospective, multicenter study of a large series of patients

Plerixafor (PLX) appears to effectively enhance hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization prior to autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT). However, the quality of engraftment following auto-HCT has been little explored. Here, engraftment following auto-HCT was assessed in patients mobilized with PLX through a retrospective, multicenter study of 285 consecutive patients. Information on early and 100-day post-transplant engraftment was gathered from the 245 patients that underwent auto-HCT. The median number of PLX days to reach the stem cell collection goal (≥2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg) was 1 (range 1-4) and the median PLX administration time before apheresis was 11 h (range 1-18). The median number of apheresis sessions to achieve the collection goal was 2 (range 1-5) and the mean number of CD34⁺ cells collected was 2.95 × 10⁶/kg (range 0-30.5). PLX administration was safe, with only 2 mild and transient gastrointestinal adverse events reported. The median time to achieve an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) >500/μL was 11 days (range 3-31) and the median time to platelet recovery >20 × 10³/μL was 13 days (range 5-69). At 100 days after auto-HCT, the platelet count was 137 × 10⁹/L (range 7-340), the ANC was 2.3 × 10⁹/L (range 0.1-13.0), and the hemoglobin concentration was 123 g/L (range 79-165). PLX use allowed auto-HCT to be performed in a high percentage of poorly mobilized patients, resulting in optimal medium-term engraftment in the majority of patients in whom mobilization failed, in this case mainly due to suboptimal peripheral blood CD34⁺ cell concentration on day +4 or low CD34⁺ cell yield on apheresis.

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.

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.

Autologous stem-cell collection following VTD or VRD induction therapy in multiple myeloma: a single-center experience

Triplet-drug regimen bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) and bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD) are considered as standard of care induction prior autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in myeloma. In addition to improve response rate, induction therapy should preserve an adequate stem-cell collection. In the present retrospective study, we analyzed stem-cell collection in 325 newly diagnosed myeloma patients who received either VTD or VRD induction before ASCT. Stem-cell mobilization consisted of intravenous cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF. Plerixafor was administered preemptively to rescue mobilization. In comparison with VTD, VRD induction was associated with a more frequent use of plerixafor (19.3% versus 5.4%, p = 0.004) and with an increased number of apheresis to reach adequate collection (>2 apheresis required in 42.3% versus 30.2%, p = 0.05). Moreover, more patients experienced collection failure in the VRD group (6% versus 1.8%, p = 0.004). The median number of CD34-positive cells (×10⁶/kg) was lower in the VRD group: 8.5 versus 9.3 (p = 0.05) in the VTD group. The vast majority of patients underwent ASCT (93% versus 98%, in VRD and VTD group, respectively). These data highlight the need of optimal stem-cell collection strategy, especially in the context of tandem transplantation and incorporation of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody into induction.

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.

Characterization, Dynamics, and Mechanism of CXCR4 Antagonists on a Constitutively Active Mutant

The G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) CXCR4 is a co-receptor for HIV and is involved in cancers and autoimmune diseases. We characterized five purine or quinazoline core polyamine pharmacophores used for targeting CXCR4 dysregulation in diseases. All were neutral antagonists for wild-type CXCR4 and two were biased antagonists with effects on β-arrestin-2 only at high concentrations. These compounds displayed various activities for a constitutively active mutant (CAM). We use the IT1t-CXCR4 crystal structure and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to develop two hypotheses for the activation of the N1193.35A CAM. The N1193.35A mutation facilitates increased coupling of TM helices III and VI. IT1t deactivates the CAM by disrupting the coupling between TM helices III and VI, mediated primarily by residue F872.53. Mutants of F872.53 in N1193.35A CXCR4 precluded constitutive signaling and prevented inverse agonism. This work characterizes CXCR4 ligands and provides a mechanism for N1193.35A constitutive activation.

Successful hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization with plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor in multiple myeloma patients treated with pomalidomide

Autologous stem-cell transplantation is an effective procedure for the treatment of multiple myeloma, and involves the collection of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). However, in some patients, HSCs in the bone marrow fail to mobilize. Pomalidomide upregulates CXCR4 in hematopoietic stem cells, in a manner similar to that of lenalidomide, and is, thus, likely to have a negative impact on hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients. Here, we report the two cases in which hematopoietic stem cells were mobilized using plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor after exposure to lenalidomide and pomalidomide. Use of plerixafor with a sufficient washout period may lead to successful mobilization following pomalidomide use, although further study of this potential use is needed.

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.

A Pilot, Exploratory, Randomized, Phase II Safety Study Evaluating Tumor Cell Mobilization and Apheresis Product Contamination in Patients Treated with Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Alone or Plus Plerixafor

Because of the potential risk of tumor cell mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), it is crucial to evaluate any potential effect of plerixafor treatment in the presence of G-CSF on multiple myeloma (MM) cell mobilization. This was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, exploratory, safety study (NCT01753453) that investigated the extent of MM cell mobilization after treatment with G-CSF + plerixafor in patients who were deemed poor mobilizers of hematopoietic stem cells. The primary efficacy outcome was the number of MM cells in peripheral blood and apheresis product after G-CSF + plerixafor treatment versus G-CSF alone. Key secondary efficacy outcomes included overall survival and disease status up to 2 years after the first G-CSF dose. Twenty patients were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study treatment. There were no patients with MM cells in peripheral blood up to day 8 G-CSF administration in either treatment group. Up to day 8 no patient in the G-CSF + plerixafor arm and only 1 patient in the G-CSF arm mobilized at least 4.5 × 10⁵ MM cells in the apheresis product. Nine of 10 patients from each treatment arm proceeded to transplantation. MM cells were detected in 5 patients from each treatment arm before and after transplantation. Adverse events observed in the G-CSF + plerixafor arm were consistent with the known safety profile of plerixafor. No MM cells were detected in peripheral blood of either treatment group up to day 8 of mobilization. Only 1 patient in the G-CSF alone group mobilized at least 4.5 × 10⁵ MM tumor cells in apheresis product up to day 8. However, 50% of patients in both treatment arms had detectable amounts of MM cells in their peripheral blood pre- and post-transplantation. There were no new safety concerns with plerixafor.

UK consensus statement on the use of plerixafor to facilitate autologous peripheral blood stem cell collection to support high-dose chemoradiotherapy for patients with malignancy

Plerixafor is a CXC chemokine receptor (CXCR4) antagonist that mobilizes stem cells in the peripheral blood. It is indicated (in combination with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor [G-CSF]) to enhance the harvest of adequate quantities of cluster differentiation (CD) 34+ cells for autologous transplantation in patients with lymphoma or multiple myeloma whose cells mobilize poorly. Strategies for use include delayed re-mobilization after a failed mobilization attempt with G-CSF, and rescue or pre-emptive mobilization in patients in whom mobilization with G-CSF is likely to fail. Pre-emptive use has the advantage that it avoids the need to re-schedule the transplant procedure, with its attendant inconvenience, quality-of-life issues for the patient and cost of additional admissions to the transplant unit. UK experience from 2 major centers suggests that pre-emptive plerixafor is associated with an incremental drug cost of less than £2000 when averaged over all patients undergoing peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplant. A CD34+ cell count of <15 µl^-1 at the time of recovery after chemomobilization or after four days of G-CSF treatment, or an apheresis yield of <1 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg on the first day of apheresis, could be used to predict the need for pre-emptive plerixafor.

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.

Cyclophosphamide-based stem cell mobilization in relapsed multiple myeloma patients: A subgroup analysis from the phase III trial ReLApsE

OBJECTIVE

Analysis of the efficiency and toxicity of cyclophosphamide-based stem cell mobilization in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM).

METHODS

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) were mobilized with high dose cyclophosphamide (2 g/m² daily on days 1 and 2) and G-CSF plus pre-emptive/rescue plerixafor in RMM patients (first to third relapse) treated within the ReLApsE trial of the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG).

RESULTS

Mobilization was initiated with high-dose cyclophosphamide (HD-CY) and G-CSF in 30 patients. Fifteen patients received additional pre-emptive/rescue administration of plerixafor. Stem cell collection was successful (≥2×10⁶ CD34+ cells per kg bw) in 77% (23/30 patients). Patients with prior high-dose melphalan collected a significantly lower median total number of PBSCs than patients without prior high-dose melphalan (3.3×10⁶ vs 17×10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg bw). Toxicity of HD-CY was frequent with 12 serious adverse events (SAE) in 37% of patients (11/30 patients). Infections accounted for the majority of SAE reports. In two patients, SAEs were lethal (septic shock).

CONCLUSIONS

These data proof feasibility of PBSC collection at relapse but emphasize the importance of collection and storage of additional PBSC transplants during first-line treatment when mobilization is more efficient and less toxic.

Single Dose Preemptive Plerixafor for Stem Cell Mobilization for ASCT After Lenalidomide Based Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Impact in Resource Limited Setting

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization with cytokines for autologous stem cell transplant in multiple myeloma is adversely affected by initial induction therapy consisting of either Lenalidomide or cytotoxic drugs, with failure rates of up to 45%. The use of Plerixafor with G-CSF for PBSC mobilisation significantly improves the chances of a successful mobilization. Plerixafor is a costly therapy and increases the overall costs of ASCT which can affect the number of patients being taken up for ASCT in resource limited settings. We prospectively studied the impact of single dose preemptive Plerixafor for PBSC mobilization in patients with prior Lenalidomide exposure. 26 patients who had received Lenalidomide based induction protocol underwent PBSC mobilisation during the study period with G-CSF 10 μg/kg/day SC for 4 days and single dose preemptive Plerixafor 240 μg/kg SC stat 11 h before the scheduled PB stem cell harvest on D5, based on a D4 PB CD34+ counts of <20/μL. A median of 07 cycles of Lenalidomide based combination therapy was used for induction therapy prior to ASCT. 84% patients underwent successful mobilization with one sitting of stem cell harvest post a single dose of Inj Plerixafor. 7.6% patients failed to mobilise the predefined minimum cell dose of CD34 and could not be taken up for ASCT. The median CD34% of the harvest bag sample was 0.33% (0.1-0.97%). Injection site erythema (34%), paresthesia's (34%) and nausea (30%) were the commonest adverse events reported post Inj Plerixafor. We did a real-world cost analysis for a resource limited setting for PBSC mobilization and found significant cost savings for the preemptive Plerixafor group.

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

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

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.

A nationwide survey of the use of plerixafor in patients with lymphoid malignancies who mobilize poorly demonstrates the predominant use of the "on-demand" scheme of administration at French autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant programs

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy supported with autologous stem cell transplantation is a standard therapeutic option for a subset of patients with lymphoid malignancies. Cell procurement is nowadays done almost exclusively through cytapheresis, after mobilization of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) from the marrow to peripheral blood (PB). The egress of HSPCs out of hematopoietic niches occurs in various physiologic or nonhomeostatic situations; pharmacologic approaches include the administration of acutely myelosuppressive agents or hematopoietic growth factors such as recombinant human granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (rHuG-CSF). The introduction of plerixafor, a first-of-its-class molecule that reversibly inhibits the interaction between the chemokine CXCL-12 (also known as SDF-1) and its receptor CXCR-4, has offered new opportunities for the so-called "poor mobilizers" who achieve insufficient mobilization and/or collection with conventional approaches.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Because of the lack of consensus on a definition for poor mobilizers and the relatively high cost of plerixafor, French competent authorities have mandated a postmarketing survey on its use in routine practice.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

We report here the results of this nationwide survey that confirms the clinical efficacy of plerixafor, even in the subset of patients who barely increased PB CD34+ cell count in response to rHuG-CSF-containing mobilization regimen. Furthermore, analysis of this registry showed that despite heterogeneity in medical practices, the early-"on-demand" or "preemptive"-introduction of plerixafor was widely used and did not result in an excess of prescriptions, beyond its expected use at the time when marketing authorization was granted.