Plerixafor and granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma previously failing mobilization with G-CSF with or without chemotherapy for autologous hematopoietic stem cell mobilization: the Austrian experienc

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.

How to manage poor mobilisers

Autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell transplantation (ASCT) has been used for more than five decades to treat malignant and non-malignant diseases. Successful engraftment after high-dose chemotherapy relies on the ability to collect sufficient CD34 + hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs), typically from peripheral blood after mobilization. Commonly, either granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone as a single agent (i.e. steady-state mobilization) or G-CSF after chemotherapy is administered to collect adequate numbers of HPCs (minimum ≥2 × 106 CD34 + cells/kg for one ASCT; optimal up to 5 × 106 CD34 + cells/kg). However, a significant proportion of patients fail successful HPC mobilization, which is commonly defined as a CD34+ cell count below 10-15/µL after at least 4 days of 10 µg/kg b.w. G-CSF alone, or after chemo-mobilization in combination with 5-10 µg/kg b.w. G-CSF. In these situations plerixafor, a chemokine receptor inhibitor (CXCR4) can be used to enhance HPC collection in patients with multiple myeloma and malignant lymphoma whose cells mobilize poorly. Risk factors for poor mobilization have been evaluated and several strategies (e.g. plerixafor to rescue the mobilization approach or pre-emptive use) have been suggested to optimize mobilization, especially in patients at risk. This manuscript discusses the risk factors of poor CD34+ mobilization and summarizes the current strategies to optimize mobilization and HPC collection.

Poor Mobilizers in Lymphoma but Not Myeloma Patients Had Significantly Poorer Progression-Free Survival after Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation: Results of a Large Retrospective, Single-Center Observational Study

In our single-center study, 357 myeloma and lymphoma patients between 2009 and 2019 were mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF 7.5 µg/kg bid for four days) plus a fixed dose of 24 mg Plerixafor when indicated (Plerixafor Group, n = 187) or G-CSF alone (G-CSF Group, n = 170). The target CD34 cell yields were ≥2.0 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg in lymphoma and ≥4.0 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg in myeloma patients to enable putative second transplants in the latter. There were no significant differences in engraftment kinetics or transfusion requirements between the Plerixafor Group and the control group in the myeloma cohort, with lymphoma patients not requiring Plerixafor showing significantly faster neutrophil recovery, a trend to faster platelet recovery, and a significantly lower need for platelet transfusions, probably due to the significantly lower number of CD34-positive cells re-transfused. While in myeloma patients the outcome (overall survival, progression-free survival) following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was similar between the Plerixafor Group and the control group, hard to mobilize lymphoma patients had significantly poorer progression-free survival (47% vs. 74% at 36 months after ASCT, p = 0.003) with a trend also to poorer overall survival (71% vs. 84%). In conclusion, while there seem to be no differences in stemness capacity and long-term engraftment efficiency between the Plerixafor and the G-CSF Group in lymphoma as well as myeloma patients, poor mobilizing lymphoma patients per se constitute a high-risk population with a poorer outcome after ASCT. Whether disease characteristics and/or a more intense or stem cell-toxic pre-mobilization chemo-/radiotherapy burden in this cohort are responsible for this observation remains to be shown in future studies.

Impact of Mobilization Strategies on Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Collection Efficiency and Product Quality: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

Autologous stem cell transplantation is routinely used in the management of several hematological diseases, solid tumors, and immune disorders. Peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection performed by apheresis is the preferred source of stem cells. In this study, the potential impact of mobilization regimens on the performance of the Spectra Optia^® continuous mononuclear cell collection system was evaluated. We performed a retrospective data analysis for patients undergoing autologous PBSC collection at the Medical University Vienna, Vienna General Hospital between September 2016 and June 2018. Collections were divided into two main groups according to the mobilization regimen received: without (210 collections) or with (99 collections) plerixafor. Assessed variables included product characteristics and collection efficiency (CE). Overall, product characteristics were similar between the groups. Median CD34+ CE2 was 50.1% versus 53.0%, and CE1 was 66.9% versus 69.9% following mobilization without and with plerixafor, respectively; the difference was not statistically significant. Simple linear regression showed a very weak positive correlation between the mobilization method and CE1 or CE2 (mobilization with plerixafor increased CE2 by 4.106%). In conclusion, the Spectra Optia^® apheresis system led to high CE and a good quality of PBSC products when mobilization regimens with or without plerixafor were used.

Role of CXCR4 in the progression and therapy of acute leukaemia

CXCR4 is expressed on leukaemia cells and haematopoietic stem cells (HSCs), and its ligand stromal-derived factor 1 (SDF-1) is produced abundantly by stromal cells in the bone marrow (BM). The SDF-1/CXCR4 axis plays important roles in homing to and retention in the protective BM microenvironment of malignant leukaemia cells and normal HSCs. CXCR4 expression is regulated by multiple mechanisms and the level of CXCR4 expression on leukaemia cells has prognostic indications in patients with acute leukaemia. CXCR4 antagonists can mobilize leukaemia cells from BM to circulation, which render them effectively eradicated by chemotherapeutic agents, small molecular inhibitors or hypomethylating agents. Therefore, such combinational therapies have been tested in clinical trials. However, new evidence emerged that drug-resistant leukaemia cells were not affected by CXCR4 antagonists, and the migration of certain leukaemia cells to the leukaemia niche was independent of SDF-1/CXCR4 axis. In this review, we summarize the role of CXCR4 in progression and treatment of acute leukaemia, with a focus on the potential of CXCR4 as a therapeutic target for acute leukaemia. We also discuss the potential value of using CXCR4 antagonists as chemosensitizer for conditioning regimens and immunosensitizer for graft-vs-leukaemia effects of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Clinical significance of chemokine receptor antagonists

Introduction: Chemokine receptors are important therapeutic targets for the treatment of many human diseases. This study will provide an overview of approved chemokine receptor antagonists and promising candidates in advanced clinical trials.Areas covered: We will describe clinical aspects of chemokine receptor antagonists regarding their clinical efficacy, mechanisms of action, and re-purposed applications.Expert opinion: Three chemokine antagonists have been approved: (i) plerixafor is a small-molecule CXCR4 antagonist that mobilizes hematopoietic stem cells; (ii) maraviroc is a small-molecule CCR5 antagonist for anti-HIV treatment; and (iii) mogamulizumab is a monoclonal-antibody CCR4 antagonist for the treatment of mycosis fungoides or Sézary syndrome. Moreover, phase 3 trials are ongoing to evaluate many potent candidates, including CCR5 antagonists (e.g. leronlimab), dual CCR2/CCR5 antagonists (e.g. cenicriviroc), and CXCR4 antagonists (e.g. balixafortide, mavorixafor, motixafortide). The success of chemokine receptor antagonists depends on the selective blockage of disease-relevant chemokine receptors which are indispensable for disease progression. Although clinical translation has been slow, antagonists targeting chemokine receptors with multifaced functions offer the potential to treat a broad spectrum of human diseases.

The Biological and Clinical Relevance of G Protein-Coupled Receptors to the Outcomes of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematized Review

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) remains the only curative treatment for several malignant and non-malignant diseases at the cost of serious treatment-related toxicities (TRTs). Recent research on extending the benefits of HSCT to more patients and indications has focused on limiting TRTs and improving immunological effects following proper mobilization and engraftment. Increasing numbers of studies report associations between HSCT outcomes and the expression or the manipulation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). This large family of cell surface receptors is involved in various human diseases. With ever-better knowledge of their crystal structures and signaling dynamics, GPCRs are already the targets for one third of the current therapeutic arsenal. The present paper assesses the current status of animal and human research on GPCRs in the context of selected HSCT outcomes via a systematized survey and analysis of the literature.

Mobilized peripheral blood stem cell apheresis via Hickman catheter in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplantation remains an integral treatment tool for certain childhood malignancies. In children, a central venous catheter is typically necessary to provide adequate flow rates for preparative apheresis. In this study, the feasibility and efficiency of collecting CD34+ cells via an indwelling Hickman catheter, preimplanted for chemotherapy, instead of placing an additional temporary central venous catheter was evaluated.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Forty-eight pediatric leukaphereses for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation using Spectra Optia MNC, Version 3.0 were reviewed. We compared preimplanted Hickman catheters with a temporary Shaldon catheter, inserted for apheresis. Apheresis was considered successful if a dose of 2 × 10⁶ CD34+ peripheral blood stem cells/kg BW was achieved.

RESULTS

In 43 (89.6%) of the 48 patients, a Hickman catheter was used for leukapheresis. Only 5 patients (10.4%) received a temporary Shaldon catheter. In both groups, apheresis was performed without apparent adverse reactions. The dose of collected CD34+ peripheral blood stem cells was 12.7 × 10⁶ (range, 2.3-70.7 × 10⁶ ) cells/kg BW in the Hickman group and 16.2 × 10⁶ (range, 3.8-48.4 × 10⁶ ) cells/kg BW in the Shaldon group, showing no statistically significant difference (p = 0.58). In both groups, the primary endpoint of a minimal CD34+ cell concentration of 2 × 10⁶ cells/kg BW was achieved at a maximum of two leukapheresis sessions. Apheresis efficacy was further confirmed by the collection efficiency of 40.2% in the Hickman group and 27.8% in the Shaldon group (p = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

These data indicate the reliable feasibility and efficacy of mobilized apheresis via an indwelling Hickman catheter. In light of this, the routine insertion of a dialysis catheter for the purpose of leukapheresis should be critically reconsidered.

Blood graft composition and post-transplant recovery in myeloma patients mobilized with plerixafor: a prospective multicenter study

The composition of autologous blood grafts after cryopreservation, post-transplant hematological recovery up to 1 year and immune recovery up to 6 months as well as outcome was analyzed in 87 patients with multiple myeloma (MM). The patients receiving added plerixafor due to poor mobilization (11%) were compared to those mobilized with G-CSF or cyclophosphamide (CY) plus G-CSF. The use of plerixafor was found to significantly affect the graft composition as there was a significantly higher proportion of the more primitive CD34⁺ cells, higher number of T and B lymphocytes as well as NK cells in the grafts of patients who received also plerixafor. The hematological recovery after auto-SCT was comparable between the groups. The recovery of CD3⁺CD4⁺ T cells was faster in plerixafor mobilized patients at 1 and 3 months post-transplant. There were no significant differences in progression-free (PFS) or overall survival (OS) according to the plerixafor use.

Stem Cell Mobilization and Harvesting Failure in Case of Heavily Pretreated Patients

Background: High-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation have become a standard curative treatment in various hematologic malignancies. Many factors can affect the success of mobilization and hematopoietic stem cell harvesting.

Aim: The aim of this study was to analyze factors that lead to mobilization failure.

Material and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on 19 patients with failure of stem cell harvesting. All patients were administered high doses of GCS-F (filgrastim, 15 μg/kg/day) and 0.24 mg/kg of plerixafor on day +5 or +10 of harvesting.

Results: The median age of the study population was 51 years (range 35–67) and 52.6% (n = 10) were males. The study group included 4 (21%) subjects with multiple myeloma, 6 (31.5%) with Hodgkin lymphoma, 8 cases (42.1%) with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and 1 patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Each patient received 2.78 (range 1–5) lines of chemotherapy, administered in 11.57 (range 2 to over 20) cycles of treatment.

Conclusion: In hematologic malignancies it is very important to collect stem cells in time, in order to reduce mobilization failure. As we have shown in our studied cases, multiple lines of polychemotherapy with or without radiotherapy lead to mobilization failure.

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.

Prognostic factors for re-mobilization using plerixafor and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma previously failing mobilization with G-CSF with or without chemotherapy: the Korean multicenter retrospective study

Plerixafor in combination with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been shown to improve the rates of successful peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization in patients with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma (MM) who experienced prior failure of PBSC mobilization. We evaluated the mobilization results of re-mobilization using plerixafor and G-CSF in insufficiently mobilizing patients. Forty-four patients with lymphoma (n = 29) or MM (n = 15) were included in the study. The median age was 50 (range, 24-64) years. Previous mobilization regimens were chemotherapy with G-CSF (n = 28), including cyclophosphamide with G-CSF (n = 15), and G-CSF only (n = 16). All patients with lymphoma achieved at least partial response (PR) before the mobilization, including 13 complete responses (CRs). Eleven patients with MM achieved at least PR and four patients with MM were in stable disease before mobilization. The median number of apheresis was 3 (range, 1-6). The median yield of PBSC collections was 3.41 (0.13-38.11) × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg. Thirty-four (77.3 %) patients had successful collections defined as at least 2 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg. The rate of successful collections was not different between the two underlying diseases (79.3 % in lymphoma and 73.3 % in MM). Of the entire cohort, 38 (86.4 %) of patients went on to receive an autologous transplant. Previous long-term use of high-risk drugs (>4 cycles use of alkylating agents, platinum-containing agents, or thalidomide) (HR 10.8, 95 % CI 1.1-110.0, P = 0.043) and low platelet count (<100 × 10(9)/L) 1 day before the first apheresis (HR 27.9, 95 % CI 2.9-273.7, P = 0.004) were independent prognostic factors for predicting failure of PBSC re-mobilization using plerixafor and G-CSF. In conclusion, re-mobilization using plerixafor and G-CSF showed a success rate of 77.3 % in patients with lymphoma or MM who experienced prior failure of PBSC mobilization, and the majority of them underwent autologous transplant. Therefore, plerixafor-based re-mobilization was an effective method in poor mobilizers.

Plerixafor (Mozobil): A Stem Cell-Mobilizing Agent for Transplantation in Lymphoma Patients Predicted to Be Poor Mobilizers - A Pilot Study

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the standard therapy for refractory/relapsed aggressive lymphoma. The initial step of the procedure involves mobilization and collection of hematopoietic stem cells. G-CSF fails to achieve mobilization in 15-25% of lymphoma patients. Plerixafor is a novel CXCR4 antagonist that can promote mobilization. It has been used successfully in patients after the failure of G-CSF. It is reasonable to test whether plerixafor should become the mobilizing agent of choice in patients expected to exhibit difficulties in mobilization. We initiated a study to assess the use of plerixafor as a first-line stem cell mobilizer in 20 elderly or heavily pretreated patients with non-Hodgkin or Hodgkin lymphoma. The minimum defined CD34+ cell dose of ≥2 × 106 cells/kg was achieved by 90% of the patients, and for 83% of them with one apheresis procedure. The target CD34+ dose of ≥5 × 106 cells/kg was achieved by 70% of the patients. The median number of circulating CD34+ cells before and after plerixafor was 14.4 and 42.8 cells/μl, respectively. The post-plerixafor adverse events were mild. All patients promptly engrafted after high-dose chemotherapy treatment. We conclude that plerixafor administration is safe and efficient for upfront mobilization in lymphoma patients predicted to be poor mobilizers.

Outcome in Multiple Myeloma Patients Eligible for Stem Cell Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard of care for selected patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Many data exist on ASCT in the era of novel agents. We retrospectively analyzed 189 patients (108 males and 81 females) with biopsy-proven MM, who had received ASCT after induction therapy with either conventional chemotherapy alone or in combination with novel agents at our department. The outcomes of both groups and the risk factors for shorter survival were investigated. The most commonly used induction chemotherapy prior to ASCT was VAD (vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone, 42%), followed by PAD (bortezomib, doxorubicin and dexamethasone, 21%). One-hundred and twenty-nine patients (68%) received cyclophosphamide-recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for stem cell mobilization. No differences were observed for progression-free survival in terms of the number of transplanted CD34+ cells (p = 0.261). A trend in improved overall survival (OS) was seen for the use of novel agents when compared to conventional chemotherapy (164.3 vs. 82.0 months; p = 0.046). The International Staging System stages had a significant (p = 0.036) impact on OS. The novel agents improved OS in our patients with MM undergoing ASCT when compared to conventional chemotherapy regimens. The number of transplanted CD34+ cells had no significant impact on hematopoietic reconstitution.

The CXCR4 and adhesion molecule expression of CD34+ hematopoietic cells mobilized by "on-demand" addition of plerixafor to granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor

Background

Granulocyte–colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is routinely used for mobilization of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells preceding autologous transplantation after high-dose chemotherapy in hematologic malignancies. However, due to high mobilization failure rates, alternative mobilization strategies are required.

Study Design and Methods

Patients who poorly mobilized CD34+ hematopoietic cells (HCs) with G-CSF additionally received the CXCR4 antagonist plerixafor. The phenotype of CD34+ HCs collected after this plerixafor-induced “rescue” mobilization, in regard to adhesion molecule and CD133, CD34, and CD38 expression in comparison to CD34+ HCs collected after traditional G-CSF administration in good mobilizers, was analyzed flow cytometrically. To confirm previous studies in our patient cohort, the efficiency of mobilization and subsequent engraftment after this “on-demand” plerixafor mobilization were analyzed.

Results

Pronounced mobilization occurred after plerixafor administration in poor mobilizers, resulting in similar CD34+ cell yields as obtained by G-CSF in good mobilizers, whereby plerixafor increased the content of primitive CD133+/CD34+/CD38– cells. The surface expression profiles of the marrow homing and retention receptors CXCR4, VLA-4, LFA-1, and CD44 on mobilized CD34+ cells and hematopoietic recovery after transplantation were similar in patients receiving G-CSF plus plerixafor or G-CSF. Unexpectedly, the expression levels of respective adhesion receptors were not related to mobilization efficiency or engraftment.

Conclusion

The results show that CD34+ HCs collected by plerixafor-induced rescue mobilization are qualitatively equivalent to CD34+ HCs collected after traditional G-CSF mobilization in good mobilizers, in regard to their adhesive phenotype and engraftment potential. Thereby, plerixafor facilitates the treatment of poor mobilizers with autologous HC transplantation after high-dose chemotherapy.

A plerixafor-based strategy allows adequate hematopoietic stem cell collection in poor mobilizers: results from the Canadian Special Access Program

Plerixafor effectively mobilizes hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). However, most patients' cells are successfully collected using traditional strategies and there is limited cost-effectiveness data. The objectives of this study were to: (1) summarize the published reports of mobilization using a plerixafor-based strategy during compassionate access programs and (2) describe the Canadian experience with plerixafor during its availability by Health Canada's Special Access Program. A literature search identified reports of plerixafor-based mobilization during compassionate access programs. Overall, successful collection of at least 2 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg was achieved in ~75% of patients, and about two-thirds of patients went on to HSCT. A greater proportion of patients had successful collections when plerixafor was used in the upfront or preemptive settings. Plerixafor was made available by Health Canada's SAP from September 2008 to December 2010. In 96 of 132 (73%) patients, there was successful collection of at least 2 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg. Ninety-nine (75%) patients went on to receive an autologous transplant. Plerixafor-based mobilization is effective in perceived poor mobilizers. The optimal way to incorporate plerixafor into a mobilization strategy, however, remains to be determined. Centre-specific analysis of resource utilization may help to identify the most cost-effective way to implement various plerixafor-based mobilization strategies.

Factors affecting successful mobilization with plerixafor: an Italian prospective survey in 215 patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of plerixafor in peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization has been explored in several studies, factors associated with successful plerixafor mobilization after administration of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), with or without chemotherapy, have not been investigated. We analyzed data on PBSC mobilization from a large Italian database of lymphoma and myeloma plerixafor-treated patients.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Two endpoints were established to define successful mobilization: patients with at least 2 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg collected by three leukapheresis procedures and patients achieving a peak count of at least 20 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/L during mobilization.

RESULTS

Plerixafor achieved successful mobilization in both predicted (n = 64) and proven poor mobilizers (PMs; n = 143), classified according to the Gruppo Italiano Trapianto di Midollo Osseo (GITMO) criteria. Successful mobilization was independent of type of mobilization (steady state or chemotherapy); age; sex; disease; number or type of chemotherapy regimens preceding plerixafor; radiation therapy; prior treatment with melphalan, carmustine, lenalidomide, and radioimmune conjugates; and laboratory variables. Multivariate analysis identified previous fludarabine treatment and premobilization platelet count as predictors of successful mobilization.

CONCLUSION

This large, prospective, nationwide study confirmed plerixafor efficacy for mobilizing PBSCs when added to G-CSF with or without chemotherapy. Plerixafor can overcome negative effects of most predictors of poor mobilization to achieve satisfactory harvest both in predicted and proven PM.

Peripheral blood CD34+ cell monitoring after cyclophosphamide and granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor: an algorithm for the pre-emptive use of plerixafor

Plerixafor "on demand" after chemotherapy plus granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is efficient in peripheral stem cell mobilization, but the timing of administration and criteria for patient selection are under investigation. To devise an algorithm for the "on demand" use of plerixafor at the first mobilization attempt, we analyzed the kinetics of hematopoietic recovery and peripheral blood CD34+ cells in 107 patients treated with high-dose cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF. Fifty-one patients with myeloma were treated with cyclophosphamide 3-4 g/m(2) on day 0 followed by G-CSF 10 μg/kg from day + 6, and 56 patients with lymphoma received cyclophosphamide 6-7 g/m(2) followed by G-CSF 5 μg/kg from day + 1. Peripheral blood CD34+ cell monitoring was started on day + 8 in patients with myeloma and day + 10 in patients with lymphoma. The outcome of interest was a collection of ≤ 2 × 10(6) CD34+/kg. By a multivariate logistic regression model, CD34+ cell count < 10/μL at leukocyte recovery (> 1000/μL) or leukocyte count < 1000/μL after day + 12 in myeloma and day + 14 in lymphoma predicted the failure of mobilization by 2.7 and 2.8 times (p = 0.001 and p = 0.02) with a sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 88%, respectively. Plerixafor "on demand" may be considered in patients with myeloma and lymphoma with delayed hematopoietic recovery and < 10/μL CD34+ cells, as a first-line mobilization strategy.

European data on stem cell mobilization with plerixafor in patients with nonhematologic diseases: an analysis of the European consortium of stem cell mobilization

BACKGROUND

Plerixafor with granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been shown to enhance stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma with previous mobilization failure. In this European named patient program we report the experience in insufficiently mobilizing patients diagnosed with nonhematologic diseases.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients with germ cell tumor (n=11), Ewing sarcoma (n=6), Wiscott-Aldrich disease (n=5), neuroblastoma (n=4), and other nonhematologic diseases (n=7) were included in the study. Plerixafor was limited to patients with previous or current stem cell mobilization failure and given after 4 days of G-CSF (n=21) or after chemotherapy and G-CSF (n=12) in patients who mobilized poorly.

RESULTS

Overall, 28 (85%) patients succeeded in collecting at least 2×10(6)/kg body weight (b.w.) CD34+ cells (median, 5.0×10(6)/kg b.w. CD34+ cells; range, 2.0×10(6)-29.5×10(6)/kg b.w. CD34+ cells), and five (15%) patients collected a median of 1.5×10(6)/kg b.w. CD34+ cells (range, 0.9×10(6)-1.8×10(6)/kg b.w. CD34+ cells). Nineteen patients proceeded to transplantation. The median dose of CD34+ cells infused was 3.3×10(6)/kg b.w. (range, 2.3×10(6)-6.7×10(6)/kg b.w. CD34+ cells). The median numbers of days to neutrophil and platelet engraftment were 11 (range, 9-12) and 15 (range, 10-25) days, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These data emphasize the role of plerixafor in combination with G-CSF or chemotherapy and G-CSF as an effective mobilization regimen with the potential of successful stem cell collection. Accordingly, plerixafor seems to be safe and effective in patients with nonhematologic diseases. Larger prospective studies are warranted to further assess its use in these patients.

Novel strategies for blood stem cell mobilization: special focus on plerixafor

INTRODUCTION

More than 98% of autologous stem cell transplants are now performed with the support of mobilized blood stem cells, and the proportion of allogeneic blood stem cell transplants has risen to more than 70%. Blood stem cell mobilization strategies are therefore important components of all transplant programs.

AREAS COVERED

Stem cell mobilization strategies are evaluated based on current literature, with special focus on the use of plerixafor, a CXCR4 chemokine receptor antagonist. Mobilization methods in autologous settings include the use of G-CSF alone or following chemotherapy (chemomobilization), and the use of G-CSF alone in allogeneic transplants. A combination of G-CSF + plerixafor has been shown to be effective in patients who have failed a previous mobilization. This combination has also been found to be superior to G-CSF alone in Phase III studies in myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients as the first-line mobilization.

EXPERT OPINION

Addition of plerixafor to chemomobilization or G-CSF mobilization may be more cost-effective than its routine use, and it is worth considering in predicted or proven poor mobilizers. Novel mobilization strategies have allowed more successful stem cell collection in autologous setting, although the effect of plerixafor on graft content and long-term patient outcomes needs further investigation.

European data on stem cell mobilization with plerixafor in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients. A subgroup analysis of the European Consortium of stem cell mobilization

The effectiveness of the novel hematopoietic stem cell mobilizing agent plerixafor was evaluated in nationwide compassionate use programs in 13 European countries. A total of 580 poor mobilizers with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) and multiple myeloma (MM) were enrolled. All patients received plerixafor plus granulocyte CSF with or without chemotherapy. Overall, the collection yield was significantly higher in MM patients (>2.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg: 81.6%; >5.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg: 32.0%) than in NHL patients (>2.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg: 64.8%; >5.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg: 12.6%; P<0.0001) and also significantly higher in HL patients (>2.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg: 81.5%; >5.0 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg: 22.2%) than in NHL patients (P=0.013). In a subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in mobilization success comparing patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma. Our data emphasize the role of plerixafor in poor mobilizers, but further strategies to improve the apheresis yield especially in patients with NHL are required.

Increased mobilization and yield of stem cells using plerixafor in combination with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for the treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma remain the most common indications for high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell rescue. While a CD34+ cell dose of 1 × 10⁶/kg is considered the minimum required for engraftment, higher CD34+ doses correlate with improved outcome. Numerous studies, however, support targeting a minimum CD34+ cell dose of 2.0 × 10⁶/kg, and an “optimal” dose of 4 to 6 × 10⁶/kg for a single transplant. Unfortunately, up to 40% of patients fail to mobilize an optimal CD34+ cell dose using myeloid growth factors alone. Plerixafor is a novel reversible inhibitor of CXCR4 that significantly increases the mobilization and collection of higher numbers of hematopoietic progenitor cells. Two randomized multi-center clinical trials in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and multiple myeloma have demonstrated that the addition of plerixafor to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor increases the mobilization and yield of CD34+ cells in fewer apheresis days, which results in durable engraftment. This review summarizes the pharmacology and evidence for the clinical efficacy of plerixafor in mobilizing hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells, and discusses potential ways to utilize plerixafor in a cost-effective manner in patients with these diseases.