Safety and efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor biosimilars in engraftment after autologous stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies: a 4-year, single institute experience with different conditioning regimens

Innovator Filgrastim versus Generic Filgrastim in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Mobilization

Methods This is a retrospective study. G-CSF was administered in the dose of 10 μg/kg subcutaneous as a single dose for 4 days. On day 5, peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) apheresis was performed using Haemonetics MCS plus or COBE Spectra apheresis machine through a double-lumen central venous catheter. Primary outcome parameters were the total number of CD34+ HSCs/kg of recipient weight mobilized in peripheral blood and the number of days required for neutrophil and platelets engraftment, respectively.

Objective We compared the effectiveness and safety of innovator filgrastim versus generic filgrastim in patients who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

Results A total of 91 stem cell mobilizations was analyzed. There were 58 normal healthy donors for allogeneic HSCT and 33 patients for autologous HSCT. There was no statistically significant difference among groups in terms of total collected CD34+ cells value ( p = 0.609). The mean time to neutrophil engraftment was 13.7 days in the innovator group and 13.2 days in the Grafeel group ( p = 0.518). The mean time to platelet engraftment was 16.2 days in the innovator group and 14.8 days in the generic group ( p = 0.435). The patient who received generic filgrastim had more febrile episodes during the course of transplantation ( p = 0.020).

Conclusion Generic filgrastim was found to be comparable to original filgrastim for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in normal healthy donors for allogeneic HSCT and patients for autologous HSCT.

Real World Clinical Experience of Biosimilar G-CSF (Grastofil) for Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization: Single Center Experience in Canada Following Early Adoption

Introduction: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is the first line treatment for mobilization, most commonly using a regimen of daily filgrastim. The use of biosimilars can provide substantial cost savings to the health care system while delivering comparable efficacy outcomes. In 2016, the Saskatchewan Cancer Agency was a leader in Canada, instituting formulary changed from a G-CSF originator product to a cost savings alternative biosimilar for stem cell mobilization prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and for engraftment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical comparability of biosimilar G-CSF to its reference product in a real-world clinical setting and to validate use of the biosimilar in mobilization and engraftment-an indication which had been granted by extrapolation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed including all patients diagnosed with a hematological malignancy between 2012 and 2018 who underwent ASCT. To assess real-world outcomes across a diverse population, successful CD34+ stem cell collection was compared between patients mobilized with originator filgrastim, Neupogen, and biosimilar filgrastim, Grastofil. Additional comparisons included the number of apheresis required, time to absolute neutrophil count (ANC) engraftment, platelet engraftment, length of hospital stay, and Plerixafor use.

RESULTS

217 patients were mobilized and transplanted during the study period. There was no statistically significant difference in success rate between patients mobilized with biosimilar filgrastim and those who had received originator G-CSF (100% vs. 92.4%, p = 0.075). Neither disease type, nor concurrent chemomobilization regimen resulted in a detectable difference between the two G-CSF products in successful stem cell harvest. Engraftment was highly similar between groups, as demonstrated by ANC recovery (11.6 days Neupogen vs. 11.6 days Grastofil), platelet recovery (14.0 days Neupogen vs. 14.2 days Grastofil), and total length of hospital stay (22.4 days Neupogen vs. 22.3 days Grastofil). No statistically significant difference in adjunctive use of Plerixafor^® was observed between Neupogen and Grastofil patients (25.9% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.72).

CONCLUSION

Extrapolation of indications for biosimilars is justified. This real-world evidence builds upon registrational studies to confirm that no clinically meaningful differences were detected between originator Neupogen and biosimilar Grastofil in the setting of PBSC mobilization and engraftment post ASCT. Biosimilars are as safe and effective as originator products. Implementation across all approved indications without hesitation maximizes cost savings to the provincial system, allowing for more optimal allocation of health care resources.

Drug use evaluation of opioid analgesics in pain management among patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients usually experience mucositis, musculoskeletal pain associated with high-dose chemotherapy, radiation, post-HSCT infection, or graft-versus-host disease. Pain management is important for the patients' quality of life. We evaluated appropriate opioid analgesic use in HSCT patients to propose effective pain management strategies.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted using electronic medical records of adult patients with HSCT treated with opioids for moderate to severe pain at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. The numeric rating scale (NRS) was used in pain management. NRS scores of 4‒10 correspond to moderate to severe pain. Appropriate opioid analgesic use was evaluated following published cancer pain management guidelines.

RESULTS

In total, 119 cases were evaluated, including 369 episodes of moderate to severe pain. Mucositis-related, musculoskeletal, and headache pain occurred in 62.6%, 25.8%, and 6.0% of episodes, respectively. Frequently used opioids were intravenous tramadol (84.9%), fentanyl patch (73.9%), and intravenous morphine sulfate (68.9%). Intravenous and topical administrations were used for mucosal pain. In total, 95.0% of patients received appropriate short-acting opioids for initial pain management, 80.5% received appropriate doses of short-acting opioids, appropriate opioids dose adjustment was done after first assessment in 95.5% of patients, and 85.6% were converted to appropriate long-acting opioids.

CONCLUSION

Short-acting opioid analgesic use for initial pain management and dose adjustment after assessment were appropriate. However, initial and conversion dosages recommended by guidelines may be difficult to implement considering the severity of HSCT patients. Pain management guidelines specific for HSCT patients should be developed in the future.

Efficacy and Safety of Nivestim Versus Neupogen for Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells for Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in Singapore General Hospital to study the safety and efficacy of biosimilar granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) Nivestim for chemo-mobilization of stem cells for autologous stem cell transplant (autoSCT). All patients who underwent an autoSCT between January 2011 and December 2016 were screened for eligibility. A total of 194 patients were screened, and 131 were included. Nivestim was used in 65 patients and the originator G-CSF (Neupogen) in 66. Patient characteristics were similar between both arms except for chemo-mobilization regimen used (p < 0.0001). Mobilization success rates were found to be comparable, at 96.9% (Nivestim) and 97% (Neupogen). Adverse events rates were also similar. Median duration of G-CSF use and hospitalization were both found to be shorter in the Nivestim arm. Median drug acquisition cost per mobilization cycle was significantly lower in the Nivestim arm at $533.40 (range $213.40–$1280.20) as compared to $1261.90 (range $574–$2755.20) in the Neupogen arm (p < 0.0001). No difference was observed for neutrophil and platelet engraftment after autoSCT. Nivestim was found to be safe and non-inferior to Neupogen for chemo-mobilization of stem cells for autoSCT, and associated with lower cost and shorter length of hospitalization.

Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential and its impact on patient trajectories after stem cell transplantation

Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) is a recently identified process where older patients accumulate distinct subclones defined by recurring somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem cells. CHIP's implications for stem cell transplantation have been harder to identify due to the high degree of mutational heterogeneity that is present within the genetically distinct subclones. In order to gain a better understanding of CHIP and the impact of clonal dynamics on transplantation outcomes, we created a mathematical model of clonal competition dynamics. Our analyses highlight the importance of understanding competition intensity between healthy and mutant clones. Importantly, we highlight the risk that CHIP poses in leading to dominance of precancerous mutant clones and the risk of donor derived leukemia. Furthermore, we estimate the degree of competition intensity and bone marrow niche decline in mice during aging by using our modeling framework. Together, our work highlights the importance of better characterizing the ecological and clonal composition in hematopoietic donor populations at the time of stem cell transplantation.

Evaluation of a biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim XM02) for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and transplantation: a single center experience in Japan

Background

Biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has recently been introduced into clinical practice. G-CSFs are used to mobilize CD34⁺ cells and accelerate engraftment after transplantation. However, in Asia, particularly in Japan, data for peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization by this biosimilar G-CSF are currently lacking. Therefore, the clinical efficacy and safety of biosimilar G-CSF for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation needs to be evaluated in a Japanese context.

Materials and methods

The subjects included two groups of patients with malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma. All patients received chemotherapy priming for the mobilization of PBSCs. All patients were treated with chemotherapy followed by the administration of either the biosimilar G-CSF, filgrastim XM02 (FBNK), or the originators, filgrastim, or lenograstim.

Results

There were no significant differences among FBNK, filgrastim, and lenograstim treatments in the numbers of CD34⁺ cells in harvested PBSCs, the scores for granulocyte/macrophage colony forming units, or for malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients evaluated as separate or combined cohorts. In addition, there were no significant differences in safety, side effects, complications, or the time to engraftment after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Conclusion

Biosimilar FBNK shows the same efficacy and safety as originator G-CSFs for facilitating bone marrow recovery in Japanese malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients undergoing stem cell transplantation. In addition, it is less expensive than the originators, reducing hospitalization costs.

Italian consensus conference for the outpatient autologous stem cell transplantation management in multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the leading indication for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) worldwide. The safety and efficacy of reducing hospital stay for MM patients undergoing ASCT have been widely explored, and different outpatient models have been proposed. However, there is no agreement on the criteria for selecting patients eligible for this strategy as well as the standards for their clinical management. On the basis of this rationale, the Italian Group for Stem Cell Transplantation (GITMO) endorsed a project to develop guidelines for the management of outpatient ASCT in MM, using evidence-based knowledge and consensus-formation techniques. An expert panel convened to discuss the currently available data on the practice of outpatient ASCT management and formulated recommendations according to the supporting evidence. Evidence gaps were filled with consensus-based statements. Three main topics were addressed: (1) the identification of criteria for selecting MM patients eligible for outpatient ASCT management; (2) the definition of standard procedures for performing outpatient ASCT (model, supportive care and monitoring during the aplastic phase); (3) the definition of the standard criteria and procedures for re-hospitalization during the aplastic phase at home. Herein, we report the summary and the results of the discussion and the consensus.