Optimal timing of apheresis for the efficient mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells recruited by high-dose granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in healthy donors

Population Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor to Optimize Dosing and Timing for CD34+ Cell Harvesting

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilizes peripheral blood (PB) progenitor cells from bone marrow (BM) into circulation for PB stem cell transplantation (PBSCT). This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model of filgrastim in healthy subjects to optimize PB CD34+ cell collection. Plasma filgrastim concentrations and CD34+ cell count data were obtained from a clinical study involving healthy Korean subjects. A total of 1378 plasma concentration measurements and 982 CD34+ cell count data collected from 53 subjects were used in the PK-PD model. Filgrastim PKs were adequately described by a one-compartment linear disposition model with an additional transit compartment for absorption. Log-transformed body weight was the only significant covariate affecting the volume of distribution and clearance. CD34+ cell mobilization was best captured by a modified Friberg model, assuming continual entry of proliferating BM stem cells into PB via a single transit compartment. Simulation results suggested that the 5 μg/kg twice-daily dosing regimen may yield higher CD34+ cell counts compared to the 10 μg/kg once-daily regimen for achieving target CD34+ cell counts of 20/μL and 50/μL. We successfully developed a robust PK-PD model of G-CSF that optimizes the yield of CD34+ cells during allogeneic PBSCT. This model can guide the efficient determination of optimal G-CSF dosing regimens and CD34+ cell harvesting strategies.

Single Apheresis Session on the 4th Day of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Administration Seems Convenient to Collect Enough Peripheral Blood Stem Cells from Healthy Donors

Background

To minimize adverse events of peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection in healthy donors, it is reasonable to limit the total dose of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and/or the number of apheresis days without decreasing of PBSCs yield. Therefore, we have started to collect G-CSF induced PBSCs on day 4 instead of on day 5. So, we retrospectively aimed to investigate the results of this 4-day G-CSF administration.

Study Design and Methods

Seventy-six healthy donors who performed on G-CSF induced PBSCs donation consecutively between January 2020 and July 2022 were included in this study. G-CSF (filgrastim) at 2 × 5 µg/kg/day subcutaneously was applied. Apheresis started on day 4.

Results

Sixty-nine (90.8%) of 76 donors provided enough PBSCs on day 4 apheresis session. Younger age (p = 0.004), higher PB CD34+ cell count on the 4th day of G-CSF (p < 0.001), and male donor (p = 0.010) were correlated with increased amounts of PBSCs yield. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to predict very good mobilizers (collected PBSCs ≥8 × 106/kg after the first apheresis) were performed. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, male sex (p = 0.004), PB CD34+ cell count ≥100/µL on the 4th day of G-CSF (p < 0.001), and glomerular filtration rate ≥115 mL/min (p = 0.031) were found to be independent predicting factors to demonstrate very good mobilizer.

Conclusion

It seems that starting the apheresis on the 4th day of G-CSF administration is effective and to provide minimal G-CSF exposure in healthy donors.

Stem Cells Collection and Mobilization in Adult Autologous/Allogeneic Transplantation: Critical Points and Future Challenges

Achieving successful hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) relies on two fundamental pillars: effective mobilization and efficient collection through apheresis to attain the optimal graft dose. These cornerstones pave the way for enhanced patient outcomes. The primary challenges encountered by the clinical unit and collection facility within a transplant program encompass augmenting mobilization efficiency to optimize the harvest of target cell populations, implementing robust monitoring and predictive strategies for mobilization, streamlining the apheresis procedure to minimize collection duration while ensuring adequate yield, prioritizing patient comfort by reducing the overall collection time, guaranteeing the quality and purity of stem cell products to optimize graft function and transplant success, and facilitating seamless coordination between diverse entities involved in the HSCT process. In this review, we aim to address key questions and provide insights into the critical aspects of mobilizing and collecting hematopoietic stem cells for transplantation purposes.

Stem Cells mobilization and collection in allogeneic related and unrelated donors: a single center experience with focus on plerixafor

INTRODUCTION

Poor CD34 + cells mobilization in allogeneic donors could affect transplant outcome. In a subgroup of patient mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone is unsatisfactory, and Plerixafor could be used to enhance CD34 + cells release from bone marrow niche.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-center, cohort study on healthy allogeneic donors both related and unrelated, treated by Udine Transfusion Center over the last 10 years (2012-2022). In the 195 allogeneic donors treated we analyzed age, sex, body weight, BMI, comorbidities, G-CSF dosage and even baseline white blood cell count as possible predictor of insufficient CD34 + cells mobilization on day 5. In the subgroup of related donors we evaluated even baseline CD34 + cells (measured before mobilization start). Processed donor blood volume, collection efficiency and apheresis product were examined. Additionally a comparative analysis was conducted between G-CSF alone treated donors and poor mobilizing ones, in which Plerixafor was administered at a dose of 0.24 mg/kg as a pre-emptive or rescue agent.

RESULTS

In 9 donors, due to poor mobilization (defined as CD34 + < 20/µL or estimated yield < 1 ×106 kg/recipient body weight), the use of plerixafor was necessary. PLX at a dose of 0.24 mg/kg was administered 5 h before collection, inducing an average increase of 5.1 (1.7-12.6) in CD34 + circulating cells. In this subgroup of patients, BMI and weight were significantly lower (p = 0.03). Interestingly, baseline CD34 + cells (measured before the onset of mobilization) also seems to predict poor mobilization (p = 0.003). In donors additionally treated with Plerixafor compared to those who received G-CSF alone, collection efficiency was higher (p = 0.02) and CD34 + cells collected were comparable (p = 0.2). Side effects related to the administration of plerixafor, if they occurred, were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Plerixafor is a safe and effective drug in the rescue and prevention of poor mobilization. New prospective studies on allogeneic donors should be performed to increase the treatable population to avoid inadequate collection and mobilization. New laboratory predictors such as baseline CD34 + cells should be investigated in larger cohorts and then used as early screening.

Comparison of cryoprotectants in hematopoietic cell infusion-related adverse events

BACKGROUND

The standard cryoprotectant for human cellular products is dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), which is associated with hematopoietic cell infusion-related adverse events (HCI-AEs) in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation including peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation (PBSCT). DMSO is often used with hydroxyethyl starch (HES), which reduces DMSO concentration while maintaining the postthaw cell recovery. The cryoprotectant medium CP-1 (Kyokuto Pharmaceutical Industrial) is widely used in Japan. After mixture of a product with CP-1, DMSO and HES concentrations are 5% and 6%, respectively. However, the safety profile of CP-1 in association with HCI-AEs has not been investigated.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

To compare CP-1 with other cryoprotectants, we conducted a subgroup analysis of PBSCT recipients in a prospective surveillance study for HCI-AEs. Moreover, we validated the toxicity of CP-1 in 90 rats following various dose administration.

RESULTS

The PBSC products cryopreserved with CP-1 (CP-1 group) and those with other cryoprotectants, mainly 10% DMSO (non-CP-1 group), were infused into 418 and 58 recipients, respectively. The rate of ≥grade 2 HCI-AEs was higher in the CP-1 group, but that of overall or ≥grade 3 HCI-AEs was not significantly different, compared to the non-CP-1 group. Similarly, after propensity score matching, ≥grade 2 HCI-AEs were more frequent in the CP-1 group, but the ≥grade 3 HCI-AE rate did not differ significantly between the groups. No significant toxicity was detected regardless of the CP-1 dose in the 90 rats.

CONCLUSIONS

Infusion of a CP-1-containing PBSC product is feasible with the respect of HCI-AEs.

Use of plerixafor to mobilize haematopoietic progenitor cells in healthy donors

Increased transplant activity calls for improved stem cell collection, especially when peripheral blood is the preferred source of haematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). Plerixafor is a bicyclam molecule that mobilizes CD34+ cells by reversibly disrupting CXCR4-CXCL12-supported HPC retention. Plerixafor is given with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to help harvest autologous CD34+ cells for transplantation when mobilization with G-CSF fails. Mobilization protocols with the same doses of plerixafor and G-CSF have been used off-label in healthy allogeneic donors, with equal success and scarce side effects, both in adult and paediatric patients. Plerixafor has also been used as a sole mobilization agent. Plerixafor alone or coupled with G-CSF might lead to harvesting distinct cellular populations conferring improved engraftment properties and increased survival. Those characteristics might make plerixafor an especially attractive mobilization agent, particularly for non-related donations. However, available data are limited, and long-term follow-up is needed to clarify the best scenario for using plerixafor with or without G-CSF in healthy donors. In this review, we will summarize the evidence supporting this practice, highlighting the practical aspects and providing clues for an expanded use of plerixafor.