Plerixafor with and without chemotherapy in poor mobilizers: results from the German compassionate use program

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.

Mobilization and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Collection in Poor Mobilizing Patients with Lymphoma: Final Results of the German OPTIMOB Study

Introduction

Successful mobilization and collection of peripheral hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) are necessary for lymphoma patients eligible for myeloablative chemotherapy with subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Albeit G-CSF alone or combined with chemotherapy is well-established methods for HSC mobilization, up to 40% of the patients fail to mobilize (poor mobilizer, PM). Plerixafor (PLX) is commonly used in PM patients resulting in increased migration of HSCs into peripheral blood and thus improves the collection outcome.

Methods

The prospective, multicenter, open-label, non-interventional OPTIMOB study assessed mobilization and collection parameter of patients with lymphoma or multiple myeloma to get deep insights in the treatment of those patients in clinical routine focusing on PM patients. PM was defined as follows: (1) no achievement of ≥20 CD34+ progenitor cells/µL before first apheresis, (2) PLX administration at any time point during the observational period, (3) reduction of the initially planned CD34+ progenitor cell yield as necessity due to failed mobilization or HSC collection, and (4) no performance of apheresis due to low CD34+ progenitor level. Primary objective of the study was to assess mobilization success by the proportion of PM patients achieving >2 × 106 CD34+ progenitor cells/kg body weight on the first day of apheresis. Here, the data of the lymphoma cohort are presented.

Results

Out of 238 patients with lymphoma documented in the study, 32% were classified as PM. 87% of them received PLX. Demographic data revealed no obvious differences between PM and good mobilizing (GM) patients. All patients were treated highly individualized prior to mobilization. Majority of all PM patients were able to undergo apheresis (95%) and reached their individual requested CD34+ progenitor cell target (72%). 57% of the PM patients achieved >2.0 × 106 CD34+ progenitor cells/kg body weight on day 1 of apheresis and nearby 70% of them underwent ASCT. Median time to engraftment was similar in PM and GM patients of the lymphoma cohort.

Conclusions

Majority of PM patients with lymphoma were successfully mobilized and underwent ASCT. Most of them received PLX during the study.

Day -1 CD34+ Cells and Platelet Count Predict the Number of Apheresis in Poor-Mobilizer Patients Rescued by Plerixafor

Plerixafor is widely used as up-front treatment with G-CSF to enhance peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cell output in patients failing previous mobilizations. Less frequently, plerixafor is used to rescue an unsatisfactory mobilization following chemotherapy (CT) and G-CSF. This study investigates if pre-collection factors affect the CD34+ cell harvest in chemotherapy and G-CSF mobilizations rescued by plerixafor. Clinical and hematological data relative to patients, mobilization, and apheresis products were retrospectively examined. The outcome was completing a target cell dose ≥ 2 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg at first apheresis. The effect exerted on the outcome by patient- and disease-related factors was investigated by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The analysis included data from 42 patients affected by hematological (39 patients) and non-hematological malignancies (three patients). Twenty-nine patients (69%) attained the target cell dose at first apheresis. Twelve out of the remaining 13 patients received an additional plerixafor administration, and all accomplished the transplant dose at a second apheresis procedure. Day -1 CD34+ PB count (OR1.46, 95% CI 1.1-1.9, p = 0.008) and platelet count (OR1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.0, p = 0.033) predicted the achievement of the target dose at first apheresis, independently of pre-mobilization CT, radiation therapy, and disease status at mobilization. At ROC curve analysis, the best cut-off value predicting the successful collection at first apheresis was 7.5/µL for Day -1 CD34+ cell count (AUC 0.830, 0.69 sensitivity, and 0.92 specificity) and 75 × 10⁹/L for Day -1 platelet count (AUC = 0.736, 0.65 sensitivity and 0.85 specificity). In conclusion, on-demand plerixafor rescue allows a successful stem cell collection, irrespectively of disease type and status, prior CT lines, and radiation exposure. Pre-apheresis CD34+ cells and platelet count predict the need for one or two aphereses.

Single-center results reporting improved hematopoietic stem cell mobilization success in pediatric and young adult patients with solid tumors and lymphoma

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) is an established treatment for pediatric and young adult patients with solid tumors and lymphomas. Plerixafor is a CXC chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4) antagonist that can be used with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) to amplify the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 167 pediatric solid tumor and lymphoma patients from January 2010 to July 2020 in whom HSCs were mobilized using G-CSF alone or with plerixafor.

RESULTS

Thirteen heavily pretreated patients (33.3%) required twice-daily dosing of G-CSF compared to five patients (3.9%) in the not heavily pretreated group (p = .0005). Fourteen heavily pretreated patients (35.9%) required plerixafor compared to four patients (3.1%) in the comparison cohort (p = .0002). The number of mobilization days was similar between both cohorts, with 5 days (range 3-11 days) in the heavily pretreated group and 5 days (range 3-13 days) in the not heavily pretreated group (p = .55). The number of harvest days was 2 days (range 1-5 days) in the heavily pretreated group and 1 day (range 1-4 days) in the not heavily pretreated group (p = .0025). The final cluster of differentiation (CD)34⁺ /kilogram (kg) count was 9.52 × 10⁶ /kg among heavily pretreated patients compared to 34.99 × 10⁶ /kg CD34⁺ cells in the comparison group (p < .0001). Three heavily pretreated patients (7.7%) failed HSC mobilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients at the highest risk for poor HSC mobilization can be successfully treated with more frequent G-CSF dosing or G-CSF with plerixafor in a large majority of cases.

Integration of Immunome With Disease-Gene Network Reveals Common Cellular Mechanisms Between IMIDs and Drug Repurposing Strategies

Objective

Development and progression of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) involve intricate dysregulation of the disease-associated genes (DAGs) and their expressing immune cells. Identifying the crucial disease-associated cells (DACs) in IMIDs has been challenging due to the underlying complex molecular mechanism.

Methods

Using transcriptome profiles of 40 different immune cells, unsupervised machine learning, and disease-gene networks, we constructed the Disease-gene IMmune cell Expression (DIME) network and identified top DACs and DAGs of 12 phenotypically different IMIDs. We compared the DIME networks of IMIDs to identify common pathways between them. We used the common pathways and publicly available drug-gene network to identify promising drug repurposing targets.

Results

We found CD4+Treg, CD4+Th1, and NK cells as top DACs in inflammatory arthritis such as ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis (RA); neutrophils, granulocytes, and BDCA1+CD14+ cells in systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic scleroderma; ILC2, CD4+Th1, CD4+Treg, and NK cells in the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). We identified lymphoid cells (CD4+Th1, CD4+Treg, and NK) and their associated pathways to be important in HLA-B27 type diseases (psoriasis, AS, and IBDs) and in primary-joint-inflammation-based inflammatory arthritis (AS and RA). Based on the common cellular mechanisms, we identified lifitegrast as a potential drug repurposing candidate for Crohn's disease and other IMIDs.

Conclusions

Existing methods are inadequate in capturing the intricate involvement of the crucial genes and cell types essential to IMIDs. Our approach identified the key DACs, DAGs, common mechanisms between IMIDs, and proposed potential drug repurposing targets using the DIME network. To extend our method to other diseases, we built the DIME tool (https://bitbucket.org/systemsimmunology/dime/) to help scientists uncover the etiology of complex and rare diseases to further drug development by better-determining drug targets, thereby mitigating the risk of failure in late clinical development.

Etoposide + Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor and Optional Plerixafor in Patients Who Failed Chemomobilization with or without Plerixafor

We conducted a retrospective study of 62 patients undergoing etoposide (2 g/m²) + granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF; 10 patients also received additional plerixafor) as a salvage stem cell mobilization regimen after previous unsuccessful chemomobilization with or without plerixafor. The median peak CD34⁺ values after etoposide + G-CSF ± plerixafor was 54.07 CD34⁺/μL compared with 9.6 CD34⁺/μL after previous mobilization attempts (P < .001). The median yield was 6.33 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg per 2 apheresis. Etoposide + G-CSF ± plerixafor mobilization regimen resulted in 91.53% successful mobilizations and 89.83% of patients proceeding to autologous stem cell transplantation. All 7 patients who had previously failed plerixafor-based mobilization attempts were successfully mobilized with etoposide + G-CSF ± plerixafor and proceeded to autologous stem cell transplantation. The most common grades 3 to 4 adverse events of etoposide + G-CSF ± plerixafor were febrile neutropenia (69.35%), mucositis (51.62%), and bacteremia (20.97%). No fatal outcomes were observed. Rates of 12-month overall survival and progression-free survival were 88.71% and 70.97%, respectively. Etoposide + G-CSF ± plerixafor is an effective regimen for salvage stem cell mobilization also in patients who failed plerixafor, with most patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation. The adverse event rate may warrant a decrease in the dose of etoposide.

Poor mobilizer and its countermeasures

Mobilization failure is a major concern in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation, especially in an autologous setting, as almost all donor harvests can be accomplished with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone. Poor mobilizers, defined as those with a peripheral blood CD34⁺ cell count ≤20 cells/μl after mobilization preceding apheresis is a significant risk factor for mobilization failure. We recommend preemptive plerixafor plus G-CSF (filgrastim, 10 μg/kg daily) as a first mobilization strategy, which yields sufficient peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs) in almost all patients and avoids otherwise unnecessary remobilization. Preemptive plerixafor is administered in patients with a day-4 peripheral blood CD34⁺ count <15, depending on the disease and the target PBPC amount. Cyclophosphamide is reserved for patients who fail the first PBPC collection. We recommend second mobilization for patients who could not achieve a sufficient PBPC amount with the first mobilization. In these patients, a second attempt with plerixafor plus G-CSF or mobilization with plerixafor in combination with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF is recommended. Increased dose and/or twice daily administration of G-CSF can be considered.

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.

Dynamic cellular phynotyping defines specific mobilization mechanisms of human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells induced by SDF1α versus synthetic agents

Efficient mobilization of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) is one of the most crucial issues for harvesting an adequate amount of peripheral HSPC for successful clinical transplantation. Applying well-defined surrogate models for the bone marrow niche, live cell imaging techniques, and novel tools in statistical physics, we have quantified the functionality of two mobilization agents that have been applied in the clinic, NOX-A12 and AMD3100 (plerixafor), as compared to a naturally occurring chemokine in the bone marrow, SDF1α. We found that NOX-A12, an L-enantiomeric RNA oligonucleotide to SDF1, significantly reduced the adhesion of HSPC to the niche surface mediated via the CXCR4-SDF1α axis, and stretched the migration trajectories of the HSPC. We found that the stretching of trajectories by NOX-A12 was more prominent than that by SDF1α. In contrast, plerixafor exhibited no detectable interference with adhesion and migration. We also found that the deformation of HSPC induced by SDF1α or plerixafor was also drastically suppressed in the presence of NOX-A12. This novel technology of quantitative assessment of "dynamic phenotypes" by physical tools has therefore enabled us to define different mechanisms of function for various extrinsic factors compared to naturally occurring chemokines.

Comparison of Different Stem Cell Mobilization Regimens in AL Amyloidosis Patients

High-dose melphalan (HDM) and autologous blood stem cell transplantation (ABSCT) is an effective treatment for transplantation-eligible patients with systemic light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Whereas most centers use granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone for mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC), the application of mobilization chemotherapy might offer specific advantages. We retrospectively analyzed 110 patients with AL amyloidosis who underwent PBSC collection. Major eligibility criteria included age <70 years and cardiac insufficiency New York Heart Association ≤III°. Before mobilization, 67 patients (61%) had been pretreated with induction therapy, including 17 (15%) patients who had received melphalan. Chemo-mobilization was performed with either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dexamethasone (CAD)/G-CSF (n = 78, 71%); ifosfamide/G-CSF (n = 14, 13%); or other regimens (n = 8, 7%). AL amyloidosis patients with predominant heart involvement and/or status post heart transplantation were mobilized with G-CSF only (n = 10, 9%). PBSC collection was successful in 101 patients (92%) at first attempt. The median number of CD34⁺ cells was 8.7 (range, 2.1 to 45.5) × 10⁶ CD34⁺/kg collected in a median of 1 leukapheresis (LP) session. Compared with G-CSF-only mobilization, a chemo-mobilization with CAD/G-CSF or ifosfamide/G-CSF had a positive impact on the number of collected CD34⁺ cell number/kg per LP (P <.001, multivariate). Melphalan-containing previous therapy and higher age had a significant negative impact on quantity of collected CD34⁺ cells. Median common toxicity criteria (CTC) grade of nonhematologic toxicity was II (range, 0 to IV). Life-threatening CTC grade IV adverse events were observed in 3 patients with no fatalities. Cardiovascular events were observed in 17 patients (22%) upon CAD/G-CSF mobilization (median CTC: grade 3; range, 1 to 4). Toxicity in patients undergoing ifosfamide/G-CSF mobilization was higher than in with those who received G-CSF-only mobilization. HDM and ABSCT were performed in 100 patients. Compared with >6.5 × 10⁶ transplanted CD34⁺ cells/kg, an ABSCT with <3 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg was associated with a longer duration to leukocyte reconstitution >1 × 10⁹/L and a reduced platelet count <150 × 10⁹/L 1 year after ASCT. Our results show that CAD chemotherapy is very effective in PBSC mobilization and has a tolerable toxicity profile in AL amyloidosis patients. A further toxicity reduction by omission of doxorubicin might be considered. Because of advanced nonhematologic toxicity, ifosfamide administration cannot be recommended. However, G-CSF mobilization alone is also safe and effective. Considering the hematopoietic reconstitution and long-term stem cell function, our results provide a rationale to collect and transplant as many as >6.5 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg, if feasible with reasonable effort.

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.

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.

Plerixafor for autologous stem-cell mobilization and transplantation for patients in Ontario

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation (asct) is an accepted part of standard therapy for patients with hematologic malignancies. Usually, stem-cell mobilization uses granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (g-csf); however, some patients are not able to be mobilized with chemotherapy and g-csf, and such patients could be at higher risk of failing mobilization. Plerixafor is a novel mobilization agent that is absorbed quickly after subcutaneous injection and, at the recommended dose of 0.24 mg/kg, provides a sustained increase in circulating CD34+ cells for 10-18 hours. The main purpose of the present report was to evaluate the most current evidence on the efficacy of plerixafor in enhancing hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization and collection before asct for patients in Ontario so as to make recommendations for clinical practice and to assist Cancer Care Ontario in decision-making with respect to this intervention.

METHODS

The medline and embase databases were systematically searched for evidence from January 1996 to March 2015, and the best available evidence was used to draft recommendations relevant to the efficacy of plerixafor in enhancing hematopoietic stem-cell mobilization and collection before asct. Final approval of this practice guideline report was obtained from both the Stem Cell Transplant Steering Committee and the Report Approval Panel of the Program in Evidence-Based Care.

RECOMMENDATIONS

These recommendations apply to adult patients considered for asct: ■ Adding plerixafor to g-csf is an option for initial mobilization in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma who are eligible for asct when chemotherapy cannot be used and only g-csf mobilization is available.■ For patients with a low peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (for example, <10/μL) at the time of anticipated stem-cell harvesting, or with an inadequate first-day apheresis collection, it is recommended that plerixafor be added to the mobilization regimen to maximize stem-cell collection and to prevent the need for remobilization.■ It is recommended that patients who have failed a previous mobilization attempt undergo remobilization with g-csf and plerixafor, with or without chemotherapy.

Combined plerixafor and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for harvesting high-dose hematopoietic stem cells: Possible niche for plerixafor use in pediatric patients

PB is a source of HSC, especially for autologous HCT in solid tumors. However, there is a risk of failing to achieve the target number of SC after mobilization with growth factors alone in patients who were heavily pretreated with chemotherapy or those in need for tandem transplants. SC were harvested from seven pediatric patients with solid tumors who were in need of autologous HCT following combination GCSF and plerixafor. Six of them received plerixafor after failing to achieve enough SC with GCSF only, while the seventh patient received the combined protocol upfront. All seven patients achieved the target number of SC according to their treatment protocol. There were no adverse events. All patients underwent autologous HCT using the harvested HSC and achieved full engraftment. A protocol for harvesting autologous HCT using GCSF and plerixafor is feasible and safe in children with solid tumors who had been heavily pretreated with chemotherapy or needed tandem transplants.

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.

Additional plerixafor to granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for haematopoietic stem cell mobilisation for autologous transplantation in people with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplantation is widely used to restore functioning bone marrow in people with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma after myeloablative chemotherapy. Results of some clinical trials indicate that plerixafor in addition to granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) compared to G-CSF only could lead to an increased mobilisation and release of CD34-positive cells, facilitating effective apheresis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of additional plerixafor to G-CSF for haematopoietic stem cell mobilisation in people with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1990 to September 2015), as well as conference proceedings (American Society of Hematology; American Society of Clinical Oncology; European Hematology Association; American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation; European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation) for studies. Two review authors independently screened search results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing plerixafor in addition to G-CSF compared to G-CSF only for stem cell mobilisation in people with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma of all stages and ages. We included full text as well as abstracts and unpublished data if sufficient information on study design, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes was available. We excluded cross-over trials, quasi-randomised trials, and post-hoc retrospective trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed quality, and analysed data according to standard Cochrane methods. We performed final interpretation with an experienced clinician.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four RCTs fitting the inclusion criteria. However, two of these closed prematurely due to low recruitment and did not report results. The remaining two trials evaluated 600 participants with multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In both studies the experimental group received G-CSF plus plerixafor and the control group received G-CSF plus placebo.The meta-analysis showed no evidence for differences between plerixafor and placebo group regarding mortality at 12 months (600 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.69; P = 1.00; moderate-quality evidence) and adverse events during stem cell mobilisation and collection (593 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.06; P = 0.19; high-quality evidence).Regarding the outcome successful stem cell collection, the meta-analysis showed an advantage for those participants randomised to the plerixafor group (600 participants; RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.96; P < 0.00001; high-quality evidence).As there was high heterogeneity between studies for the number of transplanted participants, we did not meta-analyse these data. In the multiple myeloma study, 95.9% (142 participants) in the plerixafor arm and 88.3% (136 participants) in the placebo arm underwent transplantation (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.16); in the non-Hodgkin lymphoma trial, 90% (135 participants) in the plerixafor group versus 55.4% (82 participants) in the placebo group could be transplanted (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.89). In both trials there was no evidence for a difference between participants in the plerixafor and placebo group in terms of time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment in transplanted participants.None of the trials reported on the outcomes quality of life and progression-free survival.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of the analysed data suggest that additional plerixafor leads to increased stem cell collection in a shorter time. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether additional plerixafor affects survival or adverse events.The two trials included in the meta-analysis, both of which were conducted by the Genzyme Corporation, the manufacturer of plerixafor, were published several times. Two more RCTs examining the addition of plerixafor to a G-CSF mobilisation regimen terminated early without publishing any outcome. The trials included nine and five participants, respectively. Another RCT with 100 participants was recently completed, but has not yet published outcomes. Due to the unpublished RCTs, it is possible that our review is affected by publication bias, even though two trials failed to recruit a sufficient number of participants to analyse any data.

Mobilisation of haematopoietic stem cells in paediatric patients, prior to autologous transplantation following administration of plerixafor and G-CSF

Previous chemotherapy and radiation exposure can make adequate stem cell mobilisation prior to autologous transplant extremely difficult in paediatrics. Plerixafor, a selective reversible CXCR4 antagonist interferes with CXCR4 interaction with Stromal cell-derived factor 1 alpha (SDF-1). Combination with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) amplifies G-CSF affects in mobilising haematopoietic stem cells. Whilst licensed for use with G-CSF for enhancement of mobilisation of haematopoietic stem cells in adults, paediatric data for use of plerixafor remain limited. We present a retrospective review of outcomes seen with plerixafor and G-CSF to mobilise stem cells heavily pre-treated paediatric patients with cancer.

Plerixafor is superior to conventional chemotherapy for first-line stem cell mobilisation, and is effective even in heavily pretreated patients

This study (PHANTASTIC) compares first-line plerixafor with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in 98 myeloma and lymphoma patients with 151 historic controls mobilised by conventional chemotherapy+G-CSF. Eleven patients developed mild transient symptoms possibly related to plerixafor. No serious adverse events were seen. Seventy (71%) plerixafor-mobilised patients achieved both ⩾4 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg in ⩽2 aphereses and no neutropenia (<1.0 × 10⁹/l). This is significantly >48 (32%) of 151 historical chemotherapy+G-CSF-mobilised control patients achieving this end point (P<0.001). Ninety-six (98%) plerixafor-mobilised patients achieved ⩾2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg within one harvest round compared with 114 (75%) of controls (P=0.001). Engraftment times and 12-month outcome were comparable in both groups. Prior treatment was summarised by two scoring systems. Controls mobilising either >2.0 or >4.0 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg have significantly lower scores than mobilisation failures (P=0.002), but this relationship was not seen for plerixafor-mobilised patients. Plerixafor is a more effective and less toxic mobilising agent than conventional chemotherapy (especially in heavily pretreated patients), with comparable subsequent outcome, and merits consideration as the first-line standard of care for stem cell mobilisation.

PBSC mobilization in lymphoma patients: analysis of risk factors for collection failure and development of a predictive score based on the kinetics of circulating CD34+ cells and WBC after chemotherapy and G-CSF mobilization

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a potentially curative treatment of lymphoma, but peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization fails in some patients. PBSC mobilizing agents have recently been proved to improve the PBSC yield after a prior mobilization failure. Predictive parameters of mobilization failure allowing for a preemptive, more cost-effective use of such agents during the first mobilization attempt are still poorly defined, particularly during mobilization with chemotherapy + granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). We performed a retrospective analysis of a series of lymphoma patients who were candidates for ASCT, to identify factors influencing PBSC mobilization outcome. Premobilization parameters-age, histology, disease status, mobilizing protocol, and previous treatments-as well as white blood cell (WBC) and PBSC kinetics, markers potentially able to predict failure during the ongoing mobilization attempt, were analyzed in 415 consecutive mobilization procedures in 388 patients. We used chemotherapy + G-CSF in 411 (99%) of mobilization attempts and PBSC collection failed (<2 × 10(6) CD34+ PBSC/kg) in 13%. Multivariable analysis showed that only a low CD34+ PBSC count and CD34+ PBSC/WBC ratio, together with the use of nonplatinum-containing chemotherapy, independently predicted mobilization failure. Using these three parameters, we established a scoring system to predict risk of failure during mobilization ranging from 2 to 90%, thus allowing a selective use of a preemptive mobilization policy.

An effective mobilization strategy for lymphoma patients after failed upfront mobilization with plerixafor

In an otherwise eligible patient, inadequate mobilization of PBSCs is a limiting factor to proceeding with an auto-ASCT. In such situations, plerixafor is commonly added to improve PBSC collection yields along with cytokine (G-CSF alone) or chemomobilization (chemotherapy+G-CSF). Individually, both strategies are proven to be safe and effective. Here we report six patients who underwent successful mobilization with combination chemomobilization plus plerixafor after upfront failure of cytokine mobilization plus plerixafor. The median CD34(+) cell yield after chemomobilization was 2.48 × 10(6)/kg (range 0.99-8.49) after receiving one to two doses of plerixafor. All patients subsequently underwent ASCT without major unforeseen toxicities and engrafted successfully. No significant delays in time to neutrophil recovery were observed. Our experience highlights the safety and effectiveness of chemomobilization with plerixafor after G-CSF plus plerixafor (G+P) failure and suggests this is a viable salvage strategy after initial failed G+P mobilization.

Rescue stem cell mobilization with plerixafor economizes leukapheresis in patients with multiple myeloma

While extensive data demonstrated that plerixafor improves stem cell harvest in difficult-to-mobilize patients, economic concerns limit a broader application. We retrospectively assessed the effect of an early plerixafor rescue regimen for mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma. Patients were intended for high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (ABSCT) and therefore received cyclophosphamide-based mobilization chemotherapy and consecutive stimulation with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Fifteen patients with poor stem cell harvest in the first leukapheresis session received plerixafor. Data were compared with a matched historic control group of 45 patients who also had a poor stem cell yield in the first apheresis session, but continued mobilization with G-CSF alone. Patients in the plerixafor group collected significantly more CD34+ cells in total (median 4.9 vs. 3.7 [range 1.6-14.1 vs. 1.1-8.0] × 10(6) CD34+ cells /kg bw; P < 0.05), and also more CD34+ cells per leukapheresis procedure (P < 0.001). Consequently, they required a significantly lower number of leukapheresis procedures to achieve the collection goal (median 2.0 vs. 4.0 [range 2-3 vs. 2-9] procedures; P < 0.001). The efficiency of the collected stem cells in terms of hematologic engraftment after ABSCT was found to be equal in both groups. These data demonstrate that rescue mobilization with plerixafor triggered by a low stem cell yield in the first leukapheresis session is effective. Although the actual economic benefit may vary depending on the local leukapheresis costs, the median saving of two leukapheresis procedures offsets most of the expenses for the substance in this setting. An exemplary cost calculation is provided to illustrate this effect.

Successful hematopoietic stem cell collection in patients who fail initial plerixafor mobilization for autologous stem cell transplant

We report our experience of collecting stem cells in patients who failed to mobilize sufficient hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) using plerixafor (P) in the initial mobilization attempt. Twenty four patients were identified who failed a first mobilization attempt using P. Of these, 22 patients received granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and two patients received cyclophosphamide (CY) + G-CSF in combination with P for the initial attempt. The agents used for second collection attempt were granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) + G-CSF (19 patients), G-CSF + P (three patients), CY + G-CSF (one patient), and bone marrow harvest (one patient). A median of 0.6 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg (range 0-1.97) were collected in the initial attempt. A second collection was attempted at a median of 22 days (range 15-127) after the first failed mobilization. The median CD34(+) cell dose collected with the second attempt was 1.1 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg (range 0-7.2). A third collection was attempted in six patients at median of 51 days (range 34-163) after the first failed mobilization. These patients collected a median of 1.1 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg (range 0-6.5). Total of 16 patients (67%) collected sufficient cells to undergo autologous stem cell transplant and eight patients (33%) were able to collect ≥2 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg in a single subsequent attempt. Our experience suggests that a majority of patients who fail primary mobilization despite use of P can collect sufficient HSC with a subsequent attempt using combination of G-CSF with either P or GM-CSF.

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.

Just-in-time rescue plerixafor in combination with chemotherapy and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization

Plerixafor, a recently approved peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilizing agent, is often added to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) to mobilize peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with lymphoma or myeloma who cannot mobilize enough CD34+ cells with G-CSF alone to undergo autologous stem cell transplantation. However, data are lacking regarding the feasibility and efficacy of just-in-time plerixafor in combination with chemotherapy and G-CSF. We reviewed the peripheral blood stem cell collection data of 38 consecutive patients with lymphoma (Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's) and multiple myeloma who underwent chemomobilization and high-dose G-CSF and just-in-time plerixafor to evaluate the efficacy of this treatment combination. All patients with multiple myeloma and all but one patient with lymphoma collected the minimum required number of CD34+ cells to proceed with autologous stem cell transplantation (>2 × 10(6) /kg of body weight). The median CD34+ cell dose collected in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma was 4.93 × 10(6) /kg of body weight. The median CD34+ cell dose collected for patients with multiple myeloma was 8.81 × 10(6) /kg of body weight. Plerixafor was well tolerated; no grade 2 or higher non-hematologic toxic effects were observed.

Current clinical indications for plerixafor

Autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation are considered the standard of care for many malignancies including lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and some leukemias. In many cases, mobilized peripheral blood has become the preferred source for HSCs. Plerixafor, an inhibitor of the interaction between CX chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) and stromal derived factor-1 alpha (SDF-1), has been evaluated in clinical trials and approved by the FDA and EMA. This agent has very modest toxicity and appears to be quite potent at HSC mobilization. Current clinical indications for the use of plerixafor are the subject of this review.

Novel therapies for children with acute myeloid leukaemia

Significant improvements in survival for children with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) have been made over the past three decades, with overall survival rates now approximately 60-70%. However, these gains can be largely attributed to more intensive use of conventional cytotoxics made possible by advances in supportive care, and although over 90% of children achieve remission with frontline therapy, approximately one third in current protocols relapse. Furthermore, late effects of therapy cause significant morbidity for many survivors. Novel therapies are therefore desperately needed. Early-phase paediatric trials of several new agents such as clofarabine, sorafenib and gemtuzumab ozogamicin have shown encouraging results in recent years. Due to the relatively low incidence of AML in childhood, the success of paediatric early-phase clinical trials is largely dependent upon collaborative clinical trial design by international cooperative study groups. Successfully incorporating novel therapies into frontline therapy remains a challenge, but the potential for significant improvement in the duration and quality of survival for children with AML is high.

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.

Long-term follow up of patients proceeding to transplant using plerixafor mobilized stem cells and incidence of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome/AML

We report the long-term follow up of 49 patients (pts) enrolled on plerixafor compassionate use protocol. Thirty-seven pts (76%) had failed one previous mobilization attempt, while 12 (24%) had failed two or more previous attempts. Using the combination of plerixafor and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, we collected2.5 × 10(6) CD34+cells/kg in 33 pts (67%). Forty-three of the 49 pts proceeded to an auto-SCT (ASCT). The median days to WBC and platelet engraftment were 11 (range, 9-13 days) and 16 (range, 11-77 days) days post ASCT, respectively. The median WBC count, Hb and platelet counts 1 year after ASCT were 4.7 × 10(9)/L, 12.2 g/dL and 109 × 10(9)/L, respectively. With median follow up of 42 months (range <1-54 months), 21 pts had evidence of disease progression. Five pts developed myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/AML at median of 29 months post ASCT. The cumulative incidence of MDS/AML at 42 months was 17% (95% confidence interval, 6 to 32%). Development of secondary MDS/AML in pts proceeding to ASCT after plerixafor mobilization needs to be studied further in a larger cohort.

The evolving role of plerixafor in hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization

The introduction of plerixafor as a peripheral blood stem cell mobilization agent has allowed more patients with multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and Hodgkin's disease to mobilize sufficient hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) to proceed to autologous transplantation. Because of the high cost of plerixafor, it is not routinely used in all patients undergoing HPC mobilization. If cost were not an issue, an argument could be made that plerixafor could be added to every mobilization regimen, but cost is an issue so in an attempt to be more cost-effective, many centers have limited plerixafor use to patients who have failed or who are predicted to fail collection of adequate numbers of cells by other methods. Additionally, plerixafor is now under investigation both for HPC collection of healthy donors for allogeneic stem cell transplantation and as an adjunct therapy (i.e., chemosensitizing agent) for acute leukemias. This article briefly reviews the role of plerixafor in autologous and allogeneic transplantation as well as its emerging role in the treatment of acute leukemias. Emphasis is placed on the choice of appropriate patients for plerixafor use to assure an adequate stem cell yield while maximizing the cost effectiveness of using plerixafor. The role of prophylactic collections and future areas of research are also presented.

Plerixafor plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor improves the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and low circulating peripheral blood CD34+ cells

Many institutions have adopted algorithms based on preapheresis circulating CD34+ cell counts to optimize the use of plerixafor. However, a circulating peripheral blood CD34+ cell threshold that predicts mobilization failure has not been defined. The superiority of plerixafor + granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) over placebo + G-CSF for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and collection was shown for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma in a phase III, prospective, randomized, controlled study. The question remains as to which patients may benefit most from the use of plerixafor. In this post hoc retrospective analysis, mobilization outcomes were compared between the 2 treatment arms in patients stratified by peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (<5, 5 to 9, 10 to 14, 15 to 19, or ≥20 cells/μL) obtained before study treatment and apheresis. Compared with placebo plus G-CSF, plerixafor plus G-CSF significantly increased the peripheral blood CD34+ cells/μL over prior day levels in all 5 stratified groups. The probability of subsequent transplantation without a rescue mobilization was far greater in the plerixafor-treated patients for the lowest initial (day 4) peripheral blood CD34+ cells/μL groups (<5, 5 to 9, or 10 to 14). Engraftment and durability were the same for the 2 treatment groups for all strata, but the effect in the lower strata could be altered by the addition of cells from rescue mobilizations. These findings may provide insight into the optimal use of plerixafor in all patients undergoing stem cell mobilization.

Early measurement of CD34+ cells in peripheral blood after cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor treatment predicts later CD34+ mobilisation failure and is a possible criterion for guiding "on demand" use of plerixafor

BACKGROUND

Early identification of predictive factors of failure to mobilise CD34+ cells could enable rational use of plerixafor during first mobilisation, avoiding the need for a second mobilisation course. However, "on demand" administration of plerixafor needs to be driven by established parameters to avoid inappropriate use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To address this issue, we studied the value of the peripheral blood CD34+ count, measured early (on days +10, +11, +12 and +13), in predicting the mobilisation outcome in the ensuing days. We retrospectively collected data from three Italian centres on 233 patients affected by multiple myeloma or lymphoma who underwent a first or second attempt at mobilisation with cyclophosphamide 4 g/m(2) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. To assess the diagnostic value of peripheral blood white blood cell and CD34+ cell counts with respect to "mobilisation failure", we considered failed mobilisation as "disease" and the CD34+ cell count in peripheral blood, on a specific day, as a "diagnostic test". For various thresholds, we measured sensitivity, false positive rate, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) as well as the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC).

RESULTS

A CD34+ cell count <10 × 10(6)/L on day 13 had high sensitivity (1.00) and high specificity (1.00) for predicting subsequent mobilisation failure, with an AUC of 1.0. However, good prediction was also obtained using a lower threshold (CD34+ cell count: <6 × 10(6)/L) at an earlier time (day 12). The PPV of the day 13 threshold was 1.00 while that of the day 12 one was 0.87.

DISCUSSION

We propose that patients with <6 × 10(6)/L CD34+ cells in peripheral blood on day 12 and <10 × 10(6)/L on day 13 following mobilisation with cyclophosphamide 4 g/m(2) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor are candidates for "on demand" use of plerixafor, making the administration of this expensive agent more efficient and avoiding its inappropriate use.

New strategies for stem cell mobilization

Mobilized peripheral blood (PB) is widely used as source of stem cells (PBSCs) for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The use of cytokines, alone or in combination with chemotherapy (chemomobilization), is the most common strategy applied to mobilize and collect PBSCs. However, a significant proportion of cancer patients fail to mobilize enough PBSCs to proceed to ASCT. Plerixafor is a small molecule that reversibly and transiently disrupts the interaction between the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12 (formerly known as stroma derived factor 1, SDF-1) leading to the rapid release of CD34⁺ hematopoietic stem cells from the bone marrow (BM) to PB. Plerixafor has been recently approved to enhance PBSC mobilization in adult patients with multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin lymphoma and has been shown to be more effective than G-CSF alone. There is limited experience on combining plerixafor with chemotherapy plus G-CSF in patients who mobilize poorly. Current evidence suggests that the addition of plerixafor is safe and effective in the large majority of the patients with low blood CD34⁺ cell count after mobilization and/or poor yield after the first collection(s). Circulating CD34⁺ cells can be increased by several folds with plerixafor and the majority of the patients considered “poor mobilizers” can be successfully collected. Overall, its mechanism of action inducing the rapid release of CD34⁺ cells from the BM to the circulation makes plerixafor suitable for the ‘preemptive’ use in patients who are hard-to-mobilize.

Plerixafor Salvage Is Safe and Effective in Hard-to-Mobilize Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy and Filgrastim-Based Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cell Mobilization

The combination of filgrastim (G-CSF) and plerixafor is currently approved for mobilizing peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma undergoing autologous peripheral blood hematopoietic cell transplantation. However, chemotherapy and G-CSF-based mobilization remains a widely used strategy for peripheral blood progenitor cell collection. In this paper we describe our experience from two North American transplant centers in a series of patients who received salvage plerixafor while failing chemotherapy and G-CSF mobilization. Patients received a median of two doses of plerixafor salvage upon failure to mobilize adequate number of peripheral blood progenitor cells at neutrophil recovery. The use of plerixafor was associated with a 2.4-fold increase in peripheral blood CD34+ cell count and 3.9-fold increase in total CD34+ cell yield. All patients were able to collect ≥2 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg with this approach. These results were more pronounced in patients with a higher CD34+ cell count at the time of the first plerixafor dose. Interestingly, peripheral blood white blood cell count was not shown to correlate with a response to plerixafor. Our results provide safety and efficacy data for the use of plerixafor in patients who are destined to fail chemomobilization.

Who should be really considered as a poor mobilizer in the plerixafor era?

Patients with a number of peripheral CD34+ cells ≥20/μL have recently been defined in the literature as "poor mobilizers". We retrospectively reviewed medical records from a total of 248 patients affected by hematological malignancies or solid tumors undergoing peripheral blood stem cell collection following chemotherapy plus G-CSF. On the basis of the CD34+ cell peak in peripheral blood following mobilization therapy, patients were defined as good mobilizers (group A, CD34+ cells ≥20/μL), relative poor mobilizers (group B, CD34+ cells <20 and ≥8/μL) and absolute poor mobilizers (group C, CD34+ cells <8/μL). One hundred and seventy-seven (71%) patients resulted good mobilizers, 35 (14%) patients relative poor mobilizers and 36 (15%) patients absolute poor mobilizers. Target of stem cell collection was ≥2.0×10(6) CD34+cells/kg for each transplantation procedure. All patients in group A, 20 patients in group B (57%) and 1 patient in group C (2.7%) were able to collect ≥2.0×10(6) CD34+cells/kg. The multivariate analysis confirmed that more than three lines of previous chemotherapy and a previous autologous PBSC transplantation negatively affect mobilization of CD34+ cells in peripheral blood. Our data suggest that a number of CD34+ cells ≥20/μL does not always result in a failed stem cell collection and in fact in our patient series more than 70% of the patients defined as poor mobilizers have indeed collected the minimum number of 2.0×10(6) CD34+cells/kg required for a successful transplantation. The use of new agent such as CXCR4 antagonist plerixafor might further improve mobilization efficacy in such patients.

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.

The effective use of plerixafor as a real-time rescue strategy for patients poorly mobilizing autologous CD34(+) cells

Plerixafor enhances CD34(+) cell mobilization, however, its optimal use is unknown. We hypothesized that plerixafor could "rescue" patients in the midst of mobilization when factors indicated a poor CD34(+) yield. Of 295 consecutive autologous peripheral blood mobilization attempts at our center, 39 (13%) used plerixafor as rescue strategy due to a CD34(+) cell concentration <10/μl (median 5.95/μl, n = 30), low CD34(+) cell yield from prior apheresis day (median 1.06 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg, n = 7), or other (n = 2). Patients received a median of one plerixafor dose (range: 1-4). Thirty-four (87%) collected =2 × 10 (6) CD34(+) cells/kg and 26 (67%) collected =4 × 10 (6) CD34(+) cells/kg. Median collections for lymphoma (n = 24) and myeloma (n = 15) patients were 4.1 × 10(6) and 8.3 × 10(6) CD34/kg, respectively. A single dose of plerixafor was associated with an increase in the mean peripheral blood CD34(+) concentration of 17.2 cells/μl (P < 0.001) and mean increased CD34(+) cell yield following a single apheresis of 5.11 × 10(6) /kg (P < 0.03). A real-time rescue use of plerixafor is feasible and may allow targeted use of this agent. J. Clin. Apheresis, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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.

Preemptive use of plerixafor in difficult-to-mobilize patients: an emerging concept

Mobilized peripheral blood (PB) is the preferred source of stem cells (PBSCs) for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The use of cytokines, alone or in combination with chemotherapy (chemomobilization), is currently the most common strategy applied to collect PBSCs. However, a significant proportion of patients with lymphoid malignancies fail to mobilize enough PBSCs to proceed to ASCT. Plerixafor has been recently introduced for clinical use to enhance PBSC mobilization and has been shown to be more effective than granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone in patients with multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. There is limited experience on combining plerixafor with chemotherapy plus G-CSF in patients who mobilize poorly. This review attempts to summarize the published experience on the preemptive use of plerixafor after chemomobilization or G-CSF mobilization to enhance stem cell collection and to prevent mobilization failure. Current evidence suggests that addition of plerixafor is safe and effective in the large majority of the patients with low blood CD34+ cell counts after mobilization and/or poor yield after the first collection(s). Circulating CD34+ cell counts can be increased by severalfold with plerixafor and the majority of the patients considered difficult to mobilize can be successfully collected. Although more studies are needed to evaluate proper patient selection and optimal timing for the addition of plerixafor after chemotherapy, its mechanism of action inducing the rapid release of CD34+ cells from the marrow to the PB makes this molecule suitable for its "preemptive" use in patients who are difficult to mobilize.