Comparison of lenograstim vs filgrastim administration following chemotherapy for peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection: a retrospective study of 126 patients

Lenograstim versus filgrastim in mobilization before autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma - Single center experience

OBJECTIVE

Peripheral blood stem cell transplantation is frequently used in the treatment of various hematological malignancies after intensive chemotherapy. The primary aim of our study is to compare the amount of collected CD34+ cells and engraftment times in patients mobilized with filgrastim or lenograstim.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Demographic and clinical data of multiple myeloma (MM) and lymphoma patients who underwent autologous transplantation and mobilized with G-CSF (filgrastim or lenograstim) without chemotherapy were collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

One hundred eleven MM and 58 lymphoma patients were included in the study. When mobilization with filgrastim and lenograstim was compared in MM patients, there was no significant difference in neutrophil and thrombocyte engraftment times of lenograstim and filgrastim groups (p = 0.931 p = 0.135, respectively). Similarly, the median number of CD34+ cells collected in patients receiving filgrastim and lenograstim was very similar (4.2 × 10⁶/kg vs 4.3 × 10⁶/kg, p = 0.977). When compared with patients who received lenalidomide before transplantation and patients who did not receive lenalidomide, the CD34+ counts of the two groups were similar. However, neutrophil and platelet engraftment times in the group not receiving lenalidomide tended to be shorter (p = 0.095 and p = 0.12, respectively). When lymphoma patients mobilized with filgrastim and lenograstim were compared, neutrophil engraftment time (p = 0.498), thrombocyte engraftment time (p = 0.184), collected CD34+ cell counts (p = 0.179) and mobilization success (p = 0.161) of the groups mobilized with filgrastim and lenograstim were similar.

CONCLUSION

The superiority of the two agents to each other could not be demonstrated. Multi-center prospective studies with larger numbers of patients are needed.

The establishment of new protein expression system using N starvation inducible promoters in Chlorella

Chlorella is a unicellular green microalga that has been used in fields such as bioenergy production and food supplementation. In this study, two promoters of N (nitrogen) deficiency-inducible Chlorella vulgaris N Deficiency Inducible (CvNDI) genes were isolated from Chlorella vulgaris UTEX 395. These promoters were used for the production of a recombinant protein, human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (hG-CSF) in Chlorella vulgaris UTEX 395 and Chlorella sp. ArM0029B. To efficiently secrete the hG-CSF, the protein expression vectors incorporated novel signal peptides obtained from a secretomics analysis of Chlorella spp. After a stable transformation of those vectors with a codon-optimized hG-CSF sequence, hG-CSF polypeptides were successfully produced in the spent media of the transgenic Chlorella. To our knowledge, this is the first report of recombinant protein expression using endogenous gene components of Chlorella.

Construction of a Pichia pastoris strain efficiently producing recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) and study of its biological activity on bone marrow cells

Non-glycosylated, recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF), produced by Escherichia coli (filgrastim, leukostim) is widely used to treat a number of serious human diseases and aids in the recovery post bone marrow transplantation. Although glycosylation is not required for the manifestation of the biological activity of G-CSF, a number of studies have shown that the carbohydrate residue significantly increases the physicochemical stability of the G-CSF molecule. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to design a Pichia pastoris strain capable of producing glycosylated rhG-CSF, and to study its effects on rat bone marrow cells. The nucleotide sequence of the rhG-CSF gene has been optimized for expression in P. pastoris, synthesized, cloned into the pPICZαA vector and expressed under the control of the AOX promoter in P. pastoris X33. One of the selected clones secreting rhG-CSF, produced 100-120 mg/l of rhG-CSF three days post-induction with methanol. The recombinant cytokine was purified using two-step, ion-exchange chromatography. The final yield of purified G-CSF was 35 mg/L of culture medium. The biological activity of rhG-CSF was examined in rat bone marrow cells. The P. pastoris strain was designed to produce relatively high levels of rhG-CSF. The rhG-CSF protein had a strong stimulating effect on the growth of rat bone marrow cells, which was comparable to that of the commercial drug leukostim, but showed a more persistent effect on granulocyte cells and monocyte sprouts, enabling the enhanced maintenance of the viability of the cells into the 4th day of incubation.

Mobilization and Collection of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells in Adults: Focus on Timing and Benchmarking

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) are preferentially used as a hematopoietic stem cell source for autologous blood stem cell transplantation (ABSCT) upon high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) in a variety of hemato-oncologic diseases. As a prerequisite, hematopoietic stem cells have to be mobilized into the peripheral blood (PB) and collected by leukapheresis (LP). Despite continuous improvements, e.g., the introduction of plerixafor, current challenges are the further optimization regarding the leukapheresis procedure, preventing collection failures, as well as benchmarking and harmonization of mobilization approaches between institutions.This chapter summarizes the current PBSC mobilization and collection approaches and is focusing on timely orchestration of mobilization therapy, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) application, and peripheral blood (PB) CD34⁺ cell assessment. Moreover, strategies for prediction and performance assessment of the PBSC collection yield are discussed.

What is the role of biosimilar G-CSF agents in hematopoietic stem cell mobilization at present?

Mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells, which has largely replaced bone marrow harvesting as a source of hematopoietic stem cells, using recombinant agents such as filgrastim or lenograstim has become a standard procedure in both patients and healthy donors prior to peripheral blood stem cell collection for autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Published literature data suggest that mobilization with recombinant granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is safe and mobilization outcomes are satisfactory. In recent years, besides G-CSF originators, biosimilar G-CSF agents have been approved by the regulatory agencies for the same indications. Current data showed that by using the biosimilar G-CSF, similar results regarding safety and efficacy of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization may be achieved compared to the originator G-CSF. Although the issues such as the similarity to a licenced biological medicine, differences in manufacturing processes, the potential to cause immunogenicity, extrapolation and interchangeability of these biosimilar products are still being discussed by the scientific area, however, more experience with these agents now exists in approved endications and there seems to be no reason to expect significant differences between biosimilar G-CSF and originator G-CSF regarding their efficacy and safety in both patients and healthy donors. Also, the significant cost savings of biosimilars in real life setting may enhance the use of these agents in the future. Nonetheless, the collection of long-term follow-up data is mandatory for both patients and healthy donors, and multicentre randomized clinical trials that directly compare biosimilar G-CSF with the originator G-CSF are needed in order to allow the transplant community to make informed decisions regarding the choice of G-CSF.

Management of mobilization failure in 2017

In contemporary clinical practice, almost all allogeneic transplantations and autologous transplantations now capitalize on peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) as opposed to bone marrow (BM) for the source of stem cells. In this context, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) plays a pivotal role as the most frequently applied frontline agent for stem cell mobilization. For patients classified as high-risk, chemotherapy based mobilization regimens can be preferred as a first choice and it is notable that this also used for remobilization. Mobilization failure occurs at a rate of 10%-40% with traditional strategies and it typically leads to low-efficiency practices, resource wastage, and delayed in treatment intervention. Notably, however, several factors can impact the effectiveness of CD34⁺ progenitor cell mobilization, including patient age and medical history (prior chemotherapy or radiotherapy, disease and marrow infiltration at the time of mobilization). In recent years, main (yet largely ineffective) approach was to increase G-CSF dose and add SCF, but novel and promising pathways have been opened up by the synergistic impact of a reversible inhibitor of CXCR4, plerixafor, with G-CSF. The literature shows to its favorable results in upfront and failed mobilizers, and it is necessary to use plerixafor (or equivalent agents) to optimize HSC harvest in poor mobilizers. Different CXCR4 inhibitors, growth hormone, VLA4 inhibitors, and parathormone, have been cited as new agents for mobilization failure in recent years. In view of the above considerations, the purpose of this paper is to examine the mobilization of PBSC while focusing specifically on poor mobilizers.

Comparison of biosimilar filgrastim, originator filgrastim, and lenograstim for autologous stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) originators such as filgrastim (Neupogen) and lenograstim (Granocyte) are widely used for peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization. In recent years, biosimilar agents have been approved for the same indications. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the mobilization efficiency of the three G-CSF variants originator filgrastim, lenograstim, and the biosimilar Filgrastim Hexal in a homogeneous group of multiple myeloma (MM) patients in first-line therapy.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Overall mobilization data of 250 patients with MM were included. Of these patients, 74 (30%), 131 (52%), and 45 (18%) were mobilized with originator filgrastim, biosimilar Filgrastim Hexal, or lenograstim, respectively, at a dose of 5 to 10 µg/kg body weight subcutaneously starting from Day 5 after chemomobilization with CAD (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dexamethasone) until completion of PBSC collection.

RESULTS

All but one patient reached the collection goal of a minimum of at least 2 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg body weight during a median of one (range, one to three) leukapheresis session. No significant differences in CD34+ mobilization and collection yields between the filgrastim-mobilized (median, 10.5; range, 2.7-40.4), Filgrastim Hexal-mobilized (median, 9.9; range, 0.2-26.0), and lenograstim-mobilized (median, 10.7; range, 3.1-27.9 CD34+ cells × 10⁶ /kg body weight) patients were observed.

CONCLUSION

Concerning the clinically relevant efficiencies of PBSC mobilization and in terms of reaching the individual collection target, this retrospective study did not detect any significant differences between the three G-CSF variants in the analyzed patient cohort.

Optimizing mobilization strategies in difficult-to-mobilize patients: The role of plerixafor

Peripheral blood stem cell collection is currently the most widely used source for hematopoietic autologous transplantation. Several factors such as advanced age, previous chemotherapy, disease and marrow infiltration at the time of mobilization influence the efficacy of CD34(+) progenitor cell mobilization. Despite the safety and efficiency of the standard mobilization protocols (G-CSF ± chemotherapy), there is still a significant amount of mobilization failure rate (10-40%), which necessitate novel agents for effective mobilization. Plerixafor, is a novel agent, has been recently approved for mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). The combination of Plerixafor with G-CSF provides the collection of large numbers of stem cells in fewer apheresis sessions and can salvage those who fail with standard mobilization regimens. The development and optimization of practical algorithms for the use Plerixafor is crucial to make hematopoietic stem cell mobilization more efficient in a cost-effective way. This review is aimed at summarizing how to identify poor mobilizers, and define rational use of Plerixafor for planning mobilization in hard-to-mobilize patients.

Use of biosimilar filgrastim compared with lenograstim in autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplant and in sibling allogeneic transplant

OBJECTIVES

Biosimilar filgrastim was compared with lenograstim for autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplant (HSCT) in patients with haematological malignancies. Data from a separate group of sibling donors who underwent allogeneic HSCT are also reported.

METHODS

Patients with lymphoma or multiple myeloma (MM) who underwent autologous HSCT with biosimilar filgrastim were compared with a historical control group of patients who received lenograstim. Peripheral blood (PB) cells counts were monitored after 7-8 consecutive days of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) injection and apheresis was performed on day 8 if PB CD34+ cell count was ⩾10 cells/µl. The target PB CD34+ cell doses were ⩾2.0 × 10(6)/kg (lymphoma), ⩾4.0 × 10(6)/kg (MM ⩾60 years old) or ⩾8.0 × 10(6)/kg (MM <60 years old).

RESULTS

A total of 259 patients were included in the autologous HSCT comparison (biosimilar filgrastim, n = 104; lenograstim, n = 155). In patients with lymphoma and older MM patients (⩾60 years old), no significant differences were observed between groups with regard to stem-cell mobilization parameters. However, in MM patients <60 years old, all parameters were significantly superior in the biosimilar filgrastim group, including the need for 1 rather than 2 apheresis procedures. No significant differences were observed between groups in median number of days to absolute neutrophil count (ANC) or platelet recovery. In the allogeneic setting, 47 sibling donors received biosimilar filgrastim. Mean CD34+ count at the first apheresis was 6.1 × 10(6)/kg. A total of 13 donors needed a second apheresis and 4 required a third. Among recipients, median days to ANC recovery was 16 (10-28) and to platelet recovery was 13 (9-54).

CONCLUSIONS

Biosimilar filgrastim is as effective as lenograstim for autologous HSCT in patients with lymphoma or MM patients ⩾60 years old. However, mobilization with biosimilar filgrastim appeared to be superior to that with lenograstim in younger MM patients.

Filgrastim XM02 (Tevagrastim®) after autologous stem cell transplantation compared to lenograstim: favourable cost-efficacy analysis

PURPOSE

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), filgrastim and lenograstim, are recognised to be useful in accelerating engraftment after autologous stem cell transplantation. Several forms of biosimilar non-glycosylated G-CSF have been approved by the European Medicines Agency, with limited published data supporting the clinical equivalence in peripheral blood stem cell mobilisation and recovery after autologous stem cell transplantation.

METHOD

With the aim of comparing cost-effective strategies in the use of G-CSF after autologous stem cell transplantation, we retrospectively evaluated 32 patients consecutively treated with biosimilar filgrastim XM02 (Tevagrastim) and 26 with lenograstim. All patients received G-CSF (biosimilar or lenograstim) at a dosage of 5 mcg/kg/day subcutaneously from day 5 to absolute neutrophil count of 1500/mmc for three days.

RESULTS

The median time to absolute neutrophil count engraftment was 11 days for the filgrastim XM02 group and 12 days for the lenograstim group. As for platelets recovery, the median time was 12 days in both groups. The median number of G-CSF vials used for patients was 9.5 for Tevagrastim and 10.5 for lenograstim, reflecting a mean estimated cost of about 556.1 euros for Tevagrastim versus 932.2 euros for lenograstim (p< 0.001). The median days of febrile neutropenia were 1.5 and 1 for filgrastim XM02 and lenograstim, respectively. No adverse event related to the use of XM02 filgrastim was recorded.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, filgrastim XM02 and lenograstim showed comparable efficacy in shortening the period of neutropenia after cytoreduction and autologous stem cell transplantation, with a favourable cost effect for filgrastim XM02.

Regulatory systems in bone marrow for hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells mobilization and homing

Regulation of hematopoietic stem cell release, migration, and homing from the bone marrow (BM) and of the mobilization pathway involves a complex interaction among adhesion molecules, cytokines, proteolytic enzymes, stromal cells, and hematopoietic cells. The identification of new mechanisms that regulate the trafficking of hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPCs) cells has important implications, not only for hematopoietic transplantation but also for cell therapies in regenerative medicine for patients with acute myocardial infarction, spinal cord injury, and stroke, among others. This paper reviews the regulation mechanisms underlying the homing and mobilization of BM hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells, investigating the following issues: (a) the role of different factors, such as stromal cell derived factor-1 (SDF-1), granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1), among other ligands; (b) the stem cell count in peripheral blood and BM and influential factors; (c) the therapeutic utilization of this phenomenon in lesions in different tissues, examining the agents involved in HSPCs mobilization, such as the different forms of G-CSF, plerixafor, and natalizumab; and (d) the effects of this mobilization on BM-derived stem/progenitor cells in clinical trials of patients with different diseases.

Advances in stem cell mobilization

The use of mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) has largely replaced the use of bone marrow as a source of stem cells for both allogeneic and autologous stem cell transplantation. G-CSF with or without chemotherapy is the most commonly used regimen for stem cell mobilization. Some donors or patients, especially the heavily pretreated patients, fail to mobilize the targeted number of stem cells with this regimen. A better understanding of the mechanisms involved in hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) trafficking could lead to the development of newer mobilizing agents and therapeutic approaches. This review will cover the current methods for stem cell mobilization and recent developments in the understanding of the biology of stem cells and the bone marrow microenvironment.

Mobilisation strategies for normal and malignant cells

This review evaluates the latest information on the mobilisation of haemopoietic stem cells for transplantation, with the focus on what is the current best practice and how new understanding of the bone marrow stem cell niche provides new insights into optimising mobilisation regimens. The review then looks at the mobilisation of mesenchymal stromal cells, immune cells as well as malignant cells and what clinical implications there are.

How I treat patients who mobilize hematopoietic stem cells poorly

Transplantation with 2-5 × 106 mobilized CD34+cells/kg body weight lowers transplantation costs and mortality. Mobilization is most commonly performed with recombinant human G-CSF with or without chemotherapy, but a proportion of patients/donors fail to mobilize sufficient cells. BM disease, prior treatment, and age are factors influencing mobilization, but genetics also contributes. Mobilization may fail because of the changes affecting the HSC/progenitor cell/BM niche integrity and chemotaxis. Poor mobilization affects patient outcome and increases resource use. Until recently increasing G-CSF dose and adding SCF have been used in poor mobilizers with limited success. However, plerixafor through its rapid direct blockage of the CXCR4/CXCL12 chemotaxis pathway and synergy with G-CSF and chemotherapy has become a new and important agent for mobilization. Its efficacy in upfront and failed mobilizers is well established. To maximize HSC harvest in poor mobilizers the clinician needs to optimize current mobilization protocols and to integrate novel agents such as plerixafor. These include when to mobilize in relation to chemotherapy, how to schedule and perform apheresis, how to identify poor mobilizers, and what are the criteria for preemptive and immediate salvage use of plerixafor.

First experience of autologous peripheral blood stem cell mobilization with biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor

INTRODUCTION

Mobilization techniques for autologous peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection include chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic growth factors, such as granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Biosimilar versions of G-CSF are now available in Europe.

METHODS

In this study, 40 patients with a hematological malignancy scheduled to receive biosimilar G-CSF (Zarzio(®) Sandoz Biopharmaceuticals, Paris, France) following first-cycle chemotherapy for treatment and autologous PBSC mobilization were prospectively included at a single center. These patients were compared with a historical control group who had been treated with G-CSF (Neupogen(®) Paris, France) at the same center according to the same clinical protocol. PBSC harvesting was considered successful if at least 3×10(6) CD34+ cells/kg were collected. If three consecutive CD34+ tests were below 10/μL then PBSC harvesting was not performed.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were similar in both groups with no significant differences in age, diagnosis, previous chemotherapy, or chemotherapy mobilization regimen. No significant differences were observed between groups in median CD34+ cells mobilized and collected, or the number of G-CSF injections and leukaphereses required to obtain the minimal CD34+ cell count. Proportion of failures was also similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Zarziois(®) comparable to Neupogen(®) for PBSC mobilization and collection after chemotherapy and so may provide a more cost-effective strategy.

Granulocyte and erythropoietic stimulating proteins after high-dose chemotherapy for myeloma

High-dose chemotherapy is an established treatment for patients with myeloma. In randomized trials it has been shown to prolong disease-free survival by around 1 year compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone. Physically and psychologically high-dose therapy takes its toll on the patient who may be in hospital for around 3 weeks and take some weeks or months to convalesce after discharge. Granulocyte colony stimulating factors and erythropoietic stimulating agents will speed neutrophil and red cell recovery, respectively, when used at an appropriate time after the high-dose chemotherapy. The clinical value of these laboratory findings is uncertain and the role of these agents after high-dose chemotherapy remains a subject for debate.

Hourly monitoring of circulating CD34+ cells to optimize timing of autologous apheresis in pediatric patients

In order to increase the CD34+ cell yield in children undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation, the optimum time of apheresis after G-CSF administration has still to be found. We prospectively studied the mobilization of CD34+ cells and white blood cells in the peripheral blood (PB) of 20 pediatric patients before leukapheresis. The monitoring schedule covered 12 h, with blood samples taken before and at 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 h after G-CSF administration when 10 CD34+ cells/mul were reached. CD34+ cells were measured by flow cytometric analysis both in the single- and dual-platform setting. Two different patterns of mobilization (POM) emerged: 12 patients showed an increase in CD34+ cells in PB during the first 4 h after G-CSF (POM I), while eight patients had an initial decrease of CD34+ cells. However, all patients together showed a significant increase of CD34+ cells about 10 h after G-CSF administration. Further studies with more patients, using an enhanced monitoring schedule will be required to refine the results.

Clinical practice and future needs in recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor treatment: a review of randomized trials in clinical haemato-oncology

Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHuG-CSF) may have a significant impact on preventing infections associated with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, as well as shortening time to tree lineage engraftment following high-dose chemotherapy and progenitor transplantation. However, the scientific literature documenting evidence-based practice is insufficient and often misinterpreted. This review presents data and discusses the evidence for actual clinical practice in the use of rHuG-CSF in conventional cyclic chemotherapy, either prophylactic or therapeutic, and high-dose therapy, either in priming for mobilization or post-transplantation. In the past decade, many reports have based their conclusions on surrogate markers, and it is time to move towards evaluation of clinically relevant factors. Data must be generated prospectively based on current clinical practice, and several issues must be considered and evaluated to define the true clinical benefit of rHuG-CSF with or without stem-cell support. Evaluation should include complications and needs for resources as well as impact on toxicity and efficacy of conventional or high-dose chemotherapy.

Mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has been extensively exploited as a therapeutic and research modality and has revolutionized current patient care. At present, more and more medical centers use peripheral blood progenitor cells for transplantation by mobilizing hematopoietic stem cells from bone marrow to peripheral blood because of potential advantages of peripheral blood stem cell transplantation over bone-marrow transplantation. Different effective mobilization regimens have been developed recently with chemotherapeutic agents, hematopoietic growth factors or their combination. This article reviews current developments related to hematopoietic stem cell mobilization including the biology of hematopoietic stem cells, strategies for mobilization, management for mobilization failure, mechanisms of mobilization, and side effects during mobilization. Finally, the Initiation-Amplification-Emigration-Adaptation Model is proposed to help aid understanding of the mechanisms of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and to stimulate development of novel and optimal mobilization strategies for patient care.