Efficacy and cost-benefit analysis of risk-adaptive use of plerixafor for autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization

The effect of preemptive use of plerixafor on stem cell mobilization in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of the preemptive use of plerixafor in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma which was administered as a preemptive single dose to the patients who were determined to have a CD34+ cell count of

Economic evaluation of plerixafor addition in the mobilization and leukapheresis of hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Although plerixafor in association with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) can improve mobilization and collection of hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) by leukapheresis, cost may limit its clinical application. The present study systematically reviews economic evaluations of plerixafor plus G-CSF usage compared to G-CSF alone and compares different strategies of plerixafor utilization in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients eligible for autologous HSC transplantation.

AREAS COVERED

Relevant economic evaluations, partial or complete, were searched on PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for a period ending 30 June 2021. This systematic review was reported following the PRISMA Statement. Six economic evaluations were included, considering the use of upfront or just-in-time plerixafor compared to G-CSF alone or other plerixafor strategies. Most comparisons showed both increased cost and health benefits with the addition of plerixafor. Most analyses favored just-in-time plerixafor compared to upfront plerixafor, with a probable preference for broader cutoffs for just-in-time plerixafor initiation.

EXPERT OPINION

Plerixafor is a potentially cost-effective technology in the mobilization of HSC in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphomas eligible for autologous HSC transplantation. There is a decreased number of leukapheresis sessions and remobilizations and a higher yield of CD34+ cells.

A Comparison of Four Leukapheresis Methods to Harvest an Optimal Dose of CD34+ Cells: A Single Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Chemokine receptor CXCR4 antagonist plerixafor (Px) as well as high volume (HV) leukapheresis have been shown to reduce hematopoietic stem progenitor cell (HSPC) mobilization failure rates. However, no direct comparisons of such methods currently exists.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We compared the HSPC collection yield based on basal peripheral blood CD34+ cell numbers in patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation in a retrospective chart review. The leukapheresis methods used included HV vs. regular volume (RV) with or without Px. There were 116 patients in the study group while the historical control group had 34 patients.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Control group underwent RV leukapheresis without Px. Addition of Px or HV in the study group failed to display significant improvement in CD34+ cell collection yield; however, when basal CD34+ cell numbers were taken into account, both Px+RV and HV without Px increased CD34+ cell collection yield. The collection failure rates of HV without Px group were comparable to Px+RV when the basal CD34+ cell numbers were over 20/μL. Of interest, multivariate linear regression analysis did not detect any significant difference between HV vs Px+RV or other leukapheresis methods in CD34 yields or collection failure rates from a single collection after controlling for other factors (sex, age or underlying disease). In multivariate analysis, pre apheresis CD34+ cell number was significantly and positively associated with the CD34+ cell yields from a single apheresis. In our studies, the majority of patients can be rescued without Px by HV alone as a potential cost saving approach. In summary, trend in our studies reflects that both Px and HV are capable of reducing the mobilization failure rates except the poorest mobilizers which will need to be validated in larger studies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

A Review of Advances in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization and the Potential Role of Notch2 Blockade

Hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation can be a potential cure for hematological malignancies and some nonhematologic diseases. Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) collected from peripheral blood after mobilization are the primary source to provide HSC transplantation. In most of the cases, mobilization by the cytokine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with chemotherapy, and in some settings, with the CXC chemokine receptor type 4 antagonist plerixafor, can achieve high yield of hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). However, adequate mobilization is not always successful in a significant portion of donors. Research is going on to find new agents or strategies to increase HSC mobilization. Here, we briefly review the history of HSC transplantation, current mobilization regimens, some of the novel agents that are under investigation for clinical practice, and our recent findings from animal studies regarding Notch and ligand interaction as potential targets for HSPC mobilization.

Cost saving, patient centered algorithm for progenitor cell mobilization for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation

Administration of plerixafor with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilizes CD34+ cells much more effectively than G-CSF alone, but cost generally limits plerixafor use to patients at high risk of insufficient CD34+ cell collection based on low peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ counts following 4 days of G-CSF. We analyzed costs associated with administering plerixafor to patients with higher day 4 CD34+ cell counts to decrease apheresis days and explored the use of a fixed split dose of plerixafor instead of weight-based dosing. We analyzed 235 patients with plasma cell disorders or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who underwent progenitor cell mobilization and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) between March 2014 and December 2017. Two hundred ten (89%) received G-CSF plus Plerixafor and 25 (11%) received G-CSF alone. Overall, 180 patients (77%) collected in 1 day, 53 (22%) in 2 days and 2 (1%) in 3 days. Based on our data, we present a probabilistic algorithm to identify patients likely to require more than one day of collection using G-CSF alone. CD34+ cell yield, ANC and platelet recovery were not significantly different between fixed and standard dose plerixafor. Plerixafor enabled collection in 1 day and with estimated savings of $5000, compared to patients who did not receive plerixafor and required collection for three days. While collection and processing costs and patient populations vary among institutions, our results suggest re-evaluation of current algorithms.

Optimized peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation in children with high-risk and refractory malignancies

BACKGROUND

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) using hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) has become an important therapeutic modality for patients with high-risk malignancies. Current literature on standardized method for HPC apheresis in children is sparse and failure rate reported as high as 30%.

PATIENTS/METHODS

A retrospective study of 125 pediatric patients with high-risk malignancies undergoing aHSCT in Western Australia between 1997 and 2016 was conducted.

RESULTS

Mobilization was achieved by means of chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Patients underwent apheresis the day after CD34⁺ counts reached ≥20/µL and an additional dose of G-CSF. Peripheral arterial and intravenous lines were inserted in pediatric intensive care unit under local anesthetic and/or sedation, omitting the need for general anesthesia as well as facilitating an uninterrupted apheresis flow. Larger apheresis total blood volumes were processed in patients weighing ≤20 kg. The minimal dose of ≥2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg was successfully collected in 98.4% of all patients. The optimal dose of 3-5 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg was collected in 96% of patients scheduled for a single aHSCT, 87.5% for tandem, and 100% for triple aHSCT. All HPC collections were completed in one apheresis session. Mobilization after ≤3 chemotherapy cycles and cycles including cyclophosphamide resulted in a significantly higher yield of CD34⁺ cells.

CONCLUSION

Our approach to HPC mobilization by means of chemotherapy and single myeloid growth factor combined with optimal collection timing facilitated by continuous apheresis flow resulted in highly effective HPC harvest in children and adolescents with high-risk cancers.

Comparison and cost analysis of three protocols for mobilization and apheresis of haematopoietic progenitor cells

INTRODUCTION

Autologous bone marrow transplantation is a component of the malignant hemopathy therapy. The preferred mobilization and collection method is apheresis. The aim of this study is to compare three protocols analyzing the effect of plerixafor, higher dose of G-CSF and large volume leukapheresis (LVL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study including 119 patients referred for mobilization. Three protocols were compared: (a) G-CSF 10 μg/kg/day subcutaneous (sc) × 4 days mobilizing 1 to 1.5 blood volumes. (b) G-CSF 10 μg/kg/day sc × 4 days + plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg/day sc preventively or as a rescue agent mobilizing 1 to 1.5 blood volumes. (c) G-CSF 20 μg/kg/day sc × 4 days ± plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg/day sc preventively or as a rescue agent mobilizing 3 to 4 blood volumes.

RESULTS

The average number of days of apheresis was reduced to 1.37 with protocol 3. The average cost per patient was reduced by 67% compared with protocol 2 and increased by only 5% compared with protocol 1, reducing the failure rate to 0%.

CONCLUSION

Adding preemptive or rescue plerixafor (protocol 2) to G-CSF 10 μg/kg/day alone (protocol 1) did not improve the days of apheresis nor the number of CD34+ cells collected but had higher cost and failure rate. Using LVL, plerixafor and G-CSF 20 μg/kg/day (protocol 3) decreased the number of sessions to 1.37, reduced the failure rate to 0% and led to a significant increase in the number of CD34+ cells collected without toxicity and with a similar cost to protocol 1.

Impact of good and poor mobilizers on hematopoietic progenitor cell collection efficiency and product quality

BACKGROUND

Mobilization regimen choice is a significant contributing factor for successful hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) collection by leukocytapheresis and reaching the target CD34+ cell dose. How mobilization regimen affects collection efficiency and the quality of products collected using the Spectra Optia apheresis instrument is not fully known.

METHODS

We evaluated the impact of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (GCSF) and GCSF/plerixafor mobilization regimens on CE and product composition. We studied 373 leukocytapheresis HPC collections for 147 autologous transplants from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014. Patients were categorized in two groups; good mobilizers, mobilized with GCSF only (GM) and poor mobilizers, mobilized with GCSF and Plerixafor (PM).

RESULTS

Overall, compared with PM group, total nucleated cell (TNC) yield was significantly lower in GM group (P = <.001). In contrast, median percent mononuclear cell (MNC) collected from GM (86.5%) was significantly higher than products collected from PM group (79.5%; P < .001). Compared with GM group, CD34+ cell CE was about 10% lower in PM group (P < .008). In addition, daily CD34+ cell/Kg yield was significantly higher in GM (2.08 × 10/Kg) compared with PM group (1.64 x 10/Kg, P = .019). Overall, the median number of collections per patient was two for GM and three for PM (P = .004).

CONCLUSION

Products collected from PM group contained higher TNC content relative to GM group but had lower MNC enrichment, CD34+ cell CE and daily CD34+ cell yield per Kg.

Mobilization of Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells for Autologous Transplantation Using Pegfilgrastim and Plerixafor: Efficacy and Cost Implications

Filgrastim (FIL) is the most common growth factor combined with plerixafor for autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization, but requires daily, multi-injection administration. We adopted a standardized mobilization regimen with pegfilgrastim (PEG) and upfront plerixafor, allowing for a single injection given the long half-life and slow elimination of PEG. Between 2015 and 2017, a total of 235 patients with lymphoma or plasma cell dyscrasias underwent mobilization with PEG 6 mg on day 1 and upfront plerixafor 24 mg on day 3, followed by apheresis on day 4 regardless of peripheral blood CD34⁺ cells. The median CD34⁺ cells/mm³ in peripheral blood on first day of collection was 48 and median collection yield was 7.27 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg (range, 0.32 to 39.6 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg) after a mean of 1.6 apheresis collections. Overall, 83% of patients achieved the mobilization target, and 95% reached the minimum necessary CD34⁺ cell yield to proceed with transplantation (2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg). Because FIL is weight-based and dosed daily, the cost comparison with PEG is influenced by patient weight and number of apheresis sessions required. A cost simulation using actual patient data indicates that PEG is associated with lower cost than FIL for the majority of patients. Autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with PEG and plerixafor is practical, effective, and not associated with increased cost compared with FIL mobilization.

Plerixafor in poor mobilizers with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a multi-center time-motion analysis

High-dose chemotherapy alongside peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) infusion has become the standard of care in different hematologic malignancies. The goal of PBSC mobilization is to allow collection of sufficient CD34+ cells to proceed to transplantation. The current mobilization regimen with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), alone or in combination with chemotherapy, still fails in 10-25% of patients. Plerixafor is able to rescue most of these patients from mobilization failure. In this study, we investigated the impact of plerixafor on the cost and time spent on apheresis in patients who were considered poor mobilizers, with <20 × 10⁶/µl peripheral CD34+ cells after mobilization but prior to apheresis. Patient hospital records from ten centers in three European countries were reviewed and compared during two time periods, namely prior and after plerixafor introduction to the market. During the plerixafor period, patients spent less time on apheresis (350 vs. 461  min). Poor mobilizers given plerixafor collected more CD34+ cells during the first apheresis session, leading to a decrease in the average number of apheresis sessions needed. The total apheresis yield was unaffected. This analysis shows that the use of plerixafor lessens the time-effort associated with the management of poor mobilizers and reduces apheresis costs.

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: Growth factors or chemotherapy?

High-dose therapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplant is considered standard of care for eligible patients with multiple myeloma. The optimal collection strategy should be effective in procuring sufficient HSC while maintaining a low toxicity profile. Currently available mobilization strategies include growth factors alone, growth factors in combination with chemotherapy, or growth factors in combination with chemokine receptor antagonists; however, the optimal strategy has yet to be elucidated. Herein, we review the risks and benefits of each approach.

Cyclophosphamide-based stem cell mobilization in relapsed multiple myeloma patients: A subgroup analysis from the phase III trial ReLApsE

OBJECTIVE

Analysis of the efficiency and toxicity of cyclophosphamide-based stem cell mobilization in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM).

METHODS

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) were mobilized with high dose cyclophosphamide (2 g/m² daily on days 1 and 2) and G-CSF plus pre-emptive/rescue plerixafor in RMM patients (first to third relapse) treated within the ReLApsE trial of the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG).

RESULTS

Mobilization was initiated with high-dose cyclophosphamide (HD-CY) and G-CSF in 30 patients. Fifteen patients received additional pre-emptive/rescue administration of plerixafor. Stem cell collection was successful (≥2×10⁶ CD34+ cells per kg bw) in 77% (23/30 patients). Patients with prior high-dose melphalan collected a significantly lower median total number of PBSCs than patients without prior high-dose melphalan (3.3×10⁶ vs 17×10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg bw). Toxicity of HD-CY was frequent with 12 serious adverse events (SAE) in 37% of patients (11/30 patients). Infections accounted for the majority of SAE reports. In two patients, SAEs were lethal (septic shock).

CONCLUSIONS

These data proof feasibility of PBSC collection at relapse but emphasize the importance of collection and storage of additional PBSC transplants during first-line treatment when mobilization is more efficient and less toxic.

Single Dose Preemptive Plerixafor for Stem Cell Mobilization for ASCT After Lenalidomide Based Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Impact in Resource Limited Setting

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization with cytokines for autologous stem cell transplant in multiple myeloma is adversely affected by initial induction therapy consisting of either Lenalidomide or cytotoxic drugs, with failure rates of up to 45%. The use of Plerixafor with G-CSF for PBSC mobilisation significantly improves the chances of a successful mobilization. Plerixafor is a costly therapy and increases the overall costs of ASCT which can affect the number of patients being taken up for ASCT in resource limited settings. We prospectively studied the impact of single dose preemptive Plerixafor for PBSC mobilization in patients with prior Lenalidomide exposure. 26 patients who had received Lenalidomide based induction protocol underwent PBSC mobilisation during the study period with G-CSF 10 μg/kg/day SC for 4 days and single dose preemptive Plerixafor 240 μg/kg SC stat 11 h before the scheduled PB stem cell harvest on D5, based on a D4 PB CD34+ counts of <20/μL. A median of 07 cycles of Lenalidomide based combination therapy was used for induction therapy prior to ASCT. 84% patients underwent successful mobilization with one sitting of stem cell harvest post a single dose of Inj Plerixafor. 7.6% patients failed to mobilise the predefined minimum cell dose of CD34 and could not be taken up for ASCT. The median CD34% of the harvest bag sample was 0.33% (0.1-0.97%). Injection site erythema (34%), paresthesia's (34%) and nausea (30%) were the commonest adverse events reported post Inj Plerixafor. We did a real-world cost analysis for a resource limited setting for PBSC mobilization and found significant cost savings for the preemptive Plerixafor group.

How do we mobilize and collect autologous peripheral blood stem cells?

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) with mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) has become a widely applied therapeutic approach for many hematologic and nonhematologic diseases. Adequate PBSC mobilization is critical to the success of ASCT. However, many factors can contribute to poor mobilization. Plerixafor is an effective yet costly adjunct agent that has been increasingly used to improve mobilization in a variety of diagnoses and clinical settings. However, to achieve both optimal cell collection yields and cost-effectiveness, the role of plerixafor in PBSC mobilization needs to be well defined in terms of triggers for initiating its use and criteria for monitoring response. As one of the largest hematopoietic transplant centers in the country, we have developed an approach to PBSC mobilization and collection that incorporates patient laboratory assessments, monitoring of the collection yields, and judicious use of plerixafor as well as various patient support and education programs. These measures have resulted in an increase in our collection success rate and a decrease in the mean number of collection days. In this article we describe our approach to autologous PBSC mobilization and collection. Pertinent reports in the literature are also reviewed and discussed.

Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with "just-in-time" plerixafor approach is a cost-effective alternative to routine plerixafor use

BACKGROUND AIMS

Hematopoietic cell mobilization with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor results in superior CD34+ cell yield compared with G-CSF alone in patients with myeloma and lymphoma. However, plerixafor-based approaches may be associated with high costs. Several institutions use a "just-in-time" plerixafor approach, in which plerixafor is only administered to patients likely to fail mobilization with G-CSF alone. Whether such an approach is cost-effective is unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated 136 patients with myeloma or lymphoma who underwent mobilization with 2 approaches of plerixafor utilization. Between January 2010 and October 2012, 76 patients uniformly received mobilization with G-CSF and plerixafor. Between November 2012 and June 2014, 60 patients were mobilized with plerixafor administered only to those patients likely to fail mobilization with G-CSF alone.

RESULTS

The routine plerixafor group had a higher median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (62 versus 29 cells/μL, P < 0.001) and a higher median day 1 CD34+ yield (2.9 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg versus 2.1 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, P = 0.001). The median total CD34+ collection was higher with routine plerixafor use (5.8 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg versus 4.5 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, P = 0.007). In the "just-in-time" group, 40% (n = 24) completed adequate collection without plerixafor. There was no difference in mobilization failure rates. The mean plerixafor doses used was lower with "just-in-time" approach (1.3 versus 2.1, P = 0.0002). The mean estimated cost in the routine plerixafor group was higher (USD 27,513 versus USD 23,597, P = 0.01).

DISCUSSION

Our analysis demonstrates that mobilization with a just-in-time plerixafor approach is a safe, effective, and cost-efficient strategy for HPC collection.

Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization for autologous transplantation - a literature review

The use of high-dose chemotherapy with autologous support of hematopoietic progenitor cells is an effective strategy to treat various hematologic neoplasms, such as non-Hodgkin lymphomas and multiple myeloma. Mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells are the main source of support for autologous transplants, and collection of an adequate number of hematopoietic progenitor cells is a critical step in the autologous transplant procedure. Traditional strategies, based on the use of growth factors with or without chemotherapy, have limitations even when remobilizations are performed. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor is the most widely used agent for progenitor cell mobilization. The association of plerixafor, a C-X-C Chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4) inhibitor, to granulocyte colony stimulating factor generates rapid mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells. A literature review was performed of randomized studies comparing different mobilization schemes in the treatment of multiple myeloma and lymphomas to analyze their limitations and effectiveness in hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization for autologous transplant. This analysis showed that the addition of plerixafor to granulocyte colony stimulating factor is well tolerated and results in a greater proportion of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphomas or multiple myeloma reaching optimal CD34⁺ cell collections with a smaller number of apheresis compared the use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor alone.

G-CSF plus preemptive plerixafor vs hyperfractionated CY plus G-CSF for autologous stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: effectiveness, safety and cost analysis

The optimal stem cell mobilization regimen for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) remains undefined. We retrospectively compared our experience in hematopoietic cell mobilization in 83 MM patients using fractionated high-dose CY and G-CSF with G-CSF plus preemptive plerixafor. All patients in the CY group (n=56) received fractionated high-dose CY (5 g/m(2) divided into five doses of 1 g/m(2) every 3 h) with G-CSF. All patients in the plerixafor group (n=27) received G-CSF and plerixafor preemptively based on an established algorithm. Compared with plerixafor, CY use was associated with higher total CD34+ cell yield (7.5 × 10(6) vs 15.5 × 10(6) cells/kg, P=0.005). All patients in both groups yielded ⩾4 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg. Conversely, CY use was associated with high frequency of febrile neutropenia, blood and platelet transfusions need and hospitalizations. The average total cost of mobilization in Lebanon was slightly higher in the plerixafor group ($7886 vs $7536; P=0.16). Our data indicate robust stem cell mobilization in MM patients with either fractionated high-dose CY and G-CSF or G-CSF alone with preemptive plerixafor. The chemo-mobilization approach was associated with twofold stem cell yield, slightly lower cost but significantly increased toxicity.

Intermediate doses of cytarabine plus granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor as an effective and safe regimen for hematopoietic stem cell collection in lymphoma patients with prior mobilization failure

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy supported by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an effective treatment for patients with lymphomas. However, failure to reach the minimum threshold of hematopoietic stem cells to proceed to ASCT may occur, even with the most effective strategies currently available.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We report on 33 patients diagnosed with lymphoma who had at least one prior mobilization failure and received cytarabine at a dose of 400 mg/m(2) /day intravenously × 3 days plus granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 10 to 12 μg/kg/day as mobilization regimen. The median number of previous lines of chemotherapy was three.

RESULTS

Thirty-two of 33 patients (96.8%) reached the target CD34+ cell dose (>2 × 10(6) /kg). The mean (range) number of apheresis procedures was 1.8 (1-3) with 4.69 × 10(6) (1.5 × 10(6) -6.8 × 10(6) )/kg CD34+ cells obtained. All but one patient received chemomobilization in the outpatient department. Severe infections or treatment-related mortality were not observed. All patients that received ASCT (31/33) engrafted without requiring G-CSF during the posttransplant period.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that cytarabine at intermediate doses plus G-CSF in patients diagnosed with lymphoma who had a prior mobilization failure is a feasible and effective mobilization regimen.

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.

Plerixafor: what we still have to learn

Plerixafor, a hematopoietic stem cell mobilizer, is indicated in combination with G-CSF to mobilize hematopoietic stem cells to the peripheral blood for collection and subsequent autologous transplantation in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Current evidence suggests that the addition of plerixafor with chemotherapy plus G-CSF 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. Nevertheless, there are several questions strongly debated, and in this paper, we would like to identify areas of possible future use and development of the drug.

The prognostic impact of peripheral blood progenitor cell dose following high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplant for hematologic malignancies

High-dose chemotherapy (HDT) followed by autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell transplant (PBPCT) has become a standard intervention in certain clinical settings of hematologic malignancies, particularly multiple myeloma and relapsed/refractory lymphoma. While the minimal required PBPCs infused, as defined by number of CD34 + cells, has been relatively well delineated for adequate hematopoietic recovery post-HDT, optimal PBPC dose has not been clearly defined. This is particularly relevant in the context of retrospective data suggesting improved survival outcomes with increased PBPC doses. The potential confounding of these data as they relate to disease risk is discussed within this review. Additionally, other retrospective data have suggested that enhanced quantitative lymphocyte subset reconstitution post-HDT-PBPCT may confer progression-free and overall survival advantage. These reported series herein reviewed may inform discussion of future, prospective clinical trials with the intent of defining optimal autologous PBPC dose following HDT, especially as it may relate to metrics beyond hematopoietic recovery.

Pharmacoeconomic impact of up-front use of plerixafor for autologous stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND AIMS

Stem cell collection can be a major component of overall cost of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Plerixafor is an effective agent for mobilization; however, it is often reserved for salvage therapy because of its high cost. We present data on the pharmacoeconomic impact of the use of plerixafor as an up-front mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

METHODS

Patients with MM who underwent ASCT between January 2008 and April 2011 at the Mount Sinai Medical Center were reviewed retrospectively. In April 2010, practice changes were instituted for patients with MM to delay initiation of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support from day 0 to day +5 and to add plerixafor to G-CSF as an up-front autologous mobilization. Targets of collection were 5-10 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg.

RESULTS

Of 50 adults with MM who underwent ASCT, 25 received plerixafor/filgrastim and 25 received G-CSF alone as an up-front mobilization. Compared with the control, plerixafor mobilization yielded higher CD34(+) cell content (16.1 versus 8.4 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg; P = 0.0007) and required fewer sessions of apheresis (1.9 versus 3.1; P = 0.0001). In the plerixafor group, the mean number of plerixafor doses required per patient was 1.8. Although the overall cost of medications was higher in the plerixafor group, the cost for blood products and overall cost of hospitalization were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Up-front use of plerixafor is an effective mobilization strategy in patients with MM and does not have a substantial pharmacoeconomic impact in overall cost of hospitalization combined with the apheresis procedure.

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.

Plerixafor for mobilization of blood stem cells in autologous transplantation: an update

INTRODUCTION

About 99% of all autologous transplants are now performed with blood stem cells. G-CSF alone or combined with chemotherapy have been used to mobilize CD34(+) cells. Plerixafor is a novel drug used for mobilization purposes.

AREAS COVERED

We have evaluated recent data in regard to plerixafor use in predicted or proven poor mobilizers. In addition, we have looked for preemptive strategies to optimize the use of this expensive drug. Also cost-efficacy issues and effects of plerixafor on graft composition and post-transplant outcomes will be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Plerixafor added to G-CSF is superior than G-CSF alone for mobilization of CD34(+) cells. This combination is also efficient in patients who have failed a previous mobilization attempt with other methods or in patients with risk factors for poor mobilization. Addition of plerixafor to G-CSF or chemotherapy plus G-CSF mobilization in patients who appear to mobilize poorly is under active investigation and algorithms for a preemptive use of this expensive agent have been proposed. Grafts collected after plerixafor appear to contain more lymphoid cells than the grafts collected without it. Whether this affects post-transplant outcomes such as immune reconstitution and risk of relapse needs to be evaluated.

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.

Advances in stem cell mobilization

Use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)-mobilized peripheral blood hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) has largely replaced bone marrow (BM) as a source of stem cells for both autologous and allogeneic cell transplantation. With G-CSF alone, up to 35% of patients are unable to mobilize sufficient numbers of CD34 cells/kg to ensure successful and consistent multi-lineage engraftment and sustained hematopoietic recovery. To this end, research is ongoing to identify new agents or combinations which will lead to the most effective and efficient stem cell mobilization strategies, especially in those patients who are at risk for mobilization failure. We describe both established agents and novel strategies at various stages of development. The latter include but are not limited to drugs that target the SDF-1/CXCR4 axis, S1P agonists, VCAM/VLA-4 inhibitors, parathyroid hormone, proteosome inhibitors, Groβ, and agents that stabilize HIF. While none of the novel agents have yet gained an established role in HPC mobilization in clinical practice, many early studies exploring these new pathways show promising results and warrant further investigation.

Prediction of poor mobilization of autologous CD34+ cells with growth factor in multiple myeloma patients: implications for risk-stratification

It is unknown whether clinical characteristics can successfully predict which multiple myeloma (MM) patients would be poor mobilizers with growth factor (GF) alone so they can be assigned to mobilization with chemotherapy + GF or GF + plerixafor. MM patients (N = 477) who underwent autologous mobilization with GF were retrospectively reviewed and assigned into training and validation cohorts. In multiple regression analysis, age, platelet count at time of mobilization, type of GF utilized, and extent of exposure to lenalidomide independently correlated with peripheral blood (PB)-CD34+ and were integrated in a predicting score (PS) for poor mobilizers, defined as PB-CD34+ < 20/mm(3) 4 days after initiation of GF. There was no correlation between institution, gender, time between diagnosis, and mobilization or plasma cells in the bone marrow at time of mobilization and PBCD34+. The PS cut-off found in the training cohort to have 90% sensitivity for prediction of poor mobilizers performed with 89.7% sensitivity but only 34.8% specificity in the validation cohort. Conversely, the PS cut-off developed to have 90% specificity performed with 86.9% specificity but only 37% sensitivity. We conclude that clinical characteristics identifiable before initiation of mobilization should not be used to stratify MM patients for different mobilization strategies.

Optimizing autologous stem cell mobilization strategies to improve patient outcomes: consensus guidelines and recommendations

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is a well-established treatment for malignancies such as multiple myeloma (MM) and lymphomas. Various changes in the field over the past decade, including the frequent use of tandem aHSCT in MM, the advent of novel therapies for the treatment of MM and lymphoma, and the addition of new stem cell mobilization techniques, have led to the need to reassess current stem cell mobilization strategies. Mobilization failures with traditional strategies are common and result in delays in treatment and increased cost and resource utilization. Recently, plerixafor-containing strategies have been shown to significantly reduce mobilization failure rates, but the ideal method to maximize stem cell yields and minimize costs associated with collection has not yet been determined. A panel of experts convened to discuss the currently available data on autologous hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and transplantation and to devise guidelines to optimize mobilization strategies. Herein is a summary of their discussion and consensus.

Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF vs G-CSF alone

Chemotherapy plus G-CSF (C+G) and G-CSF alone are two of the most common methods used to mobilize CD34(+) cells for autologous hematopoietic SCT (AHSCT). In order to compare and determine the real-world outcomes and costs of these strategies, we performed a retrospective study of 226 consecutive patients at 11 medical centers (64 lymphoma, 162 multiple myeloma), of whom 55% of lymphoma patients and 66% of myeloma patients received C+G. Patients with C+G yielded more CD34(+) cells/day than those with G-CSF alone (lymphoma: average 5.51 × 10(6) cells/kg on day 1 vs 2.92 × 10(6) cells/kg, P=0.0231; myeloma: 4.16 × 10(6) vs 3.69 × 10(6) cells/kg, P<0.00001) and required fewer days of apheresis (lymphoma: average 2.11 vs 2.96 days, P=0.012; myeloma: 2.02 vs 2.83 days, P=0.0015), although nearly all patients ultimately reached the goal of 2 × 10(6) cells/kg. With the exception of higher rates of febrile neutropenia in myeloma patients with C+G (17% vs 2%, P<0.05), toxicities and other outcomes were similar. Mobilization with C+G cost significantly more (lymphoma: median $10,300 vs $7300, P<0.0001; myeloma: $8800 vs $5600, P<0.0001), although re-mobilization adds $6700 for drugs alone. Our results suggest that although both C+G and G-CSF alone are effective mobilization strategies, C+G may be more cost-effective for patients at high risk of insufficient mobilization.

Pharmacoeconomics of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization: an overview of current evidence and gaps in the literature

Adequate hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) mobilization and collection is required prior to proceeding with high dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Cytokines such as G-CSF, GM-CSF, and peg-filgrastim, alone or in combination with plerixafor, and after chemotherapy have been used to mobilize HSCs. Studies have shown that the efficiency of HSC mobilization and collection may vary when different methods of mobilization are used. No studies have shown that survival is significantly affected by the method of mobilization, but some studies have suggested that cost and resource utilization may be different between different mobilization techniques. After the FDA approval of plerixafor with G-CSF to mobilize HSCs many transplant centers became concerned about the cost of HSC mobilization. A panel of experts was convened ant this paper reviews the current literature on the pharmacoeconomics of HSC mobilization.

A retrospective study of autologous stem cell mobilization to guide an immediate salvage protocol using plerixafor for patients who mobilize stem cells poorly

The addition of plerixafor to G-CSF decreases the risk of failed stem cell collection, but at considerable extra cost. Using a logistic regression model based on 354 autologous mobilizations, we have identified a local minimum peripheral blood CD34 count at which the probability of a successful collection is 50%. This seems an appropriate CD34 count at which to add immediate salvage plerixafor.

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.

CD34+ cell subclasses and lymphocyte subsets in blood grafts collected after various mobilization methods in myeloma patients

BACKGROUND

Cyclophosphamide (CY) combined with granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly used to mobilize stem cells in multiple myeloma (MM). Plerixafor may also be used with G-CSF in patients who mobilize poorly or it may be added to chemomobilization to boost mobilization. Limited data are available on graft content collected after various mobilization methods.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Blood grafts collected from 21 MM patients were retrospectively analyzed. We analyzed CD34+ subclasses and lymphocyte subsets from cryopreserved grafts collected on the next morning after plerixafor injection in nine MM patients mobilized with G-CSF with (n = 5) or without preceding CY (n = 4). As controls we had the first collections from 12 MM patients mobilized with low-dose CY with G-CSF.

RESULTS

The proportion of the most primitive stem cells (CD34+CD133+CD38-) from all CD34+ cells in the graft was higher in the plerixafor-treated patients but there was no significant difference in the total number of these cells. The numbers of CD19+ B lymphocytes and natural killer cells were higher in patients collected after G-CSF plus plerixafor when compared to the patients mobilized with CY plus G-CSF. Early engraftment after high-dose melphalan was comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Plerixafor appears to have effects on blood stem cell graft composition in myeloma patients. A higher number of grafts should be evaluated in regard to cellular content and longer follow-up of the patients is needed to evaluate the potential clinical impact of graft content.

Blood graft composition after plerixafor injection in patients with NHL

BACKGROUND

Plerixafor is used to mobilize CD34(+) hematopoietic stem cells from bone marrow to circulation. Limited data are available in regard to graft cellular content collected after plerixafor.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess effects of plerixafor added to chemomobilization on graft CD34(+) cell subclasses, lymphocyte subsets, engraftment, and post-transplant course in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients with NHL were included. All patients received chemotherapy plus G-CSF to mobilize stem cells. Nineteen patients received plerixafor pre-emptively owing to poor mobilization or poor collection yields. The rest of the patients constituted the control group. Flow cytometric analyzes were performed from cryopreserved graft samples. Also, data on post-transplant engraftment and outcome were collected.

RESULTS

The proportion of primitive stem cells (CD34(+)  CD133(+)  CD38(-) ) was significantly higher after the plerixafor injection when compared to the first collection in the control group. The amount of T cells (CD3(+) ), helper (CD3(+)  CD4(+) ) T subsets, and suppressor (CD3(+)  CD8(+) ) T subsets in the graft was all significantly higher in the plerixafor group. Also, the amount of NK cells (CD3(-)  CD16/56(+) ) was higher. Engraftment after high-dose therapy was comparable between the groups, but leukocyte and platelet count at 6 months were higher in patients receiving plerixafor-mobilized grafts.

CONCLUSION

Plerixafor, when used pre-emptively in addition to chemomobilization, seems to mobilize more primitive CD34(+) stem cells, T lymphocytes, and NK cells. Whether these differences are associated with immune reconstitution, long-term engraftment, or patient outcomes needs to be evaluated in larger patient groups with longer follow-up.

Growth factor plus preemptive ('just-in-time') plerixafor successfully mobilizes hematopoietic stem cells in multiple myeloma patients despite prior lenalidomide exposure

Lenalidomide is associated with suboptimal autologous hematopoietic stem cell (AHSC) mobilization. We hypothesized that growth factor plus preemptive plerixafor is an effective strategy for AHSC mobilization in multiple myeloma (MM) despite prior exposure to lenalidomide. We retrospectively reviewed patient characteristics and mobilization outcomes of 89 consecutive MM patients undergoing first mobilization with filgrastim or pegfilgrastim +/- preemptive plerixafor using a previously validated algorithm based on day 4 peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (PB-CD34+) and mobilization target. Outcomes were analyzed according to the extent of prior exposure to lenalidomide: no prior exposure (group A, n=40), 1- 4 cycles (group B, n=30) and >4 cycles (group C, n=19). Multivariate analysis yielded only age and number of cycles of lenalidomide as negatively associated, and mobilization with pegfilgrastim as positively associated with higher PB-CD34+. Only 45% of patients in group A required plerixafor vs 63% in groups B and 84% in C, P=0.01. A higher proportion of patients in group A (100%) met the mobilization target than in groups B (90%) or C (79%), P=0.008. All patients yielded at least 2 × 10(6) CD34+/kg. Growth factor mobilization with preemptive plerixafor is an adequate upfront mobilization strategy for MM patients regardless of prior exposure to lenalidomide.

Preemptive dosing of plerixafor given to poor stem cell mobilizers on day 5 of G-CSF administration

Plerixafor, given on day 4 of G-CSF treatment is more effective than G-CSF alone in mobilizing hematopoietic progenitor cells. We tested a strategy of preemptive plerixafor use following assessment of the peak mobilization response to 5 days of G-CSF. Patients were eligible for plerixafor if, on day 5 of G-CSF, there were <7 circulating CD34+ cells/μL or if <1.3 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg were collected on the first day of apheresis. Plerixafor (0.24 mg/kg s.c.) was given on day 5 of G-CSF followed by apheresis on day 6. This was repeated for up to two additional doses of plerixafor. The primary end point of the study was the percentage of patients who collected at least 2 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg. Twenty candidates for auto-SCT enrolled on the trial. The circulating CD34+ cell level increased a median of 3.1 fold (range 1-8 fold) after the first dose of plerixafor and a median of 1.2 fold (range 0.3-6.5 fold) after the second dose of plerixafor. In all, 15 out of 20 (75%) patients achieved the primary end point. In conclusion, the decision to administer plerixafor can be delayed until after the peak mobilization response to G-CSF has been fully assessed.