Biosimilar granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor for healthy donor stem cell mobilization: need we be afraid?

Donor-Matched Peripheral Blood-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Combined With Platelet-Rich Plasma Synergistically Ameliorate Surgery-Induced Osteoarthritis in Rabbits: An In Vitro and In Vivo Study

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease that causes joint pain and disability. Stem cell therapy is emerging as a promising treatment for OA.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the ability of peripheral blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells (PBMSCs) combined with donor-matched platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to treat OA in a rabbit model.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

PBMSCs and donor-matched PRP were isolated and prepared from the same rabbit. PBMSCs were treated with serum-free medium, fetal bovine serum, and PRP; a series of PBMSC behaviors, including proliferation, migration, and adhesion, were compared among groups. The ability of PBMSCs or PRP alone and PBMSCs+PRP to protect chondrocytes against proinflammatory cytokine (interleukin 1β [IL-1β]) treatment was compared by analyzing reactive oxygen species (ROS)-scavenging ability and apoptosis. Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction and immunofluorescence were used to investigate the expression of extracellular matrix (ECM) metabolism genes and proteins, and Western blotting was used to explore the potential mechanism of the corresponding signaling pathway. In vivo, the effect of PBMSCs+PRP on cartilage and inflammation of the synovium was observed in a surgery-induced OA rabbit model via gross observation, histological and immunohistochemical staining, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Proliferation, migration, and adhesion ability were enhanced in PBMSCs treated with PRP. Moreover, compared with either PBMSCs or PRP alone, PBMSCs+PRP enhanced ROS-scavenging ability and inhibited apoptosis in IL-1β-treated chondrocytes. PBMSCs+PRP also reversed the IL-1β-induced degradation of collagen type 2 and aggrecan and increased expression of matrix metalloproteinase 13, and this effect was related to increased expression of ECM synthesis and decreased expression of degradation and inflammatory genes and proteins. Mechanistically, PBMSCs+PRP reduced the phosphorylation of inhibitor of nuclear factor-κBα (IκBα), which further inhibited the phosphorylation of downstream nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) in the NF-κB signaling pathway. In vivo, compared with PBMSCs or PRP alone, intra-articular (IA) injection of PBMSCs+PRP enhanced cartilage regeneration and attenuated synovial inflammation in OA-induced rabbits.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate that PRP could enhance biological activities, including viability, migration, and adhesion, in PBMSCs. PBMSCs+PRP could rescue ECM degeneration by inhibiting inflammatory signaling in IL-1β-treated OA chondrocytes. In addition, IA injection of PBMSCs+PRP effectively attenuated OA progression in a surgery-induced OA rabbit model.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

PBMSCs+PRP may provide a promising treatment for knee OA, and this study can advance the related basic research.

Is split-dose better than single-dose? Results of Turkish Stem Cell Coordination Center (TURKOK) donors in the era of rising biosimilar G-CSF

BACKGROUND

Turkish Stem Cell Coordination Center (TURKOK) carries out the procurement process of unrelated allogeneic hematopoietic stem cells in Turkey. This study aims to compare the efficacy of both once-daily and divided-dose G-CSF administration and the original and biosimilar G-CSF use and the frequency and severity of adverse events in TURKOK donors.

METHOD

The study was conducted retrospectively with 142 healthy TURKOK donors. For PBSC mobilization, two different subcutaneous G-CSF programs were used as 10 μ/kg/day single-dose and 5 μ/kg/12 h. Neupogen (Amgen, Puerto Rico) and Tevagrastim (Teva, Kfar Saba, Israel) were used as G-CSF. All donors started apheresis on the fifth day, and all side effects were recorded during the procedure.

RESULTS

Stem cell yield was similar between single-dose and divided-doses based on donor weight, favoring the split-dose based on recipient weight (P = .506 and P = .023, respectively). Both G-CSF posologies were comparable if the target CD34+ cell yield was ≥4 × 10⁶ /kg. CD34+ cell yield was equivalent when evaluated against recipient weight, significantly favoring Tevagrastim vs Neupogen by donor weight (P = .740 and P = .021, respectively). Side effects, duration of pain, and need for analgesia favor Tevagratim over Neupogen.

CONCLUSION

Split-dose may be recommended for cases where the need for large numbers of CD34+ cells to be harvested is anticipated due to significant cell yield relative to recipient weight. However, sufficient hematopoietic stem cells can be collected with both posology. Tevagrastim is non-inferiority effective to Neupogen. Side effects during administration are both low-grade and temporary.

Superior physical and mental health of healthy volunteers before and five years after mobilized stem cell donation

Background

Safety, tolerability and efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for mobilization of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) from healthy donors have been conclusively demonstrated. This explicitly includes, albeit for smaller cohorts and shorter observation periods, biosimilar G-CSFs. HSPC donation is non-remunerated, its sole reward being “warm glow”, hence harm to donors must be avoided with maximal certitude. To ascertain, therefore, long-term physical and mental health effects of HSPC donation, a cohort of G-CSF mobilized donors was followed longitudinally.

Methods

We enrolled 245 healthy volunteers in this bi-centric long-term surveillance study. 244 healthy volunteers began mobilization with twice-daily Sandoz biosimilar filgrastim and 242 underwent apheresis after G-CSF mobilization. Physical and mental health were followed up over a period of 5-years using the validated SF-12 health questionnaire.

Results

Baseline physical and mental health of HSPC donors was markedly better than in a healthy reference population matched for ethnicity, sex and age. Physical, but not mental health was sharply diminished at the time of apheresis, likely due to side effects of biosimilar G-CSF, however had returned to pre-apheresis values by the next follow-up appointment after 6 months. Physical and mental health slightly deteriorated over time with kinetics reflecting the known effects of aging. Hence, superior physical and mental health compared to the general healthy non-donor population was maintained over time.

Conclusions

HSPC donors are of better overall physical and mental health than the average healthy non-donor. Superior well-being is maintained over time, supporting the favorable risk–benefit assessment of volunteer HSPC donation.

Trial registration National Clinical Trial NCT01766934

Mobilization of Hematopoietic Stem Cells into Peripheral Blood for Autologous Transplantation Seems Less Efficacious in Poor Mobilizers with the Use of a Biosimilar of Filgrastim and Plerixafor: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis

Introduction

Biosimilars of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) have shown similar efficacy to originator filgrastim (Neupogen® [NEU]; Amgen Inc.) as prophylaxis in neutropenia and in the mobilization of stem cells in patients receiving combination chemotherapy with G-CSF.

Methods

This was a retrospective study in which the characteristics of stem cell mobilization treated with a G-CSF alone were compared in 216 patients and 56 donors. The two G-CSF compared were NEU and the biosimilar filgrastim Zarzio® (Sandoz GmbH) (referred to hereafter as BIO). Primary objectives were mobilization rate (minimum of 10 × 10³/ml CD34+ on day 4 of treatment [day +4]) and use of the immunostimulant plerixafor (PLEX) in each group.

Results

The general characteristics of the patients receiving NEU (n = 138) and those receiving BIO (n = 78) did not differ significantly. PLEX was used in 24% of BIO patients and in 25.7% of NEU patients. The median CD34+ cell count on day +4 was significantly lower in BIO patients who needed PLEX than in those who did not (2.4 vs. 4.8 × 10³/ml; p = 0.002), as was the final CD34+ cell count (2.5 vs. 3.3 × 10⁶/kg; p 0.03). Mobilization failure rate was higher in the BIO group than in the NEU group (20 vs. 0%; p = 0.01). With respect to donors, more than one apheresis was needed in three BIO donors, one of them with PLEX. The use of BIO was the only risk factor for mobilization failure in patients who needed PLEX (hazard ratio 10.3; 95% confidence interval 1.3–77.8).

Conclusion

The study revealed that BIO had a lower efficacy for stem cell mobilization when the only treatment was G-CSF, especially in poor mobilizers needing PLEX.

Biosimilars in supportive care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review covers recent publications relating to the use of biosimilar medicines in the supportive care of cancer patients, and broader publications focussed on the benefits and challenges of implementing biosimilars into clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

A metaanalysis and a number of systematic literature reviews have confirmed that the safety and efficacy of biosimilar versions of epoetin-α, filgrastim and infliximab are equivalent to those of their corresponding reference biologics. New guidelines have been issued concerning the interchangeability of biosimilars and the practice of substituting a biosimilar in place of a prescribed reference product. The introduction of biosimilars into a health system has been shown to improve patient access to treatment while also delivering cost savings, however, there are a number of barriers that can prevent or delay the adoption of biosimilars into clinical practice which must be overcome for the potential benefits of biosimilars to be realized.

SUMMARY

There is a large amount of data to demonstrate that supportive care biosimilars are well tolerated and effective, with over 10 years of experience in Europe. We can learn from the challenges faced when introducing biosimilars into supportive care to facilitate the introduction of newer biosimilars into the treatment setting.

A survey of global biosimilar implementation practice conducted by the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners

Background

The International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP) Biosimilars Task Force was charged to develop educational activities and resources to assist members when implementing biosimilar medicines into their local practice. To facilitate the process, the task force conducted a survey in order to understand biosimilar implementation practice by ISOPP members across the world and the challenges that oncology pharmacists face when adopting biosimilars into their clinical practice.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted between 20 April 2019 and 27 May 2019. Members of ISOPP and a number of national oncology pharmacy groups were invited to complete the survey. The survey contained 29 items and consisted of three sections: respondents’ demographics, respondents’ institutional practice relating to biosimilar implementation and post implementation practice at the respondents’ institutions. Descriptive statistics were utilized to analyze the survey results.

Results

A total of 265 ISOPP members were surveyed, with 50 members providing a response (response rate = 19%). In addition, 40 nonmembers participated in the survey, bringing the total to 90 respondents. The most common factors that influence the decision to implement use of a biosimilar as reported by respondents are medication costs/pricing (92%), available clinical data (73%), and product availability (63%). Respondents also commented on the barriers to biosimilar implementation at their institutions, which included a reluctance of prescribers to use biosimilars (due to the lack of familiarity or perceived inferiority), a reluctance to switch established patients from an originator to a biosimilar and the preferences of insurance companies or funding bodies.

Conclusion

The results of this survey reinforce the need for greater education and training for health care professionals in the use of biosimilars, the importance of sharing good practice, and a need for standardization.

Towards a comprehensive safety understanding of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor biosimilars in treating chemotherapy associated febrile neutropenia: Trends from decades of data

Filgrastim, a biopharmaceutical listed on WHO model list of essential medicines, was approved in USA in 1991 for patients with non-myeloid malignancies associated with severe neutropenia and fever. Several filgrastim biosimilars have now been approved in USA, Europe and elsewhere since 2008, based on the reference product which has lost patent exclusivity; however their immunogenicity and safety is controversial. We conducted a retrospective, post market study between 1991 and May 2018 using VigiBase®. The study included all adverse events with case reports ≥150. Overall, 11,183 adverse drugs reaction reports were identified during observation period; of which 5764; 51.5% reports concerned to Neupogen®, the originator, and rest consists of Leucostim® (N = 680), Zarzio® (N = 622), Grasin® (N = 545), Nivestim® (N = 359) and Tevagrastim® (N = 152) biosimilars. When compared with the originator, Grasin® was associated with higher reporting of pyrexia (11.5% vs 7.9%, ROR 1.52, IC₀₂₅ 1.12), myalgia (37% vs 2.2%, ROR 25.94, IC₀₂₅ 2.11) and back pain (11.3% vs 4%, ROR 3.09, IC₀₂₅ 2.32). Zarzio® was associated with increased reporting of arthralgia (4.5% vs 2.9%, ROR 1.59, IC₀₂₅ 1.25) and neutropenia (11.4% vs 4%, ROR 2.59, IC₀₂₅ 3.07). Bone pain was reported more often with Nivestim® (14.4% vs 8.3%, ROR 1.87, IC₀₂₅ 5.30). Drug ineffectiveness was reported in cases with Zarzio® (35.9%), Nivestim® (19.4%) and Tevagrastim® (42.2%). Authors observed significant differences among originator and biosimilars in particular to efficacy, adverse events reported and time to onset of occurrences. Large epidemiologic studies are needed to further confirm these finding and provide additional insights.

Evaluation of a biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in Japanese healthy donors: a prospective study

A "biosimilar" is a biotechnological product with a lower cost profile and equivalent efficacy and safety to the originator, but post-marketing clinical evaluation of biosimilar products has not been adequately conducted. We prospectively investigated the utility of biosimilar filgrastim in 13 peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) donors from June 2014 to January 2017. In addition, we retrospectively compared these to another 13 PBSC donors mobilized with the originator filgrastim in the same period. Donor characteristics were equivalent between the groups. The median number of CD34⁺ cells per donor body weight (BW) and blood volume processed (BV) were 4.87 × 10⁶/kg and 25.5 × 10³/mL in the biosimilar group and 4.93 × 10⁶/kg and 16.6 × 10³/mL in the originator group, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups in the number of CD34⁺ cells per donor BW or BV. All adverse events associated with G-CSF were permissive. The total G-CSF cost was significantly lower in the biosimilar group than in the originator group. These findings suggest that biosimilar filgrastim has the same efficacy and short-term safety as originator filgrastim for PBSC mobilization in healthy donors, with economic superiority. Longer follow-up studies are needed to evaluate the incidence of long-term adverse events.

The Impact of Biosimilars in Supportive Care in Cancer

Collapse

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.

Biosimilar G-CSF versus filgrastim and lenograstim in healthy unrelated volunteer hematopoietic stem cell donors

The World Marrow Donor Organization recommends original granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for the mobilization of stem cells in healthy unrelated hematopoietic stem cell donors. We report the comparison of a biosimilar G-CSF (Zarzio) with two original G-CSFs (filgrastim and lenograstim) in mobilization in unrelated donors. We included data of 313 consecutive donors who were mobilized during the period from October 2014 to March 2016 at the Medical University of Warsaw. The primary endpoints of this study were the efficiency of CD34+ cell mobilization to the circulation and results of the first apheresis. The mean daily dose of G-CSF was 9.1 μg/kg for lenograstim, 9.8 μg/kg for biosimilar filgrastim, and 9.3 μg/kg for filgrastim (p < 0.001). The mean CD34+ cell number per microliter in the blood before the first apheresis was 111 for lenograstim, 119 for biosimilar filgrastim, and 124 for filgrastim (p = 0.354); the mean difference was even less significant when comparing CD34+ number per dose of G-CSF per kilogram (p = 0.787). Target doses of CD34+ cells were reached with one apheresis in 87% donors mobilized with lenograstim and in 93% donors mobilized with original and biosimilar filgrastim (p = 0.005). The mobilized apheresis outcomes (mean number of CD34+ cells/kg of donor collected during the first apheresis) was similar with lenograstim, biosimilar filgrastim, and filgrastim: 6.2 × 10⁶, 7.6 × 10⁶, and 7.3 × 10⁶, respectively, p = 0.06. There was no mobilization failure in any of the donors. Biosimilar G-CSF is as effective in the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells in unrelated donors as original G-CSFs. Small and clinically irrelevant differences seen in the study can be attributed to differences in G-CSF dose and collection-related factors. Active safety surveillance concurrent to clinical use and reporting to donor outcome registry (e.g., EBMT donor outcome registry or WMDA SEAR/SPEAR) might help to evaluate the possible short- and long-term complications of biosimilar G-CSF.

Comparative study of the number of report and time-to-onset of the reported adverse event between the biosimilars and the originator of filgrastim

PURPOSE

The objective of this study is to specify the most reported adverse events as preferred terms (PTs) and to compare the reported adverse events about some properties including the number of report and time-to-onset (TTO) distribution of the originator of filgrastim Neupogen® and its biosimilars in Europe, using VigiBase®.

METHODS

We identified the biosimilar which was reported as the suspected drug in more than 100 individual case safety reports in Europe. Then, we specified the top ranking 10 PTs in the cases reported with Neupogen® or each biosimilar as the suspected drug. We also compared the TTO of the most reported PTs using the data about the onset date of the PT and the start date of filgrastim. We used Kolmogorov-Smirnov method to detect significant difference.

RESULTS

The total ICSR numbers with Neupogen® and 3 biosimilars, Zarzio®, Nivestim®, and Tevagrastim® were 1,301, 295, 156, and 127, respectively, in Europe. The most reported PTs with Neupogen® were bone pain, pyrexia, and dyspnoea. The TTO of bone pain and pyrexia with Zarzio® (N: 22 and 16, median: 1 and 0.5 days) were significantly shorter than those with Neupogen® (P < 0.01, N: 72 and 33, median: 3.5 and 3 days), respectively. The most reported PTs with biosimilars were drug ineffective and neutropenia.

CONCLUSION

The difference in the TTO was identified between originator filgrastim Neupogen and its biosimilar regarding some PTs, which may suggest the difference in their safety profile. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Healthy donor hematopoietic stem cell mobilization with biosimilar granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor: safety, efficacy, and graft performance

BACKGROUND

Biosimilar granulocyte-colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) have been available in the European Union since 2008, and Sandoz' biosimilar filgrastim was approved in the United States in March 2015 for all of the reference product's indications except acute radiation syndrome. Biosimilar G-CSFs have been largely embraced by the medical community, except for some reservations about healthy-donor stem cell mobilization, for which use outside of clinical studies was cautioned against by some members of the scientific community.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

In a two-center safety surveillance study (National Clinical Trial NCT01766934), 245 healthy volunteer stem cell donors were enrolled. Of 244 donors who began mobilization with twice-daily Sandoz biosimilar filgrastim, 242 received a full (n = 241) or partial (n = 1) course of G-CSF and underwent apheresis. Efficacy and safety were assessed and are reported here.

RESULTS

Biosimilar filgrastim was accompanied by the typical G-CSF class-related adverse effects of expected frequency and severity. Median mobilization for CD34-positive stem cells was 97/µL (range, 20-347/µL); after one apheresis (91%) or two aphereses (9%) from all but three donors (1.2%), cell doses in excess of the typical 4 × 10⁶ CD34-positive cells/kg of the recipient had been collected (range, 3-52 × 10⁶ /kg). Biochemical and hematologic alterations were consistent with previous reports; all had normalized by the first follow-up 1 month after mobilization. Stem cell products engrafted with typical probability and kinetics for G-CSF-mobilized stem cell products.

CONCLUSION

These data support the use of biosimilar filgrastim for healthy-donor stem cell mobilization as safe and effective.

Update on biosimilars of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor - when no news is good news

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the approval of the first biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), biosimilars - copies of therapeutic biologicals whose patent protection has expired - have finally reached the US healthcare market. Its advent is an occasion for a closer look at recent insights into biosimilar G-CSF and an attempt at prognosticating the future (future role) of biosimilars in general.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature regarding biosimilar G-CSF orbits significantly around patient access and effects on healthcare expenditure. The advent of biosimilar G-CSF has induced unexpectedly large price reductions for short-acting G-CSF. On the clinical side, little excitement is tangible, probably appropriately so, since clinical data indicate nothing short of biological similarity. Although formal clinical trials are few, the plethora of case series and historic comparisons which have come forth offer reassurance about the appropriateness of the regulators' assessment of biosimilar G-CSF as indeed in all respects biologically similar to the originator.

SUMMARY

All evidence points to an overwhelming similarity of originator and biosimilar G-CSF in all indications. Overall clinical acceptance, albeit possibly significantly dictated by economic pressures, is good. Price reductions exceed predictions and may jeopardize the economic viability of biosimilar programs. A concurrent shift towards long-acting G-CSF ('biobetters') is observed in Europe.

Mobilization of autologous and allogeneic peripheral blood stem cells for transplantation in haematological malignancies using biosimilar G-CSF

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Biosimilars of the granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) filgrastim were approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for registered indications of the originator G-CSF, including prevention and treatment of neutropenia, as well as mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells in 2008. Nevertheless, there is still an ongoing debate regarding the quality, efficacy and safety of biosimilar G-CSF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This article is a meta-analysis of clinical studies on the use of biosimilar G-CSF for mobilization and transplantation of haematopoietic stem cells as available in public databases. All data sets were weighted for the number of patients and parameters and then subjected to statistical meta-analysis employing the Mann-Whitney U-test followed by the Hodges-Lehmann estimator to assess differences between biosimilar and originator G-SCF.

RESULTS

A total of 1892 individuals, mostly with haematological malignancies but also including 351 healthy donors have been successfully mobilized for autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation using biosimilar G-CSF (Zarzio(TM) : 1239 individuals; Ratiograstim(TM) /Tevagrastim(TM) : 653 individuals). A total of 740 patients with multiple myeloma, 491 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), 150 with Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) and other diseases are included in this meta-analysis, as well as 161 siblings and 190 volunteer unrelated donors. For biosimilar and originator G-CSF, bioequivalence was observed for the yield of CD34+ stem cells as well as for the engraftment of the transplants.

CONCLUSION

Biosimilar G-CSF has equivalent effects and safety as originator G-CSF.

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.

Adult stem cells in neural repair: Current options, limitations and perspectives

Stem cells represent a promising step for the future of regenerative medicine. As they are able to differentiate into any cell type, tissue or organ, these cells are great candidates for treatments against the worst diseases that defy doctors and researchers around the world. Stem cells can be divided into three main groups: (1) embryonic stem cells; (2) fetal stem cells; and (3) adult stem cells. In terms of their capacity for proliferation, stem cells are also classified as totipotent, pluripotent or multipotent. Adult stem cells, also known as somatic cells, are found in various regions of the adult organism, such as bone marrow, skin, eyes, viscera and brain. They can differentiate into unipotent cells of the residing tissue, generally for the purpose of repair. These cells represent an excellent choice in regenerative medicine, every patient can be a donor of adult stem cells to provide a more customized and efficient therapy against various diseases, in other words, they allow the opportunity of autologous transplantation. But in order to start clinical trials and achieve great results, we need to understand how these cells interact with the host tissue, how they can manipulate or be manipulated by the microenvironment where they will be transplanted and for how long they can maintain their multipotent state to provide a full regeneration.

Regulatory and clinical considerations for biosimilar oncology drugs

Biological oncology products are integral to cancer treatment, but their high costs pose challenges to patients, families, providers, and insurers. The introduction of biosimilar agents-molecules that are similar in structure, function, activity, immunogenicity, and safety to the original biological drugs-provide opportunities both to improve health-care access and outcomes, and to reduce costs. Several international regulatory pathways have been developed to expedite entry of biosimilars into global marketplaces. The first wave of oncology biosimilar use was in Europe and India in 2007. Oncology biosimilars are now widely marketed in several countries in Europe, and in Australia, Japan, China, Russia, India, and South Korea. Their use is emerging worldwide, with the notable exception of the USA, where several regulatory and cost barriers to biosimilar approval exist. In this Review, we discuss oncology biosimilars and summarise their regulatory frameworks, clinical experiences, and safety concerns.

CMV-specific T cell isolation from G-CSF mobilized peripheral blood: depletion of myeloid progenitors eliminates non-specific binding of MHC-multimers

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific T cell infusion to immunocompromised patients following allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (allo-HSCT) is able to induce a successful anti-viral response. These cells have classically been manufactured from steady-state apheresis samples collected from the donor in an additional harvest prior to G-CSF mobilization, treatment that induces hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) mobilization to the periphery. However, two closely-timed cellular collections are not usually available in the unrelated donor setting, which limits the accessibility of anti-viral cells for adoptive immunotherapy. CMV-specific cytotoxic T cell (CTL) manufacture from the same G-CSF mobilized donor stem cell harvest offers great regulatory advantages, but the isolation using MHC-multimers is hampered by the high non-specific binding to myeloid progenitors, which reduces the purity of the cellular product.

METHODS

In the present study we describe an easy and fast method based on plastic adherence to remove myeloid cell subsets from 11 G-CSF mobilized donor samples. CMV-specific CTLs were isolated from the non-adherent fraction using pentamers and purity and yield of the process were compared to products obtained from unmanipulated samples.

RESULTS

After the elimination of unwanted cell subtypes, non-specific binding of pentamers was notably reduced. Accordingly, following the isolation process the purity of the obtained cellular product was significantly improved.

CONCLUSIONS

G-CSF mobilized leukapheresis samples can successfully be used to isolate antigen-specific T cells with MHC-multimers to be adoptively transferred following allo-HSCT, widening the accessibility of this therapy in the unrelated donor setting. The combination of the clinically translatable plastic adherence process to the antigen-specific cell isolation using MHC-multimers improves the quality of the therapeutic cellular product, thereby reducing the clinical negative effects associated with undesired alloreactive cell infusion.