Optimizing Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor Dosing Scheme in Healthy Stem Cell Donors for Allogenic Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Single Dose vs. Split Dose

Objectives The optimal dosing schedule strategy for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in healthy stem cell donors remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of once-daily versus twice-daily G-CSF administration in allogeneic stem cell donors. Materials and methods We retrospectively analyzed data from 388 healthy unrelated donors (282 males, 106 females) who underwent stem cell mobilization at our center between September 2018 and June 2022. Donors received daily either a single dose of 10 μg/kg/day or two doses of 5 μg/kg/day of filgrastim. Results The split-dose group had significantly higher CD34+ cell counts in peripheral blood (p<0.001), total collected CD34+ cell counts (p<0.001), and total collected CD34+ cell counts per donor body weight (p<0.001) than the single-dose group with one apheresis procedure on the fifth day of GCSF. Multivariable analysis revealed that split-dose G-CSF administration was independently associated with higher peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (p<0.001) and higher total collected CD34+ cell count per donor body weight (p<0.001). Coincidentally, the split-dose group also had higher rates of catheter use (p = 0.003). Conclusion Split-dose G-CSF administration led to better stem cell mobilization than once-daily dosing. These findings contribute to optimizing G-CSF regimens for allogeneic stem cell donation, potentially improving transplantation outcomes.

Scoping Review of Factors Associated with Stem Cell Mobilization and Collection in Allogeneic Stem Cell Donors

There is wide interindividual variation in the efficacy of CD34+ cell mobilization and collection in healthy allogenic hematopoietic stem cell donors. Donor characteristics, blood cell counts, and various factors related to mobilization and collection have been associated with blood CD34+ cell count and CD34+ cell yield after granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilization and collection. Given the heterogenous nature of the literature reporting these associations, in this scoping review we clarify the determinants of CD34+ count and yield. Studies published between 2000 and 2023 reporting allogeneic donors undergoing G-CSF mobilization and peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection were evaluated. Eligible studies were those that assessed blood CD34+ cell count or CD34+ cell yield in the first PBSC collection after mobilization with 4 or 5 days of G-CSF treatment. Associations were recorded between these outcomes and donor factors (age, sex, weight, ethnicity), mobilization factors (G-CSF scheduling or dose), collection factors (venous access, processed blood volume [PBV]) or laboratory factors (blood cell counts at baseline or after mobilization). The 52 studies evaluated between 15 and 20,884 donors. Forty-three studies were retrospective, 33 assessed blood CD34+ cell counts, and 39 assessed CD34+ cell yield from PBSCs. Blood CD34+ cell counts consistently predicted CD34+ cell yield. Younger donors usually had higher blood CD34+ cell counts and CD34+ cell yield. Most studies that investigated the effect of donor ancestry found that donors of non-European ancestry had higher blood CD34+ cell counts after mobilization and higher CD34+ cell yields from collection. The poor consensus about the best predictors of blood CD34+ cell count and yield necessitates further prospective studies, particularly of the role of donor ancestry. The current focus on donor sex as a major predictor requires re-evaluation.

Treatment effectiveness in a rare oncology indication: Lessons from an external control cohort study

Real-world data (RWD) reflecting patient treatment in routine clinical practice can be used to develop external control groups for single-arm trials. External controls can provide valuable benchmark results on potential comparator drug effectiveness, particularly in rare indications when randomized controlled trials are either infeasible or unethical. This paper describes lessons learned from a descriptive real-world external control cohort study conducted to provide benchmark data for a single-arm clinical trial in a rare oncology biomarker driven disease. Conducting external control cohort studies to evaluate treatment effectiveness in rare indications likely will present with data and analysis challenges as seen in the example study. However, there are mitigating measures that can be applied in the study design, identification of RWD sources, and data analysis. The lessons learned and reported here with a proposal of an external control study framework can provide guidance for future research in this area, and may be applicable as well in other rare indications. Taking these learnings into consideration, the use of real-world external controls to contextualize treatment effectiveness in rare indications is a valuable approach and warrants further application in the future.

Challenge to Predict Mobilized Peripheral Blood Stem Cells on the Fourth Day of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Treatment in Healthy Donors: Predictive Value of Basal CD34+ Cell and Platelet Counts

A longitudinal, prospective, observational, single-center cohort study on healthy donors was designed to identify predictors of CD34⁺ cell mobilization on day 4 after granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration. As potential predictors of mobilization, age, sex, body weight, height, blood volume, WBC count, peripheral blood (PB) mononuclear cell count, platelet (Plt) count, and hematocrit and hemoglobin levels were considered. Two different evaluations of CD34⁺ cell counts were determined for each donor: baseline (before G-CSF administration) and in PB on day 4 after G-CSF administration. One hundred twenty-two consecutive healthy donors with a median age of 47.5 years were enrolled. The median value of CD34⁺ on day 4 was 43 cells/µL (interquartile range, 23 to 68), and 81.1% of donors had ≥20 cells/µL. Basal WBC count, Plt count, and CD34⁺ were significantly higher for the subjects with CD34⁺ levels over median values on day 4. A multivariate quartile regression analysis, adjusted by sex, age, basal CD34⁺, and basal Plt count, showed a progressively stronger relationship between baseline CD34⁺ and Plt levels and the CD34⁺ levels on day 4. The basal CD34⁺ cut-off level to predict the levels of CD34⁺ on day 4 was either ≤2 cells/μL or ≥3 cells/μL and that of basal Plt count was ≤229 × 10⁹/L or ≥230 × 10⁹/L, respectively, to determine whether mobilization therapy should or should not be attempted. PB stem cell mobilization with G-CSF was highly effective on day 4, and herein we describe a model for predicting the probability of performing PB stem cell collection after a short course of G-CSF.

Method comparison study of peripheral blood CD34+ count performed on an Abbott CELL-DYN Sapphire hematology analyzer versus flow cytometry reference procedure (modified ISHAGE)

Introduction

CD34+ cell enumeration is a critical parameter used to determine the timing of apheresis collections of hematopoietic progenitor cell products (HPC(A)). Automated hematology analyzers equipped with flow cytometry capabilities may be a solution to the problem of limited access to standard flow cytometry testing.

Methods

We compared CD34+ cell enumeration using a reference flow cytometry procedure employing modified International Society of Hematotherapy and Graft Engineering (ISHAGE) analysis with a hematology analyzer /flow cytometer hybrid (CELL DYN (CD)Sapphire) using a sequential gating analysis designed to emulate the ISHAGE gating strategy.

Results

CD34+ cell values obtained from the ISHAGE and CD Sapphire analysis were plotted and compared in a linear regression analysis which showed a high degree of correlation (R²=0.96). No statistically significant (p=0.53) differences in CD34+ cell enumeration values were observed between the flow cytometer and automated hematology analyzer using manual analysis schema.

Conclusions

We have demonstrated that an automated hematology analyzer equipped with a flow module can provide CD34+ cell enumeration results in the peripheral blood for clinical decision algorithms without the need for a dedicated flow cytometry laboratory.

Pegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor versus non-pegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilizes and increases the amount of hematopoietic stem cells in peripheral blood, enabling its harvest by few apheresis procedures. The pegylated G-CSF has longer half-life and is given once only, which is more comfortable for patients, whereas the non-pegylated requires multiple daily injection because of its short half-life. We summarized results of randomized trials comparing the efficacy and safety of pegylated and non-pegylated G-CSF for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization. We searched the Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and two conference proceedings. Two authors made the selection, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality using GRADE independently. We used random-effects model for meta-analysis. We found 3956 records and retrieved 47 full texts. We included eight randomized trials with a total number of 554 randomized and 532 analyzed subjects. The meta-analysis included five trials because not all trials reported the same outcomes. Pooling data from two studies shows no evidence for a difference in the successful mobilization rate (CD34+ cell ≥ 2 × 10⁶ /kg collected) between pegfilgrastim 6 mg (early administration) and filgrastim 5 µg/kg/day (147 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.67-1.11; P = .26). Pooling data from three studies shows no difference in the incidence of adverse events between pegylated and non-pegylated G-CSF (170 participants; RR 0.86, 95%CI 0.34-2.17; P = .75). No difference found on the quantity of CD34+ cells collected, number of apheresis procedure in successful mobilization, level of peak PB CD34+ cells achieved, and day of neutrophil and platelet engraftment.