The avoidance of G-CSF and the addition of prophylactic corticosteroids after autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma patients appeal for the at-home setting to reduce readmission for neutropenic fever

Endothelial activation and damage as a common pathological substrate in different pathologies and cell therapy complications

The endothelium is a biologically active interface with multiple functions, some of them common throughout the vascular tree, and others that depend on its anatomical location. Endothelial cells are continually exposed to cellular and humoral factors, and to all those elements (biological, chemical, or hemodynamic) that circulate in blood at a certain time. It can adapt to different stimuli but this capability may be lost if the stimuli are strong enough and/or persistent in time. If the endothelium loses its adaptability it may become dysfunctional, becoming a potential real danger to the host. Endothelial dysfunction is present in multiple clinical conditions, such as chronic kidney disease, obesity, major depression, pregnancy-related complications, septic syndromes, COVID-19, and thrombotic microangiopathies, among other pathologies, but also in association with cell therapies, such as hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and treatment with chimeric antigen receptor T cells. In these diverse conditions, evidence suggests that the presence and severity of endothelial dysfunction correlate with the severity of the associated disease. More importantly, endothelial dysfunction has a strong diagnostic and prognostic value for the development of critical complications that, although may differ according to the underlying disease, have a vascular background in common. Our multidisciplinary team of women has devoted many years to exploring the role of the endothelium in association with the mentioned diseases and conditions. Our research group has characterized some of the mechanisms and also proposed biomarkers of endothelial damage. A better knowledge would provide therapeutic strategies either to prevent or to treat endothelial dysfunction.

Feasibility of a Hospital-at-Home Program for Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

The Hospital at Home (HaH) model has been positioned as an appropriate therapeutic strategy for selected patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This care model provides hospital-equivalent care, in terms of both quality and quantity, with medical and nursing staff that go to the patient's home. Here we describe our experience with a full HaH model for patients undergoing ASCT during the phase of aplasia. The patients met the eligibility criteria between January 1997 and December 2019 and were discharged from the hospital and admitted into the HaH-ASCT program on the same day they in which hematopoietic stem cells were infused. A total of 84 patients were included. The median patient age was 54 years (range, 16 to 74 years), and the median duration of participation in the HaH program was 17 days (range, 3 to 86 days). Only 10 of these patients (12%) required hospital readmission to the hematology department, 9 of them due to sepsis and 1 because of family care support claudication. Seventy-two patients (86%) experienced an episode of neutropenic fever during the HAH admission, with a median duration of 2 days (interquartile range [IQR], 1 to 11 days); all were treated with empiric i.v. antimicrobial therapy. Most patients (88%) presented with mucositis (44% with grade 3-4). Parenteral nutrition was administered in 26% of patients for a median of 6 days (IQR, 1 to 12 days). Most patients (94%) required at least 1 blood product transfusion at home. There was no transplantation-related mortality during the HaH-ASCT program or in the patients who were readmitted. With careful selection of patients and a comprehensive and well- experienced multidisciplinary team (doctors, nurses, and auxiliary nurses) in the HaH department and in close collaboration with the hematology department, complete at-home management of ASCT recipients immediately after transplantation is possible. This allows patients undergoing an aggressive procedure such as ASCT to remain in their own familiar environment, providing a better quality of life with a program that has demonstrated to be effective and safe, with a low incidence of complications and no associated mortality.

A Prospective, Randomized Trial Examining the Use of G-CSF Versus No G-CSF in Patients Post-Autologous Transplantation

Contemporary, prospective data regarding the impact of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) on outcomes after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Auto-HSCT) in an era when stem cell grafts are more qualitatively robust are limited. Recent retrospective analyses have not supported a beneficial effect of post-transplantation G-CSF use on major outcomes after Auto-HSCT leading to strategies to delay or eliminate the use of G-CSF altogether in this context. To test the hypothesis that the infusion of consistently higher doses of stem cells (defined as ≥4 × 10⁶/kg) in Auto-HSCT will obviate the need for post-transplantation G-CSF. If so, the impact of withholding G-CSF will be noninferior to the use of G-CSF in terms of length of stay (LOS). The specific objectives were to conduct a prospective, randomized clinical trial primarily examining the impact of post-transplantation G-CSF on LOS, and secondarily on engraftment, infectious complications, antibiotic usage, and incidence of engraftment syndrome after Auto-HSCT in patients receiving versus not receiving G-CSF after Auto-HSCT. Patients with multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who underwent Pegfilgrastim plus Plerixafor-primed stem cell collection followed by Auto-HSCT were randomized to the G-CSF group (receive G-CSF starting at day 3 after Auto-HSCT) or the no G-CSF group (G-CSF withheld after Auto-HSCT). Seventy patients per arm were planned to demonstrate the primary endpoint of noninferiority in LOS between the G-CSF and the no G-CSF groups. Patient outcomes in the two groups were followed up and compared after Auto-HSCT, and an interim analysis for futility was planned when accrual reached 50%.The primary finding of this study was that despite only a 2-day longer median absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovery in the no G-CSF arm (median 11 versus 13 days; P = .001), LOS was 4 days longer in patients not treated with G-CSF (median 11 days versus 15 days; P = .001). G-CSF use was associated with more robust incremental daily increases in ANC once recovered (P = .001), fewer days of febrile neutropenia (P = .001), and fewer days on antibiotics (P = .001), potentially contributing to this disproportionate finding. Inferiority in LOS in the no G-CSF group was demonstrated on the interim analysis, and the study was closed at the half-way point. There were no significant group differences in platelet recovery, documented infections, hospital readmissions, or overall survival at 1 year. Engraftment syndrome occurred in 54.3% of patients and was not related to G-CSF use. These results suggest that the increased LOS associated with the omission of G-CSF is largely due to concerns regarding the potential for infection in patients without a stable, recovered ANC in a hospital setting. Engraftment syndrome represented a significant source of febrile neutropenia further contributing to patient safety concerns and requires strategies to decrease its incidence. Infectious complications and death were not affected by the omission of G-CSF supporting a carefully monitored outpatient approach to Auto-HSCT in which white blood cell growth factor is eliminated or given as needed for documented infection. © 2023 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.