|
1
|
Gertz MA. Is There Still a Role for Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma? Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2024; 38:407-420. [PMID: 38151401 DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2023.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2023]
Abstract
No therapy in multiple myeloma has been as extensively investigated as stem cell transplantation following high-dose chemotherapy. A search of the national library of medicine in February 2023 revealed over 27,000 publications covering stem cell transplantation. No other treatment for multiple myeloma has been so vigorously investigated. However, given the rapid advances seen in the treatment of multiple myeloma, it is legitimate to ask whether the technique first introduced in 1983 by Thomas McIlwain still has relevance. In 1984,Barlogie introduced infusional vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone and in 1986 published a first series on high-dose therapy with autologous marrow-derived stem cells. At this point, the only available therapies were melphalan, prednisone, other intensive steroids such as methylprednisolone, and interferon. Cyclophosphamide was used both orally and parenterally. VBMCP was introduced as a combination therapy at Memorial Hospital subsequently shown not to be superior to melphalan and prednisone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morie A Gertz
- Mayo Clinic, 200 SW First street, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Prisciandaro M, Santinelli E, Tomarchio V, Tafuri MA, Bonchi C, Palazzo G, Nobile C, Marinucci A, Mele M, Annibali O, Rigacci L, Vacca M. Stem Cells Collection and Mobilization in Adult Autologous/Allogeneic Transplantation: Critical Points and Future Challenges. Cells 2024; 13:586. [PMID: 38607025 PMCID: PMC11011310 DOI: 10.3390/cells13070586] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2024] [Revised: 03/23/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Achieving successful hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) relies on two fundamental pillars: effective mobilization and efficient collection through apheresis to attain the optimal graft dose. These cornerstones pave the way for enhanced patient outcomes. The primary challenges encountered by the clinical unit and collection facility within a transplant program encompass augmenting mobilization efficiency to optimize the harvest of target cell populations, implementing robust monitoring and predictive strategies for mobilization, streamlining the apheresis procedure to minimize collection duration while ensuring adequate yield, prioritizing patient comfort by reducing the overall collection time, guaranteeing the quality and purity of stem cell products to optimize graft function and transplant success, and facilitating seamless coordination between diverse entities involved in the HSCT process. In this review, we aim to address key questions and provide insights into the critical aspects of mobilizing and collecting hematopoietic stem cells for transplantation purposes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michele Prisciandaro
- Operative Research Unit of Transfusion Medicine and Cellular Therapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (C.B.); (G.P.); (C.N.); (A.M.)
| | - Enrico Santinelli
- Operative Research Unit of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (E.S.); (V.T.); (M.A.T.); (M.M.); (O.A.); (L.R.)
- Program in Immunology, Molecular Medicine and Applied Biotechnologies, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy
| | - Valeria Tomarchio
- Operative Research Unit of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (E.S.); (V.T.); (M.A.T.); (M.M.); (O.A.); (L.R.)
| | - Maria Antonietta Tafuri
- Operative Research Unit of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (E.S.); (V.T.); (M.A.T.); (M.M.); (O.A.); (L.R.)
| | - Cecilia Bonchi
- Operative Research Unit of Transfusion Medicine and Cellular Therapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (C.B.); (G.P.); (C.N.); (A.M.)
| | - Gloria Palazzo
- Operative Research Unit of Transfusion Medicine and Cellular Therapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (C.B.); (G.P.); (C.N.); (A.M.)
| | - Carolina Nobile
- Operative Research Unit of Transfusion Medicine and Cellular Therapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (C.B.); (G.P.); (C.N.); (A.M.)
| | - Alessandra Marinucci
- Operative Research Unit of Transfusion Medicine and Cellular Therapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (C.B.); (G.P.); (C.N.); (A.M.)
| | - Marcella Mele
- Operative Research Unit of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (E.S.); (V.T.); (M.A.T.); (M.M.); (O.A.); (L.R.)
| | - Ombretta Annibali
- Operative Research Unit of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (E.S.); (V.T.); (M.A.T.); (M.M.); (O.A.); (L.R.)
| | - Luigi Rigacci
- Operative Research Unit of Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (E.S.); (V.T.); (M.A.T.); (M.M.); (O.A.); (L.R.)
| | - Michele Vacca
- Operative Research Unit of Transfusion Medicine and Cellular Therapy, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Roma, Italy; (C.B.); (G.P.); (C.N.); (A.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Teipel R, Rieprecht S, Trautmann-Grill K, Röllig C, Klötzer C, Zimmer K, Rathaj G, Bach E, Brückner M, Heyn S, Wang SY, Jentzsch M, Schwind S, Kretschmann T, Egger-Heidrich K, Remane Y, Franke GN, von Bonin M, Bornhäuser M, Platzbecker U, Hölig K, Merz M, Vučinić V. Steady-state versus chemotherapy-based hematopoietic cell mobilization after anti-CD38-based induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Transfusion 2023; 63:2131-2139. [PMID: 37850414 DOI: 10.1111/trf.17566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2023] [Revised: 08/26/2023] [Accepted: 08/29/2023] [Indexed: 10/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The incorporation of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in induction regimens of newly diagnosed transplant-eligible multiple myeloma (MM) patients has been established as a new standard. However, the optimal strategy of stem cell mobilization in this context is not yet clear. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS From May 2020 till September 2022, we retrospectively reviewed patients receiving anti-CD38 mAb-based induction therapy followed by stem cell mobilization either in a steady-state protocol (SSM) using 10 μg/kg granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for 5 days or in a chemotherapy-based protocol (CM) using 1-4 g/m2 cyclophosphamide and G-CSF. RESULTS Overall, 85 patients (median age 61 years) were included in the analysis. In total, 90 mobilization attempts were performed, 42 with SSM and 48 with CM. There was no significant difference in the median concentration of CD34+ cells in peripheral blood (PB) prior to apheresis between SSM and CM (61/μL vs. 55.4/μL; p = .60). Cumulative CD34+ yields did not differ between the groups with median of 6.68 and 6.75 × 106 /kg body weight, respectively (p = .35). The target yield (≥4 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg body weight) was reached in 88% (CM) and 86% (SSM), with a high proportion even after a single apheresis session (76% vs. 75%). Plerixafor was found to be more frequently used in SSM (52%) than in CM (23%; p < .01). A total of 83 patients underwent autologous transplantation and all were engrafted. CONCLUSIONS Stem cell collection in patients undergoing anti-CD38-based induction therapy is feasible with either CM or SSM, although SSM more frequently requires plerixafor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raphael Teipel
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Susanne Rieprecht
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
- Pharmacy, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | | | - Christoph Röllig
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christina Klötzer
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Kristin Zimmer
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Grit Rathaj
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Enrica Bach
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Mandy Brückner
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Simone Heyn
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Song-Yau Wang
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Madlen Jentzsch
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | | | - Theresa Kretschmann
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | | | - Yvonne Remane
- Pharmacy, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Georg-Nikolaus Franke
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Malte von Bonin
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Martin Bornhäuser
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Disease (NCT), Dresden, Germany
| | - Uwe Platzbecker
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Kristina Hölig
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany
| | - Maximilian Merz
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Vladan Vučinić
- Department of Hematology, Cellular Therapy, Hemostaseology, and Infectious Diseases, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| |
Collapse
|