Approaches to the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells: a literature review


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Stem cell mobilization is the necessary part of high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The primary goal of mobilization is a sufficient CD34 cell dose collection. Mobilization efficacy determines choice of subsequent treatment. Approach to stem cell collection depends on clinical case and previous mobilization outcomes. So, mobilization failure could be a major problem. The combination of plerixafor and G-CSF significantly increases stem cell yield, but high cost of plerixafor limits its clinical use. Chemomobilization is also an effective mobilization strategy. Evaluating its advantages and disadvantages, optimal chemomobilization regimen may be a possible way to collect target stem cell yield. In this review general approaches to the CD34+ cell mobilization, risk factors associated with poor mobilization and its prevention, efficacy data of chemomobilization with cytarabine and etoposide are discussed.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

S. S Elkhova

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology

St. Petersburg, Russia

Larisa V. Filatova

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology; North-Western State Medical University n.a. I.I. Mechnikov

Email: Larisa_Filatova@list.ru
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor, Leading Researcher at the Scientific Department of Innovative Methods of Therapeutic Oncology and Rehabilitation; Professor at the Department of Oncology St. Petersburg, Russia; St. Petersburg, Russia

I. S Zyuzgin

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology

St. Petersburg, Russia

S. A Volchenkov

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology

St. Petersburg, Russia

A. K Kovyazin

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology

St. Petersburg, Russia

M. S Motalkina

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology

St. Petersburg, Russia

Yu. A Chudinovskikh

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology

St. Petersburg, Russia

T. Yu Semiglazova

N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology; North-Western State Medical University n.a. I.I. Mechnikov

St. Petersburg, Russia; St. Petersburg, Russia

References

  1. Kriegsmann K., Wuchter P Mobilization and Collection of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells in Adults: Focus on Timing and Benchmarking. In: Klein G., Wuchter P. (eds) Stem Cell Mobilization. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2017. New York (NY): Humana, 2019. P 41-58. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-95
  2. Giralt S., Costa L., Schriber J., et al. Optimizing autologous stem cell mobilization strategies to improve patient outcomes: consensus guidelines and recommendations. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014;20:295-308. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2013.10.013.
  3. Mohty M, Hubel K., Kroger N., et al. Autologous haematopoietic stem cell mobilisation in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients: a position statement from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2014;49:865-72. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2014.39.
  4. Kroger N, Zeller W., Hassan H., et al. Stem cell mobilization with G-CSF alone in breast cancer patients: higher progenitor cell yield by delivering divided doses (2×5 μg/kg) compared to a single dose (1×10 μg/kg). Bone Marrow Transplant. 1999;20:125-29. Doi: 10.1038/ sj.bmt.1701549.
  5. Carrion R, Serrano D., Gomez-Pineda A., et al. A randomised study of 10 μg/kg/day (single dose) vs 2×5 μg/kg/day (split dose) G-CSF as stem cell mobilisation regimen in high-risk breast cancer patients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2003;32:563-67. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1704202.
  6. Anderlini P., Donato M., Lauppe M.J., et al. A comparative study of once-daily versus twice-daily filgrastim administration for the mobilization and collection of CD34+ peripheral blood progenitor cells in normal donors. Br J Haematol. 2000;109(4):770-72. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2000.02083.x.
  7. Hosing C, Qazilbash M.H., Kebriaei P., et al. Fixed-dose single agent pegfilgrastim for peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilisation in patients with multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2006;133(5):533-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2006.06054.x.
  8. Bassi S., Rabascio C., Nassi L., et al. A single dose of Pegfilgrastim versus daily Filgrastim to evaluate the mobilization and the engraftment of autologous peripheral hematopoietic progenitors in malignant lymphoma patients candidate for high-dose chemotherapy. Transfus Apher. Sci. 2010;43(3):321-26. doi: 10.1016/j.transci.2010.10.001.
  9. Costa L.J., Kramer C., Hogan K.R., et al. Pegfilgrastim-versus filgrastim-based autologous hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in the setting of preemptive use of plerixafor: efficacy and cost analysis. Transfusion. 2012;52(11):2375-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2012.03579.x.
  10. Kuan J.W, Su A.T., Leong C.F Pegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor versus non-pegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Apher. 2017;32(6):517-42. doi: 10.1002/jca.21550.
  11. Weaver C.H., Schulman K.A., Wilson-Relyea B., et al. Randomized trial of filgrastim, sargramostim, or sequential sargramostim and filgrastim after myelosuppressive chemotherapy for the harvesting of peripheral-blood stem cells. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(1):43-53. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.1.43.
  12. Arora M, Burns L.J., Barker J.N., et al. Randomized comparison of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus granulocyte-macrophage colonystimulating factor plus intensive chemotherapy for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2004;10(6):395-404. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2004.02.001.
  13. Hamadani M., Kochuparambil S.T., Osman S., et al.Intermediate-dose versus low-dose cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma treated with novel induction therapies. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012;18(7):1128-35. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.01.005.
  14. Sizemore A., Laporte J., Holland H.K., et al. A Comparison Of Toxicity And Mobilization Efficacy Following Two Different Doses Of Cyclophosphamide For Mobilization Of Hematopoietic Stem Cells In Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Patients. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation. 2010;16:206. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.12.161.
  15. Andre M., Baudoux E., Bron D., et al. Phase III randomized study comparing 5 or 10 microg per kg per day of filgrastim for mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells with chemotherapy, followed by intensification and autologous transplantation in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies. Transfusion. 2003;43(1):50-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.2003.00273.x.
  16. Narayanasami U., Kanteti R, Morelli J., et al. Randomized trial of filgrastim versus chemotherapy and filgrastim mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells for rescue in autologous transplantation. Blood. 2001;98(7):2059-64. doi: 10.1182/blood.v98.7.2059.
  17. Sung A.D., Grima D.T., Bernard L.M., et al. Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF vs G-CSF alone. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48(11):1444-49. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2013.80.
  18. Gertz M.A., Kumar S.K., Lacy M.Q., et al.Comparison of high-dose CY and growth factor with growth factor alone for mobilization of stem cells for transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009;43(8):619-25. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2008.369.
  19. Sheppard D., Bredeson C., Allan D., et al. Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization strategies for autologous transplantation for hematologic malignancies. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012;18(8):1191-203. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.01.008.
  20. Desikan K.R., Barlogie B., Jagannath S., et al.Comparable engraftment kinetics following peripheral-blood stem-cell infusion mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with or without cyclophosphamide in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(4):1547-53. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.4.1547.
  21. Dingli D., Nowakowski G.S., Dispenzieri A., et al. Cyclophosphamide mobilization does not improve outcome in patients receiving stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma. 2006;6(5):384-88. doi: 10.3816/CLM.2006.n.014.
  22. Wang S., Nademanee A., Qian D., et al. Peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and collection efficacy is not an independent prognostic factor for autologous stem cell transplantation. Transfusion. 2007;47(12):2207-16. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01448.x.
  23. Hosing C., Saliba R.M., Ahlawat S., et al. Poor hematopoietic stem cell mobilizers: a single institution study of incidence and risk factors in patients with recurrent or relapsed lymphoma. Am J Hematol. 2009;84(6):335-37. doi: 10.1002/ajh.21400.
  24. Kuittinen T., Nousiainen T., Halonen P., et al. Prediction of mobilisation failure in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004;33(9):907-12. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1704466.
  25. Wuchter P., Ran D., Bruckner T., et al. Poor mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells-definitions, incidence, risk factors, and impact on outcome of autologous transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010;16(4):490-99. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.11.012.
  26. Gertz M.A. Current status of stem cell mobilization. Br J Haematol. 2010;150(6):647-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08313.x.
  27. Pusic I., Jiang S.Y., Landua S., et al. Impact of mobilization and remobilization strategies on achieving sufficient stem cell yields for autologous transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008;14(9):1045-56. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.07.004.
  28. Armitage S., Hargreaves R., Samson D., et al. CD34 counts to predict the adequate collection of peripheral blood progenitor cells. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;20(7):587-91. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1700938.
  29. Gambell P, Herbert K, Dickinson M., et al. Peripheral blood CD34+ cell enumeration as a predictor of apheresis yield: an analysis of more than 1,000 collections. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2012;18(5):763-72. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2011.10.002.
  30. Gutensohn K., Magens M.M., Kuehnl P., et al. Increasing the economic efficacy of peripheral blood progenitor cell collections by monitoring peripheral blood CD34+ concentrations. Transfusion. 2010;50(3):656-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2009.02466.x.
  31. Flomenberg N., Devine S.M., Dipersio J.F., et al. The use of AMD3100 plus G-CSF for autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization is superior to G-CSF alone. Blood. 2005;106(5):1867-74. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-02-0468.
  32. DiPersio J.F, Micallef I.N., Stiff PJ., et al. Phase III prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of plerixafor plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor compared with placebo plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for autologous stem-cell mobilization and transplantation for patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(28):4767-73. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008. 20.72 09.
  33. DiPersio J.F, Stadtmauer E.A., Nademanee A., et al. Plerixafor and G-CSF versus placebo and G-CSF to mobilize hematopoietic stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood. 2009;4;113(23):5720-26. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-08-174946.
  34. Stiff P., Micallef I., McCarthy P., et al. Treatment with plerixafor in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients to increase the number of peripheral blood stem cells when given a mobilizing regimen of G-CSF: implications for the heavily pretreated patient. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(2):249-56. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.11.028.
  35. Micallef I.N., Stiff PJ., DiPersio J.F, et al. Successful stem cell remobilization using plerixafor (mozobil) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in patients with non-hodgkin lymphoma: results from the plerixafor NHL phase 3 study rescue protocol. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15(12):1578-86. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.08.005.
  36. Damon L.E., Johnson J.L., Niedzwiecki D., et al. Immunochemotherapy and autologous stemcell transplantation for untreated patients with mantle-cell lymphoma: CALGB 59909. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(36):6101-108. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.22.2554.
  37. Geisler C.H., Kolstad A., Laurell A., et al. Nordic Lymphoma Group. Long-term progression-free survival of mantle cell lymphoma after intensive front-line immunochemotherapy with in vivo-purged stem cell rescue: a nonrandomized phase 2 multicenter study by the Nordic Lymphoma Group. Blood. 2008;112(7): 2687-93. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-03147025.
  38. Callera A.F., Rosa E.S., Callera F.Intermediate-dose cytarabine plus G-CSF as mobilization regimen for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and heavily pre-treated patients with hematological and non-hematological malignancies. Transfus Apher Sci. 2019;58(3):318-22. doi: 10.1016/j.transci.2019.03.018.
  39. Jelinek T., Adamusova L., Popkova T., et al. Cytarabine + G-CSF is more effective than cyclophosphamide + G-CSF as a stem cell mobilization regimen in multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2019;54(7):1107-14. doi: 10.1038/s41409-018-0396-x.
  40. Czerw T., Sadus-Wojciechowska M., Michalak K., et al. Increased Efficacy of Stem Cell Chemomobilization with Intermediate-Dose Cytarabine Plus Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) Compared with G-CSF Alone in Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Results of a Randomized Trial. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019;25(2):248-55. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.09.023.
  41. Wood W.A., Whitley J., Moore D., et al. Chemomobilization with Etoposide is Highly Effective in Patients with Multiple Myeloma and Overcomes the Effects of Age and Prior Therapy. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2011;17(1):141-46. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2010.06.021.
  42. Song G.Y, Jung S.H., Ahn S.Y., et al. Optimal chemo-mobilization for the collection of peripheral blood stem cells in patients with multiple myeloma. BMC Cancer. 2019;19(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5285-1.
  43. Park Y, Kim D.S., Jeon M.J., et al. Single-dose etoposide is an effective and safe protocol for stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma. J Clin Apher. 2019;34(5):579-88. doi: 10.1002/jca.21734.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies