Predictive factors for poor peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and peak CD34+cell count to guide pre-emptive or immediate rescue mobilization.

Sancho, Juan‐Manuel; Morgades, Mireia; Grífols, Joan-Ramon; Juncà, Jordi; Guàrdia, Ramón; Vives, Susana; Ferrà, Christelle; Batlle, Montse; Ester, Anna; Gallardo, David; Millá, Fuensanta; Feliú, Evarist; Ribera, Josep‐Marǐa

doi:10.3109/14653249.2012.681042

Cited by 53 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have found similar results, indicating that mobilization failure occurs more often when using these agents. 5,8,9 The highest ratio of mobilization failure occurred in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (8 cases), followed by Hodgkin lymphoma (6 cases) and multiple myeloma (4 cases), similar to the results of a study conducted by Sancho et al 5 Patients with ages between 51-61 years had the highest ratio of failure.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…A known risk factor in poor mobilization is previous radiotherapy, 5,9 which was present in only 3 cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[2][3][4] Mobilization failure is the main cause for not being able to perform autologous hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation. 5 The main factors that influence stem cell mobilization include age, previous therapy, collateral diseases, and genetic polymorphism. 5,6 An important risk factor for hematopoietic stem cell exhaustion and mobilization failure is represented by successive cycles of chemotherapy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 The main factors that influence stem cell mobilization include age, previous therapy, collateral diseases, and genetic polymorphism. 5,6 An important risk factor for hematopoietic stem cell exhaustion and mobilization failure is represented by successive cycles of chemotherapy. HSCs present changes in their quality throughout development and life, and the greatest proliferation and differentiation potential is present in HSCs obtained from the fetal liver, followed by neonatal and postnatal bone marrow of young and older donors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Stem Cell Mobilization and Harvesting Failure in Case of Heavily Pretreated Patients

Mild¹,

Lázár

Köpeczi³

et al. 2017

Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: High-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation have become a standard curative treatment in various hematologic malignancies. Many factors can affect the success of mobilization and hematopoietic stem cell harvesting. Aim: The aim of this study was to analyze factors that lead to mobilization failure. Material and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on 19 patients with failure of stem cell harvesting. All patients were administered high doses of GCS-F (filgrastim, 15 μg/kg/day) and 0.24 mg/kg of plerixafor on day +5 or +10 of harvesting. Results: The median age of the study population was 51 years (range 35-67) and 52.6% (n = 10) were males. The study group included 4 (21%) subjects with multiple myeloma, 6 (31.5%) with Hodgkin lymphoma, 8 cases (42.1%) with nonHodgkin lymphoma and 1 patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Each patient received 2.78 (range 1-5) lines of chemotherapy, administered in 11.57 (range 2 to over 20) cycles of treatment. Conclusion: In hematologic malignancies it is very important to collect stem cells in time, in order to reduce mobilization failure. As we have shown in our studied cases, multiple lines of polychemotherapy with or without radiotherapy lead to mobilization failure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…A known risk factor in poor mobilization is previous radiotherapy, 5,9 which was present in only 3 cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Stem Cell Mobilization and Harvesting Failure in Case of Heavily Pretreated Patients

Mild¹,

Lázár

Köpeczi³

et al. 2017

Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] However, the value of patient characteristics and prior treatment clinical factors to successfully score and accurately predict the risk of poor mobilization is controversial, and recent studies do suggest that they are inaccurate predictors and should not be used to identify candidates for optimized strategies to prevent mobilization failure. 17,18 At present, the measurement of preapheresis levels of CD34+ cells in PB 7,[19][20][21][22] is the most robust and recommended indicator to identify potential poor mobilizers and efficiently rescue them with novel mobilization strategies, including the use of plerixafor. 23,24 Plerixafor in combination with steady-state G-CSF mobilization in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma has been shown very reproducibly to increase PBSC yields and the number of patients yielding target cell doses, both in first-line mobilization [25][26][27][28] and as remobilization strategy in patients who failed prior mobilization attempts, including those with a variety of high-risk clinical factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plerixafor in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma: effectiveness in cases with very low circulating CD34+ cell levels and preemptive intervention vs remobilization

Sánchez-Ortega

Querol

Encuentra

et al. 2014

Bone Marrow Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This retrospective study presents data from 105 consecutive multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients who had PB CD34+ cell counts o 10/μL on day 4 of steady-state G-CSF mobilization for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation. Our results confirm the capacity of plerixafor to improve mobilization outcomes in this clinical setting. In addition, they show that the effectiveness of plerixafor, compared with G-CSF only, translates to patients with very low (o 3.5/μL) circulating CD34+ cell counts: overnight CD34+ cell count expansion (5.3-vs 1.7-fold), overall CD34+ cell yield (2.29 vs 0.15 × 10 6 CD34+ cells per kg) and patients yielding ⩾ 2 × 10 6 CD34+ cells per kg (63% vs 3%). Furthermore, our data also show that preemptive plerixafor is significantly more effective and more efficient than in remobilization: CD34+ cell yield in the first apheresis (3.28 vs 2.0 × 10 6 CD34+ cells per kg) and overall (3.73 vs 2.44 × 10 6 CD34+ cells per kg), patients yielding ⩾ 2 × 10 6 CD34+ cells per kg in the first apheresis (85% vs 44%) and overall (92% vs 64%), all this requiring less days and doses of plerixafor treatment (1.08 vs 1.48). These data would advocate using plerixafor as an early preemptive intervention based on day 4 circulating CD34+ counts, including very high-risk patients with very low circulating levels.

show abstract

Amphibian Surgery

Vergneau‐Grosset,

Weber

2021

Surgery of Exotic Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predictive factors for poor peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and peak CD34+cell count to guide pre-emptive or immediate rescue mobilization.

Cited by 53 publications

References 36 publications

Stem Cell Mobilization and Harvesting Failure in Case of Heavily Pretreated Patients

Stem Cell Mobilization and Harvesting Failure in Case of Heavily Pretreated Patients

Plerixafor in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma: effectiveness in cases with very low circulating CD34+ cell levels and preemptive intervention vs remobilization

Amphibian Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About