Reduced risk of acute GVHD following mobilization of HLA-identical sibling donors with GM-CSF alone

Devine, Steven M.; Brown, Randy A.; Trinkaus, Kathryn; Khoury, H. Jean; Adkins, Douglas R.; Vij, Ravi; Sempek, Diane S.; Graubert, Timothy A.; Tomasson, Michael H.; Goodnough, Lawrence T.; DiPersio, John F.

doi:10.1038/sj.bmt.1705091

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although our trial was not designed for this comparison, the rates of acute and chronic GVHD we observed in the first 20 recipients were not significantly different compared with historical control patients at Washington University receiving G-CSF-mobilized allografts together with the exact same conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis. 19,20 It is possible there may be functional differences in addition to the numerical differences noted. Data we have generated in mice do not suggest this, and preliminary flow cytometric analysis of T-cell subsets in a small sample of 4 donors did not demonstrate any prominent skewing of T-cell subsets toward a regulatory T-cell or activated T-cell phenotype after AMD3100.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This historical group has been previously reported and received the exact same conditioning regimen and supportive care as the recipients enrolled on the current trial. 20 There was no difference in the median time to neutrophil or platelet engraftment between recipients in the AMD3100 group or the historical group receiving G-CSF-mobilized allografts.…”

Section: Hematopoietic Engraftment and Chimerismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is the standard GVHD prophylaxis we have used with this conditioning regimen after HLA-matched sibling donor transplantation, and outcomes have been previously reported. 19,20 All patients received subcutaneous G-CSF at 5 g/kg per day beginning day 1 and continuing until the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was more than 1.5 ϫ 10 9 /L (1500/L) for 3 days. All patients received prophylactic acyclovir, but no routine bacterial or fungal prophylaxis was given.…”

Section: Conditioning Regimen Gvhd Prophylaxis and Supportive Carementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Rapid mobilization of functional donor hematopoietic cells without G-CSF using AMD3100, an antagonist of the CXCR4/SDF-1 interaction

Devine

Vij

Rettig

et al. 2008

Blood

284

252

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Allografts from HLA-matched sibling donors were mobilized and collected without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) using AMD3100, a direct antagonist of CXCR4/stromal-derived factor 1 (SDF-1/CXCL12). Donors (N ‫؍‬ 25) were treated with AMD3100 at a dose of 240 g/kg by subcutaneous injection, and leukapheresis was then initiated just 4 hours later. Two-thirds of the donors collected an allograft with a CD34 ؉ cell dose sufficient for transplantation after just one dose of AMD3100.No donor experienced more than grade 1 toxicity. After a myeloablative regimen, 20 patients with hematologic malignancies received allografts collected after AMD3100 alone. All patients engrafted neutrophils (median day 10) and platelets (median day 12) promptly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hematopoietic Engraftment and Chimerismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conditioning Regimen Gvhd Prophylaxis and Supportive Carementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rapid mobilization of functional donor hematopoietic cells without G-CSF using AMD3100, an antagonist of the CXCR4/SDF-1 interaction

Devine

Vij

Rettig

et al. 2008

Blood

284

252

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They noted important differences in graft compositions and clinical outcomes with the three approaches. 98 Grafts obtained after GM-CSF versus G-CSF þ GM-CSF mobilization contained significantly fewer T cells and NK cells (Table 1). GM-CSF (10 mg/kg/day) alone produced an adequate number of CD34 þ cells in only eight of 10 donors who also required more leukapheresis procedures than those given G-CSF.…”

Section: Donor Mobilization With Gm-csf: It Work But Is It Reliable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilizing stem cells from normal donors: is it possible to improve upon G-CSF?

Cashen

Lazarus

Devine

2007

Bone Marrow Transplant

Self Cite

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, it has been suggested that GM-CSF mobilization may affect the development of GVHD and graft-versus-malignancy effects due to its influence on the graft constituents [6]. Previous studies comparing G-and GM-CSF mobilization demonstrated that a decrease in the frequency of CD4 1 cells in GM-CSF mobilized products and a increase in the frequency of CD8 1 cells related to G-CSF products and the depressed T cell function in GM-CSF mobilized PBSC products, where the monocytes were shown to actively inhibit T cell proliferation [16][17][18][19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilization effects of G‐CSF, GM‐CSF, and darbepoetin‐α for allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation

Kim¹,

Moon²,

Kim³

et al. 2009

J of Clinical Apheresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of GM-/G-CSF and darbepoetin-alpha on stem cell mobilization were investigated. From February 2005 to March 2007, 30 allogeneic sibling donors were randomly assigned to a G-CSF group (5 microg/kg/day for 5-7 days) or triple group (GM-CSF 10 microg/kg/day on 1st and 2nd day, G-CSF 5 microg/kg/day for 5-7 days, and darbepoetin-alpha 40 mg on 1st day). The MNCs and CD34(+) cells were not different between the two groups, although the doses (x10(8)/kg of recipient body weight) of CD3(+) cells (3.64 +/- 1.75 vs. 2.63 +/- 1.36, P = 0.089) and CD8(+) cells (1.07 +/- 0.53 vs. 0.60 +/- 0.30, P = 0.006) were lower in the triple group. The engraftments, frequency of RBC transfusions, and hemoglobin recovery were not different between the two groups. The cumulative incidence of overall and Grades II-IV aGVHD was 64.3% vs. 61.1% and 25.9% vs. 27.1% in the G-CSF and triple regimen group, respectively, whereas the cumulative incidence of cGVHD was 20.8 +/- 1.3% and 24.4 +/- 1.7%, respectively. In conclusion, the triple regimen did not seem to be superior to G-CSF alone in terms of the CD34+ cell dose, hemoglobin recovery, and GVHD. However, the CD8+ cell count was significantly lower in the triple regimen group. The role of a lower CD8+ cell count in the graft may need to be elucidated in the future.

show abstract

Reduced risk of acute GVHD following mobilization of HLA-identical sibling donors with GM-CSF alone

Cited by 26 publications

References 40 publications

Rapid mobilization of functional donor hematopoietic cells without G-CSF using AMD3100, an antagonist of the CXCR4/SDF-1 interaction

Rapid mobilization of functional donor hematopoietic cells without G-CSF using AMD3100, an antagonist of the CXCR4/SDF-1 interaction

Mobilizing stem cells from normal donors: is it possible to improve upon G-CSF?

Mobilization effects of G‐CSF, GM‐CSF, and darbepoetin‐α for allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About