Plerixafor-aided Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Hematopoietic Stem Cells to Support Subsequent High-dose Chemotherapy After a Prior Autologous Transplant.

BACKGROUND: An appreciable proportion of patients in need of salvage high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) and autologous peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation (PBSCT) fail to mobilize adequate numbers of hematopoietic progenitors, and plerixafor is applied for that purpose. Limited data exist on remobilization of PBSCs in patients who have relapsed after prior HDC + PBSCT. Herein, we report on consecutive patients that had undergone successful prior single or tandem HDC for a variety of malignant neoplasms in our institution, and later required re-mobilization of PBSCs in order to support further HDC cycles. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plerixafor was administered in combination with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor alone, or after mobilizing chemotherapy. Five patients, 2 B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas, 1 multiple myeloma, 1 germ-cell tumor, and 1 Ewing sarcoma, having relapsed after prior HDC + PBSCT, were deemed candidates for further cycle(s) of PBSC-supported HDC. Plerixafor was applied in a "just-in-time" strategy after low CD34+ numbers were measured on the first day of anticipated hematopoietic stem cell collection (non-Hodgkin lymphoma, germ-cell tumor, and Ewing sarcoma), or pre-emptively in multiple myeloma. RESULTS: Successful collection of adequate PBSCs was achieved in all patients, from 1.8 to 3.8 × 106/kg after a median of 2 (range, 1-3) leukaphereses; 4 of 5 patients underwent subsequent HDC + PBSCT and engrafted after a median of 11 days (range, 9-55 days) and 25 days (range, 17-76 days) for neutrophils and platelets, respectively. CONCLUSION: Plerixafor proved effective to mobilize adequate numbers of PBSCs in individual patients with relapsed malignancies after prior single or tandem HDC + PBSCT. These PBSCs could establish sustained multi-lineage hematopoietic engraftment without any sequelae.

Management of patients with recurrent/advanced cervical cancer beyond first line platinum regimens: Where do we stand? A literature review.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer affecting women worldwide. Despite advances in screening and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, a significant number of women present with or develop advanced disease. Palliative platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) is the standard first-line treatment for metastatic/recurrent cervical cancer. The prognosis remains poor and effective second line options are urgently needed. METHODS: We searched the English-language medical literature as well as relevant guideline databases, published from January 1981 to December 2015 and identified publications related to cervical cancer and its therapies. Our effort was to highlight the available treatment options in the setting of recurrent/metastatic disease. RESULTS: Although there have been important advances in the management of women with cervical cancer, the optimal treatment for patients with locally recurrent and metastatic disease after platinum failure is still problematic. Overall, there is a trend in terms of longer overall survival (OS) and better quality of life for the combination of cisplatin/paclitaxel (PC) as compared to the doublets of cisplatin/topotecan (TC), cisplatin/vinorelbine (VC), and cisplatin/gemcitabine (GC). Currently available single agents beyond first-line platinum-based therapy have limited efficacy in this setting and include topoisomerase inhibitors, vinca alkaloids, taxanes, alkylating agents and antimetabolites. Several targeted therapies have demonstrated activity in advanced cervical cancer. Bevacizumab has been evaluated in a phase III trial using doublets of cisplatin with paclitaxel or topotecan and has been approved in the first-line setting by the U. S. Food and Drug Administration. Selective targeting of angiogenic kinases by tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) may represent a novel therapeutic tool in this setting, but its use alone or in combination with CT is still investigational. Early reports have implicated PI3KCA somatic mutations suggesting that mTOR-targeted agents should be explored in this disease. Development of the immune checkpoint programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and T-lymphocyte-associated molecule-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors have been of considerable interest, leading to ongoing phase II studies in patients with advanced cervical cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Progress in the management of recurrent and advanced cervical cancer patients has been slow and restricted to palliative intent. These patients should be considered for clinical trials of novel targeted agents and/or immunotherapy.