Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with "just-in-time" plerixafor approach is a cost-effective alternative to routine plerixafor use.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Hematopoietic cell mobilization with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor results in superior CD34+ cell yield compared with G-CSF alone in patients with myeloma and lymphoma. However, plerixafor-based approaches may be associated with high costs. Several institutions use a "just-in-time" plerixafor approach, in which plerixafor is only administered to patients likely to fail mobilization with G-CSF alone. Whether such an approach is cost-effective is unknown. METHODS: We evaluated 136 patients with myeloma or lymphoma who underwent mobilization with 2 approaches of plerixafor utilization. Between January 2010 and October 2012, 76 patients uniformly received mobilization with G-CSF and plerixafor. Between November 2012 and June 2014, 60 patients were mobilized with plerixafor administered only to those patients likely to fail mobilization with G-CSF alone. RESULTS: The routine plerixafor group had a higher median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (62 versus 29 cells/µL, P < 0.001) and a higher median day 1 CD34+ yield (2.9 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg versus 2.1 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, P = 0.001). The median total CD34+ collection was higher with routine plerixafor use (5.8 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg versus 4.5 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, P = 0.007). In the "just-in-time" group, 40% (n = 24) completed adequate collection without plerixafor. There was no difference in mobilization failure rates. The mean plerixafor doses used was lower with "just-in-time" approach (1.3 versus 2.1, P = 0.0002). The mean estimated cost in the routine plerixafor group was higher (USD 27,513 versus USD 23,597, P = 0.01). DISCUSSION: Our analysis demonstrates that mobilization with a just-in-time plerixafor approach is a safe, effective, and cost-efficient strategy for HPC collection.

Predictors and impact of thirty-day readmission on patient outcomes and health care costs after reduced-toxicity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Thirty-day readmission (30-DR) has become an important quality-of-care measure. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) presents a medical setting with higher readmission rates. We analyzed factors affecting 30-DR and its impact on patient outcomes and on health care costs in 91 patients who underwent reduced-toxicity conditioning (RTC) allo-HCT with fludarabine and busulfan. The patient cohort was divided into 2: the readmission group (R-gp) or the no-readmission group (NR-gp). Overall, 38% (n = 35) required readmission with a median time to readmission of 14 days. In multivariate analysis, only documented infection during the index admission predicted 30-DR, P = .01. With a median follow-up of 18 months (range, 1 to 69) for surviving patients, the 2-year overall survival was 49% and 58% in the R-gp and NR-gp respectively, P = .48. The 1-year nonrelapse mortality in R-gp and NR-gp was 18% and 13% respectively, P = .43. The median post-transplantation hospital charges in the R-gp and NR-gp were $85,115 (range, $32,015 to $242,519) and $45,083 (range, $10,715 to $485,456), P = .0002. In conclusion, only documented infections during the index hospitalization influenced 30-DR after RTC allo-HCT. Although 30-DR did not adversely affect mortality or survival, it was associated with significantly increased 100-day post-transplantation hospital charges, thus supporting its role as a quality-of-care measure in allo-HCT patients.

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF.

Studies comparing the efficacy and cost of peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide (LD-CY) and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) against plerixafor and G-CSF, in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated in the novel therapy-era are not available. Herein, we report mobilization outcomes of 107 patients who underwent transplantation within 1-year of starting induction chemotherapy with novel agents. Patients undergoing mobilization with LD-CY (1.5 gm/m(2)) and G-CSF (n = 74) were compared against patients receiving plerixafor and G-CSF (n = 33). Compared to plerixafor, LD-CY was associated with a significantly lower median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (68/µL vs. 36/µL, P = 0.048), and lower CD34+ cell yield on day 1 of collection (6.9 × 10(6)/kg vs. 2.4 × 10(6)/kg, P = 0.001). Six patients (8.1%) in the LD-CY group experienced mobilization failure, compared to none in the plerixafor group. The total CD34+ cell yield was significantly higher in the plerixafor group (median 11.6 × 10(6)/kg vs. 7 × 10(6)/kg; P-value = 0.001). Mobilization with LD-CY was associated with increased (albeit statistically non-significant) episodes of febrile neutropenia (5.4% vs. 0%; P = 0.24), higher use of intravenous antibiotics (6.7% vs. 3%; P = 0.45), and need for hospitalizations (9.4% vs. 3%; P = 0.24). The average total cost of mobilization in the plerixafor group was significantly higher compared to the LD-CY group ($28,980 vs. $19,626.5 P-value < 0.0001). In conclusion, in MM plerixafor-based mobilization has superior efficacy, but significantly higher mobilization costs compared to LD-CY mobilization. Our data caution against the use of LD-CY in MM patients for mobilization, especially after induction with lenalidomide-containing regimens.

Incidence and Pattern of Graft-versus-Host Disease in Patients Undergoing Allogeneic Transplantation after Nonmyeloablative Conditioning with Total Lymphoid Irradiation and Antithymocyte Globulin.

Nonmyeloablative (NMA) conditioning with total lymphoid irradiation and antithymocyte globulin (TLI/ATG) has been shown to protect against acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). We report here our institutional experience with allogeneic transplantation following NMA conditioning with TLI/ATG (n = 21). GVHD prophylaxis consisted of a combination of a calcineurin inhibitor and mycophenolate mofetil. Median patient age was 59 years. The median followup of surviving patients is 545 days. One patient experienced primary graft rejection. The median time to neutrophil engraftment was 18 days and platelet engraftment was 9.5 days. The cumulative incidence (CI) of grade II-IV acute GVHD at day +100 was 28.6% and 38.1% at day +180. The CI for grade III-IV acute GVHD was 28.6% at day +180. CI of chronic GVHD was 45.2% at 1 year. The CI of disease relapse was 9.5% at 1 year. The rate of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 0% at day +100 and only 9.5% at 1 year. The overall and progression free survival at 1 year was 81% and 80.4%, respectively. Our limited, retrospective data show encouraging relapse and NRM rates with TLI/ATG-based NMA conditioning, but with higher than previously reported rates of acute and chronic GVHD, underscoring the need for novel strategies designed to effectively prevent GVHD.

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.

Peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization with intermediate-dose cyclophosphamide (ID-CY) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been shown to be more efficacious, albeit more toxic, than low-dose cyclophosphamide (LD-CY) mobilization regimens in patients with multiple myeloma treated with conventional therapies. However, the relative importance of cyclophosphamide dose intensity in peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization after novel induction regimens is not known. Here we report mobilization outcomes of 123 patients who underwent transplantation within 1 year of starting induction chemotherapy with novel agents. We compared consecutive patients undergoing mobilization with ID-CY/G-CSF (3-4 g/m(2)) at one institution (n = 55) with patients receiving LD-CY/G-CSF (1.5 g/m(2)) at a different transplantation center (n = 68). At baseline, the 2 groups were well balanced, except for more frequent previous lenalidomide use in the ID-CY group (P = .04). Compared with LD-CY, ID-CY use was associated with higher median peak PB CD34(+) cell count (35/µL versus 160/µL; P < .001), CD34(+) cell yield on day 1 of collection (2.6 × 10(6)/kg versus 11.7 × 10(6)/kg, P ≤ .001), and total CD34(+) cell yield (7.5 × 10(6)/kg versus 16.6 × 10(6)/kg; P ≤ .001). Six patients in the LD-CY group had mobilization failure, compared with no patients in the ID-CY group. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the LD-CY group (P < .001) were unable to collect ≥5 × 10(6)/kg and ≥10 × 10(6)/kg CD34(+) cells. Neutrophil and platelet engraftment were significantly faster in the ID-CY group, likely because of higher infused CD34(+) cell doses. In conclusion, compared with LD-CY, ID-CY produced a more robust peripheral blood progenitor cell mobilization and significantly reduced the rates of mobilization failure. These data caution against the use of LD-CY-containing mobilization strategies in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing stem cell collection after novel induction regimens.

Higher infused CD34+ cell dose and overall survival in patients undergoing in vivo T-cell depleted, but not t-cell repleted, allogeneic peripheral blood hematopoietic cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Understanding the effect of cellular graft composition on allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) outcomes is an area of great interest. The objective of the study was to analyze the correlation between transplant-related outcomes and administered CD34+, CD3+, CD4+ and CD8+ cell doses in patients who had undergone peripheral blood, AHCT and received either in vivo T-cell depleted or T-cell replete allografts. DESIGN AND SETTING: Comparison of consecutive patients who underwent peripheral blood AHCT in our institution between January 2003 and December 2009. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The cohort of 149 patients was divided into two groups; non T-cell depleted (NTCD) (n=54) and T-cell depleted (TCD) (n=95). Study endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), engraftment kinetics (neutrophil and platelet recovery), incidence of acute graft versus host disease (acute GVHD), chronic GVHD, nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and disease relapse. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that higher infused CD34+ cell dose improved OS (relative risk 0.58, 95% CI 0.34-0.98, P=.04), PFS (relative risk 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-1.00, P=.05) and NRM (relative risk 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-0.99, P=.048) in the TCD group. By multivariate analysis, there was no difference in engraftment, grades II-IV acute GVHD, extensive chronic GVHD and relapse in the two groups relative to the infused cell doses. There was a trend towards improved OS (relative risk 0.54, 95% CI 0.29-1.01, P=.05) with higher CD3+ cell dose in the TCD group. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that higher CD34+ cell dose imparts survival benefit only to in vivo TCD peripheral blood AHCT recipients.

Higher busulfan dose intensity does not improve outcomes of patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation following fludarabine, busulfan-based reduced toxicity conditioning.

We evaluated the impact of busulfan dose intensity in patients undergoing reduced toxicity/intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation in a multicenter retrospective study of 112 consecutive patients. Seventy-five patients were conditioned with busulfan (0.8 mg/kg/dose IV × 8 doses), fludarabine (30 mg/m(2) /day, days -7 to -3), and 6 mg/kg of ATG [reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) group], while 37 patients received a more-intense conditioning with busulfan (130 mg/m(2) /day IV, days -6 to -3), fludarabine (40 mg/m(2) /day, days -6 to -3) and 6 mg/kg of ATG [reduced toxicity conditioning (RTC) group]. At baseline both groups were matched for median age, unrelated donor allografts, and human leukocyte antigen-mismatched allografts. More patients in RIC group had high-risk disease, and higher median comorbidity index. There were no graft rejections. Median time to neutrophil (17 days vs. 15 days; p = 0.003) and platelet engraftment (16 days vs. 11 days; p < 0.001) was significantly longer in the RIC group. RTC group had significantly more bacterial (62.2% vs. 32%; p = 0.004) and fungal infections (13.5% vs. 1.3% p = 0.01). For RIC and RTC groups rates of grades II-IV acute GVHD (34% vs. 40%; p-value = 0.54), and chronic GVHD (45% vs. 57%; p-value = 0.30) were not significantly different. In similar order at 1 year the cumulative-incidence of non-relapse mortality (NRM; 12% vs. 21%; p-value = 0.21) and relapse rates (38% vs. 39%; p = 0.96) were not significantly different. Patients in RIC and RTC groups had similar 1-year overall survival (61% vs. 50%, p = 0.11) and progression-free survival (50% vs. 36%, p-value = 0.39). Our data suggest that the merits of higher busulfan dose intensity in the context of fludarabine/busulfan-based RTC may be offset by higher early morbidity.