A comparison between erythrocytapheresis and venesection for the treatment of JAK2-mutated polycythaemia.

BACKGROUND: JAK2-mutated polycythaemia vera (PV) is associated with reduced survival because of thrombotic events and haematological disease transformation. Therapeutic venesection has traditionally been used to lower haematocrit, but the technique of erythrocytapheresis has emerged over the last decade. AIM: To compare erythrocytapheresis with venesection as treatment for PV by assessing medical efficacy and financial viability. METHODS: One hundred sixteen patients with PV who received red cell depletion therapy at Barwon Health between 2014 and 2021 were identified. The haematocrit drop after each session, interval between treatment times and number of sessions required to achieve a haematocrit <0.45 were compared with an independent t test. Thrombosis rates were compared with Pearson's chi-squared test. Cost-funding analysis was done by assessing the Weighted Inlier Equivalent Separation and National Weighted Activity Unit funding models. RESULTS: Patients treated with erythrocytapheresis achieved a greater haematocrit drop each treatment session (0.075 vs 0.03, P < 0.01), required fewer sessions to achieve a haematocrit <0.45 (1 vs 4, P < 0.01) and experienced fewer thrombotic complications (8.7% vs 32.1%, P = 0.02) than those treated with venesection. Cost-funding analysis demonstrated that erythrocytapheresis was more financially viable with a surplus of AU$297 per session compared to a deficit of AU$176 with venesection. Even if funding for venesection is increased, the cost of erythrocytapheresis may be mitigated by a lower number of procedures required per year (3.8 vs 5.3, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Erythrocytapheresis is more efficacious than venesection for the treatment of PV and is accompanied by rapid reductions in haematocrit and reduced thrombotic complications.

Autologous stem cell transplantation in elderly multiple myeloma patients aged ≥65 years: a two-centre Australian experience.

There are currently limited Australian data on the outcomes of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in elderly multiple myeloma (MM) patients. We present the largest cohort of elderly MM patients aged ≥65 years undergoing ASCT in Australia and report their outcomes based on our two-centre experience. Our study affirms that ASCT is well tolerated, safe and effective in elderly MM patients aged ≥65 years and should be considered an important component of treatment in patients who are fit enough for the procedure.

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilisation with G-CSF alone versus G-CSF and cyclophosphamide after bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induction in multiple myeloma.

Bortezomib-based induction is often used in transplant-eligible patients with myeloma. The optimal peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilisation strategy in this context is unclear. We reviewed the efficacy of G-CSF alone (G-alone) vs. G-CSF and cyclophosphamide (G-cyclo: standard dose: 1.5-2 g/m2; high dose: 3-4 g/m2) PBSC mobilisation strategies in 288 patients who only received bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (VCD) induction prior to autograft across six apheresis centres from November 2012 to June 2017. 'Uncomplicated successful mobilisation' was defined as achieving a PBSC yield of ≥4 × 106/kg within two aphereses, without plerixafor or mobilisation-associated toxicity (predominantly febrile neutropenia, FN). Success rates were 84% in G-cyclo standard dose (6% FN), 64% in G-cyclo high dose (18% FN) and 69% in G-alone (plerixafor successfully salvaged 8/9 patients). Median total stem cell yield was significantly higher with G-cyclo, but not different between the two cyclophosphamide doses. Age greater than the median of 61 years was associated with higher failure rates (22 vs. 11%, p = 0.01) and lower PBSC yield, especially in the G-alone group. Prior radiotherapy exposure did not impact on collection success. Our observations suggest that both G-cyclo standard dose and G-alone are reasonable mobilisation strategies. The former may be preferred if salvage plerixafor is unavailable.