Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019 Nov 27. pii: S1083-8791(19)30830-4. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.11.024. [Epub ahead of print]

Impact of Plerixafor Use at Different Peripheral Blood CD34+ Thresholds on Autologous Stem Cell Collection in Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

Author information

1
Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, Washington.
2
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, California.
3
Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology/Blood and Marrow Transplant, University of California, San Francisco, California.
4
Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology/Blood and Marrow Transplant, University of California, San Francisco, California; Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California.
5
Department of Nursing, UCSF Health, University of California, San Francisco, California.
6
Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology/Blood and Marrow Transplant, University of California, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: Tom.Martin@ucsf.edu.

Abstract

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) scheduled for autologous stem cell transplantation must undergo autologous stem cell mobilization; unfortunately, however, many do not obtain an adequate collection yield. Despite the availability of plerixafor, its widespread and uniform use is limited by its cost, and consequently, many institutions have adopted various risk-adapted algorithms. We report our mobilization experience as we have modified our plerixafor algorithm to a more liberal one, with the expectation of greater collection efficiency and mobilization success with higher plerixafor use. A total of 344 mobilization attempts were analyzed over 3 time periods and using 3 different peripheral blood CD34+ cell counts to guide plerixafor use: <15/µL (n = 66), <20/µL (n = 130), and <40/µL (n = 148). The primary endpoints were evaluation of changes in mean plerixafor utilization and apheresis days and assessment of the impact on overall mobilization costs. Secondary endpoints were a description of the impact of lenalidomide use on mobilization and evaluation of the rate of mobilization failure. We found that mean plerixafor use increased from 1.32 to 1.65 to 1.74 doses per mobilization (P = .026) and the mean days of apheresis decreased from 2.15 to 2.17 to 1.89 days per mobilization for the <15/µL, <20/µL, and <40/µL cohorts, respectively (P = .011). The combined cost of plerixafor and apheresis procedures at a threshold of 40/µL is close to that at a threshold of 15/µL, while saving 26 apheresis days per 100 patients. In general, there were low rates of mobilization failure across all thresholds. Patients who received more than 6 cycles of lenalidomide demonstrated impaired mobilization and required more apheresis sessions (P < .013) and greater plerixafor use (P < .001) to achieve target stem cell yields. Overall, using plerixafor in patients with MM, with a day 4 pCD34 count of <40/µL is a reasonable and cost-effective strategy to optimize apheresis utilization.

KEYWORDS:

Autologous stem cell collection; Mobilization; Mozobil; Multiple myeloma; Plerixafor

PMID:
31785375
DOI:
10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.11.024

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center