scholarly journals Long-term outcomes, secondary malignancies and stem cell collection following bendamustine in patients with previously treated non-Hodgkin lymphoma

2017 ◽  
Vol 178 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Martin ◽  
Zhengming Chen ◽  
Bruce D. Cheson ◽  
Katherine S. Robinson ◽  
Michael Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Secondary Malignancies ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Stem Cell Collection

scholarly journals Superior Long-Term Outcome of Patients With Early Transformation of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Undergoing Stem Cell Transplantation

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 406-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishitha Reddy ◽  
Olalekan Oluwole ◽  
John P. Greer ◽  
Stacey Goodman ◽  
Brian Engelhardt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Transplantation ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Long Term Outcome ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma

“Fludarabine Containing-Regimens May Adversely Affect Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Collection in Low-Grade Non Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients”

2000 ◽  
Vol 37 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 157-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniele Laszlo ◽  
Piero Galieni ◽  
Donatella Raspadori ◽  
Giulia Scalia ◽  
Catia Bigazzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Peripheral Blood ◽  
Peripheral Blood Stem Cell ◽  
Blood Stem Cell ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Stem Cell Collection

scholarly journals Unrelated Donor Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: Long-Term Outcomes

2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 554-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koen van Besien ◽  
Jeanette Carreras ◽  
Philip J. Bierman ◽  
Brent R. Logan ◽  
Arturo Molina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Transplantation ◽  
Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation ◽  
Hematopoietic Cell ◽  
Unrelated Donor ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma

scholarly journals Plerixafor for Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients Previously Treated with Fludarabine or Lenalidomide

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 1932-1932
Author(s):  
Florent Malard ◽  
Nicolaus Kröger ◽  
Ian H Gabriel ◽  
Kai Hübel ◽  
Jane F. Apperley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Peripheral Blood ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Stem Cell Mobilization ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Cd34 Cells ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Cell Mobilization ◽  
Autologous Hsct

Abstract Abstract 1932 High dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an effective treatment for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and multiple myeloma (MM). At present, G-CSF-mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) are the preferred stem cell source for autologous HSCT. Fludarabine and lenalidomide are essential drugs in the front line treatment of NHL and MM respectively. Data suggests that fludarabine and lenalidomide therapy may have a deleterious effect on stem cell mobilization. Prior to the drug approval in Europe, a plerixafor compassionate use program (CUP) was available from July 2008 to August 2010 to provide access to the drug for patients with MM or lymphoma who had previously failed a mobilization attempt, and who were not eligible for another specific plerixafor trial. In the European CUP, 48 patients (median age 57 years; range, 36–69), previously treated with fludarabine (median 5 cycles; range, 1–7 cycles) were given plerixafor plus G-CSF for remobilization following a primary mobilisation attempt. All 48 patients had a diagnosis of NHL. The overall median number of CD34+ cells collected was 2.3×106 /Kg (range, 0.3–13.4). The minimum required number of CD34+ cells (≥2.0×106 per kg) was collected from 58% of patients, while only 3 patients (6%) collected ≥5.0×106 CD34+ cells. The collection target of 2.0×106/Kg was reached in a median of 2 apheresis sessions (range, 1–3). Thirty-five patients (median age 57 years; range, 34–66), previously treated with lenalidomide (median 5 cycles; range, 1–10 cycles) were given plerixafor plus G-CSF for remobilization. All patients the 35 patients had MM. The overall median number of CD34+ cells collected was 3.4×106/Kg (range, 1.1–14.8). The minimum required number of CD34+ cells (≥2.0×106 per kg) was collected from 69% of patients, including 12 patients (34%) who were able to collect ≥5.0×106 cells/Kg. In the Len group, 7 patients (20%) had received a prior autologous HSCT before salvage mobilization with plerixafor. Both targets were reached with a median of 2 apheresis sessions (range, 1–4). In conclusion, salvage mobilization with plerixafor plus G-CSF is successful in the majority of patients with MM previously treated with lenalidomide. In fludarabine-exposed patients, only 58% of patients will achieve successful salvage mobilization with plerixafor plus G-CSF, suggesting the need for large prospective studies evaluating the efficacy of plerixafor for frontline mobilization in this subgroup of patients.Table 1.Study population characteristicsCharacteristic (%)Fludarabine (N=48)Lenalidomide (N=35)Patient age, median (range)57 (36–69)57 (34–66)Patient gender    Male26 (54)18 (51)    Female22 (46)17 (42)Fludarabine or Lenalidomide cycles, median (range)5 (1–7)5 (1–10)Diagnosis and disease statusIndolent NHL48 (100)0 (0)Multiple myeloma0 (0)35 (100)Previous chemotherapy: number of lines, median (range)3 (1–6)4 (1–9)Previous autograft    Yes07 (20)    No43 (90)20 (57)    Data missing5 (10)8 (23)Radiotherapy    Yes5 (10)3 (9)    No36 (75)24 (68)    Data missing7 (15)8 (23)Mobilization strategy with plerixafor    Steady-state GCSF mobilization38 (79)27 (77)    Chemotherapy+GCSF mobilization10 (21)8 (23)No. of patients collected44 (92)34 (97)CD34+ cells collected per Kg, median (range)2.3 (0.3–13.4)3.4 (1.1–14.8)No. of patients who reached ≥ 2.106 CD34+28 (58)24 (69)No. of apheresis days to reach ≥ 2.106 CD34+2 (1–3)2 (1–4)No. of patients who reached ≥ 5.106 CD34+3 (6)12 (34)No. of apheresis days to reach ≥ 5.106 CD34+2 (1–3)2 (1–3)NHL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma Disclosures: Mohty: Genzyme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Single institution retrospective review of CD34+ apheresis collection based on mobilization regimen and primary diagnosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 156 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S161-S162
Author(s):  
C Puzo ◽  
P Li ◽  
A Siddon ◽  
C Tormey
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Primary Diagnosis ◽  
Lower Percentage ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Lower Baseline ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Stem Cell Collection

Abstract Introduction/Objective Plerixafor has been increasingly used in conjunction with G-CSF to increase mobilization of CD34+ stem cells in patients undergoing leukapheresis collection for autologous stem cell transplantation. While G- CSF and plerixafor have been shown to increase CD34+ counts, studies examining patients’ ability to meet collection goals for patients with multiple myeloma (MM), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) have not been well documented. Methods/Case Report All autologous stem cell collection patients between 2017-2021 were retrospectively reviewed and categorized by primary diagnosis. Patients received a mobilization regimen of G-CSF alone, G-CSF and plerixafor, G-CSF and chemotherapy, or G-CSF, plerixafor, and chemotherapy. CD34+ stem cell collection results were recorded. All units of CD34+ stem cells were processed according to protocol and viability was assessed by Trypan blue method on a thawed aliquot 2 weeks after processing. Results (if a Case Study enter NA) 385 patients (271 MM, 41 DLBCL, 30 HL, and 43 NHL patients; male: 242; female: 143; age range: 16-78) were identified. Binomial logistic regression demonstrated that use of plerixafor with G- CSF was negatively associated with meeting CD34+ goal collection (OR= -1.57, p= 0.003) compared to G-CSF alone. This result was particularly true for MM patients (OR= -1.62, p= 0.014). A pairwise t-test indicated that patients receiving G-CSF and plerixafor had lower CD34+ cell viabilities (t= 2.21, p = 0.028); after Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, MM samples also had significantly lower percentage viability than DLBCL (p= 0.003) or HL (p= 0.022) samples. Conclusion A higher percentage of patients mobilized on G-CSF alone were able to meet collection goal versus patients who were mobilized on G-CSF and plerixafor. Patients who received G-CSF and plerixafor had significantly lower viability than those who received G-CSF alone. We hypothesize these findings to be due to lower baseline mobilization for patients on G-CSF and plerixafor.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document