Sequential administration of interleukin-3 and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor following standard-dose combination chemotherapy with etoposide, ifosfamide, and cisplatin.

Brugger, Wolfram; Frisch, Jürgen; Schulz, G.; Pressler, K; Mertelsmann, Roland; Kanz, Lothar

doi:10.1200/jco.1992.10.9.1452

Cited by 97 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Differences in the quantitative recruitment of hematopoietic progenitors in the bloodstream achieved by different mobilization schedules might be dependent on the relative frequency of CD34 + subpopulations that are not clonogenic in short-term culture assay systems, such as lymphoid progenitors as well as primitive progenitors and stem cells. 12,13 We found that CD34 + cells from the G-CSF group had a significantly lower plating efficiency than CY+G-CSF mobilized CD34 + cells. This finding associated with the significantly lower numbers of LTC-IC detected in the G-CSFmobilized products suggests that the lower clonogenicity of CD34 + cells observed in G-CSF-mobilized patients was likely to be due to the mobilization of mature CD34 + cells which are not detected in the CFU-Mix assay.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…[1][2][3]5,12,13,22 Both chemotherapy or growth factors used alone expand the pool of circulating progenitors and, when combined, exert a significantly higher effect. 3,4 Fol- lowing CY+G-CSF administration, circulating CD34 + cells and committed progenitors initially decrease to undetectable levels, while reappearing together with the more primitive LTC-IC at the time of leukocyte recovery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11,12 Moreover, different in vitro clonogenic activities displayed by differently mobilized CD34 + cells indicates that phenotypic analysis is a quantitative parameter and does not provide qualitative information concerning the proliferative potential of stem/progenitor cells. 12,13 The long-term culture initiating cell (LTC-IC) assay, which detects self-renewing progenitors capable of initiating and sustaining hematopoiesis for at least 5 weeks in long-term culture, 14 has been used to detect hematopoietic progenitors both in steady-state and mobilized blood 13,[15][16][17] and is considered to be an efficient assay system for measuring the primitive progenitor cell content of mobilized blood. 9,18 No definitive comparison has so far been provided on the mobilization potential of different schedules in terms of both clonogenic and primitive progenitors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

CD34+ cells mobilized by cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) are functionally different from CD34+ cells mobilized by G-CSF

Cesana

Carlo‐Stella

Regazzi

et al. 1998

Bone Marrow Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) are increasingly used as an alternative to bone marrow for autografting procedures. Currently, cyclophosphamide (CY) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) or G-CSF alone are the most commonly used PBPC mobilization schedules. In an attempt to investigate whether the use of these two mobilization regimens could result in the collection of functionally different CD34 ؉ cells, we analyzed nucleated cells (NC), CD34 ؉ cells, committed progenitor cells and long-term culture initiating-cells (LTC-IC) in 52 leukaphereses from 26 patients with lymphoid malignancies, mobilized either by CY+G-CSF (n ‫؍‬ 16) or G-CSF alone (n ‫؍‬ 10). Thirty-four aphereses from the CY+G-CSF group and 18 aphereses from the G-CSF group were investigated. According to the study design, leukaphereses were carried out until an average number of 7 ؋ 10 6 CD34 ؉ cells/kg body weight were collected. The mean (؎ s.e.m.) numbers of CD34 ؉ cells mobilized per apheresis by CY+G-CSF and G-CSF were not significantly different (2.76 ؎ 0.6 ؋ 10 8 vs 2.53 ؎ 0.4 ؋ 10 8 , P р 0.7). This resulted from a mean number of NC that was significantly lower in the CY+G-CSF products than in the G-CSF products (12.4 ؎ 1.7 ؋ 10 9 vs 32 ؎ 5.4 ؋ 10 9 , P р 0.0001) and a mean incidence of CD34 ؉ cells that was significantly higher in the CY؉G-CSF products than in the G-CSF products (2.9 ؎ 0.6% vs 0.9 ؎ 0.2%, P р 0.0018). The mean (؎ s.e.m.) number of CFU-GM collected per apheresis was significantly higher in the CY+G-CSF group than in the G-CSF group (37 ؎ 7 ؋ 10 6 vs 14 ؎ 2 ؋ 10 6 , P р 0.03). Interestingly, CY+G-CSF-mobilized CD34 ؉ cells had a significantly higher plating efficiency than G-CSF-mobilized CD34 ϩ cells (25.5 ؎ 2.9% vs 10.8 ؎ 1.9%, P р 0.0006). In addition, the mean number of LTC-IC was significantly higher in the CY+G-CSF products than in the G-CSF products (6.3 ؎ 1 ؋ 10 6 vs 3.3 ؎ 0.3 ؋ 10 6 , P р 0.05). In conclusion, our data provide evidence that CY؉G-CSF and G-CSF induce the mobilization of CD34 ؉ cells with

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

CD34+ cells mobilized by cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) are functionally different from CD34+ cells mobilized by G-CSF

Cesana

Carlo‐Stella

Regazzi

et al. 1998

Bone Marrow Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the relatively low burden of the harvest proce dure may explain the increased popularity of PBSC. Fur thermore, total costs of PBPC autografting are lower than those of ABMT [69], Peripheral blood stem cells can be mobilised by chemotherapy [70][71][72], chemotherapy followed by HGFs [73][74][75] and HGFs alone [76][77][78][79]. Despite the increasing knowledge of progenitor-stroma interaction, the mechanisms of stem cell mobilisation remain undefined.…”

Section: Peripheral Stem Cell Transplantation In Haematology and Oncomentioning

confidence: 99%

A European perspective on haematopoietic growth factors in haemato-oncology: Report of an expert meeting of the EORTC

Croockewit

Bronchud

Aapro

et al. 1997

European Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, mobilization with disease-oriented chemotherapy in addition to cytokines is particularly recommended in patients with chemosensitive neoplasms as the greater efficacy of mobilization is combined with the anti-tumour effect of the drug. In fact, in most CPC transplantation programmes the mobilizing regimens include agents (often at high doses) with proven efficacy against the underlying disease (Brugger et al, 1992;Shimazaki et al, 1992;Gianni AM et al, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Collection of circulating progenitor cells after epirubicin, paclitaxel and filgrastim in patients with metastatic breast cancer

Pedrazzoli

Perotti²,

Prada³

et al. 1997

Br J Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The efficacy of high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) and circulating progenitor cell (CPC) transplantation in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) relies mainly on giving this treatment after a response to conventional induction chemotherapy has been achieved. For this reason an optimal mobilization regimen should be therapeutically effective while minimizing the number of leucaphereses required to support the myeloablative therapy. The combination of an anthracycline and paclitaxel in chemotherapy-untreated MBC has produced impressive response rates. We evaluated the CPC-mobilizing capacity of the combination epirubicin (90 mg m-2) and paclitaxel (135 mg m-2) followed by filgrastim (5 Ag kg-1 day-1) starting 48 h after chemotherapy administration in ten patients with MBC who were eligible for an HDC and CPC transplantation programme. Leucaphereses were performed by processing at least two blood volumes per procedure at recovery from neutrophil nadir when CD34+ cells in the peripheral blood exceeded 20 [I-. In most patients (six out of 10) more than 2.5 x 106 CD34+ cells kg-', a threshold considered to be sufficient for haematopoietic reconstitution, were collected with a single apheresis. In the remaining four patients an additional procedure, performed the following day, was enough to reach the required number of progenitors. These data suggest that the epirubicin-paclitaxel combination, besides being a very active regimen in MBC, is effective in releasing large amounts of progenitor cells into circulation.Keywords: progenitor cell; mobilization; breast cancer; chemotherapyThe autologous transfusion of circulating progenitor cells (CPCs) collected from the peripheral blood by leucapheresis is rapidly replacing autologous bone marrow transplantation to support haematopoiesis after high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) for lymphoma and solid tumours (Gianni AM, 1994;Holoyake, 1994). The main reason for the success of this procedure is the capability of CPCs to produce a much faster haematopoietic recovery than bone marrow cells (Siena et al, 1989;Sheridan et al, 1992;Chao et al, 1993;Schmitz et al, 1996).An adequate number of progenitor cells capable of guaranteeing short-and long-term haematopoiesis can be harvested from the peripheral blood after treatment with haematopoietic growth factors administered as single agents or, more frequently, following myelosuppressive chemotherapy (Bensinger et al, 1993;Siena et al, 1994). Moreover, mobilization with disease-oriented chemotherapy in addition to cytokines is particularly recommended in patients with chemosensitive neoplasms as the greater efficacy of mobilization is combined with the anti-tumour effect of the drug. In fact, in most CPC transplantation programmes the mobilizing regimens include agents (often at high doses) with proven efficacy against the underlying disease (Brugger et al, 1992;Shimazaki et al, 1992;Gianni AM et al, 1995 Controversy still surrounds the use of HDC with CPC support in stage IV breast cancer (Shpall et al, 1994;Hortobagyi, 1995;Kennedy, 1995), mai...

show abstract

Sequential administration of interleukin-3 and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor following standard-dose combination chemotherapy with etoposide, ifosfamide, and cisplatin.

Cited by 97 publications

References 16 publications

CD34+ cells mobilized by cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) are functionally different from CD34+ cells mobilized by G-CSF

CD34+ cells mobilized by cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) are functionally different from CD34+ cells mobilized by G-CSF

A European perspective on haematopoietic growth factors in haemato-oncology: Report of an expert meeting of the EORTC

Collection of circulating progenitor cells after epirubicin, paclitaxel and filgrastim in patients with metastatic breast cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About