The role of stem cell factor in mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells: Synergy with G&amp;hyphen;CSF

McNiece, Ian; Briddell, Robert A.; Hartley, Cynthia; Andrews, Robert G.

doi:10.1002/stem.5530110920

Cited by 19 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present paper, based on the study of a homogeneous group of 22 breast cancer patients, we have confirmed previous observations 16 indicating that a high number of CD34 ϩ PB HPC can be obtained with a mobilization protocol based on SCF plus G-CSF and cyclophosphamide. The median number of total CD34 ϩ HPC harvested in one leukapheresis session was 13 Ϯ 13 ϫ 10 6 CD34 ϩ cells/kg body weight and therefore much higher than reported for cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF in the absence of SCF.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…14,15 Previous studies have shown that once administered in combination with other cytokines such as G-CSF, SCF has a synergistic effect on enhancing mobilization of CD34 ϩ HPCs into the PB. 16 Accordingly, accumulating evidence exists that the combined use of G-CSF and SCF is associated with higher mobilization rates as compared to G-CSF alone. [17][18][19] Moreover, SCF has become an alternative agent in patients who show a poor response to other mobilization protocols.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sequential analysis of CD34+ and CD34− cell subsets in peripheral blood and leukapheresis products from breast cancer patients mobilized with SCF plus G-CSF and cyclophosphamide

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Administration of stem cell factor (SCF) has been proven to enhance cytokine-induced mobilization of CD34 ؉ hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPC) into the peripheral blood (PB). The aim of the present study was to explore in a homogeneous group of 22 uniformly treated breast cancer patients: (1) the kinetics of mobilization into PB of both CD34 ؉ and CD34 ؊ cell subsets, including dendritic cells, in sequential samples obtained from day ؉7 up to day ؉12 after mobilization; and (2)

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequential analysis of CD34+ and CD34− cell subsets in peripheral blood and leukapheresis products from breast cancer patients mobilized with SCF plus G-CSF and cyclophosphamide

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[23][24][25][26] Cytotoxic agents, with or without growth factor, are known to damage both hematopoietic and mesenchymal marrow stem cell compartments, thus suggesting that different chemotherapy agents might affect not only the quantity, but also the quality of mobilized progenitors. [27][28][29][30] No definitive assessment exists concerning the best chemotherapy mobilizing regimen given with G-CSF. 31,32 Hematological parameters including MNC or CD34 + cell pre-apheresis counts can probably predict hematopoietic stem cell collection.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells with high-dose cyclophosphamide or the DHAP regimen plus G-CSF in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

Pavone

Gaudio

Guarini

et al. 2002

Bone Marrow Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Our study analyzes the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells after two chemotherapeutic regimens in nonHodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) patients. The study included 72 patients with NHL (42 follicular and 30 large cells). The mean age was 37 years (range 17-60). Sixty-four patients (88.9%) had stage III-IV disease. Forty-eight patients (66.7%) had bone marrow involvement. Systemic B symptoms were present in 42 patients (58.3%). Mobilization chemotherapy regimens were randomly assigned as DHAP in 38 patients (52.7%) or cyclophosphamide (CPM) (5 g/m 2 ) in 34 (47.2%) and the results of 132 procedures were analyzed. At the time of PBSC mobilization, 46 patients (63.9%) were considered to be responsive (complete remission, partial remission or sensitive relapse) and 26 (36.1%) not responsive (refractory relapse or refractory to therapy). Pre-apheresis CD34 + blood cell count and number of previous chemotherapy treatments were used to predict the total number of CD34 + cells in the apheresis product. The mobilizing regimens (CPM or DHAP) were similar in achieving the threshold CD34 + cell yield, for optimal engraftment. Since DHAP was very effective as salvage treatment, we suggest using DHAP as a mobilizing regimen in patients with active residual lymphoma at the time of stem cell collection. ( toxicity. [5][6][7][8] In the literature, high-dose cyclophosphamide (CPM) seems to be the gold standard for mobilizing hematopoietic progenitor cells in lymphoproliferative disorders. 9,10 Single high doses of alkylating agents (high-dose CPM or melphalan) have been used as mobilizing chemotherapy in NHL and other malignancies. [9][10][11][12] Combination chemotherapy regimens such as DHAP or MAD or ESHAP have also been used for stem cell harvesting. [13][14][15] In a previous study the DHAP protocol has already shown real efficacy in debulking and in vivo purging in refractory or in partial remission NHL. 16,17 The DHAP regimen was thus integrated into various treatment plans tailored for NHL patients as a second-line therapy and salvage chemotherapy for PR patients, or as an intensification and mobilizing regimen in CR high risk patients. 16,17 In our previous experience, we used the DHAP protocol as salvage treatment in patients in PR or with refractory NHL. Few randomised studies report a comparison of mobilizing capacity of two different chemotherapeutic regimens such as ESHAP or ifosfamide vs CPM in lymphoproliferative disorders. [18][19][20] In our study 72 NHL patients undergoing PBSC transplantation were prospectively randomized to mobilize PBSC with the DHAP regimen or with high-dose CPM in order to evaluate whether there were any differences in the number of mononuclear cells harvested (× 10 8 /kg), CD34 + cells (×10 6 /kg), colony-forming units granulocyte-macrophage (CFU-GM) (×10 4 /kg) obtained or engraftment speed. Bone Marrow Transplantation Patients and methodsThe following parameters were examined in the two different mobilized groups: (1) Clinical: (i) type of mobilizing regimen (DHAP (cisplatin 100 mg/...

show abstract

“…[17][18][19][20][21] Whether G-CSF alone can stimulate a true in vivo expansion, or an increase in the total number of progenitor cells or their precursors, or whether it acts only to redistribute progenitors within the hematopoietic tissues remains controversial. [22][23][24] Although G-CSF can act synergistically with IL-3 to induce proliferation of dormant murine stem cells, its contribution to initiating expansion of dormant human stem cells when utilized in solo has never been demonstrated.…”

Section: G-csf Stem/progenitor Cell Mobilizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunobiology of allogeneic peripheral blood mononuclear cells mobilized with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor

Gyger

Perreault

2000

Bone Marrow Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:The use of mobilized peripheral blood (PB) stem cells for autologous transplantation initially generated much enthusiasm because of enhanced engraftment in comparison to marrow stem cells and avoidance of general anesthesia for the donor. Its application to the allogeneic setting seemed inevitable. For obvious ethical reasons, allogeneic donors are mobilized with cytokines only, mainly granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF).Results from preliminary studies suggest that in comparison to standard bone marrow transplants, outcomes such as engraftment, host-versus-graft reaction, graftversus-host disease, graft-versus-leukemia and immunological reconstitution may be different. Surprisingly, G-CSF, previously recognized as a late acting lineage-specific factor for neutrophil production, not only disrupts homeostasis between stem cells and their microenvironment, but also induces significant quantitative and qualitative changes in the accessory cell compartment, affecting lymphocytes, monocytes, natural killer, dendritic, and stromal cells. Furthermore, mobilization of huge numbers of non-professional antigen presenting cells (CD34 + stem cells) amplifies the tolerizing potential of PB stem cell grafts. Thus, G-CSF mobilization provides PB transplants with different immunobiologic properties in comparison to standard bone marrow grafts. Whether these immunobiologic differences will lead to better transplant outcomes remains to be shown through much awaited results of large randomized clinical trials. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2000) 26, 1-16. Keywords: stem cells; transplantation; mobilization; microenvironment; alloreactivity; polarization Since the first reported case of allogeneic peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMNC) transplantation, 1 PBMNCs mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GPBMNCs) are being increasingly used as a source

show abstract

The role of stem cell factor in mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells: Synergy with G&hyphen;CSF

Cited by 19 publications

References 38 publications

Sequential analysis of CD34+ and CD34− cell subsets in peripheral blood and leukapheresis products from breast cancer patients mobilized with SCF plus G-CSF and cyclophosphamide

Sequential analysis of CD34+ and CD34− cell subsets in peripheral blood and leukapheresis products from breast cancer patients mobilized with SCF plus G-CSF and cyclophosphamide

Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells with high-dose cyclophosphamide or the DHAP regimen plus G-CSF in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

Immunobiology of allogeneic peripheral blood mononuclear cells mobilized with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About