Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Progenitor Cell Mobilisation

Cyclophosphamide, etoposide and G-CSF to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma

Bone Marrow Transplantation volume 30, pages 273–278 (2002)Cite this article

Abstract

We aimed to assess the effectiveness of cyclophosphamide, etoposide and G-CSF (C+E) to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma. A matched cohort study was performed comparing patients mobilized with C+E to patients mobilized with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF (C alone). Patients were matched for disease, prior radiotherapy and a chemotherapy score reflecting the amount and type of prior chemotherapy. Thirty-eight consecutive patients mobilized with C+E were compared with 38 matched controls. C+E was equivalent to C alone in terms of numbers of patients achieving a minimum threshold of ⩾2 × 106/kg CD34+cells (82% vs 79%, P = 0.74). C+E was superior, however, in terms of total CD34+ yield (6.35 vs 3.3 × 106/kg, P < 0.01), achieving a target graft of ⩾5 × 106/kg (55% vs 34%, P = 0.04) and obtaining both a minimum (61% vs 32%, P < 0.01) and target (45% vs 13%, P < 0.01) graft in one apheresis. This superiority was largely confined to patients with lower chemotherapy scores. There was no difference in neutrophil and platelet recovery or transfusion requirements for those who subsequently received high-dose therapy and stem cell transplantation. Thus, C+E improves the efficiency of peripheral blood stem cell collection, but does not increase the number of patients who can proceed to transplantation. Most of the benefit of the regimen was confined to patients who had not received extensive prior therapy. Novel strategies are required to increase the collection efficiency of ‘hard to mobilize’ patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schmitz N, Linch DC, Dreger P et al. Randomised trial of filgrastim-mobilised peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation versus autologous bone-marrow transplantation in lymphoma patients Lancet 1996 347: 353 357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sutherland DR, Anderson L, Keeney M et al. The ISHAGE guidelines for CD34+ cell determination by flow cytometry. International Society of Hematotherapy and Graft Engineering J Hematother 1996 5: 213 226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Weaver CH, Hazelton B, Birch R et al. An analysis of engraftment kinetics as a function of the CD34 content of peripheral blood progenitor cell collections in 692 patients after the administration of myeloablative chemotherapy Blood 1995 86: 3961 3969

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sutherland DR, Filshie R, Nayar R et al. Clinical validation of the single platform ISHAGE protocol in the transplant setting: speed of engraftment highly correlates with numbers of CD34+ cells infused Blood 1999 94: 139a

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bensinger W, Appelbaum F, Rowley S et al. Factors that influence collection and engraftment of autologous peripheral-blood stem cells J Clin Oncol 1995 13: 2547 2555

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Watts MJ, Sullivan AM, Leverett D et al. Back-up bone marrow is frequently ineffective in patients with poor peripheral-blood stem-cell mobilization J Clin Oncol 1998 16: 1554 1560

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Laport GF, Zimmerman TM, Grinblatt DL et al. CD34+ peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) dose influences engraftment kinetics and other relevant clinical variables Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1996 15: 333a

    Google Scholar 

  8. Schwella N, Beyer J, Schwaner I et al. Impact of preleukapheresis cell counts on collection results and correlation of progenitor-cell dose with engraftment after high-dose chemotherapy in patients with germ cell cancer J Clin Oncol 1996 14: 1114 1121

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kiss JE, Rybka WB, Winkelstein A et al. Relationship of CD34+ cell dose to early and late hematopoiesis following autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation Bone Marrow Transplant 1997 19: 303 310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Haas R, Mohle R, Fruhauf S et al. Patient characteristics associated with successful mobilizing and autografting of peripheral blood progenitor cells in malignant lymphoma Blood 1994 83: 3787 3794

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bensinger WI, Longin K, Appelbaum F et al. Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) collected after recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF): an analysis of factors correlating with the tempo of engraftment after transplantation Br J Haematol 1994 87: 825 831

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tricot G, Jagannath S, Vesole D et al. Peripheral blood stem cell transplants for multiple myeloma: identification of favorable variables for rapid engraftment in 225 patients Blood 1995 85: 588 596

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ketterer N, Salles G, Moullet I et al. Factors associated with successful mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells in 200 patients with lymphoid malignancies Br J Haematol 1998 103: 235 242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Morton J, Morton A, Bird R et al. Predictors for optimal mobilization and subsequent engraftment of peripheral blood progenitor cells following intermediate dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF Leuk Res 1997 21: 21 27

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Moskowitz CH, Glassman JR, Wuest D et al. Factors affecting mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with lymphoma Clin Cancer Res 1998 4: 311 316

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dreger P, Kloss M, Petersen B et al. Autologous progenitor cell transplantation: prior exposure to stem cell- toxic drugs determines yield and engraftment of peripheral blood progenitor cell but not of bone marrow grafts Blood 1995 86: 3970 3978

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Watts MJ, Sullivan AM, Jamieson E et al. Progenitor-cell mobilization after low-dose cyclophosphamide and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: an analysis of progenitor-cell quantity and quality and factors predicting for these parameters in 101 pretreated patients with malignant lymphoma J Clin Oncol 1997 15: 535 546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Weaver CH, Zhen B, Buckner CD . Treatment of patients with malignant lymphoma with Mini-BEAM reduces the yield of CD34+ peripheral blood stem cells Bone Marrow Transplant 1998 21: 1169 1170

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Drake M, Ranaghan L, Morris TC et al. Analysis of the effect of prior therapy on progenitor cell yield: use of a chemotherapy scoring system Br J Haematol 1997 98: 745 749

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Clark RE, Brammer CG . Previous treatment predicts the efficiency of blood progenitor cell mobilisation: validation of a chemotherapy scoring system Bone Marrow Transplant 1998 22: 859 863

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Weaver CH, Schwartzberg LS, Birch R et al. Collection of peripheral blood progenitor cells after the administration of cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor: an analysis of 497 patients Transfusion 1997 37: 896 903

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. To LB, Shepperd KM, Haylock DN et al. Single high doses of cyclophosphamide enable the collection of high numbers of hemopoietic stem cells from the peripheral blood Exp Hematol 1990 18: 442 447

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Goldschmidt H, Hegenbart U, Haas R et al. Mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells with high-dose cyclophosphamide (4 or 7 g/m2) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in patients with multiple myeloma Bone Marrow Transplant 1996 17: 691 697

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jones HM, Jones SA, Watts MJ et al. Development of a simplified single-apheresis approach for peripheral- blood progenitor-cell transplantation in previously treated patients with lymphoma J Clin Oncol 1994 12: 1693 1702

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Haynes A, Hunter A, McQuaker G et al. Engraftment characteristics of peripheral blood stem cells mobilised with cyclophosphamide and the delayed addition of G-CSF Bone Marrow Transplant 1995 16: 359 363

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Schwartzberg LS, Weaver CH, Birch R et al. A randomized trial of two doses of cyclophosphamide with etoposide and G-CSF for mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells in 318 patients with stage II-III breast cancer J Hematother 1998 7: 141 150

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Weaver CH, Zhen B, Schwartzberg L et al. A randomized trial of mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells with cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with or without cisplatin in patients with malignant lymphoma receiving high-dose chemotherapy Am J Clin Oncol 1998 21: 408 412

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Krishnan A, Bhatia S, Slovak ML et al. Predictors of therapy-related leukemia and myelodysplasia following autologous transplantation for lymphoma: an assessment of risk factors Blood 2000 95: 1588 1593

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pedersen-Bjergaard J, Andersen MK, Christiansen DH . Therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplasia after high- dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation Blood 2000 95: 3273 3279

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rowlings PA, Bayly JL, Rawling CM et al. A comparison of peripheral blood stem cell mobilisation after chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide as a single agent in doses of 4 g/m2 or 7 g/m2 in patients with advanced cancer Aust NZ J Med 1992 22: 660 664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Watts MJ, Ings SJ, Leverett D et al. ESHAP and G-CSF is a superior blood stem cell mobilizing regimen compared to cyclophosphamide 1.5 g m2 and G-CSF for pre-treated lymphoma patients: a matched pairs analysis of 78 patients Br J Cancer 2000 82: 278 282

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Vela-Ojeda J, Tripp-Villanueva F, Montiel-Cervantes L et al. Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing high-dose ifosfamide + GM-CSF vs high-dose cyclophosphamide + GM-CSF for blood progenitor cell mobilization Bone Marrow Transplant 2000 25: 1141 1146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hohaus S, Martin H, Wassmann B et al. Recombinant human granulocyte and granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF and GM-CSF) administered following cytotoxic chemotherapy have a similar ability to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells Bone Marrow Transplant 1998 22: 625 630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. McQuaker IG, Haynes AP, Stainer C et al. Stem cell mobilization in resistant or relapsed lymphoma: superior yield of progenitor cells following a salvage regimen comprising ifosphamide, etoposide and epirubicin compared to intermediate-dose cyclophosphamide Br J Haematol 1997 98: 228 233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Moskowitz CH, Bertino JR, Glassman JR et al. Ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide: a highly effective cytoreduction and peripheral-blood progenitor-cell mobilization regimen for transplant-eligible patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma J Clin Oncol 1999 17: 3776 3785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Narayanasami U, Kanteti R, Morelli J et al. Randomized trial of filgrastim versus chemotherapy and filgrastim mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells for rescue in autologous transplantation Blood 2001 98: 2059 2064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stiff P, Gingrich R, Luger S et al. A randomized phase 2 study of PBPC mobilization by stem cell factor and filgrastim in heavily pretreated patients with Hodgkin's disease or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma Bone Marrow Transplant 2000 26: 471 481

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toronto Autologous Blood and Marrow Transplant Service, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada

    P Mollee, D Pereira, T Nagy, K Song, R Saragosa, A Keating & M Crump

Authors
  1. P Mollee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T Nagy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R Saragosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A Keating
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M Crump
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mollee, P., Pereira, D., Nagy, T. et al. Cyclophosphamide, etoposide and G-CSF to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 30, 273–278 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bmt.1703653

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bmt.1703653

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links