Cryopreserved versus non-cryopreserved peripheral blood stem cells for autologous transplantation after high-dose Melphalan in multiple myeloma: comparative analysis

The diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma has changed dramatically in the past decade. The disease definition has been updated to include highly specific biomarkers in addition to established markers of end-organ damage. The staging system has been revised to combine both measures of tumor burden and disease biology. Advances in therapy have resulted in a marked improvement in overall survival. New drugs introduced in the past few years include carfilzomib, pomalidomide, panobinostat, ixazomib, elotuzumab, and daratumumab. In this review, we outline the current approach to the diagnosis, prognosis, and management of multiple myeloma.

Transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) has been successfully developed as a part of treatment protocols for a large number of clinical indications, and cryopreservation of both autologous and allogeneic sources of HSC grafts is increasingly being used to facilitate logistical challenges in coordinating the collection, processing, preparation, quality control testing and release of the final HSC product with delivery to the patient. Direct infusion of cryopreserved cell products into patients has been associated with the development of adverse reactions, ranging from relatively mild symptoms to much more serious, life-threatening complications, including allergic/gastrointestinal/cardiovascular/neurological complications, renal/hepatic dysfunctions, and so on. In many cases, the cryoprotective agent (CPA) used-which is typically dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-is believed to be the main causal agent of these adverse reactions and thus many studies recommend depletion of DMSO before cell infusion. In this paper, we will briefly review the history of HSC cryopreservation, the side effects reported after transplantation, along with advances in strategies for reducing the adverse reactions, including methods and devices for removal of DMSO. Strategies to minimize adverse effects include medication before and after transplantation, optimizing the infusion procedure, reducing the DMSO concentration or using alternative CPAs for cryopreservation and removing DMSO before infusion. For DMSO removal, besides the traditional and widely applied method of centrifugation, new approaches have been explored in the past decade, such as filtration by spinning membrane, stepwise dilution-centrifugation using rotating syringe, diffusion-based DMSO extraction in microfluidic channels, dialysis and dilution-filtration through hollow-fiber dialyzers and some instruments (CytoMate, Sepax S-100, Cobe 2991, microfluidic channels, dilution-filtration system, etc.) as well. However, challenges still remain: development of the optimal (fast, safe, simple, automated, controllable, effective and low cost) methods and devices for CPA removal with minimum cell loss and damage remains an unfilled need.

Cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF (C+G-CSF) is one of the most widely used stem cell (SC) mobilization regimens for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Plerixafor plus G-CSF (P+G-CSF) has demonstrated superior SC mobilization efficacy when compared with G-CSF alone and has been shown to rescue patients who fail mobilization with G-CSF or C+G-CSF. Despite the proven efficacy of P+G-CSF in upfront SC mobilization, its use has been limited, mostly due to concerns of high price of the drug. However, a comprehensive comparison of the efficacy and cost effectiveness of SC mobilization using C+G-CSF versus P+G-CSF is not available. In this study, we compared 111 patients receiving C+G-CSF to 112 patients receiving P+G-CSF. The use of P+G-CSF was associated with a higher success rate of SC collection defined as ⩾ 5 × 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg (94 versus 83%, P = 0.013) and less toxicities. Thirteen patients in the C+G-CSF arm were hospitalized owing to complications while none in the P+G-CSF group. C+G-CSF was associated with higher financial burden as assessed using institutional-specific costs and charges ( P <0.001) as well as using Medicare reimbursement rates ( P = 0.27). Higher rate of hospitalization, increased need for salvage mobilization, and increased G-CSF use account for these differences.