黑料网

Hematopoietic stem cells; Mobilising peripheral blood stem cells; Autologous transplantation

Introduction

Multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma can be effectively treated with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCTHSCs (hematopoietic stem cells) must be stimulated to travel from the bone marrow to the peripheral circulation (i.e., mobilised) before harvesting because the peripheral blood only contains a small number of HSCs. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), either alone or in conjunction with chemotherapy, is the traditional method of mobilising HSCs [1,2]. However, it can occasionally be challenging to harvest enough HSCs, particularly in patients who have undergone many lines of therapy.

Methods

Plerixafor mobilisation has grown in popularity recently. Plerixafor and G-CSF together have been proven to boost the number of HSCs per harvest in comparison to each drug used alone, making them an advantageous combination for patients who have had a number of treatment cycles or exposure to myelotoxic chemicals. Plerixafor, according to certain medical professionals, raises the possibility of malignant cells contaminating the apheresis product. Plerixafor appears to improve post-ASCT results, according to a number of recent studies [3, 4]; nevertheless, more research is required. The purpose of this study was to assess plerixafor’s impact on post-ASCT outcomes in Japanese patients with haematological malignancies using a dual-center retrospective cohort design.

From September 2014 to February 2022, records of adult non- Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma patients who underwent autologous stem cell harvest (ASCH) and ASCT at Shinko Hospital in Kobe or Kyoto University Hospital in Kyoto were examined. Plerixafor is not administered to patients at the authors’ institutions whose Day-1 PB-CD34+ cell count is less than 20 cells/L. Because of this, the authors only included patients with a Day-1 PB-CD34+ cell count of 20 or less cells/L [5, 6].

Plerixafor and G-CSF can be utilised to move HSCs out of the bone marrow and into the peripheral circulation before ASCH. The best methods for HSC mobilisation have been the subject of numerous investigations, and the therapeutic requirements for employing plerixafor have been steadily clarified. Nonetheless, some medical professionals think that plerixafor raises the danger [7, 8].

Discussion

By using univariate (neutrophil, P = 0.004, platelet, P = 0.002), subgroup, propensity score matching, and inverse probability weighting analyses, it was determined that the time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment was considerably reduced with plerixafor compared to without plerixafor. Although there was no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of fever with or without plerixafor (P = 0.31), there was a significant difference in the cumulative incidence of sepsis (P 0.01). Accordingly, the results at hand show that plerixafor promotes early neutrophil and platelet engraftment while also lowering the risk of infection [9, 10].

Conclusions

The researchers discovered that plerixafor shortens hospital stays and reduces infection risk by hastening neutrophil and platelet engraftment. The authors draw the following conclusion: Plerixafor may be safe to use and may lower infection risk in patients with low Day-1 PB-CD34+.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

1. Brito FMS, Bortoletto Júnior G, Paes JB, Belini UL, Tomazello-Filho M (2020) Technological characterization of particleboards made with sugarcane bagasse and bamboo culm particles. Constr Build Mater 262:120501.

Crossref

2. Aydin I, Demirkir C, Colak S, Colakoglu G (2017) Utilization of bark flours as additive in plywood manufacturing. Eur J Wood Prod 75:63-69.

Crossref

3. Rajeshkumar G, Seshadri SA, Devnani GL, Sanjay MR (2021) Environment friendly, renewable and sustainable poly lactic acid (PLA) based natural fiber reinforced composites-A comprehensive review. J Clean Prod 310:127483.

Crossref

4. Pędzik M, Janiszewska D, Rogoziński T (2021) Alternative lignocellulosic raw materials in particleboard production: A review. Ind Crops Prod 174:114162.

Crossref

5. Lee SH, Lum WC, Boon JG (2022) Particleboard from agricultural biomass and recycled wood waste: A review. J Mater Res Technol 20:4630-4658.

Crossref

6. França WT, Barros MV, Salvador R (2021) Integrating life cycle assessment and life cycle cost: A review of environmental-economic studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26:244-274.

Crossref

7. Hammiche D, Boukerrou A, Azzeddine B (2019) Characterization of polylactic acid green composites and its biodegradation in a bacterial environment. Int J Polym Anal Charact 24:236-244.

Crossref

8. Couret L, Irle M, Belloncle C (2017) Extraction and characterization of cellulose nanocrystals from post-consumer wood fiberboard waste. Cellulose 24:2125-2137.

Crossref

9. Haag AP, Maier RM, Combie J (2004) Bacterially derived biopolymers as wood adhesives. Int J Adhes 24:495-502.

Crossref

10. Soubam T, Gupta A, Sharma S (2022) Mechanical property study of plywood bonded with dimethylol dihydroxy ethylene urea crosslinked rice starch-natural rubber latex-based adhesive. Mater Today Proc.

Crossref