Comparison of biosimilar filgrastim and originator filgrastim for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Nivestym, a biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to the originator filgrastim (Neupogen), is now being used for the mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). We aim to compare the efficacy of Nivestym and Neupogen for PBSC mobilization in healthy allogeneic donors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center study including 541 adult allo-HSCT donors receiving Nivestym (January 2013-July 2020), or Neupogen (July 2020-June 2023) for donor PBSC mobilization. Bivariate analysis was conducted using SPSS version 28. Statistical significance was determined at a p-value <.05. RESULTS: Our study included 541 allo-HSCT donors who received Neupogen (n = 345, 64%) or Nivestym (n = 196, 36%) for PBSC mobilization. The median age was 47 years (range 17-76). The median donor weight was 86 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87-91). Donors receiving Neupogen had similar pre-G-CSF white blood cell count, CD34+ percentages, and circulating CD34+ count compared with donors receiving Nivestym. The Neupogen group had similar median PBSC product total neutrophil count, CD34+ percentage, absolute CD34+ count, and infused CD34+ dose compared with the Nivestym group. For donors aged 35 years or younger, the median CD34+ dose was higher in donors who received Neupogen compared with Nivestym (6.9 vs. 6.3 million cells/kg, p = .044). CONCLUSIONS: Nivestym demonstrated similar efficacy for PBSC mobilization compared with Neupogen among allo-HSCT donors. In donors aged 35 years or younger, a slightly lower PBSC product CD34+ count was noted with Nivestym compared with Neupogen.

Outcomes with HLA-matched unrelated donor versus haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation.

We investigated the outcomes after adult haploidentical (haplo) and matched unrelated donor (MUD) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in a single-center study (n = 452) including 276 MUD and 176 haplo transplants. Myeloablative (37%) and reduced-intensity conditioning (63%) were performed. Graft sources included peripheral blood (50%) and bone marrow (50%). GVHD prophylaxis included tacrolimus/methotrexate (53%) and post-transplant cyclophosphamide-based (47%). In MUD versus haplo HCT recipients, a similar incidence of neutrophil engraftment (18 vs 17 days, p = 0.895), grade II-IV acute GVHD (51% vs 50%, p = 0.773), relapse (26% vs 23%, p = 0.578), non-relapse mortality (22% vs 23%, p = 0.817), 1-year disease-free survival (62% vs 63%. p = 0.921), and 1-year overall survival (73% vs 74%, p = 0.744) were observed. Earlier platelet engraftment (22 vs 27 days, p < 0.001) and higher chronic GVHD (45% vs 35%, p = 0.040) were noted in MUD as compared to haplo HCT. Allogeneic transplantation should be done promptly whenever indicated, utilizing either matched unrelated or haploidentical donors.

Lessons learned from COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in hematopoietic cell transplant and cell therapy recipients.

We investigated the outcomes after Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID) in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) or chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CART) therapy recipients in a single-centre study including all (n = 261)HCT/CART recipients (allogeneic-HCT 49%, autologous-HCT 40%, CART 11%). The median age was 60 (22-80) years. COVID severity was mild (74%), moderate (11%), and severe/critical (16%) with a mortality rate of 7% and a median duration of infection of 5.7 weeks. Significant predictors of COVID severe disease or mortality included concurrent infection (HR 14.9, 95% CI 2.2-5.6) and immunosuppressive therapy (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.2-3.4).HCT/CART recipients have a higher risk of mortality with COVID and warrant vigilant interventions.