Evaluating the use of plerixafor in stem cell mobilisation – an economic analysis of the PHANTASTIC trial

Plerixafor is an effective haematopoietic stem cell mobilising agent in candidates for autologous transplantation, including patients with myeloma and lymphoma. Here we compare 98 plerixafor recipients in the PHANTASTIC trial with 151 historic controls mobilised by conventional chemotherapy (each with granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor, G‐CSF). Seventy (71.4%) plerixafor‐mobilised patients achieved the composite primary endpoint of ≥4 × 106 CD34+ cells kg−1 in ≤2 aphereses and no clinically significant neutropenia, compared to 48 (31.8%) historic controls (P < 0.001), and this significant advantage was maintained in scenario analyses testing components of this composite endpoint. A patient‐level cost analysis was undertaken for 249 patients, which included the cost of remobilising patients where initial mobilisation had failed. Combined mean treatment cost for plerixafor mobilised patients was £12,679 compared with £11,694 for historical controls. However, plerixafor produces an average saving of £3,828 per lymphoma patient but average cost increase by £5,245 per myeloma patient. The present data demonstrate cost‐effectiveness for plerixafor as a first line mobilisation agent, certainly for lymphoma patients, where substantial resource savings and achievement of the primary endpoint are likely. J. Clin. Apheresis 31:434–442, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  R. Mahfouz,et al.  G-CSF plus preemptive plerixafor vs hyperfractionated CY plus G-CSF for autologous stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: effectiveness, safety and cost analysis , 2015, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[2]  I. Garcia Role of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. , 2015, Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia.

[3]  F. Lanza,et al.  Plerixafor: what we still have to learn , 2015, Expert opinion on biological therapy.

[4]  H. Goldschmidt,et al.  Rescue stem cell mobilization with plerixafor economizes leukapheresis in patients with multiple myeloma , 2014, Journal of clinical apheresis.

[5]  R. Clark,et al.  Plerixafor is superior to conventional chemotherapy for first-line stem cell mobilisation, and is effective even in heavily pretreated patients , 2014, Blood Cancer Journal.

[6]  Bernd Holleczek,et al.  Survival for haematological malignancies in Europe between 1997 and 2008 by region and age: results of EUROCARE-5, a population-based study. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[7]  E. Jantunen,et al.  Plerixafor for mobilization of blood stem cells in autologous transplantation: an update , 2014, Expert opinion on biological therapy.

[8]  E. Jantunen,et al.  Engraftment and outcome after autologous stem cell transplantation in plerixafor‐mobilized non‐Hodgkin's lymphoma patients , 2014, Transfusion.

[9]  Haitham W Tuffaha,et al.  GCSF with or without chemotherapy compared to Plerixafor with GCSF as salvage mobilization regimen in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma: Collection effectiveness and cost effectiveness analysis , 2014, Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners.

[10]  M. Kattan,et al.  Autologous haematopoietic stem cell mobilisation in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients: a position statement from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation , 2014, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[11]  A. Gennery,et al.  Hematopoietic SCT in Europe: data and trends in 2012 with special consideration of pediatric transplantation , 2014, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[12]  D. Benoit,et al.  Time to look beyond one-year mortality in critically ill hematological patients? , 2014, Critical Care.

[13]  A. Tichopád,et al.  Cost‐effectiveness of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization strategies including plerixafor in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients , 2013, Journal of clinical apheresis.

[14]  F. Awan,et al.  Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy‐era with plerixafor and G‐CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low‐dose cyclophosphamide and G‐CSF , 2013, Journal of clinical apheresis.

[15]  R. Gingrich,et al.  An algorithm for utilizing peripheral blood CD34 count as a predictor of the need for plerixafor in autologous stem cell mobilization—cost‐effectiveness analysis , 2013, Journal of clinical apheresis.

[16]  M. Mohty,et al.  Plerixafor and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for first-line steady-state autologous peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in lymphoma and multiple myeloma: results of the prospective PREDICT trial , 2013, Haematologica.

[17]  R. Lemoli New Strategies for Stem Cell Mobilization , 2012, Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases.

[18]  D. Allan,et al.  Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization strategies for autologous transplantation for hematologic malignancies. , 2012, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[19]  N. Kröger,et al.  European data on stem cell mobilization with plerixafor in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients. A subgroup analysis of the European Consortium of stem cell mobilization , 2012, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[20]  J. Dipersio,et al.  Economic evaluation of plerixafor for stem cell mobilization. , 2012, The American journal of managed care.

[21]  W. Wiktor-Jedrzejczak,et al.  Plerixafor to rescue failing chemotherapy-based stem cell mobilization: it’s not too late , 2011, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[22]  G. Keating Plerixafor , 2011, Drugs.

[23]  A. Nademanee,et al.  Transplanted CD34(+) cell dose is associated with long-term platelet count recovery following autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma. , 2011, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[24]  F. Foss,et al.  Late afternoon dosing of plerixafor for stem cell mobilization: a practical solution. , 2011, Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia.

[25]  Julie A. Murphy,et al.  Cost and clinical analysis of autologous hematopoietic stem cell mobilization with G-CSF and plerixafor compared to G-CSF and cyclophosphamide. , 2011, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[26]  D. Dingli,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of a risk-adapted algorithm of plerixafor use for autologous peripheral blood stem cell mobilization. , 2011, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[27]  W. Wiktor-Jedrzejczak,et al.  Hematopoietic stem cell mobilization with the reversible CXCR4 receptor inhibitor plerixafor (AMD3100)—Polish compassionate use experience , 2010, Annals of Hematology.

[28]  M. Gertz,et al.  Clinical impact and resource utilization after stem cell mobilization failure in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma , 2010, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[29]  J. Dipersio,et al.  Successful stem cell remobilization using plerixafor (mozobil) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in patients with non-hodgkin lymphoma: results from the plerixafor NHL phase 3 study rescue protocol. , 2009, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[30]  A. Nademanee,et al.  Phase III prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of plerixafor plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor compared with placebo plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for autologous stem-cell mobilization and transplantation for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  A. Nademanee,et al.  Plerixafor and G-CSF versus placebo and G-CSF to mobilize hematopoietic stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. , 2009, Blood.

[32]  F. Gao,et al.  A phase II study of plerixafor (AMD3100) plus G-CSF for autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. , 2008, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[33]  R. Vij,et al.  Impact of mobilization and remobilization strategies on achieving sufficient stem cell yields for autologous transplantation. , 2008, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[34]  Grazyna Adamiak,et al.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd ed , 2006 .

[35]  S. Wilson Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes , 1987 .

[36]  J. Sancho,et al.  Plerixafor in patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma: effectiveness in cases with very low circulating CD34+ cell levels and preemptive intervention vs remobilization , 2015, Bone Marrow Transplantation.