Recruitment of CD34+ cells during large-volume leukapheresis.

Abstract

Mobilized peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells (PBPCs) are increasingly used to restore hematopoiesis after myeloablative treatment. To obtain a sufficient number of CD34(+) cells, many studies have focused on the improvement of the collection technique during the leukapheresis procedure (LP), and so-called large-volume leukapheresis (LVL) procedures have been developed. Such procedures can be performed by extending the duration of the LP and/or by increasing the inlet flow rate. However, no previous studies have compared the efficiency of these procedures. In the present study, we compared the kinetics of PBPCs recruitment (including CD34(+) cell subsets), the PBPCs yield, and the collection efficiency as well as the overall feasibility of the procedures during a single LVL performed by standard (group I) (median 85 ml/min; range 50-97 ml/min) and high inlet flow rates (group II) (median 130 ml/min; range 110-150 ml/min). Seven patients with hematological malignancies were enrolled and allocated to each group. The patients' blood volumes (BV) were processed four times. The apheresis product (AP) was collected in four separate bags, which were changed every time one BV had been processed. The CD34(+) cell number and CD34(+) cell subsets were assessed in the four collection bags and in peripheral blood (PB) before every time one BV had been processed and after the leukapheresis. The CD34(+) cell yield exceeded the pre-apheresis CD34(+) cell number per ml BV in 6 out of 7 patients in group I and in 3 out of 7 patients in group II. In group II, the recruitment of CD34(+) cells from the bone marrow (BM) to PB starts in the second collection period--as early as 30-60 min after initiating the procedure. No exhaustion in the recruitment was observed in the two groups for at least 5 h during the leukapheresis, and all CD34(+) cell subsets were recruited at a steady rate. However, the collection efficiency in group II was only half of that in group I. In addition, we experienced many technical problems during the leukapheresis in group II. Thus, in 4 out of 7 patients in this group, it was not possible to perform the maximal inlet flow rate because of catheter problems. In conclusion, due to the technical problems associated with the high inlet flow rate procedure and the fact that the relative number of CD34(+) cells harvested and recruited during the leukapheresis was higher in group I than II and, also reflected an approximately two-fold higher collection efficiency, we recommend that LVL be performed by standard inlet flow rate.