O Christ1, R Kronenwett, R Haas, M Zöller. 1. Department of Tumor Progression and Immune Defense, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells is achieved mainly by application of growth factors and, more recently, by blockade of adhesion. In this report, we describe the advantages of a combined treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and anti-VLA4 (CD49d)/anti-CD44 as compared to treatment with the individual components. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mobilization by intravenous injection of anti-CD44, anti-VLA4, or G-CSF was controlled in spleen and bone marrow with regard to frequencies of multipotential colony-forming unit (C-CFU), marrow repopulating ability, long-term reconstitution, recovery of myelopoiesis, and regain of immunocompetence. RESULTS: Mobilization by anti-CD44 had a strong effect on expansion of early progenitor cells in the bone marrow, while the recovery in the spleen was poor. In anti-CD49d-mobilized noncommitted and committed progenitors, progenitor expansion was less pronounced, but settlement in the spleen was quite efficient. Thus, anti-CD44 and anti-CD49d differently influenced mobilization. Accordingly, mobilization and recovery after transfer were improved by combining anti-CD44 with anti-CD49d treatment. Mobilization by G-CSF was most efficient with respect to recovery of progenitor cells in the spleen. However, when transferring G-CSF-mobilized cells, regain of immunocompetence was strongly delayed. This disadvantage could be overridden when progenitor cells were mobilized via blockade of adhesion and when expansion of these mobilized progenitor cells was supported by low-dose G-CSF only during the last 24 hours before transfer. CONCLUSION: Mobilization of pluripotent progenitor cells via antibody blockade of CD44 or CD49d or via G-CSF relies on distinct mechanisms. Therefore, the reconstitutive capacity of a transplant can be significantly improved by mobilization regimens combining antibody with low-dose G-CSF treatment.
OBJECTIVE: Mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells is achieved mainly by application of growth factors and, more recently, by blockade of adhesion. In this report, we describe the advantages of a combined treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and anti-VLA4 (CD49d)/anti-CD44 as compared to treatment with the individual components. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mobilization by intravenous injection of anti-CD44, anti-VLA4, or G-CSF was controlled in spleen and bone marrow with regard to frequencies of multipotential colony-forming unit (C-CFU), marrow repopulating ability, long-term reconstitution, recovery of myelopoiesis, and regain of immunocompetence. RESULTS: Mobilization by anti-CD44 had a strong effect on expansion of early progenitor cells in the bone marrow, while the recovery in the spleen was poor. In anti-CD49d-mobilized noncommitted and committed progenitors, progenitor expansion was less pronounced, but settlement in the spleen was quite efficient. Thus, anti-CD44 and anti-CD49d differently influenced mobilization. Accordingly, mobilization and recovery after transfer were improved by combining anti-CD44 with anti-CD49d treatment. Mobilization by G-CSF was most efficient with respect to recovery of progenitor cells in the spleen. However, when transferring G-CSF-mobilized cells, regain of immunocompetence was strongly delayed. This disadvantage could be overridden when progenitor cells were mobilized via blockade of adhesion and when expansion of these mobilized progenitor cells was supported by low-dose G-CSF only during the last 24 hours before transfer. CONCLUSION: Mobilization of pluripotent progenitor cells via antibody blockade of CD44 or CD49d or via G-CSF relies on distinct mechanisms. Therefore, the reconstitutive capacity of a transplant can be significantly improved by mobilization regimens combining antibody with low-dose G-CSF treatment.
Authors: Clemens Warnke; Til Menge; Hans-Peter Hartung; Michael K Racke; Petra D Cravens; Jeffrey L Bennett; Elliot M Frohman; Benjamin M Greenberg; Scott S Zamvil; Ralf Gold; Bernhard Hemmer; Bernd C Kieseier; Olaf Stüve Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2010-08