Stem Cells http://www.peprotech.com/
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Reprints/Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kessinger, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kessinger, A.

Stem Cells, Vol 13, 351-354, Copyright © 1995 by AlphaMed Press

REVIEWS

Do autologous peripheral blood cell transplants provide more than hematopoietic recovery?

A Kessinger
University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3300, USA.

Bone marrow damage caused by myeloablative radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy can be repaired by intravenously infusing viable stem/progenitor cells collected from either blood or bone marrow. The hematopoietic graft product contains both stem/progenitor cells and populations of hematopoietic and nonhematopoietic (accessory) cells. The frequency of accessory cell types varies with the source of the graft product; marrow or blood. Reinfusion of these accessory cells causes effects other than the hematopoietic restoration provided by the stem/progenitor cells such as graft versus host disease and graft versus leukemia effect after allogeneic transplants. Effects of infused accessory cells in the autologous setting are less well studied and could provide ancillary advantages and/or disadvantages to the patient. Do these additional effects actually occur, and, if they do, are they more likely to appear following peripheral blood cell transplants (PBCT) or after autologous bone marrow transplants (AMBT)? Preliminary data are beginning to accumulate which suggest that reinfusion of occult tumor cells is less likely with PBCT, that immune reconstitution is different depending on the source of the autograft and that, for certain diseases, patient event-free survival following PBCT rather than ABMT may be better. However, infusion of occult tumor cells may result in re-establishment of the malignancy. If the accessory cells (including potential occult tumor cells) are eliminated from the product before transplant, will the patient have a better clinical outcome, or would benefits provided by infused accessory cells outweigh the risks of infused occult tumor cells? These controversial issues are in the very early stages of investigation.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Stem CellsHome page
M.L. Patchen, J. Liang, T. Vaudrain, T. Martin, D. Melican, S. Zhong, M. Stewart, and P.J. Quesenberry
Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cells by Betafectin(R) PGG-Glucan Alone and in Combination with Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
Stem Cells, May 1, 1998; 16(3): 208 - 217.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
STEM CELLS THE ONCOLOGIST CME ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS
http://www.peprotech.com/
Copyright © 1995 by AlphaMed Press.