Structure and stability of water clusters (H<SUB>2</SUB>O)<SUB>n</SUB>, n = 8-20: an ab initio investigation

Extensive ab initio calculations have been performed using the 6-31G(d,p) and 6-311++G(2d,2p) basis sets for several possible structures of water clusters (H2O)n, n = 8-20. It is found that the most stable geometries arise from a fusion of tetrameric or pentameric rings. As a result, (H2O)n, n = 8, 12, 16, and 20, are found to be cuboids, while (H2O)10 and (H2O)15 are fused pentameric structures. For the other water clusters (n = 9, 11, 13, 14, and 17-19) under investigation, the most stable geometries can be thought of as arising from either the cuboid or the fused pentamers or a combination thereof. The stability of some of the clusters, namely, n = 8-16, has also been studied using density functional theory. An attempt has been made to estimate the basis set superposition error and zero-point energy correction for such clusters at the Hartree-Fock (HF) level using the 6-311++G(2d,2p) basis set. To ensure that a minimum on the potential-energy surface has been located, frequency calculations have been carried out at the HF level using the 6-31G(d,p) and 6-311++G(2d,2p) basis sets for some of the clusters. Molecular electrostatic potential topography mapping has been employed for understanding the reactivity as well as the binding patterns of some of the structurally interesting clusters

Plerixafor for PBSC mobilisation in myeloma patients with advanced renal failure: safety and efficacy data in a series of 21 patients from Europe and the USA

We describe 20 patients with myeloma and 1 with primary amyloidosis from 15 centres, all with advanced renal failure, most of whom had PBSC mobilised using plerixafor following previous failed mobilisation by conventional means (plerixafor used up-front for 4 patients). For 15 patients, the plerixafor dose was reduced to 0.16 mg/kg/day, with a subsequent dose increase in one case to 0.24 mg/kg/day. The remaining six patients received a standard plerixafor dosage at 0.24 mg/kg/day. Scheduling of plerixafor and apheresis around dialysis was generally straightforward. Following plerixafor administration, all patients underwent apheresis. A median CD34+ cell dose of 4.6 × 106 per kg was achieved after 1 (n=7), 2 (n=10), 3 (n=3) or 4 (n=1) aphereses. Only one patient failed to achieve a sufficient cell dose for transplant: she subsequently underwent delayed re-mobilisation using G-CSF with plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg/day, resulting in a CD34+ cell dose of 2.12 × 106/kg. Sixteen patients experienced no plerixafor toxicities; five had mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal symptoms that did not prevent apheresis. Fifteen patients have progressed to autologous transplant, of whom 12 remain alive without disease progression. Two patients recovered endogenous renal function post autograft, and a third underwent successful renal transplantation. Plerixafor is highly effective in mobilising PBSC in this difficult patient group

Progenitor cell mobilisation - Cyclophosphamide, etoposide and G-CSF to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma

We aimed to assess the effectiveness of cyclophosphamide, etoposide and G-CSF (C+E) to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma. A matched cohort study was performed comparing patients mobilized with C+E to patients mobilized with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF (C alone). Patients were matched for disease, prior radiotherapy and a chemotherapy score reflecting the amount and type of prior chemotherapy. Thirty-eight consecutive patients mobilized with C+E were compared with 38 matched controls. C+E was equivalent to C alone in terms of numbers of patients achieving a minimum threshold of greater than or equal to2 x 10(6)/kg CD34(+) cells (82% vs 79%, P = 0.74). C+E was superior, however, in terms of total CD34(+) yield (6.35 vs 3.3 x 10(6)/kg, P < 0.01), achieving a target graft of greater than or equal to5 x 10(6)/kg (55% vs 34%, P = 0.04) and obtaining both a minimum (61% vs 32%, P < 0.01) and target (45% vs 13%, P < 0.01) graft in one apheresis. This superiority was largely confined to patients with lower chemotherapy scores. There was no difference in neutrophil and platelet recovery or transfusion requirements for those who subsequently received high-dose therapy and stem cell transplantation. Thus, C+E improves the efficiency of peripheral blood stem cell collection, but does not increase the number of patients who can proceed to transplantation. Most of the benefit of the regimen was confined to patients who had not received extensive prior therapy. Novel strategies are required to increase the collection efficiency of 'hard to mobilize' patients