Autologous blood stem cell transplantations have been increasingly per
formed worldwide for almost ten years in place of autologous bone marr
ow transplantation and even of allogenic bone marrow transplantation.
Several crucial issues were the subjects of impassioned controversies.
Some of them are now satisfactorily answered while others still remai
n unresolved. First, it is now possible to conclude today that periphe
ral blood stem cells (PBSC) are undoubtedly capable of restoring short
term hematopoiesis when reinfused after myeloablative therapy as well
and even more rapidly than bone marrow stem cells, provided that they
have been previously collected in sufficient amounts. On the opposite
, it is still impossible to firmly prove that their very immature CD34
+ cell subset, although in vitro functionally and phenotypically almos
t identical to their marrow counterpart, is actually responsible for s
ustained long term hematopoietic recovery, even if it is likely that t
hese cells play a key role. Most of the time, using chemotherapy alone
or a combination of chemotherapy and cytokine(s), mobilizing regimens
allow collection of appropriate yields of PBSC with only a small numb
er of apheresis cycles, provided that a sufficient number of residual
stem cells remains to be stimulated, when, on the contrary, collection
in steady-state is time-consuming and does not provide further accele
rated post transplant hematopoietic recovery. It was initially hypothe
sized that PBSC could have a lower likelihood of tumoral contamination
compared with bone marrow. In fact, biological as well as clinical da
ta are discordant and probably depend largely on the type of disease,
its evolutive history and its way of dissemination. Furthermore, the r
espective impact on the development of further relapse of graft contam
ination and of residual tumor cells into patient remains to be determi
ned. Finally, although it has often been claimed that the cost of mobi
lization, collection and cryopreservation of PBSC would be much higher
than the cost of bone marrow harvesting, it is now possible to assert
that the whole ABSCT procedure, including this preliminary phase, as
well as the post-transplant period, allows an indisputable saving comp
ared with ABMT. These advantages are already sufficient reasons ''per
se'' to propose ABSCT in place of ABMT or allo-BMT in many indications
even if their clinical benefit, in terms of disease-outcome, remains
to be prospectively explored.