OBJECTIVES: Autologous peripheral blood stem cell (aPBSC) transplant is the standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) beyond first remission in Spain. Patients with peripheral blood CD34+ <10 cells/μL are considered as poor mobilisers, and require alternative mobilisation regimens to achieve a sufficient number of CD34+ cells to undergo transplantation. Those patients who collect 2x106 CD34+ cell/kg will proceed to transplant. The most common mobilization treatments currently used are GCSF alone or GCSF + chemotherapy. The aim is to assess the cost-effectiveness of plerixafor + GCSF compared to GCSF alone or GCSF + chemotherapy, for mobilisation of CD34+ cells in patients with MM or NHL whose cells mobilise poorly from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System (NHS). METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a semi-Markov process that embedded two decision trees for aPBSC and continuation of care, from the NHS perspective. The Markov model used three health states: well, remission and death and annual cycles in a time horizon of 10 years. The mobilisation decision tree includes the preapheresis, apheresis and transplantation pathways. The continuation of care includes the most frequent therapies used after failing mobilisation or relapsing. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to incorporate parameter uncertainties. Outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and costs expressed in € in 2012. RESULTS: The base case analysis resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for plerixafor + GCSF versus GCSF alone of €19,787 for NHL and €30,476 for MM patients. When compared to GCSF + chemo, the ICER was €18,975 for NHL and €27,718 for MM patients. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis on the key parameters confirmed the robustness of the base case. CONCLUSIONS: Plerixafor + GCSF, used in poor mobilisers patients, is a cost-effective strategy for both NHL and MM patients in Spain.