Pegfilgrastim vs filgrastim in PBSC mobilization for autologous hematopoietic SCT: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kim, MG; Han, Na; Lee, EK; T, Kim

doi:10.1038/bmt.2014.297

Cited by 35 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Kim et alreported a systematic review and meta-analysis on pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim in PBSCM for autologous HSCT. 44 Compared to our review, this review restricted mobilization agents to pegfilgrastim as the pegylated G-CSF and filgrastim as the non-pegylated G-CSF and restricted to chemo-cytokine mobilization in autologous HSCT for hematologic malignancies. The review included Russell et al (2008) 29 as one of the nine studies selected for the systematic review.…”

Section: Agreements and Disagreements With Other Studies Or Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor versus non‐pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Kuan

Leong

2017

J of Clinical Apheresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilizes and increases the amount of hematopoietic stem cells in peripheral blood, enabling its harvest by few apheresis procedures. The pegylated G-CSF has longer half-life and is given once only, which is more comfortable for patients, whereas the non-pegylated requires multiple daily injection because of its short half-life. We summarized results of randomized trials comparing the efficacy and safety of pegylated and non-pegylated G-CSF for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization. We searched the Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and two conference proceedings. Two authors made the selection, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality using GRADE independently. We used random-effects model for meta-analysis. We found 3956 records and retrieved 47 full texts. We included eight randomized trials with a total number of 554 randomized and 532 analyzed subjects. The meta-analysis included five trials because not all trials reported the same outcomes. Pooling data from two studies shows no evidence for a difference in the successful mobilization rate (CD34+ cell ≥ 2 × 10 /kg collected) between pegfilgrastim 6 mg (early administration) and filgrastim 5 µg/kg/day (147 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.67-1.11; P = .26). Pooling data from three studies shows no difference in the incidence of adverse events between pegylated and non-pegylated G-CSF (170 participants; RR 0.86, 95%CI 0.34-2.17; P = .75). No difference found on the quantity of CD34+ cells collected, number of apheresis procedure in successful mobilization, level of peak PB CD34+ cells achieved, and day of neutrophil and platelet engraftment.

show abstract

Section: Agreements and Disagreements With Other Studies Or Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor versus non‐pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Kuan

Leong

2017

J of Clinical Apheresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stem cell mobilization with both growth factors results in comparable toxic profiles and a similar recovery of leukocytes and platelets after AHSCT 8. However, results from small trials suggest that pegfilgrastim mobilizes a different CD34+ cell subset due to higher expression levels of various genes indicative of early haematopoiesis 33,34.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several mobilization regimens are currently used, most commonly growth factors alone or in combination with chemotherapy. Considering growth factors, the most commonly used are filgrastim (G-CSF) and the long acting pegfilgrastim 6-8…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilization with cyclophosphamide reduces the number of lymphocyte subpopulations in the leukapheresis product and delays their reconstitution after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma

Škerget

Skopec

Žontar

et al. 2016

Radiology and Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAutologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is considered the standard of care for younger patients with multiple myeloma. Several mobilization regimens are currently used, most commonly growth factors alone or in combination with chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to investigate the differences in lymphocyte subpopulation counts between three different mobilization regimens on collection day, in the leukapheresis product and on day 15 after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Patients and methodsIn total 48 patients were prospectively enrolled in three different mobilization regimens; (i) filgrastim (20), (ii) pegfilgrastim (19) and (iii) cyclophosphamide + filgrastim (9). Lymphocytes, CD16+/56+ natural killer and CD4+/CD25high T regulatory cells were determined by flow cytometry.ResultsWe found a statistically significant difference between the mobilization regimens. Cyclophosphamide reduced lymphocyte and natural killer (NK) cell counts on collection day (lymphocytes 1.08 × 109/L; NK cells 0.07 × 109/L) compared to filgrastim (lymphocytes 3.08 × 109/L; NK cells 0.52 × 109/L) and pegfilgrastim (lymphocytes 3 × 109/L; NK cells 0.42 × 109/L). As a consequence lymphocyte and NK cell counts were also lower in the leukapheresis products following cyclophosphamide mobilization regimen (lymphocytes 50.1 × 109/L; NK cells 4.18 × 109/L) compared to filgrastim (lymphocytes 112 × 109/L; NK cells 17.5 × 109/L) and pegfilgrastim (lymphocytes 112 × 109/L; NK cells 14.3 × 109/L). In all mobilization regimens T regulatory cells increased 2-fold on collection day, regarding the base line value before mobilization. There was no difference in T regulatory cell counts between the regimens.ConclusionsMobilization with cyclophophamide reduces the number of mobilized and collected lymphocytes and NK cells as compared to mobilization with growth factors only and results in their delayed reconstitution following autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. We found no difference between filgrastim and pegfilgrastim mobilization.

show abstract

“…Пегилированный коло-ниестимулирующий фактор пэгфилграстим имеет ряд преимуществ по сравнению с неконъюгирован-ными КСФ: более раннее начало аферезов, умень-шение их числа и меньшее количество инъекций препарата [7,12,16].…”

Section: таблица 1 стратегии мобилизации Cd34unclassified

Mobilization of stem cell: past, present and future

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reflects the main stages of development of high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell as an effective method of treatment of various hematological, oncological and hereditary diseases. It describes the development of the research beginning with the discovery of the stem cells by A.A Maksimov to the contemporary ways to elaborate them into blood; it reflects the basic mechanisms of action of different groups of drugs on complex biochemical cascades close interaction with hematopoietic cells of the bone marrow microenvironment, which, in turn, determines their further destiny and lead to a loss of hematopoietic stem cells in peripheral blood. However, in spite of the current approaches to improve ways of harvesting stem cell, there is a certain percentage of patients in whom it is impossible to collect adequate for quick recovery of hematopoiesis after high-dose chemotherapy number of cells. This percentage will vary according to various literature sources, 5 to 40 %. Therefore, the development and application of new drugs, growth factors and cytokines, which would overcome the problem of poor mobilization is an important issue in modern medicine. The article presents data on the use of a new mobilizing agent plerixafor, the use of which in practice improves the successful mobilization of 40 %. The study of its combined action of various growth factors, including pegylated filgrastim, is a promising direction, because can be a good option for patients with poor mobilization activity for which the previous regimen mobilization proved ineffective. The research of plerixafor interacting with various growth factors including pegylated filgrastim is considered to be the most promising direction. This method is believed to help patients with low mobilizing activity where all other means have failed to improve it.

show abstract

Pegfilgrastim vs filgrastim in PBSC mobilization for autologous hematopoietic SCT: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract: Note: A study can be awarded a maximum of one star for each numbered item within the Selection and Exposure categories. A maximum of two stars can be given for Comparability.

Cited by 35 publications

References 45 publications

Pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor versus non‐pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor versus non‐pegylated granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Mobilization with cyclophosphamide reduces the number of lymphocyte subpopulations in the leukapheresis product and delays their reconstitution after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma

Mobilization of stem cell: past, present and future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About