2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.transci.2021.103251
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Selection of the mobilization regimen in lymphoma patients: A retrospective cohort study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Patients who were administered DHAP in addition to G-CSF exhibited a greater CD34 + count, and their neutrophil engraftment time was shorter than those who received ESHAP along with G-CSF (P < 0.05) [40]. Many studies have also con rmed that DHAP scheme is an effective mobilization scheme for NHL [40,41]. For mantle cell lymphoma, use of R-hyper CVAD chemotherapy was associated with signi cantly higher rates of hematopoietic progenitor cell collection failures (17%) [42].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Patients who were administered DHAP in addition to G-CSF exhibited a greater CD34 + count, and their neutrophil engraftment time was shorter than those who received ESHAP along with G-CSF (P < 0.05) [40]. Many studies have also con rmed that DHAP scheme is an effective mobilization scheme for NHL [40,41]. For mantle cell lymphoma, use of R-hyper CVAD chemotherapy was associated with signi cantly higher rates of hematopoietic progenitor cell collection failures (17%) [42].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Besides, the number of CD34 cells collected was higher with the DHAP (dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin) + CSF chemotherapy mobilization regimen compared to the ESHAP (etoposide, methylprednisolone, etoposide, and methylprednisolone [ESHAP]) regimen. Patients who were administered DHAP in addition to G-CSF exhibited a greater CD34 + count, and their neutrophil engraftment time was shorter than those who received ESHAP along with G-CSF (P < 0.05) [40]. Many studies have also con rmed that DHAP scheme is an effective mobilization scheme for NHL [40,41].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As for patients with NHL, benefits of CY in HSCs mobilization are uncertain, the two RCTs enrolling participants before the year of 2000 to compare the efficacy of CY plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone did not reach consistent conclusions [ 49 , 51 ]. Nowadays, salvage therapy regimens such as DHAP, ESHAP, ICE and IEV (ifosphamide, epirubicin and etoposide) follow by G-CSF is a commonly used HSCs mobilization approach for patients with relapsed or refractory NHL, it eliminates the requirement of additional chemotherapy [ 74 , 75 ]. A RCT comparing DHAP versus CY did not report significant difference in mean number of CD34 + cells collected [ 54 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RCTs comparing other salvage therapy regimens are not available. Retrospective studies comparing the mobilization efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens in NHL patients reported inconsistent results in different study design [ 75 77 ].Other mobilizing chemotherapy regimens including etoposide alone, ifosphamide alone, CE (cyclophosphamide, etoposide), CEP (cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin), MEOD with or without MTX are also investigated, but the related trials failed to be integrated in our network meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity in study design and the lack of connection to the main network [ 29 , 53 , 62 64 , 67 ]. In addition, mobilizing chemotherapy regimens varies across different disease subgroups and study centers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cyclophosphamide (CYP) is one of the most successful chemotherapeutic agents available and is still extensively used in a wide range of diseases, alone and in combination with other therapies. These conditions include lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, neoplasms, nephrotic syndrome and conditioning of regimens for blood and marrow transplantation (Emadi et al, 2009; Sarici et al, 2021). The early clinical trials of cyclophosphamide for the treatment of neoplasms were carried out in 1958, and in 1959 (Brock & Wilmanns, 1958), and subsequently became one of the first sets of cancer chemotherapeutic agents approved by the food and drug authority (Muggia et al, 1980).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%