Low-dose filgrastim significantly enhances neutrophil recovery following autologous peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation in patients with lymphoproliferative disorders: evidence for clinical and economic benefit

Revisiting the Utility of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Post-Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Outpatient-Based Transplantations

The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been shown to reduce the time to neutrophil engraftment, as well as the duration of hospitalization post-transplantation. However, prior studies have focused on inpatient-based ASCT, where patients are routinely admitted for conditioning and frequently remain hospitalized until signs of neutrophil recovery. Given improvements in post-transplantation care, an increasing number of patients, particularly those receiving ASCT for multiple myeloma, are now undergoing transplantation in an outpatient setting. We hypothesized that the routine use of G-CSF for outpatient-based ASCT might not result in the same benefit with respect to a reduced duration of hospitalization and thus should be reconsidered in this setting. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 633 consecutive patients with multiple myeloma (MM; n = 484) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL; n = 149) who underwent ASCT between September 2018 and February 2023. Outpatient ASCT comprised 258 (53%) of combined MM and NHL cases. Starting in September 2021, post-transplantation G-CSF was incorporated into the supportive care regimen for all ASCTs. A total of 410 patients (309 with MM, 101 with NHL) underwent ASCT during the pre-G-CSF policy period and 223 (175 with MM, 48 with NHL) did so in the post-G-CSF policy period. The primary outcome focused on the duration of hospitalization within the first 30 days following graft infusion. As expected, after implementation of the G-CSF policy, the time to neutrophil engraftment was reduced in the patients with MM (mean, -2.8 days; P < .0001) and patients with NHL (mean, -2.9 days; P < .0001). However, among the patients with MM, roughly one-half of whom underwent outpatient-based ASCT, the inpatient duration during the first 30 days was not reduced after G-CSF implementation (P = .40). Comparatively, the inpatient duration (mean, -1.8 days; P = .030) was reduced among patients with NHL, all of whom were electively admitted for ASCT. For patients with MM at an outpatient-based transplant center, incorporation of G-CSF post-ASCT resulted in reduced time to neutrophil engraftment but did not significantly reduce the time spent in the inpatient setting through day +30.

A Review of Advances in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization and the Potential Role of Notch2 Blockade

Hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation can be a potential cure for hematological malignancies and some nonhematologic diseases. Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) collected from peripheral blood after mobilization are the primary source to provide HSC transplantation. In most of the cases, mobilization by the cytokine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with chemotherapy, and in some settings, with the CXC chemokine receptor type 4 antagonist plerixafor, can achieve high yield of hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). However, adequate mobilization is not always successful in a significant portion of donors. Research is going on to find new agents or strategies to increase HSC mobilization. Here, we briefly review the history of HSC transplantation, current mobilization regimens, some of the novel agents that are under investigation for clinical practice, and our recent findings from animal studies regarding Notch and ligand interaction as potential targets for HSPC mobilization.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis or Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor Support in Multiple Myeloma Patients Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

We compare, in this manuscript, antibiotic prophylaxis versus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) support as anti-infective strategies, in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), undergoing high-dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT/ASCT). At our institution, antibiotic prophylaxis after HDT/ASCT in MM was stopped in January 2017 and replaced by G-CSF support in March 2017. Consecutive MM patients who received HDT/ASCT between March 2016 and July 2018 were included in this single-center retrospective analysis. In total, 298 patients and 353 individual cases of HDT/ASCT were evaluated. In multivariate analyses, G-CSF support was associated with a significantly shortened duration of severe leukopenia < 1/nL (p < 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) = 16.22), and hospitalization (estimate = -0.19, p < 0.001) compared to antibiotic prophylaxis. Rates of febrile neutropenia, need of antimicrobial therapy, transfer to intensive care unit, and death, were similar between the two groups. Furthermore, antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with a significantly increased risk for the development of multidrug resistant bacteria especially vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium compared to G-CSF support (odds ratio (OR) = 17.38, p = 0.01). Stop of antibiotic prophylaxis as an anti-infective strategy was associated with a reduction in overall resistance rates of bacterial isolates. These results indicate that G-CSF support should be the preferred option in MM patients undergoing HDT/ASCT.

A comparison of the effect of xinruibai versus filgrastim on hematopoietic reconstruction after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Background

To compare the effect of xinruibai (Pegfilgrastim) and filgrastim injections on white blood cell and platelet (PLT) recovery, adverse events, post-operative complications, and cost effectiveness after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT).

Methods

Children who underwent allo-HSCT at our hospital from January 2014 to May 2017 due to thalassemia major, aplastic anemia, leukemia, and mucopolysaccharidosis were included. Among the children, 53 received xinruibai injections and 33 received filgrastim injections.

Results

There were no significant differences in the average time to neutrophil and platelet recovery, the incidence of post-operative complications after allo-HSCT, the number of red blood cell and PLT infusions, or the incidence of adverse events related to the injection between two groups (P >  0.05). The pain score was 3.06 (SD 0.41) for the xinruibai group and 25.18 (SD 6.22) for the filgrastim group, indicating significant differences between the two groups (P <  0.001). No difference was found in the hospitalization cost. The cost of the granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) was 257.11 ± 61.87 Euro in the xinruibai group and 214.79 ± 0.00 Euro in the filgrastim group, showing significant difference (P <  0.001).

Conclusions

Xinruibai injection was more convenient, simple, effective, and safer than filgrastim.

Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Use after Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation: Comparison of Two Practices

Administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) is generally recommended to reduce the duration of severe neutropenia; however, data regarding the optimal timing of G-CSFs post-transplantation are limited and conflicting. This retrospective study was performed at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center between November 5, 2013, and August 9, 2016, of adult inpatient autologous PBSCT recipients who received G-CSF empirically starting on day +5 (early) versus on those who received G-CSF on day +12 only if absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was <0.5 × 10⁹/L (ANC-driven). G-CSF was dosed at 300 µg in patients weighing <75 kg and 480 µg in those weighing ≥75 kg. One hundred consecutive patients underwent autologous PBSCT using either the early (n = 50) or ANC-driven (n = 50) G-CSF regimen. Patient and transplantation characteristics were comparable in the 2 groups. In the ANC-driven group, 24% (n = 12) received G-CSF on day +12 and 60% (n = 30) started G-CSF earlier due to febrile neutropenia or at the physician's discretion, 6% (n = 3) started after day +12 at the physician's discretion, and 10% (n = 5) did not receive any G-CSF. The median start day of G-CSF therapy was day +10 in the ANC-driven group versus day +5 in the early group (P < .0001). For the primary outcome, the median time to neutrophil engraftment was 12 days (interquartile range [IQR] 11-13 days) in the early group versus 13 days (IQR, 12-14 days) in the ANC-driven group (P = .07). There were no significant between-group differences in time to platelet engraftment, 1-year relapse rate, or 1-year overall survival. The incidence of febrile neutropenia was 74% in the early group versus 90% in the ANC-driven group (P = .04); however, there was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of positive bacterial cultures or transfer to the intensive care unit. The duration of G-CSF administration until neutrophil engraftment was 6 days in the early group versus 3 days in the ANC-driven group (P < .0001). The median duration of post-transplantation hospitalization was 15 days (IQR, 14-19 days) in the early group versus 16 days (IQR, 15-22 days) in the ANC-driven group (P = .28). Our data show that early initiation of G-CSF (on day +5) and ANC-driven initiation of G-CSF following autologous PBSCT were associated with a similar time to neutrophil engraftment, length of stay post-transplantation, and 1-year overall survival.

Comparison of transplant outcomes and economic costs between biosimilar and originator filgrastim in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

From January 2012 to September 2015, 49 patients received biosimilar filgrastim (BF) after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT, n = 31) or peripheral stem cell transplantation (PBSCT, n = 18) in our institution. To evaluate the clinical impact of BF on transplant outcomes of these patients, we compared hematological recovery, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), transplantation-related mortality (TRM), cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), and acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) with those of control patients who received originator filgrastim (OF) after BMT (n = 31) or PBSCT (n = 18). All cases were randomly selected from a clinical database in our institution. In both the BMT and PBSCT settings, neutrophil recovery (17 vs. 19 days in BMT; 13 vs. 15 days in PBSCT) and platelet recovery (27 vs. 31 days in BMT; 17 vs. 28 days in PBSCT) were essentially the same between BF and OF. They were also comparable in terms of OS, DFS, TRM, CIR, and the incidence of acute GVHD and chronic GVHD. On multivariate analysis, the use of BF in both BMT and PBSCT was not a significant factor for adverse transplant outcomes. Although BF significantly reduced filgrastim costs in both BMT and PBSCT, total hospitalization costs were not significantly different between BF and OF.

Administration of G-CSF from day +6 post-allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in children and adolescents accelerates neutrophil engraftment but does not appear to have an impact on cost savings

G-CSF post-allogeneic HSCT accelerates neutrophil engraftment, but evidence that it impacts on cost-related outcomes is lacking. We performed a retrospective child and adolescent single-center cohort study examining G-CSF administration from Day +6 of allogeneic HSCT vs. ad hoc G-CSF use where clinically indicated. Forty consecutive children and adolescents undergoing allogeneic HSCT were included. End-points were as follows: time to engraftment; incidence of acute and chronic GvHD; number of patients alive at Day +100; 180-day TRM; post-transplant days in hospital; and cost of antimicrobials, TPN, and G-CSF usage. Neutrophil engraftment occurred earlier in the group that received G-CSF from Day +6. There was no difference between groups in any of the other end-points with the following exception: the cost of GCSF was significantly higher in the D + 6 G-CSF group. However, median G-CSF cost in this group amounted to only €280. There was a trend towards reduced cost of antimicrobials in the D + 6 G-CSF group, although this did not reach significance (p = 0.13). The median cost per patient of antimicrobial agents between groups differed by €1116. This study demonstrated the administration of G-CSF on Day +6 in pediatric HSCT to be safe. A further study using a larger cohort of patients is warranted to ascertain its true clinico-economic value.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (macrophage) colony-stimulating factors (G(M)-CSF) and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Current guidelines recommend the use of colony-stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20%, but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to December 2015). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications. Two review authors independently screened search results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylaxis with G(M)-CSF versus antibiotics for the prevention of infection in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy. All study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care. We included full-text, abstracts, and unpublished data if sufficient information on study design, participant characteristics, interventions and outcomes was available. We excluded cross-over trials, quasi-randomised trials and post-hoc retrospective trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to standard Cochrane methods. We did final interpretation together with an experienced clinician.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included no new randomised controlled trials. We included two trials in the review, one with 40 breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and G-CSF compared to antibiotics, a second one evaluating 155 patients with small-cell lung cancer receiving GM-CSF or antibiotics.We judge the overall risk of bias as high in the G-CSF trial, as neither patients nor physicians were blinded and not all included patients were analysed as randomised (7 out of 40 patients). We considered the overall risk of bias in the GM-CSF to be moderate, because of the risk of performance bias (neither patients nor personnel were blinded), but low risk of selection and attrition bias.For the trial comparing G-CSF to antibiotics, all cause mortality was not reported. There was no evidence of a difference for infection-related mortality, with zero events in each arm. Microbiologically or clinically documented infections, severe infections, quality of life, and adverse events were not reported. There was no evidence of a difference in frequency of febrile neutropenia (risk ratio (RR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.84). The quality of the evidence for the two reported outcomes, infection-related mortality and frequency of febrile neutropenia, was very low, due to the low number of patients evaluated (high imprecision) and the high risk of bias.There was no evidence of a difference in terms of median survival time in the trial comparing GM-CSF and antibiotics. Two-year survival times were 6% (0 to 12%) in both arms (high imprecision, low quality of evidence). There were four toxic deaths in the GM-CSF arm and three in the antibiotics arm (3.8%), without evidence of a difference (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.30 to 5.69; P = 0.71; low quality of evidence). There were 28% grade III or IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 18% in the antibiotics arm, without any evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.80; P = 0.15, low quality of evidence). There were 5 episodes out of 360 cycles of grade IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 3 episodes out of 334 cycles in the cotrimoxazole arm (0.8%), with no evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 6.42; P = 0.55; low quality of evidence). There was no significant difference between the two arms for non-haematological toxicities like diarrhoea, stomatitis, infections, neurologic, respiratory, or cardiac adverse events. Grade III and IV thrombopenia occurred significantly more frequently in the GM-CSF arm (60.8%) compared to the antibiotics arm (28.9%); (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.12; P = 0.0002; low quality of evidence). Neither infection-related mortality, incidence of febrile neutropenia, nor quality of life were reported in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As we only found two small trials with 195 patients altogether, no conclusion for clinical practice is possible. More trials are necessary to assess the benefits and harms of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics for infection prevention in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Concise review: Sowing the seeds of a fruitful harvest: hematopoietic stem cell mobilization

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the only curative option for a number of malignant and nonmalignant diseases. As the use of hematopoietic transplant has expanded, so too has the source of stem and progenitor cells. The predominate source of stem and progenitors today, particularly in settings of autologous transplantation, is mobilized peripheral blood. This review will highlight the historical advances which led to the widespread use of peripheral blood stem cells for transplantation, with a look toward future enhancements to mobilization strategies.

Efficacy of deferred dosing of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in autologous hematopoietic transplantation for multiple myeloma

Routine administration of G-CSF following autologous hematopoietic SCT (ASCT) expedites ANC recovery and reduces hospitalization by 1–2 days; it has no impact on febrile neutropenia, infections, morbidity, mortality, event-free survival or OS. To determine whether delayed G-CSF dosage could result in equivalent ANC recovery and thereby improve cost effectiveness, we deferred the administration of G-CSF until WBC recovery had begun. A total of 117 patients with multiple myeloma received ASCT from January 2005 to September 2012. Of these, 52 were in the conventional dosing group (CGD) and received G-CSF from Day +7 for a median of five doses. In the deferred dosing group (DGD), 65 patients received G-CSF from median day 14 post transplant for a median of zero doses. There was no difference between groups in the incidence or duration of febrile neutropenia, duration of ⩾grade III mucositis, weight gain, rash, engraftment syndrome or early death (100 days). The DGD group had a significantly longer time to neutrophil engraftment than the CGD group (15 days vs 12 days; P<0.0001), a longer period of severe neutropenia (<100/μL; 8 days vs 6 days; P<0.0001), longer treatment with intravenous antibiotics (7 days vs 5 days; P=0.016) and longer hospital stay (19 days vs 17 days; P=<0.0001). Although the cost of G-CSF was lower in the DGD group (mean $308 vs $2467), the additional hospitalization raised the median total cost of ASCT in this group by 17%. There was, however, no adverse effect of deferred dosing on the rate of febrile neuropenic episodes or Day 100 survival, so that deferred dosing of G-CSF may be suitable for patients receiving ASCT as outpatients, for whom longer hospital stay would not be an offsetting cost.

A risk-adapted protocol for delayed administration of filgrastim after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation

INTRODUCTION

The routine use of recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) is associated with increased costs. We prospectively explored a strategy that used prophylactic delayed filgrastim only in patients with risk factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This sequential cohort analysis compared the outcomes of consecutive patients, treated on the risk-adapted protocol (RAP) (risk factors: prior febrile neutropenia; age >60 years; and CD34+ cell infused dose of <2 × 10(6/)/kg), who received filgrastim from day +6 after auto-SCT with a historical cohort (historical day-1 cohort [HD1]), who received filgrastim from day +1.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were treated in the RAP cohort and compared with 115 patients in the HD1 cohort. There were no differences in median age (55 years) or median CD34+ cell dose (5.21 × 10(6)/kg [range, 2-62.2 × 10(6)/kg] vs. 5.24 × 10(6)/kg [range, 2.4-29.8 × 10(6)/kg]). Filgrastim was used for 6 fewer days in the RAP cohort (median 5 days [range, 0-11 days] vs. 11 days [range, 9-47 days]). There was a small absolute but significant difference in median time to neutrophil recovery in the HD1 cohort for the whole group, 10 days (range, 8-46 days) vs. 11 days (range, 9-22 days) (P = .03) and in patients with myeloma; 10 days (range, 9-14 days) vs. 11 days (range, 9-18 days) (P < .0001) as compared to the RAP cohort. There was no difference in median inpatient duration, 13 days (range, 10-26 days) vs. 12 days (range, 1-38 days) (P = .22) and 3-year survival (79% vs. 83% [P = .43]) between HD1 and RAP cohorts respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a RAP to identify patients likely to benefit from prophylactic filgrastim is safe and results in cost savings. Patients with myeloma benefit from earlier introduction of filgrastim in terms of neutrophil recovery; this disease-specific observation is an important consideration for future studies.

Antimicrobial therapy of febrile complications after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation--guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (DGHO)

More than 18,000 autolgous transplantation were performed in Europe in the year 2009. It as a routine procedure in experienced centres. Even if there is a low mortality rate, infections are a major issue after transplantation, occurring in more than 60 % of the patients. In this review we discuss all aspects of infections after autologous stem transplantation, including epidemiology, diagnostics, therapeutic algorithms, prophylaxis and supportive therapy.

Many mechanisms mediating mobilization: an alliterative review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Blood cell production is maintained by hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) that reside in specialized niches within bone marrow. Treatment with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) causes HSC egress from bone marrow niches and trafficking to the peripheral blood, a process termed 'mobilization'. Although the mobilization phenomenon has been known for some time and is utilized clinically to acquire HSC for transplant, the mechanisms mediating HSC release are not completely understood. We discuss recent advances and controversies in defining the mechanisms responsible for G-CSF-induced mobilization.

RECENT FINDINGS

New reports define a role for resident monocytes/macrophages in maintaining niche cells, which is diminished after G-CSF treatment, suggesting a new mechanism for mobilization. Although osteoblasts have been reported to be a primary component of the HSC niche, new results suggest a unique niche composed of innervated mesenchymal stem cells. Modulating bioactive lipid signaling also facilitates mobilization, and may define a future therapeutic strategy.

SUMMARY

Hematopoietic mobilization by G-CSF is primarily mediated by alterations to the bone marrow niche by both direct and indirect mechanisms, rather than directly altering HSC function. Further understanding of the processes mediating mobilization will advance our understanding on the cellular and molecular components of the HSC niche.

Delayed G-CSF stimulation after PBSCT does not seem to modify the biological parameters of bone marrow recovery

There are currently no recommendations indicating when stimulation should begin after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT). We compared the outcome following between two treatment groups, in which daily granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration began on either the fifth or the eighth day after PBSCT in lymphoma and myeloma patients. We studied eight clinical parameters: number of G-CSF injections, number of days of hospitalization, of red blood cell or platelet transfusions; days when body temperature exceeds 38°C; days of parenteral nutrition; weight loss and hospitalization costs. We studied also four biological parameters: number of CD34+ cells, days with leucocytes less than 1 × 10(9) /L, days with hemoglobin less than 90 g/L or with less than 50 × 10(9) /L of platelets. There were no statistical significant differences between the study arms. It seems that delayed stimulation by G-CSF after PBSCT is safety and does not seem to modify bone marrow recovery timing.

Delayed administration of filgrastim (G-CSF) following autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (APBSCT) in pediatric patients does not change time to neutrophil engraftment and reduces use of G-CSF

BACKGROUND

Delayed initiation of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell (APBSCT) in adult patients does not affect time to neutrophil or platelet engraftment, duration of fever, incidence of bacteremia, duration of non-prophylactic antibiotic therapy, and length of hospitalization when compared to early initiation. This study compares the effect of delayed (day +6) versus early (day +1) administration of G-CSF in pediatric patients on time to neutrophil engraftment (TNE), duration and cost of G-CSF therapy, incidence of blood stream infections, duration of febrile-neutropenia, duration of non-prophylactic antibiotic therapy, and duration of hospitalization due to febrile-neutropenia.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 65 patients who engrafted after receiving APBSCT and G-CSF between 1993 and 2006. They were divided into the delayed group (day +6) (n = 46) and the early group (day +1) (n = 19).

RESULTS

The median ages were 4.7 and 5.3 years in the early and delayed groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in TNE (P = 0.06) between the two groups. The duration of G-CSF administration was significantly less in the delayed group (P = 0.003). No significant differences were observed in the duration of neutropenia, time to platelet engraftment, the incidence of blood stream infections, and duration of fevers. Duration of hospitalization due to febrile-neutropenia was significantly lower in the delayed group (P = 0.01). Significant cost savings were observed by delaying G-CSF administration.

CONCLUSION

Delayed administration of G-CSF after APBSCT in children has no adverse effect on TNE or other clinical outcomes when compared to early administration and may incur substantial cost savings.

Review and revision of clinical practice of using G-CSF after autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation at UCSD

There was no consensus on the optimal use of G-CSF after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In this study, the practice of using G-CSF, based on the CD34(+) cell number, at the University of California, San Diego Blood and Marrow Transplant Unit (UCSD BMT) was evaluated by performing a five-year retrospective analysis of data from patients undergoing autologous and allogeneic transplantation. Various outcomes, such as time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment and length of post-transplant hospital stay are assessed in relation to use of G-CSF and number of CD34(+) cells infused. It has been found that the use of G-CSF is associated with faster neutrophil engraftment and shorter length of post-transplant hospital stay without affecting time to platelet engraftment in patients undergoing autologous transplantation. In addition, the number of CD34(+) cells do not influence outcomes in autologous and allogeneic transplant patients if they are treated with G-CSF. As a result of this evaluation, the G-CSF protocol at UCSD BMT Unit is revised. The main change is to implement the use of G-CSF in all patients undergoing autologous transplantation regardless of the number of CD34( +) cells. No changes in the allogeneic transplantation protocol are made as a result of this analysis.

Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells for autologous transplant in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients by plerixafor and G-CSF and detection of tumor cell mobilization by PCR in multiple myeloma patients

This report describes the first investigational use of plerixafor in Europe and the determination of tumor cell mobilization by polymerase chain-reaction after plerixafor treatment in a subset of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Thirty-five patients (31 MM and 4 NHL) received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) (10 microg/kg) each morning for 4 days. Starting the evening of Day 4, patients recieved plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg. Apheresis was initiated 10-11 h later, in the morning of Day 5. This regimen of G-CSF treatment each morning before apheresis and plerixafor treatment in the evening was repeated for up to 5 consecutive days. Mobilization with plerixafor and G-CSF resulted in a median 2.6-fold increase in peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ cell count compared with before plerixafor treatment. All patients collected > or =2 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg and 32 of 35 patients collected > or =5 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg. After plerixafor treatment, 3 of 7 patients had a small increase and 4 of 7 patients had a small decrease in PB tumor cells. No G-CSF was given post transplant. The median number of days to polymorphonuclear leukocyte and platelet engraftment was 14.0 and 11.0, respectively. There were no reports of graft failure. Plerixafor was generally well tolerated. Mobilization of PB CD34+ cells was consistent with previous clinical trials. The addition of plerixafor did not significantly increase the relative number of PB MM tumor cells.

Optimal use of G-CSF administration after hematopoietic SCT

After hematopoietic SCT (HSCT), G-CSF is commonly used to enhance stem cell engraftment to minimize the morbidity and mortality associated with prolonged neutropenia. However, there is no consensus on the optimal use of G-CSF after high-dose chemotherapy followed by HSCT. This review was performed to evaluate the evidence regarding the use of G-CSF after autologous and allogeneic HSCT. Studies investigating the use of G-CSF in comparison to control (observation or placebo), early vs delayed initiation of G-CSF, and other approaches driven by patient-specific parameters to identify optimal use of G-CSF have been reviewed. Various outcomes such as neutrophil and platelet engraftment, post-transplant length of hospital stay, post-transplant complications such as infection and GVHD, and survival have been assessed. Finally, we provide the level of evidence for each of the outcomes analyzed while evaluating strategies for using G-CSF in patients undergoing autologous or allogeneic HSCT.

Induction of natural killer T cell-dependent alloreactivity by administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after bone marrow transplantation

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is often used to hasten neutrophil recovery after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT), but the clinical and immunological consequences evoked remain unclear. We examined the effect of G-CSF administration after transplantation in mouse models and found that exposure to either standard G-CSF or pegylated-G-CSF soon after BMT substantially increased graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). This effect was dependent on total body irradiation (TBI) rendering host dendritic cells (DCs) responsive to G-CSF by upregulating their expression of the G-CSF receptor. Stimulation of host DCs by G-CSF subsequently unleashed a cascade of events characterized by donor natural killer T cell (NKT cell) activation, interferon-gamma secretion and CD40-dependent amplification of donor cytotoxic T lymphocyte function during the effector phase of GVHD. Crucially, the detrimental effects of G-CSF were only present when it was administered after TBI conditioning and at a time when residual host antigen presenting cells were still present, perhaps explaining the conflicting and somewhat controversial clinical studies from the large European and North American BMT registries. These data have major implications for the use of G-CSF in disease states where NKT cell activation may have effects on outcome.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (G-CSF) or granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factors (GM-CSF); and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Important current guidelines recommend the use of colony stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20% but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of G-CSF or GM-CSF with antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myeloablative chemotherapy with respect to preventing fever, febrile neutropenia, infection, infection-related mortality, early mortality and improving quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to 2007). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with G-CSF or GM-CSF versus antibiotics in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy or bone marrow or stem cell transplantation were included for review. Both study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial eligibility and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were done in duplicate. Authors were contacted to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two eligible randomised controlled trials with 195 patients. Due to differences in the outcomes reported, the trials could not be pooled for meta-analysis. Both trials showed non-significant results favouring antibiotics for the prevention of fever or hospitalisation for febrile neutropenia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence for or against antibiotics compared to G(M)-CSFs for the prevention of infections in cancer patients.

A study of incidence and characteristics of infections in 476 patients from a single center undergoing autologous blood stem cell transplantation

Infectious complications are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients who undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We examined 476 patients with hematologic malignancies (401) or solid tumors (75) who underwent ASCT between February 1990 and May 2005. Anti-infectious prophylaxis consisted of different combinations of ciprofloxacin, cotrimoxazole, fluconazole, aerosolized amphotericin B, acyclovir, and intravenous immunoglobulins. Overall, 454 patients (95%) developed fever in the first 60 days after ASCT. In the majority of patients, initial antibiotic therapy consisted of broad-spectrum beta-lactamic with or without amikacin. A glycopeptide was administered as initial therapy in 86 cases. Overall, there were 132 (29%) clinically documented infections (37 pneumonias), 79 (17%) microbiologically documented infections (65 bacteremias), and 243 (54%) fevers of unknown origin. Coagulase-negative staphylococci (18, 25%) and E coli (18, 25%) were the organisms most frequently isolated. The pattern of infection did not change throughout the study except for a significantly higher incidence of bacteremia due to gram-positive bacteria in the first 5 years of the study. Infection-related mortality was 5% (21 cases), with pneumonia the most frequent cause of death. ASCT should be considered a low-risk procedure, although new therapeutic approaches for patients developing severe respiratory infections are still needed.

Review of the value of colony stimulating factors for prophylaxis of febrile neutropenic episodes in adult patients treated for haematological malignancies

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a major dose-limiting toxicity of systemic cancer chemotherapy that can lead to fever and infection, requiring prompt analysis and in-patient treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics. Complicated neutropenia may lead to reduction and/or delay of systemic anti-cancer treatment, which may compromise outcome. Haematopoietic growth factors have the ability to augment haematopoietic cell cycling and are used to facilitate more dose-intense treatments and to decrease treatment-related complications. This review focuses on randomised trials that investigated the use of colony-stimulating factors (CSF) to prevent treatment-related febrile complications in haematological malignancies in (younger) adult patients. In general, these studies demonstrated that CSF reduced the duration of severe neutropenia but not always its febrile complications; therefore inconsistent results regarding clinically relevant reduction of hospitalisation, duration of therapeutic antibiotics, infection-related or disease-related mortality and economic effects were reported. Current developments in treatment of haematological malignancies will pose new challenges as a shift in infectious pathogens can be expected.

Differences in functional activity and antigen expression of granulocytes primed in vivo with filgrastim, lenograstim, or pegfilgrastim

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is known to affect functional activity and antigen expression of neutrophil granulocytes. Beside nonglycosylated filgrastim and glycosylated lenograstim, pegylated filgrastim (pegfilgrastim) has recently been introduced for single administration into clinical use.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Here, granulocytes from 27 patients with nonmyeloid malignancies were compared functionally (migration, reactive oxygen species production, and G-CSF serum levels) and phenotypically (cell surface antigen expression) before and after G-CSF administration.

RESULTS

After exposure to G-CSF, chemotaxis was reduced significantly in the filgrastim group. Immunophenotypically, in vivo G-CSF-primed granulocytes were more mature in the lenograstim than in the filgrastim and to lesser extent in the pegfilgrastim groups as shown by the expression profile for CD11b, CD14, and CD16. Of note, G-CSF serum levels were similar among the groups.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that granulocytes exposed to glycosylated G-CSF in vivo seem to resemble more closely their steady-state phenotype than after treatment with nonglycosylated and to lesser extent pegylated G-CSF.

Low-dose lenograstim is as effective as standard dose in shortening neutrophil engraftment time following myeloablative chemotherapy and peripheral blood progenitor cell rescue

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used following myeloablative chemotherapy (high-dose therapy; HDT) and peripheral blood progenitor cell rescue (PBPCR) to reduce neutrophil engraftment time. The dose and duration required to gain maximum clinical and economic benefit has not been fully investigated. This double blind placebo-controlled randomised trial was performed to determine whether short course low-dose or standard-dose Lenograstim (L) would influence recovery of haematopoiesis following HDT and PBPCR. Sixty-one patients were randomised between May 1999 and November 2004, to receive standard-dose lenograstim (263 microg/d), low-dose lenograstim (105 microg/d) or placebo injections. These commenced on day +5 following PBPCR and continued until neutrophil engraftment [absolute neutrophil count (ANC)] > or = 0.5 x 10(9)/l. Patients received standard supportive care until haemopoietic recovery. Both standard- and low-dose lenograstim resulted in a significantly shorter median time to neutrophil recovery (ANC > or = 0.1 x 10(9)/l:10.0 vs. 11.0 d, P = 0.025; ANC > or = 0.5 x 10(9)/l:11.0 vs. 14.0 d, P = 0.0002) compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in blood product support, antibiotic usage, documented infection, overall survival or relapse-free survival between the groups. Short course low-dose lenograstim is as effective as standard-dose in reducing neutrophil engraftment time following HDT and PBPCR.

CD34+ dose-driven administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after high-dose chemotherapy in lymphoma patients

Our goal was to optimize use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem-cell transplantation in lymphoma patients, limiting G-CSF administration to patients infusing a suboptimal CD34(+) cell number. Of 124 consecutive patients with histologically proven Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma from January 2001 to June 2004, 60 patients (group 1) given > or = 5 x 10(6)/kg CD34(+) cells received no G-CSF; 64 patients (group 2) given < or = 5 x 10(6)/kg CD34(+) cells received G-CSF from day +5 after stem-cell reinfusion. The median times to reach 0.5 x 10(9)/L and 1.0 x 10(9)/L neutrophils were, respectively, 3 and 4 d shorter in G-CSF group and this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.0014; P = 0.0001). In terms of antibiotic and antimycotic requirements, gastrointestinal toxicity, days of hospitalization, and transfusion requirements, no differences were demonstrated between the two groups. No statistically significant difference was demonstrated for the total number of febrile episodes (52 for group 1; 53 for group 2; P = 0.623) and the median number of febrile days (2 d for both groups). Myeloid reconstitution values for both groups agree with published results for autotransplanted patients treated with G-CSF from 7 to 14 d. Also, major clinical events, antibiotic, antimycotic, and transfusion requirements, and hospital stay were similar to published findings. Our data suggest that G-CSF administration can be safely optimized, used only for patients infused with a suboptimal CD34(+) cell dose.

Individually determined dosing of filgrastim after autologous peripheral stem cell transplantation in patients with malignant lymphoma ? results of a prospective multicentre controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To explore the safety and effectiveness of the individually determined application granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (ASCT).

METHODS

The administration of G-CSF from day +5 (arm A) was compared in a randomised, controlled trial with delayed, individually determined administration (G-CSF started when WBC >or= 0.5 x 10(9)/L and ANC >or= 0.1 x 10(9)/L or at day +10; arm B), and with placebo (arm C).

RESULTS

One hundred and six patients, median age 45 (range 21-64), all with malignant lymphoma treated with BEAM chemotherapy were analysed. A significant difference in the time to neutrophil engraftment and in the duration of neutropenia <0.5 x 10(9)/L and <1.0 x 10(9)/L was observed between the arms (P = 0.04-<0.0001) with a 1-d prolongation of the median durations in arm B in comparison with arm A but a 2-4-d prolongation in the placebo arm C in comparison with arm B. The median number and range of days to neutrophil engraftment >0.5 x 10(9)/L after graft re-infusion was 10 (9-14) in arm A; 11 (9-19) in arm B; and 14 (10-30) in arm C (P < 0.0001). Engraftment of platelets to >20 x 10(9)/L and >50 x 10(9)/L was significantly delayed in the arms using G-CSF in comparison with placebo (P = 0.04-0.002) without any increase in bleeding or in transfusion requirement. There was no difference in the incidence and duration of transplant-related complications and their treatment between the arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study has confirmed the safety of individually determined administration of G-CSF. The optimal timing of G-CSF application after ASCT in patients with good-quality grafts is shortly before expected spontaneous engraftment.

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Prophylactic Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor and Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor After Autologous and Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Purpose

The primary objective of our meta-analysis was to determine whether prophylactic hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) after hematopoietic autologous and allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (SCT) reduced documented infections. Our secondary objectives were to determine whether prophylactic CSFs affected other outcomes including parenteral antibiotic therapy duration, infection-related mortality, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), or treatment-related mortality.

Methods

We included studies if there was random assignment between CSFs and placebo/no therapy and CSFs were given after SCT and before recovery of neutrophils. From 3,778 reviewed study articles, 34 were included based on predefined inclusion criteria. All analyses were conducted using a random effects model.

Results

CSFs reduced the risk of documented infections (relative risk [RR] 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.00; P = .05) and duration of parenteral antibiotics (weighted mean difference, −1.39 days, 95% CI, −2.56 to −0.22; P = .02) but did not reduce infection-related mortality (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.44; P = .4). CSFs did not increase grade 2 to 4 acute GVHD (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.31; P = .8) or treatment-related mortality (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.29; P = .98).

Conclusion

CSFs were associated with a small reduction in the risk of documented infections but did not affect infection or treatment-related mortality.

2006 update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To update the 2000 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSF).

UPDATE METHODOLOGY

The Update Committee completed a review and analysis of pertinent data published from 1999 through September 2005. Guided by the 1996 ASCO clinical outcomes criteria, the Update Committee formulated recommendations based on improvements in survival, quality of life, toxicity reduction and cost-effectiveness.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2005 Update Committee agreed unanimously that reduction in febrile neutropenia (FN) is an important clinical outcome that justifies the use of CSFs, regardless of impact on other factors, when the risk of FN is approximately 20% and no other equally effective regimen that does not require CSFs is available. Primary prophylaxis is recommended for the prevention of FN in patients who are at high risk based on age, medical history, disease characteristics, and myelotoxicity of the chemotherapy regimen. CSF use allows a modest to moderate increase in dose-density and/or dose-intensity of chemotherapy regimens. Dose-dense regimens should only be used within an appropriately designed clinical trial or if supported by convincing efficacy data. Prophylactic CSF for patients with diffuse aggressive lymphoma aged 65 years and older treated with curative chemotherapy (CHOP or more aggressive regimens) should be given to reduce the incidence of FN and infections. Current recommendations for the management of patients exposed to lethal doses of total body radiotherapy, but not doses high enough to lead to certain death due to injury to other organs, includes the prompt administration of CSF or pegylated G-CSF.

Cost effectiveness of day 5 G-CSF (Lenograstim) administration after PBSC transplantation: results of a SFGM-TC randomised trial

This randomised trial was designed to compare two groups treated with different G-CSF administration schedules with a third group receiving no G-CSF, after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (APBSCT). Children and adults with haematological malignancies or solid tumours were randomly assigned to receive either 150 microg/m2/day of Lenograstim starting on day 1 (G1) or on day 5 (G5) post APBSCT, or no Lenograstim (G0). Randomisation was stratified according to the conditioning regimen (Busulfan vs TBI vs no Busulfan and no TBI) and the graft CD 34+ cell count. A total of 240 patients were randomised; 239 were evaluable. All three patient groups were comparable. Median duration of neutropenia was 9 days (4-40), and 10 days (5-15) in the G1 and G5 groups, respectively, significantly shorter than in the G0 group, 13 days (7-36) (P < 0.0001). No difference was observed in the duration of thrombocytopenia, transfusion support and extra-haematological complications. The duration of post transplant hospitalisation was significantly shorter in adults who received G-CSF. Clinical and cost arguments favour the initiation of G-CSF on day 5 in adults. The same policy could be applied in children given that clinical management is easier and costs are similar.

Growth factors in haematological cancers

Since their discovery just under a century ago, growth factors (GFs) have been used almost ubiquitously in haematology. Many haematological cancers are associated with bone marrow failure, either as a direct consequence of the disease or its treatment. Colony stimulating factors (CSFs) have been used to address the problems associated with the resulting cytopenias, however, concerns about the potential leukaemogenic effects of some of these CSFs led to a degree of initial hesitancy in usage, particularly in the management of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). This has now been largely overcome. Other limitations have included cost and side effect profiles (the latter particularly with the multilineage factors). There has been wide variation locally, nationally and internationally in the usage of GFs. The American Society of Clinical Oncologists (ASCO) attempted to rationalise the usage of GFs by producing a consensus document enumerating the evidence-based indications for use of GFs. There is little information on cost effectiveness, this remains an important issue for the future. Peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) has revolutionised the management of many malignant conditions and has contributed to the increased use of growth factors. Many other indications are emerging for GFs used singly or in combination. Current clinical applications of GFs include: i) amelioration of cytopenias following chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation, ii) chemotherapy dose maintenance and escalation, iii) chemosensitisation and modification of disease states, iv) optimisation of methods for mobilisation of progenitor stem cells, v) immunotherapy, and vi) as therapeutic targets for treatment of haematolgical malignancies.

Economic assessment in the management of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

An increasing need for economic evaluations of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) treatments exists. We performed a literature review on the currently available NHL economic evaluations, using PubMed and the Cochrane database. English and Dutch language papers on treatment in adults were selected. A total of 88 publications were found, 44 of which were included. Of these, 6 economic evaluation-specific methodological items are evaluated (study perspective, overhead costs, data sources, charges or prices, sensitivity analysis, presentations of resource use and unit costs), enabling readers to judge the value of these studies. The 11 subjects covered by the economic evaluations are discussed. Many NHL treatments remain to be studied in economic evaluations. Future publications should report on the six methodological items in more detail, and preferably tackle them in the recommended way.

A prospective randomized study of clinical and economic consequences of using G-CSF following autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) transplantation in children

This prospective and randomized study was conducted to evaluate clinical and economic consequences of using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) following autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) transplantation in children. Between January 1999 and December 2003, 117 patients underwent autologous PBPCT: 51 patients received G-CSF following PBPCT, while 66 patients did not receive G-CSF. Median time to absolute neutrophil count > 0.5 x 10(9)/l was 10 days in the treatment group and 11 days in the control group (P < 0.009). The median time to platelets >20 x 10(9)/l was 12 days in both groups (P = NS). The median time to platelets >50 x 10(9)/l was 15 days in the G-CSF group and 14 days in the control group (P<0.005). In patients who received <5 x 10(6)/kg CD34+ cells, the median time to platelets >20 x 10(9)/l and >50 x 10(9)/l was similar with or without G-CSF (12 and 15 days, respectively). Platelet transfusion requirements were lower in the control group (2 vs 3 U in G-CSF group). There was a trend towards higher total costs with G-CSF: 8146.82 Euros and 7873.34 Euros with and without G-CSF, respectively (P = 0.1). Our data suggest that there is no indication of the standard application of G-CSF in children following PBPC transplantation. The only possible indication is the group of patients with a lower yield of CD34+ cells.

Treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor increases interleukin-1 receptor antagonist levels during engraftment following allogeneic stem-cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

The effect of treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra) plasma concentrations as well as the role of IL-1ra on leucocyte recovery and parameters of infection within the first 30 days after haematopietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) are not well known.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-seven patients undergoing myeloablative therapy followed by allogeneic SCT for various haematological disorders were either treated with (n = 18) or without (n = 9) G-CSF. IL-1ra plasma levels were serially determined by ELISA starting at day - 1 and continued until patients were engrafted.

RESULTS

Patients receiving G-CSF had significantly shorter neutropenic periods and significantly lower mean C-reactive protein serum levels during the first 3 weeks succeeding bone marrow transplantation (BMT). Importantly, starting at day + 11 and paralleling the rise of peripheral blood leucocytes, increasing IL-1ra plasma concentrations were observed in both treatment groups. However, the magnitude of the IL-1ra surge was far greater in the G-CSF treatment group. Peak IL-1ra plasma level observed on day + 19 was 882.3 +/- 879.2 pg mL(-1) (mean +/- SD) in patients receiving G-CSF compared with 285.8 +/- 175.2 pg mL(-1) (mean +/- SD) in patients not receiving G-CSF (P = 0.0130). Furthermore, a direct correlation of IL-1ra with peripheral blood leucocytes was verified by the Spearman rank test (P = 0.0025).

CONCLUSION

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-mediated acceleration of neutrophil recovery following myeloablative therapy correlated with increased IL-1ra plasma concentrations. Our data suggest that IL-1ra constitutes an intrinsic component of the anti-inflammatory and neutrophil differentiating efficacy of G-CSF and, thus, IL-1ra may be required for the in vivo activity of G-CSF.

Lenograstim after autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell transplantation: results of a double-blind, randomized trial

A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial was conducted in order to compare the incidence of microbiologically defined infections occurring after high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) and ASCT in 98 patients given lenograstim (Granocyte) and 94 patients given placebo after transplantation. Hematopoietic recovery, the use of i.v. antibiotics, the numbers of red blood cell and platelet transfusions, the days spent in hospital, and the days on parenteral nutrition were also compared. The incidence of infections until neutrophil recovery was significantly less in patients who received lenograstim after HDT and ASCT as compared to patients who received placebo (66 of 98 vs 86 of 94 patients, P<0.001). Lenograstim also significantly reduced the use of i.v. antibiotics (P<0.001) and the median duration of i.v. antibiotic treatment (8 days vs 10 days, P=0.04), improved neutrophil recovery (absolute neutrophil count >0.5 x 10(9)/l: 11 days vs 15 days, P<0.001) and reduced the number of days spent in hospital (15 days vs 17 days, P<0.001). The administration of lenograstim after HDT and ASCT significantly reduces the incidence of microbiologically defined infections until neutrophil recovery. It also leads to less use of antibiotics and earlier discharge from hospital.

Combined administration of alpha-erythropoietin and filgrastim can improve the outcome and cost balance of autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoproliferative disorders

We compared the use of G-CSF plus EPO in a group of 32 multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients with historical controls receiving G-CSF alone. Haemopoietic reconstitution was significantly faster in patients receiving G-CSF+EPO (group B), with a median time of 10 days to achieve an ANC count >0.5 x 10(9)/l, compared to 11 days in the historical group (A). The median duration of severe neutropenia (ANC count <100/ml) was significantly shorter in group B compared to group A; platelet counts >20 x 10(9) and >50 x 10(9)/l were achieved at days + 13 and + 17, respectively in group B, compared to days + 14 and + 24, respectively, in group A (P = 0.015, 0.002) patients. The transfusion requirement was reduced in group B, with 0 (0-6) RBC units and 1 (0-5) platelet unit transfused in group B vs 2 RBC (0-9) and 2 platelet units (0-8) in group A. Median days of fever, antibiotic therapy and hospital stay were reduced in group B (9.5 days vs 22). The mean cost of autotransplantation per group A patient was 23,988 Euro, compared with 18,394 Euro for a group B patient. Our study suggests that the EPO + G-CSF combination not only accelerates engraftment kinetics, but can also improve the clinical course of ASCT.

Low-dose lenograstim to enhance engraftment after autologous stem cell transplantation: a prospective randomized evaluation of two different fixed doses

BACKGROUND

G-CSF is used to enhance hematopoietic recovery after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), but the optimal dose of G-CSF during engraftment has not been established. The medical cost of ASCT is a serious financial burden in developing countries, and G-CSF is the most costly drug used in this procedure. We evaluated whether a lower, vial-size fitted dose of lenograstim is clinically equivalent to a higher fixed dose.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A prospective randomized study was performed on 33 patients (11 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, 8 multiple myeloma, 14 breast cancer) undergoing ASCT. Patients were randomly administered 100 micro g or 250 micro g lenograstim daily starting on the next day of ASCT, with a minimum infusion of 3 x 10(6) CD34+ cells per kg.

RESULTS

For both lenograstim doses, median time to neutrophil engraftment was 9 days and median time to PLT engraftment was 11 days. Episodes of clinically documented infections were 10 per 379 patient-days in the 100 microg per day group and 10 per 320 patient-days in the 250 microg per day group. There were no between-group differences in requirements for transfusion of RBCs or PLTs. Duration of hospitalization was 16 days for the 100 microg per day group and 17 days for the 250 microg per day group. Daily lenograstim dose per patient's body weight and total amount of lenograstim used during ASCT were both significantly lower in the 100 microg per day group.

CONCLUSION

Administration of 100 microg per day of lenograstim showed comparable clinical efficacy to 250 microg per day lenograstim for immediate hematopoietic recovery after ASCT. Use of the lower dose was associated with lower overall lenograstim usage and lower cost.

GM-CSF versus G-CSF: engraftment characteristics, resource utilization, and cost following autologous PBSC transplantation

BACKGROUND

G-CSF and GM-CSF have both been shown to decrease the time to hematopoietic recovery when administered after autologous BM or peripheral stem cell re-infusion. However, few studies have compared G-CSF and GM-CSF to determine which is the preferred myeloid growth factor.

METHODS

This study compares a prospectively accrued cohort of 22 patients receiving GM-CSF with a historical cohort of patients who received G-CSF commencing Day + 6 after autologous PBSC transplantation. Patients were matched based on disease type and stage, CD34(+) cell dose/kg, conditioning regimen, and prior treatment. Time to myeloid engraftment, growth factor utilization, antibiotic utilization, fever incidence, and cost were compared.

RESULTS

The median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment was similar in the two groups (ANC > 500 /mm(3), GM-CSF 12 versus G-CSF 11, P = 0.69). There was a trend towards more days of temperature > 38.0 masculine C (six versus three, P = 0.05) and febrile neutropenia (three versus two, P = 0.06) in the GM-CSF arm. There was a trend towards increased use of i.v. antibiotics in the GM-CSF cohort (7.6 days versus 5.5 days, P = 0.06). More chest X-rays (1.5 versus 1.0, P = 0.03) were ordered, and more blood cultures drawn (4.2 versus 2.7, P = 0.05) as part of fever evaluation in the group treated with GM-CSF. Resource utilization based on actual wholesale pricing (AWP) favored the G-CSF cohort. Applying a sensitivity analysis, GM-CSF became cost-effective when priced below $94 per 250 micro g, despite greater resource utilization.

DISCUSSION

This study suggests that engraftment characteristics are similar with GM-CSF and G-CSF following PBSC transplantation. Resource utilization for fever treatment and evaluation may be greater with GM-CSF. Determination of which agent is more cost-effective depends on institutional acquisition costs.

A randomized phase III clinical trial of autologous blood stem cell transplantation comparing cryopreservation using dimethylsulfoxide vs dimethylsulfoxide with hydroxyethylstarch

Hematopoietic stem cells intended for autologous transplantation are usually cryopreserved in solutions containing 10% dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO, v/v) or 5% DMSO in combination with 6% hydroxyethylstarch (HES, w/v). We performed a single-blinded, randomized study comparing these cryoprotectant solutions for patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation. A total of 294 patients were evaluable; 148 received cells frozen with 10% DMSO and 146 received cells frozen in 5% DMSO/6% HES. Patients who received cells frozen with the combination cryoprotectant recovered their white blood cell count >or=1.0 x 10(9)/l at a median of 10 days, one day faster than those who received PBSC frozen with DMSO alone (P=0.04). Time to achieve neutrophil counts of >or=0.5 x 10(9) and >or=1.0 x 10(9)/l were similarly faster for the recipients of the cells frozen in the combination solution. This effect was more pronounced for patients who received quantities of CD34+ cells higher than the median for the population. Median time to discontinuation of antibiotic use was also one day faster for the recipients of cells cryopreserved with DMSO/HES (P=0.04). In contrast, median times to recovery of platelet count >or=20 x 10(9)/l were equivalent for each group (10 days; P=0.99) and the median numbers of red cell and platelet transfusions did not differ.