Cargando…
Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone
Chemotherapy plus granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (C+G) and G-CSF alone are two of the most common methods of mobilizing CD34+ cells for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). In order to compare and determine real-world outcomes and costs of these strategies, we p...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3797171/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23749109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2013.80 |
_version_ | 1782287585101479936 |
---|---|
author | Sung, Anthony D. Grima, Daniel T. Bernard, Lisa M. Brown, Stephen Carrum, George Holmberg, Leona Horwitz, Mitchell E. Liesveld, Jane L. Kanda, Junya McClune, Brian Shaughnessy, Paul Tricot, Guido J. Chao, Nelson J. |
author_facet | Sung, Anthony D. Grima, Daniel T. Bernard, Lisa M. Brown, Stephen Carrum, George Holmberg, Leona Horwitz, Mitchell E. Liesveld, Jane L. Kanda, Junya McClune, Brian Shaughnessy, Paul Tricot, Guido J. Chao, Nelson J. |
author_sort | Sung, Anthony D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Chemotherapy plus granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (C+G) and G-CSF alone are two of the most common methods of mobilizing CD34+ cells for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). In order to compare and determine real-world outcomes and costs of these strategies, we performed a retrospective study of 226 consecutive patients at 11 medical centers (64 lymphoma, 162 multiple myeloma), of whom 55% and 66% received C+G. Patients with C+G collected more CD34+ cells/day than G-CSF alone (lymphoma: average 5.51x10(6) cells/kg on day 1 vs. 2.92x10(6) cells/kg, p=0.0231; myeloma: 4.16x10(6) cells/kg vs. 3.69x10(6) cells/kg, p<0.00001) and required fewer days of apheresis (lymphoma: average 2.11 days vs. 2.96, p=0.012; myeloma: 2.02 vs. 2.83 days, p=0.0015), though nearly all patients ultimately reached the goal of 2x10(6) cells/kg. With the exception of higher rates of febrile neutropenia in myeloma patients with C+G (17% vs. 2%, p<0.05), toxicities and other outcomes were similar. Mobilization with C+G cost significantly more (lymphoma: median $10,300 vs. $7,300, p<0.0001; myeloma: $8,800 vs. $5,600, p<0.0001), though re-mobilization adds $6,700 for drugs alone. Our results suggest that while both C+G and G-CSF alone are effective mobilization strategies, C+G may be more cost-effective for patients at high risk of insufficient mobilization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3797171 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37971712014-05-01 Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone Sung, Anthony D. Grima, Daniel T. Bernard, Lisa M. Brown, Stephen Carrum, George Holmberg, Leona Horwitz, Mitchell E. Liesveld, Jane L. Kanda, Junya McClune, Brian Shaughnessy, Paul Tricot, Guido J. Chao, Nelson J. Bone Marrow Transplant Article Chemotherapy plus granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (C+G) and G-CSF alone are two of the most common methods of mobilizing CD34+ cells for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). In order to compare and determine real-world outcomes and costs of these strategies, we performed a retrospective study of 226 consecutive patients at 11 medical centers (64 lymphoma, 162 multiple myeloma), of whom 55% and 66% received C+G. Patients with C+G collected more CD34+ cells/day than G-CSF alone (lymphoma: average 5.51x10(6) cells/kg on day 1 vs. 2.92x10(6) cells/kg, p=0.0231; myeloma: 4.16x10(6) cells/kg vs. 3.69x10(6) cells/kg, p<0.00001) and required fewer days of apheresis (lymphoma: average 2.11 days vs. 2.96, p=0.012; myeloma: 2.02 vs. 2.83 days, p=0.0015), though nearly all patients ultimately reached the goal of 2x10(6) cells/kg. With the exception of higher rates of febrile neutropenia in myeloma patients with C+G (17% vs. 2%, p<0.05), toxicities and other outcomes were similar. Mobilization with C+G cost significantly more (lymphoma: median $10,300 vs. $7,300, p<0.0001; myeloma: $8,800 vs. $5,600, p<0.0001), though re-mobilization adds $6,700 for drugs alone. Our results suggest that while both C+G and G-CSF alone are effective mobilization strategies, C+G may be more cost-effective for patients at high risk of insufficient mobilization. 2013-06-10 2013-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3797171/ /pubmed/23749109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2013.80 Text en Users may view, print, copy, download and text and data- mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms |
spellingShingle | Article Sung, Anthony D. Grima, Daniel T. Bernard, Lisa M. Brown, Stephen Carrum, George Holmberg, Leona Horwitz, Mitchell E. Liesveld, Jane L. Kanda, Junya McClune, Brian Shaughnessy, Paul Tricot, Guido J. Chao, Nelson J. Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone |
title | Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone |
title_full | Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone |
title_fullStr | Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone |
title_full_unstemmed | Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone |
title_short | Outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus G-CSF versus G-CSF alone |
title_sort | outcomes and costs of autologous stem cell mobilization with chemotherapy plus g-csf versus g-csf alone |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3797171/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23749109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2013.80 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sunganthonyd outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT grimadanielt outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT bernardlisam outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT brownstephen outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT carrumgeorge outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT holmbergleona outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT horwitzmitchelle outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT liesveldjanel outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT kandajunya outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT mcclunebrian outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT shaughnessypaul outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT tricotguidoj outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone AT chaonelsonj outcomesandcostsofautologousstemcellmobilizationwithchemotherapyplusgcsfversusgcsfalone |