首页> 外文期刊>Transfusion: The Journal of the American Association of Blood Banks >Pegfilgrastim-versus filgrastim-based autologous hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in the setting of preemptive use of plerixafor: Efficacy and cost analysis
【24h】

Pegfilgrastim-versus filgrastim-based autologous hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in the setting of preemptive use of plerixafor: Efficacy and cost analysis

机译:在先行使用plerixafor的情况下,以Pegfilgrastim相对于filgrastim为基础的自体造血干细胞动员:疗效和成本分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Plerixafor enhances the ability of filgrastim (FIL) to mobilize CD34+ cells but adds cost to the mobilization. We hypothesized that replacing weight-based FIL with flat-dose pegfilgrastim (PEG) in a validated cost-based mobilization algorithm for patient-adapted use of plerixafor would add convenience without increased cost. Study design and methods: A single-center retrospective analysis compared two consecutive cohorts undergoing FIL or PEG mobilization before autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma or lymphoma. FIL dose was 10 ?μg/kg/day continuing until completion of collection and a 12-mg flat dose of PEG. Peripheral blood CD34+ cells (PB-CD34+) enumeration was performed on the fourth day after initiation of growth factor. Subjects surpassing a certain target-specific threshold of PB-CD34+ started apheresis immediately while subjects with lower PB-CD34+ received plerixafor with apheresis starting on the fifth day. Results: Overall 68 of 74 in the FIL group and 52 of 57 patients in the PEG group met the mobilization target. Only one patient in each cohort required remobilization. Median PB-CD34+ on Day 4 was significantly higher in patients in the PEG group (18.1 × 106 vs. 28.7 × 106 cells/L, p = 0.01). Consequently, patients in the PEG group were less likely to require administration of plerixafor (67.5% vs. 45.6%, p = 0.01). Cohorts had near identical mean number of apheresis sessions and comparable CD34+ yield. The estimated cost associated with growth factor was higher in patients in the PEG group, but it was counterbalanced by lower cost associated with use of plerixafor. Conclusion: Single administration of 12 mg of PEG is associated with better CD34+ mobilization than FIL allowing for effective, convenient mobilization with less frequent use of plerixafor.
机译:背景:Plerixafor增强了非格司亭(FIL)动员CD34 +细胞的能力,但增加了动员成本。我们假设,在经过验证的基于成本的动员算法中,用平剂量聚乙二醇非格司亭(PEG)代替基于体重的FIL,可以使患者适应性使用plerixafor带来更多的便利,而不会增加成本。研究设计和方法:单中心回顾性分析比较了自体造血干细胞移植治疗多发性骨髓瘤或淋巴瘤之前进行FIL或PEG动员的两个连续队列。 FIL剂量为10 µg / kg /天,一直持续到收集完成,并使用12 mg统一剂量的PEG。在生长因子启动后的第四天进行外周血CD34 +细胞(PB-CD34 +)计数。超过特定目标特异性PB-CD34 +阈值的受试者立即开始单采血液采血,而较低PB-CD34 +的受试者则从第五天开始接受普乐沙弗单采。结果:FIL组的74名患者中有68名达到了动员目标,而PEG组的57名患者中有52名达到了目标。每个队列中只有一名患者需要复员。 PEG组患者第4天的PB-CD34 +中位数显着更高(18.1×106比28.7×106细胞/ L,p = 0.01)。因此,PEG组的患者不太可能需要使用plerixafor(67.5%对45.6%,p = 0.01)。队列的平均单采程序次数和CD34 +产量相当。 PEG组患者与生长因子相关的估计成本较高,但与使用plerixafor相关的较低成本相抵消。结论:与FIL相比,单次服用12 mg PEG具有更好的CD34 +动员能力,从而实现了有效,方便的动员,而较少使用培来沙福。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号