Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Cell Procurement

Mobilization of PBSCs with chemotherapy and recombinant human G-CSF: a randomized evaluation of early vs late administration of recombinant human G-CSF

Bone Marrow Transplantation volume 44, pages 779–783 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

The optimal timing for recombinant human (rh)G-CSF administration after chemotherapy for PBSC mobilization has not yet been determined. In this study, we compared two different time schedules of rhG-CSF; 4th (early) vs 7th day (late), in 48 consecutive patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma undergoing PBSC mobilization with CE (CY 4 g/m2 on day 1 and etoposide 200 mg/m2 on days 1–3). The rhG-CSF dose was 10 μg/kg/day for all patients. Both groups were comparable in terms of sex, age and number of previously given different chemotherapy regimens. Duration of neutropenia, CD34+ cell count on the first day of apheresis and numbers of aphereses were not statistically different between the two arms. However, the number of doses of rhG-CSF up to the first cycle of apheresis procedures was significantly lower in the late group than in the early group (P=0.005). The median number of total CD34+ cells collected was 10.54 × 106/kg (range 0.11–37.27) in the early group and 10.81 × 106/kg (range 0.17–49.83) in the late group of rhG-CSF (P=0.781). We conclude that PBSC mobilization after late use of rhG-CSF is an effective approach and therefore, in routine clinical practice, late rhG-CSF may be used for PBSC collections after chemotherapy-based mobilization regimens in this cost-conscious era.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Demirer T, Bensinger WI, Buckner CD . Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization for high-dose chemotherapy. J Hematother 1999; 8: 103–113.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Elias AD, Ayash L, Anderson KC, Hunt M, Wheeler C, Schwartz G et al. Mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells by chemotherapy and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor for hematologic support after high-dose intensification for breast cancer. Blood 1992; 79: 3036–3044.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Haas R, Hohaus S, Egerer G, Ehrhardt R, Witt B, Hunstein W . Recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (rhGM-CSF) subsequent to chemotherapy improves collection of blood stem cells for autografting in patients not eligible for bone marrow harvest. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992; 9: 459–465.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bensinger W, Appelbaum F, Rowley S, Storb R, Sanders J, Lilleby K et al. Factors that influence collection and engraftment of autologous peripheral-blood stem cells. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2547–2555.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Demirer T, Buckner CD, Bensinger WI . Optimization of peripheral blood stem cell mobilization. Stem Cells 1996; 14: 106–116.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Demirer T, Buckner CD, Gooley T, Appelbaum FR, Rowley S, Chauncey T et al. Factors influencing collection of peripheral blood stem cells in patients with multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant 1996; 17: 937–941.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Demirer T, Buckner CD, Storer B, Appelbaum FR, Storb R, Bensinger WI . The effect of different chemotherapy regimens on peripheral blood stem cell mobilization yield. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 684–690.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kotasek D, Shepherd KM, Sage RE, Dale BM, Norman JE, Charles P et al. Factors affecting blood stem cell collections following high-dose cyclophosphamide mobilization in lymphoma, myeloma and solid tumors. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992; 9: 11–17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mendrone Jr A, Arrais CA, Saboya R, Chamone Dde A, Dulley FL . Factors affecting hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization: An analysis of 307 patients. Transfus Apher Sci 2008; 39: 187–192.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Weaver CH, Birch R, Greco FA, Schwartzberg L, McAneny B, Moore M et al. Mobilization and harvesting of peripheral blood stem cells: randomized evaluations of different doses of filgrastim. Br J Haematol 1998; 100: 338–347.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Demirer T, Ayli M, Ozcan M, Gunel N, Haznedar R, Dagli M et al. Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells with chemotherapy and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF): a randomized evaluation of different doses of rhG-CSF. Br J Haematol 2002; 116: 468–474.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. André M, Baudoux E, Bron D, Canon JL, D'Hondt V, Fassotte MF et al. Phase III randomized study comparing 5 or 10 microg per kg per day of filgrastim for mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells with chemotherapy, followed by intensification and autologous transplantation in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies. Transfusion 2003; 43: 50–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Demirer T, Arat M, Koç H, Üstün C, Özcan M, Gürman G et al. Stem cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel (or etoposide) and recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF): İbni Sina experience. Turkish Journal of Hematology 1999; 16: 83–84.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Demirer T, Aylı M, Daglı M, Haznedar R, Genc Y, Fen T et al. Influence of post-transplant recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor administration on peritransplant morbidity in patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation. Br J Haematol 2002; 118: 1104–1111.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jacoub JF, Suryadevara U, Pereyra V, Colón D, Fontelonga A, Mackintosh FR et al. Mobilization strategies for the collection of peripheral blood progenitor cells: results from a pilot study of delayed addition G-CSF following chemotherapy and review of the literature. Exp Hematol 2006; 34: 1443–1450.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mollee P, Pereira D, Nagy T, Song K, Saragosa R, Keating A et al. Cyclophosphamide, etoposide and G-CSF to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 2002; 30: 273–278.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lefrère F, Zohar S, Ghez D, Delarue R, Audat F, Suarez F et al. The VAD chemotherapy regimen plus a G-CSF dose of 10 microg/kg is as effective and less toxic than high-dose cyclophosphamide plus a G-CSF dose of 5 μg/kg for progenitor cell mobilization: results from a monocentric study of 82 patients. Bone Marrow Transplant 2006; 37: 725–729.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Haynes A, Hunter A, McQuaker G, Anderson S, Bienz N, Russell NH . Engraftment characteristics of peripheral blood stem cells mobilised with cyclophosphamide and the delayed addition of G-CSF. Bone Marrow Transplant 1995; 16: 359–363.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McQuaker IG, Haynes AP, Byrne JL, Russell NH . Mobilisation of peripheral blood stem cells with IVE and G-CSF improves CD341 cell yields and engraftment in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphomas and Hodgkin's disease. Bone Marrow Transplant 1999; 24: 715–722.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lerro KA, Medoff E, Wu T, Seropian SE, Snyder E, Law P et al. A simplified approach to stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients not previously treated with alkylating agents. Bone Marrow Transplant 2003; 32: 1113–1117.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bargetzi MJ, Passweg J, Baertschi E, Schoenenberger A, Gwerder C, Tichelli A et al. Mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells with vinorelbine and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in multiple myeloma patients is reliable and cost effective. Bone Marrow Transplant 2003; 31: 99–103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Min YJ, Kim SW, Suh C, Huh J, Kim HS, Noh CI et al. The possible cost effectiveness of peripheral blood stem cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide and the late addition of G-CSF. J Korean Med Sci 2000; 15: 49–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Lefrere F, Audat F, Hermine O, Cavazzana-Calvo M, Belanger B, Arnulf B et al. The timing of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor administration after chemotherapy does not affect stem and progenitor cell apheresis yield: a retrospective study of 65 cases. Transfusion 1999; 39: 561–564.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Damon L, Rugo H, Tolaney S, Navarro W, Martin T, Ries C et al. Cytoreduction of lymphoid malignancies and mobilization of blood hematopoietic progenitor cells with high doses of cyclophosphamide and etoposide plus filgrastim. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2006; 12: 316–324.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Milone G, Leotta S, Battiato K, Murgano P, Mercurio S, Strano A et al. Intermediate dose etoposide plus G-CSF 16 μg/kg is more effective than cyclophosphamide 4 g/m2 plus G-CSF 10 μg/kg in PBSC mobilization of lymphoma patients. Leuk Lymphoma 2007; 48: 1950–1960.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Uludag University School of Medicine, Bursa, Turkey

    T Ozcelik

  2. Department of Hematology and Statistics, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey

    P Topcuoglu, M Beksac, M Ozcan, M Arat, S M Bakanay, O Ilhan, G Gurman, O Arslan & T Demirer

  3. Department of Statistics, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey

    Z Bıyıklı

Authors
  1. T Ozcelik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P Topcuoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M Beksac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M Ozcan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M Arat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Z Bıyıklı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. S M Bakanay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. O Ilhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. G Gurman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. O Arslan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. T Demirer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T Demirer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ozcelik, T., Topcuoglu, P., Beksac, M. et al. Mobilization of PBSCs with chemotherapy and recombinant human G-CSF: a randomized evaluation of early vs late administration of recombinant human G-CSF. Bone Marrow Transplant 44, 779–783 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2009.161

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2009.161

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links