Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Upfront plerixafor plus G-CSF versus cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF for stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma: efficacy and cost analysis study.
Afifi, S; Adel, N G; Devlin, S; Duck, E; Vanak, J; Landau, H; Chung, D J; Lendvai, N; Lesokhin, A; Korde, N; Reich, L; Landgren, O; Giralt, S; Hassoun, H.
Afiliación
  • Afifi S; Pharmacy Department, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Adel NG; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Devlin S; Pharmacy Department, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Duck E; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Vanak J; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Landau H; Department of Epidemiology-Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Chung DJ; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Lendvai N; Department of Finance, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Lesokhin A; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Korde N; Department of Finance, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Reich L; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Landgren O; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematologic Malignancies, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Giralt S; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
  • Hassoun H; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Bone Marrow Transplant ; 51(4): 546-52, 2016 Apr.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26726942
Cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF (C+G-CSF) is one of the most widely used stem cell (SC) mobilization regimens for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Plerixafor plus G-CSF (P+G-CSF) has demonstrated superior SC mobilization efficacy when compared with G-CSF alone and has been shown to rescue patients who fail mobilization with G-CSF or C+G-CSF. Despite the proven efficacy of P+G-CSF in upfront SC mobilization, its use has been limited, mostly due to concerns of high price of the drug. However, a comprehensive comparison of the efficacy and cost effectiveness of SC mobilization using C+G-CSF versus P+G-CSF is not available. In this study, we compared 111 patients receiving C+G-CSF to 112 patients receiving P+G-CSF. The use of P+G-CSF was associated with a higher success rate of SC collection defined as ⩾5 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg (94 versus 83%, P=0.013) and less toxicities. Thirteen patients in the C+G-CSF arm were hospitalized owing to complications while none in the P+G-CSF group. C+G-CSF was associated with higher financial burden as assessed using institutional-specific costs and charges (P<0.001) as well as using Medicare reimbursement rates (P=0.27). Higher rate of hospitalization, increased need for salvage mobilization, and increased G-CSF use account for these differences.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos / Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas / Movilización de Célula Madre Hematopoyética / Ciclofosfamida / Compuestos Heterocíclicos / Mieloma Múltiple Tipo de estudio: Health_economic_evaluation Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Bone Marrow Transplant Asunto de la revista: TRANSPLANTE Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos / Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas / Movilización de Célula Madre Hematopoyética / Ciclofosfamida / Compuestos Heterocíclicos / Mieloma Múltiple Tipo de estudio: Health_economic_evaluation Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Bone Marrow Transplant Asunto de la revista: TRANSPLANTE Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos