Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Risk factors for poor mobilization in solid tumors: How effectively can we mobilize patients with solid tumors?
Yilmaz, Fergun; Soyer, Nur; Uslu, Ruchan; Tobu, Mahmut; Karaca, Burcak; Saydam, Guray; Sahin, Fahri; Vural, Filiz.
  • Yilmaz F; Izmir Katip Celebi University, Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Department of Hematology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Soyer N; Ege University Hospital, Department of Hematology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Uslu R; Ege University Hospital, Department of Medical Oncology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Tobu M; Ege University Hospital, Department of Hematology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Karaca B; Ege University Hospital, Department of Medical Oncology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Saydam G; Ege University Hospital, Department of Hematology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Sahin F; Ege University Hospital, Department of Hematology, Izmir, Turkey.
  • Vural F; Ege University Hospital, Department of Hematology, Izmir, Turkey. Electronic address: fivural@yahoo.com.
Transfus Apher Sci ; 56(6): 809-813, 2017 Dec.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29162401
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

In the literature, risk factors for poor mobilization were tried to identify. However, most of the studies consisted heterogeneous group of patients including both hematologic and oncologic malignancies. In this study, we aimed to identify the risk factors for poor mobilization in adults with solid tumors.

METHODS:

We enrolled 49(47 men, 2 women) adult patients with solid tumor who were mobilized between September 2007 and February 2017. All the mobilization procedures were performed with G-CSF(10µg/kg/day) with chemotherapy. Mobilization insufficiency was defined as peripheral blood CD34+stem cell number less than 10/µl and/or total collected CD34+cells less than 2.5×10 6/kg.

RESULTS:

The patients were divided into two groups, patients with successful mobilization at the first attempt(group 1, 36 patients,73.5%) and poor mobilizers (group 2, 13 patients 26.5%). Second and third mobilization attempt was needed in 11 and 2 patients, respectively. The median number of CD34+cells collected was 7,08×106/kg(0,6-19) with a median 4(1-6) apheresis. There was no statistical difference between two groups in terms of patient's and mobilization characteristics. Only number of CD 34+stem cells collected was statistically different (median 9,07×106/kg CD34+cells in group 1 versus 2,14×106/kg in group 2, p<0.05). The only possible risk factor that we could define was presence of organ metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS:

Since several methods and new drugs are available for peripheral stem cell collecting, risk factors should be identified clearly in adult population with solid tumors. So multicenter studies should be constructed for resolving this problem.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article