Why the study?
Does granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor affect long-term clinical outcomes or adverse events in patients after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction?
Does granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor affect long-term clinical outcomes or adverse events in patients after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction?
Stem cell mobilization with G-CSF after acute STEMI demonstrates long-term safety with no increased risk of adverse clinical events at 5 years.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports long-term safety of G-CSF post-STEMI without excess events; extends evidence for stem cell mobilization trials.
BACKGROUND: Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been investigated in trials aiming to promote recovery of myocardial function after myocardial infarction. Long-term safety-data have never been reported. A few studies indicated an increased risk of in-stent re-stenosis. We aimed to investigate clinical events 5 years after inclusion into a randomized trial of G-CSF versus placebo. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients were randomized, from 2003-2005, to G-CSF or placebo after myocardial infarction. Four patients withdrew consent prior to study treatment and were excluded leaving 36 and 38 in the placebo- and G-CSF groups. Information about all hospital admittances of included patients until 2010 was extracted from a national register. The only censoring event was immigration. The events were combined into four prespecified endpoints: Time to (1) first hospital admittance (all cause), (2) first cardiovascular-related hospital admittance, (3) first major cardiovascular event, and (4) death. RESULTS: One patient (1%) was lost to follow-up. Four patients (4%) died in the follow-up period, three in the G-CSF group and one in the placebo group (p = 0.4). Hazard ratio for all cause hospital admittance was 0.7 (95% CI 0.38-1.29). The incidence of both new myocardial infarction (p = 1.0) and revascularization procedures (p = 0.4) were similar in the two groups. Survival analyses showed no differences in the occurrence of any of the four prespecified composite endpoints between the two groups (p = 0.6; 0.5; 0.8; 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: We found no indication of increased risk of adverse events up to 5 years after G-CSF treatment. These results support the continued investigation of G-CSF for cardiac therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ripa et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: