Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The use of G-CSF post allogeneic transplant has become a common practice to accelerate neutrophil engraftment. There is some controversy in its use. To further evaluate the effectiveness, we compared outcomes in patients who underwent PBSCT, either with or without the planned use of G-CSF post SCT. Among consecutive 162 patients from October 2012 to October 2014, 65 patients received G-CSF post-PBSCT, and 97 did not. More patients in G-CSF group received MAC (78% vs. 55%). Patients who received G-CSF had earlier neutrophil engraftment (median days 11 vs. 14) and shorter post-transplant hospital stay (median days 16 vs. 20, p = 0.001). G-CSF use was associated with a higher rate of extensive chronic GVHD (44.3% vs.61.5%, p = 0.027). G-CSF cost the equivalent of 0.25 hospital days but shortened the initial transplant admission by 4 days. Early cost-benefit may be later offset by the economic burden of chronic GVHD and associated complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singh et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: