Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24096822›Full record

ArticleBone marrow transplantation2014

Efficacy of deferred dosing of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in autologous hematopoietic transplantation for multiple myeloma.

J E Cox, S Campos, J Wu, R May, H Liu, C A Ramos, G Carrum, H E Heslop, M K Brenner, R T Kamble

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Use after Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation: Comparison of Two Practices.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J E CoxDepartment of Pharmacy, Center for Cell and Gene therapy, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
S CamposCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
J WuCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
R MayCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
H LiuCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
C A RamosCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
G CarrumCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
H E HeslopCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
M K BrennerCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
R T KambleCenter for Cell and Gene therapy, Baylor College of Medicine, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.
Baylor College of Medicine · USMethodist Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Routine administration of G-CSF following autologous hematopoietic SCT (ASCT) expedites ANC recovery and reduces hospitalization by 1-2 days; it has no impact on febrile neutropenia, infections, morbidity, mortality, event-free survival or OS. To determine whether delayed G-CSF dosage could result in equivalent ANC recovery and thereby improve cost effectiveness, we deferred the administration of G-CSF until WBC recovery had begun. A total of 117 patients with multiple myeloma received ASCT from January 2005 to September 2012. Of these, 52 were in the conventional dosing group (CGD) and received G-CSF from Day +7 for a median of five doses. In the deferred dosing group (DGD), 65 patients received G-CSF from median day 14 post transplant for a median of zero doses. There was no difference between groups in the incidence or duration of febrile neutropenia, duration of grade III mucositis, weight gain, rash, engraftment syndrome or early death (100 days). The DGD group had a significantly longer time to neutrophil engraftment than the CGD group (15 days vs 12 days; P<0.0001), a longer period of severe neutropenia (<100/μL; 8 days vs 6 days; P<0.0001), longer treatment with intravenous antibiotics (7 days vs 5 days; P=0.016) and longer hospital stay (19 days vs 17 days; P=<0.0001). Although the cost of G-CSF was lower in the DGD group (mean $308 vs $2467), the additional hospitalization raised the median total cost of ASCT in this group by 17%. There was, however, no adverse effect of deferred dosing on the rate of febrile neuropenic episodes or Day 100 survival, so that deferred dosing of G-CSF may be suitable for patients receiving ASCT as outpatients, for whom longer hospital stay would not be an offsetting cost.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiple MyelomaRetrospective StudiesTransplantation, AutologousTreatment OutcomeGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor

Identifiers

PMID24096822
PMCPMC3915247
OpenAlexW1982441880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.