ArticleBone marrow transplantation2014
Use of G-CSF to hasten neutrophil recovery after auto-SCT for AML is not associated with increased relapse incidence: a report from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the EBMT.
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 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postoperative complications in patients with chemotherapy-induced acute myeloid leukemia (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- A systematic literature review of disease burden and clinical efficacy for patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia.American journal of blood research · 2021Review
- Multigene Measurable Residual Disease Assessment Improves Acute Myeloid Leukemia Relapse Risk Stratification in Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2016Article
- Autologous stem cell transplantation for adult acute leukemia in 2015: time to rethink? Present status and future prospects.Bone marrow transplantation · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Application of G-CSF in AML is controversial as leukemic blasts may express receptors interacting with the cytokine, which may stimulate leukemia growth. We retrospectively analyzed the impact of G-CSF use to accelerate neutrophil recovery after auto-SCT on outcome. Adults with AML in first CR autografted between 1994 and 2010 were included. Nine hundred and seventy two patients were treated with G-CSF after auto-SCT whereas 1121 were not. BM and PB were used as a source of stem cells in 454 (22%) and 1639 (78%) cases, respectively. The incidence of relapse at 5 years in the BM-auto-SCT group was 38% for patients receiving post-transplant G-CSF and 43% for those not treated with G-CSF, P=0.46. In the PB-auto-SCT cohort, respective probabilities were 48% and 49%, P=0.49. No impact of the use of G-CSF could be demonstrated with respect to the probability of leukemia-free survival: in the BM-auto-SCT group, 51% for G-CSF(+) and 48% for G-CSF(-), P=0.73; in PB-auto-SCT group, 42% for G-CSF(+) and 43% for G-CSF(-), P=0.83. Although G-CSF administration significantly shortened the neutropenic phase, no beneficial effect was observed with regard to non-relapse mortality. In patients with AML, the use of G-CSF after auto-SCT is not associated with increased risk of relapse irrespective of the source of stem cells used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.