Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25599171›Full record

ReviewBone marrow transplantation2015

A review of the genetic and long-term effects of G-CSF injections in healthy donors: a reassuring lack of evidence for the development of haematological malignancies.

B E Shaw, D L Confer, W Hwang, M A Pulsipher

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Bone marrow transplantation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Filgrastim, fibrinolysis, and neovascularization.Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2022
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor alters the systemic metabolomic profile in healthy donors.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2017
    Article
  20. Observational
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

B E Shaw1] Anthony Nolan Research Institute, UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK [2] Department of Haemato-Oncology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK.
D L ConferNational Marrow Donor Program, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
W Hwang1] Singapore General Hospital, Singapore City, Singapore [2] Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore City, Singapore [3] Singapore Cord Blood Bank, Singapore City, Singapore.
M A Pulsipher1] Division of Hematology and Hematologic Malignancies, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA [2] Primary Children's Hospital, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Huntsman Cancer Institute · USNational Marrow Donor Program · USSingapore General Hospital · SGUniversity College London · GB

Funding

RDSafe: A Multi-Institutional Study of HSC Donor Safety and Quality LifeR01HL085707 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI PULSIPHER, MICHAEL A, SWITZER, GALEN E. · 2009 to 2013
$3.1M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2007 the WMDA responded to the publication of two manuscripts suggesting a causal link between G-CSF and myeloid malignancies in healthy donors by convening an international symposium to examine this issue. At the time, registries reviewed the long-term follow-up of their healthy donors, which suggested no excess of leukaemia in PBSC donors compared with BM donors. Although the evidence for an increased risk of malignancy in healthy donors was felt to be weak, it could not be excluded. The WMDA, therefore, issued a statement, to be included in all donor consent forms, stating that it was unknown whether G-CSF increased or decreased the risk of later developing cancer. In 2012, with 5 years of additional donor follow-up and the results of several genetic studies now available, the clinical working group of the WMDA again reviewed the data. On the basis of an assessment of a continuing lack of evidence for an increased risk of malignancy in donors receiving G-CSF, the WMDA has re-issued a more reassuring statement. The revised statement was circulated to all WMDA member registries in late 2012 to replace the existing statement in consent forms, which now conclusively states that, 'Studies following large numbers of unrelated donors have shown that the risk of developing cancer within several years after the use of G-CSF is not increased compared with donors not receiving G-CSF'. Herein we review the evidence on which this statement is based.

Indexed as

Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHematologic NeoplasmsHumansInjectionsTissue DonorsGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor

Identifiers

PMID25599171
OpenAlexW1985863918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.