ArticleAnnals of transplantation2023
Comparison of Biosimilar Filgrastim with Innovator Fligrastim for Peripheral Blood Stem Cells Mobilization, Collection of CD34+ Stem Cells, and Engraftment in Patients Undergoing Autologous and Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience.
Article in Annals of transplantation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-World Evidence Assessing the Safety of Administering Intravenous Rituximab Biosimilar in the First Cycle and Subcutaneous Rituximab in Subsequent Cycles in B-Cell Lymphoma Patients.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Population Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor to Optimize Dosing and Timing for CD34Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- A Formulary Management Group Consensus.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the Middle East, there is lack of data on peripheral blood CD34+stem cells mobilization by using biosimilar filgrastim. We have been using both Neupogen and a biosimilar G-CSF) Zarzio® (as a mobilizing agent since February 2014 for both allogenic and autologous stem cell transplantations. MATERIAL AND METHODS This was a single-center retrospective study. All patients and healthy donors who received either the biosimilar G-CSF (Zarzio®) or original G-CSF (Neupogen®) for mobilization of CD34+ stem cells were included in the study. The primary goal was to determine and compare the rate of successful harvest and amount of CD34+ stem cells collected in either adult cancer patients or healthy donors between Zarzio® and Neupogen® groups. RESULTS A total of 114 patients, including 97 cancer patients and 17 healthy donors, underwent successful CD34+ stem cell mobilization using G-CSF with chemotherapy (35 with Zarzio® +chemotherapy, 39 with Neupogen® +chemotherapy) or G-CSF as monotherapy (14 with Zarzio®, 9 with Neupogen®) in autologous transplantation. In an allogeneic stem cell transplantation, successful harvest was achieved by using G-CSF monotherapy (8 with Zarzio®, 9 with Neupogen®). There was no difference between Zarzio® and Neupogen® in the amount of CD34+ stem cells collected at leukapheresis. There was no difference with regards to secondary outcomes between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS Our study showed that biosimilar G-CSF (Zarzio®) has comparable efficacy to the original G-CSF (Neupogen®) when used for mobilization in both autologous and allogenic stem cell transplantation and was associated with significant cost saving.
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.