ArticleCancer medicine2025
Moving Beyond G-CSF Mobilization-Learning From a 15-Year Experience of Different Stem Cell Mobilization Regimens in Multiple Myeloma.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Bone Marrow Involvement on the Success of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization in Patients With Lymphoma.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Is Less "Sufficient" and "Safe" in the MRD Era - Outcomes of Autologous Stem-Cell Transplant as per Melphalan Dose in Patients with Multiple Myeloma.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma in Kazakhstan: Ten-year single-center experience.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Observational
- Article
- Moving Beyond G-CSF Mobilization-Learning From a 15-Year Experience of Different Stem Cell Mobilization Regimens in Multiple Myeloma.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStem-cell mobilization in multiple myeloma is usually done with G-CSF with or without Cyclophosphamide (Cy) based chemotherapy/Plerixafor. Pre-clinical data suggest the role of proteasome inhibitors in mobilization. We previously reported that Bortezomib (Bort) when added to a Cy-based regimen had a better stem-cell yield. Consequent to favorable results with Bort + Cy-G-CSF, we used Bortezomib with G-CSF too. Hence, four different mobilization regimens were used-Bort + G-CSF (Group-1); G-CSF + Plerixafor (Group-2); Bort - Cy-G-CSF (Group-3); Cy + G-CSF (Group-4). We report here our 15-year retrospective analysis of these 4 mobilization regimens.
objectivesPrimary objective was to determine proportion of patients with CD34
resultsAll consecutive patients with MM aged 18-65 years who underwent stem-cell mobilization from September 2007-December 2022 were included. In an intention-to-treat analysis, a total 200 patients with 205 mobilization attempts were analysed. The median age of the cohort was 48 years. The percentage of patients who collected ≥ 5 × 10
conclusionCyclophosphamide-based chemo-mobilization regimens with or without Bortezomib have the advantage of higher total stem-cell yield, while they are equivalent to G-CSF + Plerixafor for harvest in a single apheresis. The addition of Bortezomib to Cyclophosphamide may help to increase stem cell yield.
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.