Maha M Islami, Mansoor Ahmed Khan, Mohammed A Aseeri, Majed A Alshamrani, Abdelmajid Alnatsheh, Sameer Alamoudi, Ahmed A Alzahrani
{"title":"生物仿制药 Filgrastim 与创新药 Fligrastim 在自体和异体干细胞移植患者外周血干细胞动员、CD34+ 干细胞收集和移植方面的比较:单中心经验。","authors":"Maha M Islami, Mansoor Ahmed Khan, Mohammed A Aseeri, Majed A Alshamrani, Abdelmajid Alnatsheh, Sameer Alamoudi, Ahmed A Alzahrani","doi":"10.12659/AOT.938585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":7935,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Transplantation","volume":"28 ","pages":"e938585"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2e/09/anntransplant-28-e938585.PMC9990321.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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.\",\"authors\":\"Maha M Islami, Mansoor Ahmed Khan, Mohammed A Aseeri, Majed A Alshamrani, Abdelmajid Alnatsheh, Sameer Alamoudi, Ahmed A Alzahrani\",\"doi\":\"10.12659/AOT.938585\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Transplantation\",\"volume\":\"28 \",\"pages\":\"e938585\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2e/09/anntransplant-28-e938585.PMC9990321.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Transplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12659/AOT.938585\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/AOT.938585","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
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.
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.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Transplantation is one of the fast-developing journals open to all scientists and fields of transplant medicine and related research. The journal is published quarterly and provides extensive coverage of the most important advances in transplantation.
Using an electronic on-line submission and peer review tracking system, Annals of Transplantation is committed to rapid review and publication. The average time to first decision is around 3-4 weeks. Time to publication of accepted manuscripts continues to be shortened, with the Editorial team committed to a goal of 3 months from acceptance to publication.
Expert reseachers and clinicians from around the world contribute original Articles, Review Papers, Case Reports and Special Reports in every pertinent specialty, providing a lot of arguments for discussion of exciting developments and controversies in the field.