Impact of G-CSF administration post-allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation on outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

American journal of blood research Pub Date : 2021-10-15 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01
Aditya Kumar Gupta, Jagdish Prasad Meena, Partha Haldar, Pranay Tanwar, Rachna Seth
{"title":"Impact of G-CSF administration post-allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation on outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Aditya Kumar Gupta,&nbsp;Jagdish Prasad Meena,&nbsp;Partha Haldar,&nbsp;Pranay Tanwar,&nbsp;Rachna Seth","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) have been used post hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) for earlier neutrophil engraftment. The use of G-CSFs, and their effect on other post-HSCT outcomes remains debatable. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, and IndMed using a predefined search strategy. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) reporting data on G-CSF administration post-HSCT, published in the English language from their inception until Jan 31, 2021. The primary outcome of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the time to neutrophil engraftment (NE). The secondary outcomes were probability of NE, time to platelet engraftment (PE), the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), duration of hospital stay (HS), and overall survival (OS). The review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020206989). Fourteen studies were extracted (n=9850), of which five were RCTs, and nine were NRSs. As per Egger's test, publication bias was not present for any outcome. After meta-analysis, we found that the duration of NE favouring G-CSF arm from RCTs was -0.94 days (SMD) [(95% CI: -1.38, -0.51); I<sup>2</sup>=35%], and from NRSs -1.2 days (SMD) [(95% CI: -1.43, -0.96); I<sup>2</sup>=74%]. For the outcome of GVHD, the relative risks (RR) of incidence for chronic GVHD and overall GVHD were not significant for the RCTs, and these were 1.11 (RR) [(95% CI: 1.00, 1.22); I<sup>2</sup>=43%] and 1.10 (RR) [(95% CI: 1.03, 1.18); I<sup>2</sup>=48%], respectively for NRSs. There was no difference in the incidence of GVHD (acute or chronic) in both arms. No significant difference was found between the two arms for the outcomes of PE, HS, and OS. For NE, there was a marginal benefit of around one day with the use of G-CSF. The use of G-CSF did not alter time to PE, the incidence of GVHD, HS, and OS in both arms.</p>","PeriodicalId":7479,"journal":{"name":"American journal of blood research","volume":"11 5","pages":"544-563"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8610798/pdf/ajbr0011-0544.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of blood research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) have been used post hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) for earlier neutrophil engraftment. The use of G-CSFs, and their effect on other post-HSCT outcomes remains debatable. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, and IndMed using a predefined search strategy. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) reporting data on G-CSF administration post-HSCT, published in the English language from their inception until Jan 31, 2021. The primary outcome of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the time to neutrophil engraftment (NE). The secondary outcomes were probability of NE, time to platelet engraftment (PE), the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), duration of hospital stay (HS), and overall survival (OS). The review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020206989). Fourteen studies were extracted (n=9850), of which five were RCTs, and nine were NRSs. As per Egger's test, publication bias was not present for any outcome. After meta-analysis, we found that the duration of NE favouring G-CSF arm from RCTs was -0.94 days (SMD) [(95% CI: -1.38, -0.51); I2=35%], and from NRSs -1.2 days (SMD) [(95% CI: -1.43, -0.96); I2=74%]. For the outcome of GVHD, the relative risks (RR) of incidence for chronic GVHD and overall GVHD were not significant for the RCTs, and these were 1.11 (RR) [(95% CI: 1.00, 1.22); I2=43%] and 1.10 (RR) [(95% CI: 1.03, 1.18); I2=48%], respectively for NRSs. There was no difference in the incidence of GVHD (acute or chronic) in both arms. No significant difference was found between the two arms for the outcomes of PE, HS, and OS. For NE, there was a marginal benefit of around one day with the use of G-CSF. The use of G-CSF did not alter time to PE, the incidence of GVHD, HS, and OS in both arms.

Abstract Image

异基因造血干细胞移植后给予G-CSF对预后的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
粒细胞集落刺激因子(g - csf)已被用于造血干细胞移植(HSCT)后早期中性粒细胞移植。g - csf的使用及其对hsct后其他结果的影响仍有争议。在这项系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们使用预定义的搜索策略搜索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、Google Scholar和IndMed。我们纳入了报告hsct后G-CSF给药数据的随机对照试验(rct)和非随机研究(NRSs),这些研究从开始到2021年1月31日以英语发表。本系统评价和荟萃分析的主要结果是评估中性粒细胞植入(NE)的时间。次要结局为NE发生概率、血小板植入时间(PE)、移植物抗宿主病(GVHD)发生率、住院时间(HS)和总生存期(OS)。该审查已在PROSPERO注册(CRD42020206989)。共纳入14项研究(n=9850),其中5项为rct, 9项为nrs。根据埃格的检验,任何结果都不存在发表偏倚。经过荟萃分析,我们发现随机对照试验中NE偏向G-CSF组的持续时间为-0.94天(SMD) [95% CI: -1.38, -0.51];I2=35%], nrs -1.2天(SMD) [95% CI: -1.43, -0.96];I2 = 74%)。对于GVHD的结局,慢性GVHD和总体GVHD发病率的相对风险(RR)在随机对照试验中无显著性差异,分别为1.11 (RR) [95% CI: 1.00, 1.22];I2=43%]和1.10 (RR) [95% CI: 1.03, 1.18];I2=48%],分别为NRSs。两组GVHD的发生率(急性或慢性)没有差异。PE、HS和OS的结果在两组间无显著差异。对于NE,使用G-CSF有大约一天的边际效益。在两组中,G-CSF的使用没有改变到PE的时间、GVHD、HS和OS的发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of blood research
American journal of blood research MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信