These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Evaluation and comparison of three mobilization methods for the collection of granulocytes. Author: Jendiroba DB, Lichtiger B, Anaissie E, Reddy V, O'Brien S, Kantarjian H, Freireich EJ. Journal: Transfusion; 1998 Aug; 38(8):722-8. PubMed ID: 9709779. Abstract: BACKGROUND: Cancer chemotherapeutic regimens have become more potent and myeloablative. As a consequence, morbidity and mortality due to opportunistic infections have become a major challenge. The provision of adequate doses of viable granulocytes has thus become an important approach for circumventing the problem. A schedule for collecting therapeutic numbers of cells with minimal donor toxicity has yet to be established. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: An investigation of three mobilization schedules for the collection of granulocytes for transfusion--granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 micrograms per kg daily; G-CSF 5 micrograms per kg every other day, and prednisone 60 mg given orally (20 mg doses at 17 hours, 12 hours, and 2 hours before the collection). RESULTS: A total of 464 apheresis procedures involving 163 healthy donors were analyzed. Prednisone caused a small increase in the white cell (WBC) counts over the collection days, while G-CSF every other day and daily schedules improved WBC counts to 145 and 160 percent, respectively (p = 0.004). Similarly, administration of G-CSF daily and every other day mobilized higher yields of granulocytes over the collection days, compared to the prednisone schedule (170% and 180% vs. 105%; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Compared with prednisone, higher WBC yields were achieved by G-CSF stimulation; G-CSF given every other day is as effective as daily G-CSF administration for the recruitment of granulocytes, which makes the mobilization procedure more cost-effective.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]