2011
DOI: 10.1182/blood.v118.21.5321.5321
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of Biosimilar G-CSF Is Effective After Autologous Bone Marrow Transplantation

Abstract: 5321 OBJECTIVES: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are widely used to accelerate haematopoietic recovery after bone marrow transplantation (BMT). Regulatory approval of biosimilar G-CSFs in Europe has been on the basis of comparable efficacy, safety and quality as the originator product. However, data are not presently available for all G-CSF clinical settings. This is the first reported use of a biosimilar G-CSF for neutrophil recovery after BM… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Biosimilar use following autologous stem cell transplantation is based largely upon extrapolation from non‐transplantation studies . Limited engraftment data following autologous stem cell transplantation which has emerged from European studies treated with a variety of biosimliar agents, report engraftment times between 11 and 15 d . However, differences in the types of hematological malignancies treated, conditioning regimens used, growth factor dose and schedules and institution‐specific clinical practices are major limitations for comparing results from these small studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Biosimilar use following autologous stem cell transplantation is based largely upon extrapolation from non‐transplantation studies . Limited engraftment data following autologous stem cell transplantation which has emerged from European studies treated with a variety of biosimliar agents, report engraftment times between 11 and 15 d . However, differences in the types of hematological malignancies treated, conditioning regimens used, growth factor dose and schedules and institution‐specific clinical practices are major limitations for comparing results from these small studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Collectively, these studies have shown that there are no significant differences between biosimilar versus originator G‐CSF in the median number of CD34+ cells mobilized (frequency in peripheral blood or dose of apheresed CD34+ cells by body weight) or in the number of G‐CSF injections and leukapheresis procedures required to harvest the target CD34+ cell dose . Furthermore, the side effect profiles of biosimilar versus originator G‐CSF were comparable, with a similar incidence and severity of common AEs such as bone or muscle pain and headache and no severe or unexpected AEs.…”
Section: Clinical Experience With Biosimilar G‐csf In Stem Cell Mobilmentioning
confidence: 92%