z-logo
Premium
Second donation of granulocyte–colony‐stimulating factor–mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells: risk factors associated with a low yield of CD34+ cells
Author(s) -
Platzbecker Uwe,
Bornhäuser Martin,
Zimmer Kristin,
Lerche Linda,
Rutt Claudia,
Ehninger Gerhard,
Hölig Kristina
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
transfusion
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.045
H-Index - 132
eISSN - 1537-2995
pISSN - 0041-1132
DOI - 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2005.04107.x
Subject(s) - granulocyte colony stimulating factor , medicine , progenitor cell , cd34 , mobilization , transplantation , granulocyte , filgrastim , urology , immunology , surgery , gastroenterology , stem cell , chemotherapy , biology , history , archaeology , genetics
BACKGROUND:  There are still limited data on the efficacy and safety of repeated donations of granulocyte–colony‐stimulating factor (G–CSF)‐mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs) for allogeneic transplantation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS:  Sixty‐seven healthy donors undergoing two consecutive mobilizations of PBPCs within a median interval of 5 months (range, 0.1‐47 months) were investigated. For both first mobilization (FM) and second mobilization (SM), G–CSF (lenograstim) at 7.5 µg per kg per day was administered. RESULTS:  The nonhematologic side effects were comparable between both mobilizations. A significantly lower yield of CD34+ cells × 10 6 per kg of donor weight was obtained on Day 5 of SM in female (n = 31; FM, 5.0; SM, 3.23; p = 0.008) but not in male (n = 36; FM, 5.96; SM, 5.36; p = 0.24) donors. Multivariate analysis identified a lower CD34+ blood concentration on Day 5 of FM (p < 0.001) as well as female sex (p = 0.015) as independent risk factors for a lower yield of progenitor cells, whereas donor age and body mass index, interval between donations, and schedule of G–CSF application showed no significant impact. CONCLUSION:  The identified risk factors allow the estimation of the efficacy of a SM in an individual donor before G–CSF administration, thus avoiding distress to both the donor and the recipient.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here