Harvesting peripheral blood progenitor cells from healthy donors: retrospective comparison of filgrastim and lenograstim
1Bone Marrow Transplant Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Bianchi-Melacrino-Morelli , Reggio Calabria, Italy
2S.I.T°, Azienda Ospedaliera Bianchi-Melacrino-Morelli , Reggio Calabria, Italy
Massimo Martino 1 *, Giuseppe Console 1, Giuseppe Irrera 1, Ida Callea 1, Antonia Condemi 1, Antonella Dattola 1, Giuseppe Messina 1, Antonella Pontari 1, Giulia Pucci 1, Giuseppe Furlò 2, Giuseppe Bresolin 2, Pasquale Iacopino 1, Fortunato Morabito 1
Mobilization of CD34+ into peripheral blood is attained by either glycosylated (lenograstim) or non-glycosylated recombinant G-CSF (filgrastim). 101 donors, 57 males, median age 42 years (range 16-63) entered this retrospective study. Group I (55 cases) received filgrastim and group II lenograstim subcutaneously for 5-6 days. The peak number of CD34+ cells/ l blood observed on day 4 and 5 was not significantly different in the two groups. No differences were shown in terms of both circulating CFU-GM at the time of harvesting and CD34+ target of collection. The most frequent side effects were bone pain (18.2% grade I; 36.4% grade II, 7.3% grade III), headache (18.2%), nausea (9.1%), fever (5.5%) and a mild splenomegaly (>2cm) (5.5%) in filgrastim group, and bone pain (37.0% grade I, 26.1% grade II, 2.2% grade III), headache (17.4%), nausea (15.2%), fever (4.4%) and a mild splenomegaly (4.3%) in lenograstim group, respectively. CD34+ collection was associated with thrombocytopenia, which was not significantly different between the two groups. No donor in either group developed long-term adverse effects. We conclude that both G-CSFs are comparable in terms of CD34+ cell collection, safety and tolerability.
Journal of Clinical Apheresis
Volume 20, Issue 3 , Pages 129 - 136