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

xlomafota13 shared this article with you from Inoreader Impact of G-CSF administration post-allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation on outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis Via American Journal of Blood Research Am J Blood Res. 2021 Oct 15;11(5):544-563. eCollection 2021. 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. Th e use of G-CSF did not alter time to PE, the incidence of GVHD, HS, and OS in both arms. PMID:34824887 | PMC:PMC8610798 View on the web Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.