Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF

Studies comparing the efficacy and cost of peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells mobilization with low‐dose cyclophosphamide (LD‐CY) and granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (G‐CSF) against plerixafor and G‐CSF, in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated in the novel therapy‐era are not availab...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical apheresis 2013-10, Vol.28 (5), p.359-367
Hauptverfasser: Chaudhary, Lubna, Awan, Farrukh, Cumpston, Aaron, Leadmon, Sonia, Watkins, Kathy, Tse, William, Craig, Michael, Hamadani, Mehdi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 367
container_issue 5
container_start_page 359
container_title Journal of clinical apheresis
container_volume 28
creator Chaudhary, Lubna
Awan, Farrukh
Cumpston, Aaron
Leadmon, Sonia
Watkins, Kathy
Tse, William
Craig, Michael
Hamadani, Mehdi
description Studies comparing the efficacy and cost of peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells mobilization with low‐dose cyclophosphamide (LD‐CY) and granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (G‐CSF) against plerixafor and G‐CSF, in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated in the novel therapy‐era are not available. Herein, we report mobilization outcomes of 107 patients who underwent transplantation within 1‐year of starting induction chemotherapy with novel agents. Patients undergoing mobilization with LD‐CY (1.5 gm/m2) and G‐CSF (n = 74) were compared against patients receiving plerixafor and G‐CSF (n = 33). Compared to plerixafor, LD‐CY was associated with a significantly lower median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (68/µL vs. 36/µL, P = 0.048), and lower CD34+ cell yield on day 1 of collection (6.9 × 106/kg vs. 2.4 × 106/kg, P = 0.001). Six patients (8.1%) in the LD‐CY group experienced mobilization failure, compared to none in the plerixafor group. The total CD34+ cell yield was significantly higher in the plerixafor group (median 11.6 × 106/kg vs. 7 × 106/kg; P‐value = 0.001). Mobilization with LD‐CY was associated with increased (albeit statistically non‐significant) episodes of febrile neutropenia (5.4% vs. 0%; P = 0.24), higher use of intravenous antibiotics (6.7% vs. 3%; P = 0.45), and need for hospitalizations (9.4% vs. 3%; P = 0.24). The average total cost of mobilization in the plerixafor group was significantly higher compared to the LD‐CY group ($28,980 vs. $19,626.5 P‐value 
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jca.21280
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1441666872</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3097662391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3910-d64e5dd88c8aef3243696bda0dd502a4db2b6d1200354036292dd49f085af78c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kctu1DAYhSMEoqWw4AXQL7FikdaX3LwsIzqAykXi0qXl2E7jwYlT22EanpsHwNNpi1iw8e3_zjmWTpY9x-gYI0RONlIcE0wa9CA7xIg1OcYIP8wOUU1pToqSHWRPQtgghBij5ePsgNC6KktWH2a_P2tvpl57YaG1zikIUQ8gtbUwuNZY80tE40YwIwyzjWayGoZFWzcImNJIjzFA9FrEHRJ7DaP7qe3u5MW05GmFrYk9JKE316JzHsSoYJ2vvpxBLwKEeUqT9Ky7zkghF2jnCMFcjmZ3H6NdoDeXyQ-kCylNumESXiuI7t8_3uRYt82VCxrkIq2behemXgxG6b-xT7NHnbBBP7vdj7JvZ2--rt7m55_W71an57mkDKNcVYUulWoa2QjdUVLQilWtEkipEhFRqJa0lcIEIVoWiFaEEaUK1qGmFF3dSHqUvdz7Tt5dzTpEvnGzH1Mkx0WBq6pqapKoV3tKeheC1x2fvBmEXzhGfNcvT_3ym34T--LWcW4Hre7Ju0ITcLIHtsbq5f9O_P3q9M4y3ytMav76XiH8D17VtC75xcc1Z_jD95JdYP6a_gF-JsQT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1441666872</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Chaudhary, Lubna ; Awan, Farrukh ; Cumpston, Aaron ; Leadmon, Sonia ; Watkins, Kathy ; Tse, William ; Craig, Michael ; Hamadani, Mehdi</creator><creatorcontrib>Chaudhary, Lubna ; Awan, Farrukh ; Cumpston, Aaron ; Leadmon, Sonia ; Watkins, Kathy ; Tse, William ; Craig, Michael ; Hamadani, Mehdi</creatorcontrib><description>Studies comparing the efficacy and cost of peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells mobilization with low‐dose cyclophosphamide (LD‐CY) and granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (G‐CSF) against plerixafor and G‐CSF, in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated in the novel therapy‐era are not available. Herein, we report mobilization outcomes of 107 patients who underwent transplantation within 1‐year of starting induction chemotherapy with novel agents. Patients undergoing mobilization with LD‐CY (1.5 gm/m2) and G‐CSF (n = 74) were compared against patients receiving plerixafor and G‐CSF (n = 33). Compared to plerixafor, LD‐CY was associated with a significantly lower median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (68/µL vs. 36/µL, P = 0.048), and lower CD34+ cell yield on day 1 of collection (6.9 × 106/kg vs. 2.4 × 106/kg, P = 0.001). Six patients (8.1%) in the LD‐CY group experienced mobilization failure, compared to none in the plerixafor group. The total CD34+ cell yield was significantly higher in the plerixafor group (median 11.6 × 106/kg vs. 7 × 106/kg; P‐value = 0.001). Mobilization with LD‐CY was associated with increased (albeit statistically non‐significant) episodes of febrile neutropenia (5.4% vs. 0%; P = 0.24), higher use of intravenous antibiotics (6.7% vs. 3%; P = 0.45), and need for hospitalizations (9.4% vs. 3%; P = 0.24). The average total cost of mobilization in the plerixafor group was significantly higher compared to the LD‐CY group ($28,980 vs. $19,626.5 P‐value &lt; 0.0001). In conclusion, in MM plerixafor‐based mobilization has superior efficacy, but significantly higher mobilization costs compared to LD‐CY mobilization. Our data caution against the use of LD‐CY in MM patients for mobilization, especially after induction with lenalidomide‐containing regimens. J. Clin. Apheresis 28:359–367, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0733-2459</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1098-1101</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jca.21280</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23765597</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject><![CDATA[Adult ; Aged ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - economics ; Antigens, CD34 - metabolism ; Antineoplastic Agents - administration & dosage ; Antineoplastic Agents - economics ; Boronic Acids - administration & dosage ; Boronic Acids - economics ; Bortezomib ; Cohort Studies ; cyclophosphamide ; Cyclophosphamide - administration & dosage ; Cyclophosphamide - economics ; Female ; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - administration & dosage ; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - economics ; Health Care Costs ; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - economics ; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - methods ; Heterocyclic Compounds - administration & dosage ; Heterocyclic Compounds - economics ; Humans ; Lenalidomide ; Leukocytes, Mononuclear - cytology ; Male ; Middle Aged ; mobilization ; multiple myeloma ; Multiple Myeloma - therapy ; Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation - methods ; plerixafor ; Pyrazines - administration & dosage ; Pyrazines - economics ; Thalidomide - administration & dosage ; Thalidomide - analogs & derivatives ; Thalidomide - economics ; Time Factors ; Transplantation Conditioning - methods ; Treatment Outcome]]></subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical apheresis, 2013-10, Vol.28 (5), p.359-367</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3910-d64e5dd88c8aef3243696bda0dd502a4db2b6d1200354036292dd49f085af78c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3910-d64e5dd88c8aef3243696bda0dd502a4db2b6d1200354036292dd49f085af78c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjca.21280$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjca.21280$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23765597$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chaudhary, Lubna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Awan, Farrukh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cumpston, Aaron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leadmon, Sonia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watkins, Kathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tse, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamadani, Mehdi</creatorcontrib><title>Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF</title><title>Journal of clinical apheresis</title><addtitle>J. Clin. Apheresis</addtitle><description>Studies comparing the efficacy and cost of peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells mobilization with low‐dose cyclophosphamide (LD‐CY) and granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (G‐CSF) against plerixafor and G‐CSF, in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated in the novel therapy‐era are not available. Herein, we report mobilization outcomes of 107 patients who underwent transplantation within 1‐year of starting induction chemotherapy with novel agents. Patients undergoing mobilization with LD‐CY (1.5 gm/m2) and G‐CSF (n = 74) were compared against patients receiving plerixafor and G‐CSF (n = 33). Compared to plerixafor, LD‐CY was associated with a significantly lower median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (68/µL vs. 36/µL, P = 0.048), and lower CD34+ cell yield on day 1 of collection (6.9 × 106/kg vs. 2.4 × 106/kg, P = 0.001). Six patients (8.1%) in the LD‐CY group experienced mobilization failure, compared to none in the plerixafor group. The total CD34+ cell yield was significantly higher in the plerixafor group (median 11.6 × 106/kg vs. 7 × 106/kg; P‐value = 0.001). Mobilization with LD‐CY was associated with increased (albeit statistically non‐significant) episodes of febrile neutropenia (5.4% vs. 0%; P = 0.24), higher use of intravenous antibiotics (6.7% vs. 3%; P = 0.45), and need for hospitalizations (9.4% vs. 3%; P = 0.24). The average total cost of mobilization in the plerixafor group was significantly higher compared to the LD‐CY group ($28,980 vs. $19,626.5 P‐value &lt; 0.0001). In conclusion, in MM plerixafor‐based mobilization has superior efficacy, but significantly higher mobilization costs compared to LD‐CY mobilization. Our data caution against the use of LD‐CY in MM patients for mobilization, especially after induction with lenalidomide‐containing regimens. J. Clin. Apheresis 28:359–367, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - economics</subject><subject>Antigens, CD34 - metabolism</subject><subject>Antineoplastic Agents - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Antineoplastic Agents - economics</subject><subject>Boronic Acids - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Boronic Acids - economics</subject><subject>Bortezomib</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>cyclophosphamide</subject><subject>Cyclophosphamide - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Cyclophosphamide - economics</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - economics</subject><subject>Health Care Costs</subject><subject>Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - economics</subject><subject>Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - methods</subject><subject>Heterocyclic Compounds - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Heterocyclic Compounds - economics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lenalidomide</subject><subject>Leukocytes, Mononuclear - cytology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>mobilization</subject><subject>multiple myeloma</subject><subject>Multiple Myeloma - therapy</subject><subject>Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation - methods</subject><subject>plerixafor</subject><subject>Pyrazines - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Pyrazines - economics</subject><subject>Thalidomide - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Thalidomide - analogs &amp; derivatives</subject><subject>Thalidomide - economics</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Transplantation Conditioning - methods</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0733-2459</issn><issn>1098-1101</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kctu1DAYhSMEoqWw4AXQL7FikdaX3LwsIzqAykXi0qXl2E7jwYlT22EanpsHwNNpi1iw8e3_zjmWTpY9x-gYI0RONlIcE0wa9CA7xIg1OcYIP8wOUU1pToqSHWRPQtgghBij5ePsgNC6KktWH2a_P2tvpl57YaG1zikIUQ8gtbUwuNZY80tE40YwIwyzjWayGoZFWzcImNJIjzFA9FrEHRJ7DaP7qe3u5MW05GmFrYk9JKE316JzHsSoYJ2vvpxBLwKEeUqT9Ky7zkghF2jnCMFcjmZ3H6NdoDeXyQ-kCylNumESXiuI7t8_3uRYt82VCxrkIq2behemXgxG6b-xT7NHnbBBP7vdj7JvZ2--rt7m55_W71an57mkDKNcVYUulWoa2QjdUVLQilWtEkipEhFRqJa0lcIEIVoWiFaEEaUK1qGmFF3dSHqUvdz7Tt5dzTpEvnGzH1Mkx0WBq6pqapKoV3tKeheC1x2fvBmEXzhGfNcvT_3ym34T--LWcW4Hre7Ju0ITcLIHtsbq5f9O_P3q9M4y3ytMav76XiH8D17VtC75xcc1Z_jD95JdYP6a_gF-JsQT</recordid><startdate>201310</startdate><enddate>201310</enddate><creator>Chaudhary, Lubna</creator><creator>Awan, Farrukh</creator><creator>Cumpston, Aaron</creator><creator>Leadmon, Sonia</creator><creator>Watkins, Kathy</creator><creator>Tse, William</creator><creator>Craig, Michael</creator><creator>Hamadani, Mehdi</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201310</creationdate><title>Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF</title><author>Chaudhary, Lubna ; Awan, Farrukh ; Cumpston, Aaron ; Leadmon, Sonia ; Watkins, Kathy ; Tse, William ; Craig, Michael ; Hamadani, Mehdi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3910-d64e5dd88c8aef3243696bda0dd502a4db2b6d1200354036292dd49f085af78c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - economics</topic><topic>Antigens, CD34 - metabolism</topic><topic>Antineoplastic Agents - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Antineoplastic Agents - economics</topic><topic>Boronic Acids - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Boronic Acids - economics</topic><topic>Bortezomib</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>cyclophosphamide</topic><topic>Cyclophosphamide - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Cyclophosphamide - economics</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - economics</topic><topic>Health Care Costs</topic><topic>Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - economics</topic><topic>Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - methods</topic><topic>Heterocyclic Compounds - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Heterocyclic Compounds - economics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lenalidomide</topic><topic>Leukocytes, Mononuclear - cytology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>mobilization</topic><topic>multiple myeloma</topic><topic>Multiple Myeloma - therapy</topic><topic>Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation - methods</topic><topic>plerixafor</topic><topic>Pyrazines - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Pyrazines - economics</topic><topic>Thalidomide - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Thalidomide - analogs &amp; derivatives</topic><topic>Thalidomide - economics</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Transplantation Conditioning - methods</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chaudhary, Lubna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Awan, Farrukh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cumpston, Aaron</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leadmon, Sonia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watkins, Kathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tse, William</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamadani, Mehdi</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical apheresis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chaudhary, Lubna</au><au>Awan, Farrukh</au><au>Cumpston, Aaron</au><au>Leadmon, Sonia</au><au>Watkins, Kathy</au><au>Tse, William</au><au>Craig, Michael</au><au>Hamadani, Mehdi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical apheresis</jtitle><addtitle>J. Clin. Apheresis</addtitle><date>2013-10</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>359</spage><epage>367</epage><pages>359-367</pages><issn>0733-2459</issn><eissn>1098-1101</eissn><abstract>Studies comparing the efficacy and cost of peripheral blood stem and progenitor cells mobilization with low‐dose cyclophosphamide (LD‐CY) and granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (G‐CSF) against plerixafor and G‐CSF, in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated in the novel therapy‐era are not available. Herein, we report mobilization outcomes of 107 patients who underwent transplantation within 1‐year of starting induction chemotherapy with novel agents. Patients undergoing mobilization with LD‐CY (1.5 gm/m2) and G‐CSF (n = 74) were compared against patients receiving plerixafor and G‐CSF (n = 33). Compared to plerixafor, LD‐CY was associated with a significantly lower median peak peripheral blood CD34+ cell count (68/µL vs. 36/µL, P = 0.048), and lower CD34+ cell yield on day 1 of collection (6.9 × 106/kg vs. 2.4 × 106/kg, P = 0.001). Six patients (8.1%) in the LD‐CY group experienced mobilization failure, compared to none in the plerixafor group. The total CD34+ cell yield was significantly higher in the plerixafor group (median 11.6 × 106/kg vs. 7 × 106/kg; P‐value = 0.001). Mobilization with LD‐CY was associated with increased (albeit statistically non‐significant) episodes of febrile neutropenia (5.4% vs. 0%; P = 0.24), higher use of intravenous antibiotics (6.7% vs. 3%; P = 0.45), and need for hospitalizations (9.4% vs. 3%; P = 0.24). The average total cost of mobilization in the plerixafor group was significantly higher compared to the LD‐CY group ($28,980 vs. $19,626.5 P‐value &lt; 0.0001). In conclusion, in MM plerixafor‐based mobilization has superior efficacy, but significantly higher mobilization costs compared to LD‐CY mobilization. Our data caution against the use of LD‐CY in MM patients for mobilization, especially after induction with lenalidomide‐containing regimens. J. Clin. Apheresis 28:359–367, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>23765597</pmid><doi>10.1002/jca.21280</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0733-2459
ispartof Journal of clinical apheresis, 2013-10, Vol.28 (5), p.359-367
issn 0733-2459
1098-1101
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1441666872
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Adult
Aged
Anti-Bacterial Agents - administration & dosage
Anti-Bacterial Agents - economics
Antigens, CD34 - metabolism
Antineoplastic Agents - administration & dosage
Antineoplastic Agents - economics
Boronic Acids - administration & dosage
Boronic Acids - economics
Bortezomib
Cohort Studies
cyclophosphamide
Cyclophosphamide - administration & dosage
Cyclophosphamide - economics
Female
Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - administration & dosage
Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor - economics
Health Care Costs
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - economics
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization - methods
Heterocyclic Compounds - administration & dosage
Heterocyclic Compounds - economics
Humans
Lenalidomide
Leukocytes, Mononuclear - cytology
Male
Middle Aged
mobilization
multiple myeloma
Multiple Myeloma - therapy
Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation - methods
plerixafor
Pyrazines - administration & dosage
Pyrazines - economics
Thalidomide - administration & dosage
Thalidomide - analogs & derivatives
Thalidomide - economics
Time Factors
Transplantation Conditioning - methods
Treatment Outcome
title Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients treat in the novel therapy-era with plerixafor and G-CSF has superior efficacy but significantly higher costs compared to mobilization with low-dose cyclophosphamide and G-CSF
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T00%3A50%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Peripheral%20blood%20stem%20cell%20mobilization%20in%20multiple%20myeloma%20patients%20treat%20in%20the%20novel%20therapy-era%20with%20plerixafor%20and%20G-CSF%20has%20superior%20efficacy%20but%20significantly%20higher%20costs%20compared%20to%20mobilization%20with%20low-dose%20cyclophosphamide%20and%20G-CSF&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20apheresis&rft.au=Chaudhary,%20Lubna&rft.date=2013-10&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=359&rft.epage=367&rft.pages=359-367&rft.issn=0733-2459&rft.eissn=1098-1101&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jca.21280&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3097662391%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1441666872&rft_id=info:pmid/23765597&rfr_iscdi=true