Erythropoietin plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor is better than erythropoietin alone to treat anemia in low-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: results from a randomized single-centre study

Clicks: 398
ID: 114005
2006
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #8 of 85 articles by views in Annals of hematology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Haemopoietic growth factors (HGF), i.e. erythropoietin [recombinant human erythropoietin (rHEPO)] or granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), alone or in combination, have largely been used to treat anemia in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), but whether combined rHEPO and G-CSF is really superior to rHEPO alone is still under debate. In particular, randomized studies comparing front-line rHEPO vs rHEPO+G-CSF are still lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of “standard” doses of rHEPO with the combination of rHEPO and G-CSF in the treatment of anemic patients with low-risk MDS in a prospective randomized trial. Anemic patients with low-risk MDS were randomly assigned to receive either rHEPO (10,000 IU s.c. three times a week) or the same dosage of rHEPO+G-CSF (300 μg s.c. twice a week) for a minimum of 8 weeks. Patients who were unresponsive to rHEPO were offered the combination therapy for another 8 weeks, whereas non-responders to rHEPO+G-CSF were considered “off study”. Responders continued the treatment indefinitely. Both haematological response and changes in quality-of-life (QoL) scores (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia) were recorded and evaluated. Thirty consecutive patients [10 refractory anemia (RA), 5 RA with ringed sideroblasts, 7 refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia, 5 RA with less than 10% blasts and 3 5q-syndrome] were enrolled in the study. All of them (15 in the rHEPO arm and 15 in the rHEPO+G-CSF arm) were valuable after the first 8 weeks of treatment. Erythroid response was observed in 6/15 (40%) patients in the rHEPO arm and in 11/15 (73.3%) patients in the rHEPO+G-CSF arm. In 4/9 (44.4%) patients who were unresponsive to rHEPO, the addition of G-CSF induced erythroid response at 16 weeks. No relevant adverse effects were recorded for either treatment in any of the study patients. Erythroid response to HGF was associated with a relevant improvement in QoL. Twenty responders continued the treatment. Afterwards, 8/20 (40%) discontinued therapy because of the following: losing response (2), progression to high-risk MDS (3) and death due to other causes (3). The remaining 12 are still responding and continuing treatment, with a median follow-up of 28 months. Progression to acute leukemia was cumulatively observed in 4/30 (13.3%) patients (2 in each arm). Although our data were obtained from a relatively small cohort of patients, they indicate that the rHEPO+G-CSF treatment is more effective than rHEPO alone for correcting anemia in low-risk MDS patients and for making a relevant improvement in their QoL.
Reference Key
balleari2006annalserythropoietin Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors
Journal Annals of hematology
Year 2006
DOI
doi:10.1007/s00277-005-0044-6
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.