Literature DB >> 11290864

Granulocyte colony stimulating factors: how different are they? How to make a decision?

F Martin-Christin1.   

Abstract

Two granulocyte colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are available for clinical use in Europe: filgrastim (Neupogen) and lenograstim (Granocyte). The purpose of this literature review is to study how they differ, the clinical implications of these differences (especially in terms of efficacy) and the economic impact of these differences. From a chemical point of view the two molecules are not identical. Their amino acid sequence is different and one is glycosylated, whereas the other is not. The important question to ask is what these structural differences mean for the patient. It appears that glycosylation has important consequences in terms of efficacy. Several recent comparative studies, both in vitro and in vivo, in animals and in humans, reinforce this idea which was often shared intuitively by physicians. In economical terms, in hospitals where the exact dosages are used (150 microg/m2 or 19.2 million units (MU)/m2 for Granocyte, and 5 microg/kg or 0.5 MU/kg for Neupogen), the choice of G-CSF must be made according to the daily cost of treatment which, for an average patient, means comparing the price of 325 microg of Neupogen and of 255 microg of Granocyte. This is in fact equal to comparing the price per MU of each product. In hospitals where one vial per patient per day is used whatever be their weight or body surface area, the price per MU and the price per vial should be considered together, puting into perspective the potential therapeutic benefit for patients, one vial of Granocyte 34 containing more MU than one vial of Neupogen 30.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11290864     DOI: 10.1097/00001813-200103000-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anticancer Drugs        ISSN: 0959-4973            Impact factor:   2.248


  6 in total

Review 1.  Lenograstim: a review of its use in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, for acceleration of neutrophil recovery following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation and in peripheral blood stem cell mobilization.

Authors:  Gillian M Keating
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2011-04-16       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  Evaluation of soluble expression of recombinant granulocyte macrophage stimulating factor (rGM-CSF) by three different E. coli strains.

Authors:  Sina Soheili; Ali Jahanian-Najafabadi; Vajihe Akbari
Journal:  Res Pharm Sci       Date:  2020-07-03

3.  Transient co-expression with three O-glycosylation enzymes allows production of GalNAc-O-glycosylated Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor in N. benthamiana.

Authors:  Israel A Ramírez-Alanis; Justin B Renaud; Silverio García-Lara; Rima Menassa; Guy A Cardineau
Journal:  Plant Methods       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 4.993

4.  XM02 is superior to placebo and equivalent to Neupogen in reducing the duration of severe neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia in cycle 1 in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/doxorubicin chemotherapy.

Authors:  A del Giglio; A Eniu; D Ganea-Motan; E Topuzov; H Lubenau
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2008-11-12       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  Canadian supportive care recommendations for the management of neutropenia in patients with cancer.

Authors:  C T Kouroukis; S Chia; S Verma; D Robson; C Desbiens; C Cripps; J Mikhael
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.677

6.  Antiapoptotic effects of Phe140Asn, a novel human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor mutant in H9c2 rat cardiomyocytes.

Authors:  Hee Kyoung Chung; Eun Mi Ko; Sung Woo Kim; Sung-June Byun; Hak-Jae Chung; Moosik Kwon; Hwi-Cheul Lee; Byoung-Chul Yang; Deug-Woo Han; Jin-Ki Park; Sung-Gu Hong; Won-Kyong Chang; Kyung-Woon Kim
Journal:  BMB Rep       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.778

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.