GM-CSF versus G-CSF: engraftment characteristics, resource utilization, and cost following autologous PBSC transplantation.
BACKGROUND
G-CSF and GM-CSF have both been shown to decrease the time to hematopoietic recovery when administered after autologous BM or peripheral stem cell re-infusion. However, few studies have compared G-CSF and GM-CSF to determine which is the preferred myeloid growth factor.


METHODS
This study compares a prospectively accrued cohort of 22 patients receiving GM-CSF with a historical cohort of patients who received G-CSF commencing Day + 6 after autologous PBSC transplantation. Patients were matched based on disease type and stage, CD34(+) cell dose/kg, conditioning regimen, and prior treatment. Time to myeloid engraftment, growth factor utilization, antibiotic utilization, fever incidence, and cost were compared.


RESULTS
The median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment was similar in the two groups (ANC > 500 /mm(3), GM-CSF 12 versus G-CSF 11, P = 0.69). There was a trend towards more days of temperature > 38.0 masculine C (six versus three, P = 0.05) and febrile neutropenia (three versus two, P = 0.06) in the GM-CSF arm. There was a trend towards increased use of i.v. antibiotics in the GM-CSF cohort (7.6 days versus 5.5 days, P = 0.06). More chest X-rays (1.5 versus 1.0, P = 0.03) were ordered, and more blood cultures drawn (4.2 versus 2.7, P = 0.05) as part of fever evaluation in the group treated with GM-CSF. Resource utilization based on actual wholesale pricing (AWP) favored the G-CSF cohort. Applying a sensitivity analysis, GM-CSF became cost-effective when priced below $94 per 250 micro g, despite greater resource utilization.


CONCLUSIONS
This study suggests that engraftment characteristics are similar with GM-CSF and G-CSF following PBSC transplantation. Resource utilization for fever treatment and evaluation may be greater with GM-CSF. Determination of which agent is more cost-effective depends on institutional acquisition costs.
Zumberg
M S
MS
University of Florida College of Medicine, Department of Medicine and the Bone Marrow Transplant Program, Shands Hospital at the University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Leather
H L
HL
Nejame
C
C
Meyer
C
C
Wingard
J R
JR
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000971:Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000628:therapy; D015331:Cohort Studies; D004334:Drug Administration Schedule; D005260:Female; D016179:Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D016178:Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D019650:Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods; D006412:Hematopoietic Stem Cells / Q000187:drug effects / Q000378:metabolism; D006801:Humans; D008228:Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000628:therapy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009101:Multiple Myeloma / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000628:therapy; D011446:Prospective Studies; D033581:Stem Cell Transplantation / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods*; D014182:Transplantation, Autologous
D016179:Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; D016178:Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor