Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Hematology 10/2017

Open Access 01-10-2017 | Original Article

Biosimilar G-CSF versus filgrastim and lenograstim in healthy unrelated volunteer hematopoietic stem cell donors

Authors: Roiya Farhan, Elżbieta Urbanowska, Hanna Zborowska, Małgorzata Król, Maria Król, Tigran Torosian, Iwona Piotrowska, Krzysztof Bogusz, Kamila Skwierawska, Wiesław Wiktor-Jędrzejczak, Emilian Snarski

Published in: Annals of Hematology | Issue 10/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

The World Marrow Donor Organization recommends original granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for the mobilization of stem cells in healthy unrelated hematopoietic stem cell donors. We report the comparison of a biosimilar G-CSF (Zarzio) with two original G-CSFs (filgrastim and lenograstim) in mobilization in unrelated donors. We included data of 313 consecutive donors who were mobilized during the period from October 2014 to March 2016 at the Medical University of Warsaw. The primary endpoints of this study were the efficiency of CD34+ cell mobilization to the circulation and results of the first apheresis. The mean daily dose of G-CSF was 9.1 μg/kg for lenograstim, 9.8 μg/kg for biosimilar filgrastim, and 9.3 μg/kg for filgrastim (p < 0.001). The mean CD34+ cell number per microliter in the blood before the first apheresis was 111 for lenograstim, 119 for biosimilar filgrastim, and 124 for filgrastim (p = 0.354); the mean difference was even less significant when comparing CD34+ number per dose of G-CSF per kilogram (p = 0.787). Target doses of CD34+ cells were reached with one apheresis in 87% donors mobilized with lenograstim and in 93% donors mobilized with original and biosimilar filgrastim (p = 0.005). The mobilized apheresis outcomes (mean number of CD34+ cells/kg of donor collected during the first apheresis) was similar with lenograstim, biosimilar filgrastim, and filgrastim: 6.2 × 106, 7.6 × 106, and 7.3 × 106, respectively, p = 0.06. There was no mobilization failure in any of the donors. Biosimilar G-CSF is as effective in the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells in unrelated donors as original G-CSFs. Small and clinically irrelevant differences seen in the study can be attributed to differences in G-CSF dose and collection-related factors. Active safety surveillance concurrent to clinical use and reporting to donor outcome registry (e.g., EBMT donor outcome registry or WMDA SEAR/SPEAR) might help to evaluate the possible short- and long-term complications of biosimilar G-CSF.

Literature
  1. World Marrow Donors Worldwide Homepage: www.​wmda.​info
  2. Sourgens H, Lefrère F (2011) A systematic review of available clinical evidence - filgrastim compared with lenograstim. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 49(8):510–518View ArticlePubMed
  3. Fischer JC, Frick M, Wassmuth R, Platz A, Punzel M, Wernet P (2005) Superior mobilisation of haematopoietic progenitor cells with glycosylated G-CSF in male but not female unrelated stem cell donors. Br J Haematol 130(5):740–746View ArticlePubMed
  4. Martino M, Console G, Irrera G, Callea I, Condemi A, Dattola A, Messina G, Pontari A, Pucci G, Furlò G, Bresolin G, Iacopino P, Morabito F (2005) Harvesting peripheral blood progenitor cells from healthy donors: retrospective comparison of filgrastim and lenograstim. J Clin Apher 20(3):129–136View ArticlePubMed
  5. Ings SJ, Balsa C, Mackinnon S, Linch C, Watts MJ (2006) Peripheral blood stem cell yield in 400 normal donors mobilised with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor ( G-CSF ): impact of age, sex, donor weight and type of G-CSF used. 517–525
  6. Schmitt M, Publicover A, Orchard KH, Görlach M, Wang L, Schmitt A, Mani J, Tsirigotis P, Kuriakose R, Nagler A (2014) Biosimilar G-CSF based mobilization of peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cells for autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Theranostics 4(3):280–289View ArticlePubMedPubMed Central
  7. Bonig H, Becker PS, Schwebig A, Turner M (2015) Biosimilar granulocyte–colony‐stimulating factor for healthy donor stem cell mobilization: need we be afraid? 55
  8. R. P. Becker PSA, Brauninger S, Bialleck H, Luxembourg B, Schulz M, Wiesneth M and B. H. Mytilineos J, Seidl C, Geisenberger O, Schwebig A, Schrezenmeier H, Seifried E (2013) Biosimilar filgrastim mobilizes haematopoietic stem cells in healthy volunteer donors with expected efficiency and typical acute adverse effects:interim results of a post authorization safety study. Bone Marrow Transpl (48):S28
  9. Koytchev R, Zeta E, Heigener D (2011) Concerns about the use of biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for the mobilization of stem cells in normal donors: position of the World Marrow Donor Association. Haematol Blood Transfus 96(7):942–947
  10. 2013 European Medicines Agency (2005) Scientific guidelines on biosimilar medicines. EMA, London
  11. Sutherland DR, Anderson L, Keeney M, Nayar R, Chin-Yee I (1996) The ISHAGE guidelines for CD34+ cell determination by flow cytometry. International Society of Hematotherapy and Graft Engineering. J Hematother 5(3):213–226View ArticlePubMed
  12. Bertani G, Santoleri L, Martino M, Fedele R, Moscato T, Marenco P, Grillo G, Zucchetti E, Lotesoriere I, Lando G, Cesana C, Cairoli R, Rossini S (2014) Identification of hematopoietic progenitor cell donor characteristics predicting successful mobilization: results of an Italian multicenter study. Transfusion 54(8):2028–2033View ArticlePubMed
Metadata
Title
Biosimilar G-CSF versus filgrastim and lenograstim in healthy unrelated volunteer hematopoietic stem cell donors
Authors
Roiya Farhan
Elżbieta Urbanowska
Hanna Zborowska
Małgorzata Król
Maria Król
Tigran Torosian
Iwona Piotrowska
Krzysztof Bogusz
Kamila Skwierawska
Wiesław Wiktor-Jędrzejczak
Emilian Snarski
Publication date
01-10-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Annals of Hematology / Issue 10/2017
Print ISSN: 0939-5555
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0584
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-017-3060-4

Other articles of this Issue 10/2017

Annals of Hematology 10/2017 Go to the issue