Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Apr 2:11:123-130.
doi: 10.2147/JBM.S224173. eCollection 2020.

Monocentric Analysis of the Effectiveness and Financial Consequences of the Use of Lenograstim versus Filgrastim for Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cells in Patients with Lymphoma and Myeloma Receiving Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Umberto Restelli  1   2 , Davide Croce  1   2 , Erminio Bonizzoni  3 , Mario Marzanatti  3 , Angelo Andreini  4 , Marco Sorio  4 , Cristina Tecchio  4 , Erika Barison  4 , Fabio Benedetti  4
Affiliations

Monocentric Analysis of the Effectiveness and Financial Consequences of the Use of Lenograstim versus Filgrastim for Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cells in Patients with Lymphoma and Myeloma Receiving Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Umberto Restelli et al. J Blood Med. .

Abstract

Purpose: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are widely used to mobilize CD34+ stem cells and to support the engraftment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). A budget impact analysis and an incremental cost-effectiveness study of two G-CSFs (Lenograstim and Filgrastim biosimilar), considering engraftment, number of hospitalization days and number of G-CSF vials administered were performed.

Patients and methods: Between 2009 and 2016, 248 patients undergoing autologous HSCT have been evaluated and divided into three groups (100 Leno-Leno, 93 Leno-Fil, 55 Fil-Fil) according to the type of G-CSF used for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and hematopoietic stem cell recovery after transplant.

Results: The following statistically significant differences have been observed between Leno-Leno, Leno-Fil, Fil-Fil groups: a higher number of harvested CD34+ cells (10.56 vs 8.00 vs 7.20; p=0.0003) and a lower number of G-CSF vials (8 vs 8 vs 9; p=0.00020) used for full bone marrow recovery favoring Lenograstim. No statistically significant differences were found regarding the number of G-CSF vials used for mobilization, apheresis number and CD34+ cell peak. The post-transplant hematological recovery was faster in Lenograstim group than Filgrastim group: median time to neutrophil count engraftment (>500/mmc) was 12 vs 13 days; median time for platelets recovery (>20.000/mmc) was 12 vs 15 days (p=0.0001). The use of Lenograstim achieved cost savings of €566/patient over Filgrastim biosimilar, related to a decreased number of days of hospitalization (16 vs 17 days; p=0.00012), a lower overall incidence of adverse events, laboratory tests, transfusions for platelet recovery following discharge.

Conclusion: In our experience, Lenograstim outperforms Filgrastim in terms of effectiveness and lower cost. This study shows a clinical superiority of Lenograstim over Filgrastim suggesting a potential cost savings favoring Lenograstim.

Keywords: G-CSF; HSCT; cost-effectiveness; filgrastim; lenograstim; mobilization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr Umberto Restelli reports grants from Italfarmaco, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Italfarmaco, outside the submitted work. Dr Erminio Bonizzoni reports personal fees from Italfarmaco, during the conduct of the study. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Kaplan–Meier curves of the 3 treatment groups in relation to days from chemotherapy necessary for WBCs (>500/mmc), PTLs (>20.000/mmc) recovery and days of hospitalization.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hopman RK, DiPersio JF. Advances in stem cell mobilization. Blood Rev. 2014;28(1):31–40. doi:10.1016/j.blre.2014.01.001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Orciuolo E, Buda G, Marturano E, et al. Lenograstim reduces the incidence of febrile episodes, when compared with Filgrastim, in multiple myeloma patients undergoing stem cell mobilization. Leuk Res. 2011;35(7):899–903. doi:10.1016/j.leukres.2010.10.029 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gardellini A, Gigli F, Babic A, et al. Filgrastim XM02 (Tevagrastim) after autologous stem cell transplantation compared to lenograstim: favorable cost-efficacy analysis. Ecancermedicalscience. 2013;7:327. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rogers KM. Topics in clinical pharmacology: filgrastim, a myeloid colony stimulating factor. Am J Med Sci. 1992;303(6):429–431. doi:10.1097/00000441-199206000-00015 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Curran MP, Goa KL. Pegfilgrastim. Drugs. 2002;62(8):1207–1213. doi:10.2165/00003495-200262080-00012 - DOI - PubMed