Efficacy and safety of the single-dose pegylated G-CSF vs. daily G-CSF for peripheral blood stem cells mobilization in donors: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial - Summary - MDSpire

Efficacy and safety of the single-dose pegylated G-CSF vs. daily G-CSF for peripheral blood stem cells mobilization in donors: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial

  • By

  • Jiali Li

  • Sha Zhou

  • Xiaoping Li

  • Xiangyu Ma

  • Sanbin Wang

  • Yicheng Zhang

  • Shifeng Lou

  • Jun Rao

  • Ping Wang

  • Lidan Zhu

  • Ting Chen

  • Xixi Xiang

  • Shichun Gao

  • Han Yao

  • Peiyan Kong

  • Lei Gao

  • Cheng Zhang

  • Xi Zhang

  • Li Gao

  • June 24, 2026

  • 0 min

Share

Objective:

To compare the efficacy and safety of single-dose Pegylated G-CSF (Peg-G-CSF) versus daily G-CSF in mobilizing peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) in healthy donors.

Approach:
  • Method: A
  • Method: m
  • Method: u
  • Method: l
  • Method: t
  • Method: i
  • Method: c
  • Method: e
  • Method: n
  • Method: t
  • Method: e
  • Method: r
  • Method: ,
  • Method: r
  • Method: a
  • Method: n
  • Method: d
  • Method: o
  • Method: m
  • Method: i
  • Method: z
  • Method: e
  • Method: d
  • Method: c
  • Method: o
  • Method: n
  • Method: t
  • Method: r
  • Method: o
  • Method: l
  • Method: l
  • Method: e
  • Method: d
  • Method: t
  • Method: r
  • Method: i
  • Method: a
  • Method: l
  • Method: c
  • Method: o
  • Method: n
  • Method: d
  • Method: u
  • Method: c
  • Method: t
  • Method: e
  • Method: d
  • Method: f
  • Method: r
  • Method: o
  • Method: m
  • Method: M
  • Method: a
  • Method: y
  • Method: 2
  • Method: 0
  • Method: 1
  • Method: 8
  • Method: t
  • Method: o
  • Method: A
  • Method: p
  • Method: r
  • Method: i
  • Method: l
  • Method: 2
  • Method: 0
  • Method: 1
  • Method: 9
  • Method: w
  • Method: i
  • Method: t
  • Method: h
  • Method: h
  • Method: e
  • Method: a
  • Method: l
  • Method: t
  • Method: h
  • Method: y
  • Method: d
  • Method: o
  • Method: n
  • Method: o
  • Method: r
  • Method: s
  • Method: r
  • Method: e
  • Method: c
  • Method: e
  • Method: i
  • Method: v
  • Method: i
  • Method: n
  • Method: g
  • Method: e
  • Method: i
  • Method: t
  • Method: h
  • Method: e
  • Method: r
  • Method: 1
  • Method: 2
  • Method: m
  • Method: g
  • Method: P
  • Method: e
  • Method: g
  • Method: -
  • Method: G
  • Method: -
  • Method: C
  • Method: S
  • Method: F
  • Method: o
  • Method: r
  • Method: 1
  • Method: 0
  • Method: µ
  • Method: g
  • Method: /
  • Method: k
  • Method: g
  • Method: /
  • Method: d
  • Method: G
  • Method: -
  • Method: C
  • Method: S
  • Method: F
  • Method: .
Key Findings:
  • 83.3% of donors in the Peg-G-CSF group and 79.2% in the G-CSF group collected ≥4×10^6 CD34+ cells/kg.
  • Median yield of CD34+ cells was comparable between both groups.
  • No significant differences in side effects were observed, and there were no significant differences in engraftment, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), or survival between groups.
Interpretation:

Single injection of Peg-G-CSF is as effective and safe as traditional daily G-CSF for PBSC mobilization.

Limitations:
  • The study was limited to a specific population of healthy donors related to acute leukemia recipients.
  • Follow-up loss of donors was considered in sample size estimation.
Conclusion:

Peg-G-CSF offers a viable alternative to daily G-CSF for PBSC mobilization, maintaining efficacy and safety.

Sources:

Original Source(s)

Related Content