Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Is Safe and Well Tolerated following Allogeneic Transplantation in Patients with Sickle Cell Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) used after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) can enhance neutrophil recovery in patients rendered neutropenic by the preparative regimen. G-CSF is contraindicated in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), because life-threatening complications can ensue in the presence of sickle vasculopathy. The safety profile of G-CSF after HSCT for SCD has not been described, however. We report clinical outcomes in the first 100 days post-HSCT in 62 patients supported with G-CSF until neutrophil recovery on a clinical trial of reduced- intensity conditioning HSCT for SCD. The patients received G-CSF for a median of 9 days (range, 5 to 33 days) post-transplantation from the best available stem cell source. Preparation for transplantation included a target hemoglobin S level of ≤45%. Neutrophil engraftment (absolute neutrophil count >0.5 × 10 3 /mL) was achieved at a median of 13 days (range, 10 to 34 days), and platelet engraftment (>50 × 10 3 /mL) was achieved at a median of 19 days (range, 12 to 71 days). The median duration of inpatient hospitalization following stem cell infusion (day 0) was 21.5 days (range, 11 to 33 days). No patient developed SCD-related complications following G-CSF use. The most common organ toxicities encountered between G-CSF initiation (on day +7) and day +100 were anorexia (n = 14), hypertension (n = 11), and electrolyte imbalance requiring correction (n = 9). Central nervous system-related events were noted in 5 patients, all of whom had preexisting cerebral vasculopathy/moyamoya disease, attributed to reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome in the presence of calcineurin inhibitor therapy and hypertension. We conclude that G-CSF does not adversely impact SCD HSCT recipients and can be safely used post-transplantation to enhance neutrophil recovery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".