4.7 Article

Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy for patients with neutropenia and/or neutrophil dysfunction secondary to glycogen to disease type 1b

期刊

BLOOD
卷 97, 期 2, 页码 376-382

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood.V97.2.376

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) therapy in patients with neutropenia and/or neutrophil dysfunction secondary to glycogen storage disease (GSD) type 1b, Thirteen patients with neutropenia and/or neutrophil dysfunction secondary to GSD type 1b were treated with rhG-CSF, The effects of therapy on neutrophil numbers and in vitro neutrophil function and on bone marrow cellularity and morphology were studied. The clinical status of the patients and the occurrence of adverse events associated with rhG-CSF use were monitored. Use of rhG-CSF therapy was associated with a significant increase in circulating neutrophil numbers (P < .01) and an improvement in neutrophil function as assessed in vitro. In addition, rhG-CSF therapy produced a significant increase in marrow cellularity and an increase in myeloid:erythroid (M:E) ratio, indicating stimulation of granulopoeisis, No adverse effects on marrow function were noted; in particular, no myelodysplasia or marrow exhaustion was seen. Use of rhG-CSF therapy was associated with objective and subjective improvements in infection-related morbidity, The therapy was well tolerated, although ail patients developed splenomegaly, and 5 patients developed mild hypersplenism that did not require any specific treatment. rhG-CSF therapy is efficacious in the management of neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction associated with GSD type 1b, Patients on this therapy need to be monitored for hypersplenism. Continued follow-up will be necessary to confirm long-term safety; however, no significant short-term toxicity was noted. (C) 2001 by The American Society of Hematology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据