Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis

Granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) may enhance recovery from stroke through neuroprotective mechanisms if administered early, or neurorepair if given later. Several small trials suggest administration is safe but effects on efficacy are unclear. We searched for randomised controlled trial...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: England, Timothy J., Sprigg, Nikola, Alasheev, Andrey M., Belkin, Andrey A., Kumar, Amit, Prasad, Kameshwar, Bath, Philip M.W.
Format: Article
Published: Nature Publishing Group 2016
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/38398/
_version_ 1848795602478956544
author England, Timothy J.
Sprigg, Nikola
Alasheev, Andrey M.
Belkin, Andrey A.
Kumar, Amit
Prasad, Kameshwar
Bath, Philip M.W.
author_facet England, Timothy J.
Sprigg, Nikola
Alasheev, Andrey M.
Belkin, Andrey A.
Kumar, Amit
Prasad, Kameshwar
Bath, Philip M.W.
author_sort England, Timothy J.
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description Granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) may enhance recovery from stroke through neuroprotective mechanisms if administered early, or neurorepair if given later. Several small trials suggest administration is safe but effects on efficacy are unclear. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT) assessing G-CSF in patients with hyperacute, acute, subacute or chronic stroke, and asked Investigators to share individual patient data on baseline characteristics, stroke severity and type, end-of trial modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, haematological parameters, serious adverse events and death. Multiple variable analyses were adjusted for age, sex, baseline severity and time-to-treatment. Individual patient data were obtained for 6 of 10 RCTs comprising 196 stroke patients (116 G-CSF, 80 placebo), mean age 67.1 (SD 12.9), 92% ischaemic, median NIHSS 10 (IQR 5-15), randomised 11 days (interquartile range IQR 4-238) post ictus; data from three commercial trials were not shared. G-CSF did not improve mRS (ordinal regression), odds ratio OR 1.12 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.96, p=0.62). There were more patients with a serious adverse event in the G-CSF group (29.6% versus 7.5%, p=0.07) with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (G-CSF 11.2%, placebo 7.6%, p=0.4). Overall, G-CSF did not improve stroke outcome in this individual patient data meta-analysis.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T19:34:42Z
format Article
id nottingham-38398
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T19:34:42Z
publishDate 2016
publisher Nature Publishing Group
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-383982020-05-04T18:21:00Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/38398/ Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis England, Timothy J. Sprigg, Nikola Alasheev, Andrey M. Belkin, Andrey A. Kumar, Amit Prasad, Kameshwar Bath, Philip M.W. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) may enhance recovery from stroke through neuroprotective mechanisms if administered early, or neurorepair if given later. Several small trials suggest administration is safe but effects on efficacy are unclear. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT) assessing G-CSF in patients with hyperacute, acute, subacute or chronic stroke, and asked Investigators to share individual patient data on baseline characteristics, stroke severity and type, end-of trial modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, haematological parameters, serious adverse events and death. Multiple variable analyses were adjusted for age, sex, baseline severity and time-to-treatment. Individual patient data were obtained for 6 of 10 RCTs comprising 196 stroke patients (116 G-CSF, 80 placebo), mean age 67.1 (SD 12.9), 92% ischaemic, median NIHSS 10 (IQR 5-15), randomised 11 days (interquartile range IQR 4-238) post ictus; data from three commercial trials were not shared. G-CSF did not improve mRS (ordinal regression), odds ratio OR 1.12 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.96, p=0.62). There were more patients with a serious adverse event in the G-CSF group (29.6% versus 7.5%, p=0.07) with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (G-CSF 11.2%, placebo 7.6%, p=0.4). Overall, G-CSF did not improve stroke outcome in this individual patient data meta-analysis. Nature Publishing Group 2016-11-15 Article PeerReviewed England, Timothy J., Sprigg, Nikola, Alasheev, Andrey M., Belkin, Andrey A., Kumar, Amit, Prasad, Kameshwar and Bath, Philip M.W. (2016) Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Scientific Reports, 6 . 36567/1-36567/7. ISSN 2045-2322 http://www.nature.com/articles/srep36567 doi:10.1038/srep36567 doi:10.1038/srep36567
spellingShingle England, Timothy J.
Sprigg, Nikola
Alasheev, Andrey M.
Belkin, Andrey A.
Kumar, Amit
Prasad, Kameshwar
Bath, Philip M.W.
Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
title Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
title_full Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
title_fullStr Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
title_short Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
title_sort granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (g-csf) for stroke: an individual patient data meta-analysis
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/38398/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/38398/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/38398/