Time filter

Source Type

Windrichova J.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | Fuchsova R.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | Kucera R.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | Topolcan O.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | And 3 more authors.
Anticancer Research | Year: 2017

Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate MIC1/GDF15 as a biomarker in the monitoring of bone metastases occurrence. Patients and Methods: The assessed group included patients diagnosed with: prostate cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer and colorectal cancer. Patients were divided into two groups based on the scintigraphy of the occurrence of bone metastases. Group 0 contained 55 patients without bone metastases, that served as the control group. Group 1 contained 75 patients with bone metastases. Results: Higher levels (p<0.0001) of MIC1/GDF15 were found in group 1 (with bone metastases) compared to the group 0. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed an area under the curve (AUC) 0.87. At the point of 90% specificity we found a 65% sensitivity and cut-off value of 1.48 ng/ml. Conclusion: Circulating MIC1/GDF15 is a powerful biomarker for bone metastatic disease but insufficient sensitivity calls for further studies incorporating combinations with other novel or routine markers.


Lysak D.,Charles University | Lysak D.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | Merglova L.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | Navratilova J.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen | And 3 more authors.
Transfusion and Apheresis Science | Year: 2012

Background: Increasing numbers of unrelated hematopoietic stem cell grafts are transported internationally and evaluated concurrently in different laboratories. The graft quality assessment using the CD34+ enumeration could be influenced by inter-laboratory variability. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the content of CD34+ cells in 154 consecutive collections being performed in different transplant centers during two periods (2003-2004, 2007-2010). All samples were tested twice in our own and partner laboratories. CD34+ percentage and absolute number were compared. Results: The percentage and the total CD34+ content correlated well in both observed periods (CD34+%: r=0.899 and r=0.922; CD34+×108/kg: r=0.966 and r=0.880; p<0.0001). Median CD34+ percentages obtained in our centre in comparison with other laboratories were 0.54% vs. 0.46% in 2003-2004 and 0.69% vs. 0.70% in 2007-2010 period. The degree of laboratory compliance was affected by the laboratory identity. CD34+ percentage reported by one laboratory and CD34+×108/kg reported by three from twelve laboratories lacked statistically significant correlation with our own data. Conclusions: The study documented that results of CD34+ cell dose assessment of the same grafts reported by different transplant centers are comparable. The graft quality data and the CD34+ enumeration possess a limited level of inter-laboratory variability. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.


Ales T.,CEEOR Central and Eastern European Outcomes Research | Veronika V.,CEEOR Central and Eastern European Outcomes Research | Veronika V.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital | Zdenek K.,Masaryk University | Daniel L.,Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen
Journal of Clinical Apheresis | Year: 2013

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) are preferred source of hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation. Mobilization of PBSCs using chemotherapy and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) however fails in around 20%. Combining G-CSF with plerixafor increases the mobilizations success. We compared cost-effectiveness of following schemes: the use of plerixafor "on demand" (POD) during the first mobilization in all patients with inadequate response, the remobilization with plerixafor following failure of the first standard mobilization (SSP), and the standard (re)mobilization scheme without plerixafor (SSNP). Decision tree models populated with data from a first-of-a-kind patient registry in six Czech centers (n = 93) were built to compare clinical benefits and direct costs from the payer's perspective. The success rates and costs for POD, SSP and SSNP mobilizations were; 94.9%, $7,197; 94.7%, $8,049; 84.7%, $5,991, respectively. The direct cost per successfully treated patient was $7,586, $8,501, and $7,077, respectively. The cost of re-mobilization of a poor mobilizer was $5,808 with G-CSF only and $16,755 if plerixafor was added. The total cost of plerixafor "on-demand" in the sub-cohort of poor mobilizers was $17,120. Generally, plerixafor improves the mobilization success by 10% and allows an additional patient to be successfully mobilized for incremental $11,803. Plerixafor is better and cheaper if used "on demand" than within a subsequent remobilization. J. Clin. Apheresis, 28:395-403, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


PubMed | Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen
Type: Comparative Study | Journal: Journal of clinical apheresis | Year: 2014

Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) are preferred source of hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation. Mobilization of PBSCs using chemotherapy and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) however fails in around 20%. Combining G-CSF with plerixafor increases the mobilizations success. We compared cost-effectiveness of following schemes: the use of plerixafor on demand (POD) during the first mobilization in all patients with inadequate response, the remobilization with plerixafor following failure of the first standard mobilization (SSP), and the standard (re)mobilization scheme without plerixafor (SSNP). Decision tree models populated with data from a first-of-a-kind patient registry in six Czech centers (n = 93) were built to compare clinical benefits and direct costs from the payers perspective. The success rates and costs for POD, SSP and SSNP mobilizations were; 94.9%, $7,197; 94.7%, $8,049; 84.7%, $5,991, respectively. The direct cost per successfully treated patient was $7,586, $8,501, and $7,077, respectively. The cost of re-mobilization of a poor mobilizer was $5,808 with G-CSF only and $16,755 if plerixafor was added. The total cost of plerixafor on-demand in the sub-cohort of poor mobilizers was $17,120. Generally, plerixafor improves the mobilization success by 10% and allows an additional patient to be successfully mobilized for incremental $11,803. Plerixafor is better and cheaper if used on demand than within a subsequent remobilization.

Loading Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen collaborators
Loading Medical School and Teaching Hospital in Pilsen collaborators