Rajat Kumar

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Are you Rajat Kumar?

Claim your profile

Publications (4)18.55 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common complication of cancer therapy. It can contribute to delays in treatment, increased rates of hospitalization, and severe infections. FN may also hinder completion of intended chemotherapy. Granulocyte colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) lower the rates of FN, infections, and hospitalization. Multiple national and international guidelines advocate the use of G-CSF in primary prophylaxis if the overall risk of FN is >20% (accounting for both patient and treatment-related risks). Lymphoma specific guidelines recommend G-CSF use in similar fashion. However, based on our updated review of published literature, we note that primary prophylaxis (PP) with G-CSF fails to improve overall survival as well as infection-related mortality. Moreover, lymphoma specific cost-effectiveness analyses on the use of PP have shed further doubt on the optimal use of this myeloid growth factor. In this general review, we will discuss whether PP with GCSF has any role in the management of adults with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
    Transfusion and Apheresis Science 06/2013; · 1.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    British Journal of Haematology 08/2012; 159(2):250-1. · 4.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Publication bias is the preferential publication of research with positive results, and is a threat to the validity of medical literature. Preliminary evidence suggests that research in blood and marrow transplantation (BMT) lacks publication bias. We evaluated publication bias at an international conference, the 2006 Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR)/American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT) "tandem" meeting. All abstracts were categorized by type of research, funding status, number of centers, sample size, and direction of the results. Publication status was then determined for the abstracts by searching PubMed. Of 501 abstracts, 217 (43%) were later published as complete manuscripts. Abstracts with positive results were more likely to be published than those with negative or unstated results (P = .001). Furthermore, positive studies were published in journals with a mean impact factor of 6.92, whereas journals in which negative/unstated studies were published had an impact factor of only 4.30 (P = .02). We conclude that publication bias exists in the BMT literature. Full publication of research, regardless of direction of results, should be encouraged and the BMT community should be aware of the existence of publication bias.
    Blood 12/2011; 118(25):6698-701. · 9.78 Impact Factor
  • Leukemia & lymphoma 01/2011; 52(1):134-6. · 2.61 Impact Factor