The use of an insuflon device for the administration of G-CSF in pediatric cancer patients

Patient preferences for prophylactic regimens requiring regular injections in children and adolescents: a systematic review and thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

At present, limited literature exists exploring patient preferences for prophylactic treatment of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Given low treatment completion rates to this treatment in Australia, where the burden of disease predominantly affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, an improved understanding of factors driving patient preference is required to improve outcomes. Due to limited available literature, this review sought to explore treatment preferences for conditions for which the findings might be generalisable to the ARF/RHD context.

OBJECTIVE

Explore treatment preferences of patients, parents/caregivers and healthcare providers towards regular injection regimens in paediatric and adolescent populations for any chronic condition. Findings will be applied to the development of benzathine penicillin G (BPG) prophylactic regimens that are informed by treatment preferences of patients and their caregivers. This in turn should contribute to optimisation of successful BPG delivery.

METHODS

A systematic review of databases (Medline, Embase and Global Health) was conducted using a search strategy developed with expert librarian input. Studies were selected using a two-stage process: (1) title and abstract screen and (2) full text review. Data were extracted using a reviewer-developed template and appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal tool. Data were synthesised according to a thematic analytical framework.

RESULTS

1725 papers were identified by the database search, conducted between 12 February 2022 and 8 April 2022, and 25 were included in the review. Line-by-line coding to search for concepts generated 20 descriptive themes. From these, five overarching analytical themes were derived inductively: (1) ease of use, (2) tolerability of injection, (3) impact on daily life, (4) patient/caregiver agency and (5) home/healthcare interface.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review may be used to inform the development of preference-led regular injection regimens for paediatric and adolescent patient cohorts-specifically for BPG administration in ARF/RHD secondary prophylaxis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Patient, parent and health personnel preferences towards regular injection regimes in paediatric and adolescent populations-a protocol for a systematic review. PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021284375. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021284375.

Efficacy, Safety, and Pain Level of Subcutaneous Catheter Use for Administration of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) in Children With Cancer: A Randomized Pilot Study

Background: The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy, safety, and pain level of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration via a subcutaneous catheter compared with direct injection in children with cancer. Method: This was a pilot randomized controlled trial of standard G-CSF administration versus subcutaneous catheter administration. Children 2-15 years of age who were beginning G-CSF after their first chemotherapy cycle and anticipated to receive G-CSF following the next three cycles of chemotherapy were eligible. Efficacy, safety, and pain were as outcomes of the study. Results: Twenty-nine children with cancer (median age 12 years) were enrolled in the study (16 children in the subcutaneous catheter group and 13 children in the direct injection group). During Cycle 2, the median number of days to reach absolute neutrophil count (ANC) ≥ 500/mm3 was greater among those in the subcutaneous catheter group (12 vs. 10; p  =  .02). In Cycle 3, however, the subcutaneous catheter group received fewer doses of G-CSF (8 vs. 12; p  =  .004). No complications related to subcutaneous catheter use were observed. No differences in the visual analog scale pain score were observed between groups in Cycles 1 to 3; however, in Cycle 4, children in the subcutaneous catheter group had lower median pain scores than those in the direct subcutaneous injection group (Mdn  =  0, [IQR]  =  0-2 vs. Mdn  =  1, IQR  =  0-6; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Results demonstrated administering G-CSF via a subcutaneous catheter enables ANC to recover with no pain or complications associated with its use. Thus, oncology teams may consider this administration method to be used in children with cancer.

Biosimilar Pegfilgrastim: Improving Access and Optimising Practice to Supportive Care that Enables Cure

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious complication of chemotherapy, which can cause significant morbidity and mortality, result in dose delays and reductions and, ultimately, reduce cancer survival. Over the past decade, the availability of biosimilar filgrastim (short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) has transformed patient access, with clear evidence of clinical benefit at preventing FN at reduced costs. In 2019, seven biosimilar pegfilgrastims (long-acting G-CSFs) were licensed, creating optimal market conditions and choice for prescribers. FN affects up to 117 per 1000 cancer patients, with mortality rates in the range of 2–21%. By reducing FN incidence and improving chemotherapy relative dose intensity (RDI), G-CSF has been associated with a 3.2% absolute survival benefit. Guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis and that filgrastim be administered for 10–14 days, while pegfilgrastim is administered once per cycle. When taken according to the guidelines, pegfilgrastim and filgrastim are equally effective. However, in routine clinical practice, filgrastim is often under-dosed (< 7 days) and has been shown to be inferior to pegfilgrastim at reducing FN incidence, hospitalisations and maintaining RDI. Once-per-cycle administration with pegfilgrastim might also aid patient adherence. The introduction of biosimilar pegfilgrastim should instigate a rethink of neutropenia management. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim offers countries using biosimilar filgrastim opportunities to improve adherence and thus cancer survival, whilst offering economic benefits for countries using reference pegfilgrastim. These benefits can be realised in full if biosimilar pegfilgrastim becomes part of routine clinical practice supported by drug and therapeutic committees implementing guidelines with multidisciplinary support in the hospital.

Enoxaparin Use in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Experience Over 8 Years

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of enoxaparin therapy in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Level III NICU in a Canadian academic center.

PATIENTS

All neonates treated with enoxaparin while in the NICU between January 1, 1998, and June 1, 2006.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Data abstracted included patient demographics, diagnosis of thrombosis and its progression, enoxaparin dosages with corresponding antifactor Xa levels, and adverse events. Sixteen neonates (four term, 12 preterm) were treated with enoxaparin at a mean +/- SD initial subcutaneous dose of 1.41 +/- 0.15 mg/kg every 12 hours. The target therapeutic range (antifactor Xa level 0.5-1.0 U/ml) was achieved by 12 infants at a mean +/- SD dose of 1.92 +/- 0.43 mg/kg every 12 hours, after a mean of 5.6 days (range 1-15 days). Preterm infants required a higher dose (per kilogram) compared with term infants to maintain therapeutic antifactor Xa levels (mean +/- SD 1.94 +/- 0.39 vs 1.65 +/- 0.14 mg/kg every 12 hrs, p<0.001). Enoxaparin doses were more strongly correlated to antifactor Xa levels in term infants (r(2)=0.51, p<0.001) compared with preterm infants (r(2)=0.20, p<0.001). Ten (71%) of 14 thromboembolic events resolved, either partially or completely, at a mean of 39 days (range 8-61 days) of enoxaparin therapy. Nine infants (56%) experienced minor local adverse effects at the site of the indwelling subcutaneous catheter (induration, bruises, hematomas, or leakage). Systemic adverse events that were possibly related to enoxaparin therapy included osteopenia (one infant), scleral hemorrhage (one), and minor gastrointestinal tract bleeding (three) found in gastric feeding tubes. No adverse effects were associated with antifactor Xa levels greater than 1.0 U/ml.

CONCLUSION

Enoxaparin may be effective in the treatment of neonatal thrombosis. An initial dosage of 1.5 mg/kg every 12 hours is likely inadequate to obtain therapeutic antifactor Xa levels rapidly and differs for term and preterm neonates. Therapeutic levels in preterm infants may be more variable, and the pharmacokinetics of this drug in preterm infants requires further evaluation. Future studies in neonates should prospectively evaluate a higher starting dose of enoxaparin to document effectiveness, acceptance, compliance with treatment guidelines, and adverse effects.