Effects of glycosylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after high-dose cytarabine-based induction chemotherapy for adult acute myeloid leukaemia

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF after induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan society of clinical oncology

Although granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the incidence, duration, and severity of neutropenia, its prophylactic use for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains controversial due to a theoretically increased risk of relapse. The present study investigated the effects of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for AML with remission induction therapy. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of pooled data was conducted, and the risk ratio with corresponding confidence intervals was calculated in the meta-analysis and summarized. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, nine of which were examined in the meta-analysis. Although G-CSF significantly shortened the duration of neutropenia, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not correlate with infection-related mortality. Moreover, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not affect disease progression/recurrence, overall survival, or adverse events, such as musculoskeletal pain. However, evidence to support or discourage the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for adult AML patients with induction therapy remains limited. Therefore, the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis can be considered for adult AML patients with remission induction therapy who are at a high risk of infectious complications.

Efficacy and cost-benefit of filgrastim administered after early assessment bone marrow biopsy during induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia

The role of filgrastim during acute myeloid leukemia (AML) induction therapy remains controversial. At our institution, newly diagnosed AML patients from 2003 through 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were stratified on whether they received filgrastim within 5 days after early assessment bone marrow (BMBx) and divided into early GCSF group (eGCSF) and no-eGCSF group. A total of 121 patients were included. We found significantly shorter hospital stay (median 24 vs 26 days, p < .01), absolute neutrophil count recovery days (median 23 vs 25 days, p = .03), and intravenous antibiotics days (mean 18.5 vs 21.4 days, p = .01) in patients with eGCSF comparing with no-eGCSF. There was no significant difference regarding complete response rates; however, for those failed to achieve remission, eGCSF was associated with higher blast count. There was no significant difference regarding overall survival or progression-free survival. The use of eGCSF was associated with cost savings of $5199 per patient over no-eGCSF.

Effect of rhG-CSF Combined With Decitabine Prophylaxis on Relapse of Patients With High-Risk MRD-Negative AML After HSCT: An Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial

Relapse is a major cause of treatment failure after allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) for high-risk acute myeloid leukemia (HR-AML). The aim of this study was to explore the effect of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) combined with minimal-dose decitabine (Dec) on the prevention of HR-AML relapse after allo-HSCT.

Intensive consolidation with G-CSF support: Tolerability, safety, reduced hospitalization, and efficacy in acute myeloid leukemia patients ≥60 years

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of intensified consolidation therapy employing fludarabine and ARA-C in cycle 1 and intermediate-dose ARA-C (IDAC) in cycles 2 through 4, in elderly acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients and to analyze the effects of pegfilgrastim on the duration of neutropenia, overall toxicity, and hospitalization-time during consolidation in these patients. Thirty nine elderly patients with de novo AML (median age 69.9 years) who achieved complete remission (CR) after induction-chemotherapy were analyzed. To examine the effect of pegfilgrastim on neutropenia and hospitalization, we compared cycles 2 and 4 where pegfilgrastim was given routinely from day 6 (IDAC-P) with cycle 3 where pegfilgrastim was only administered in case of severe infections and/or prolonged neutropenia. All four planned cycles were administered in 23/39 patients (59.0%); 5/39 patients (12.8%) received 3 cycles, 3/39 (7.7%) 2 cycles, and 8/39 (20.5%) one consolidation-cycle. The median duration of severe neutropenia was 7 days in cycle 2 (IDAC-P), 11.5 days in cycle 3 (IDAC), and 7.5 days in cycle 4 (IDAC-P) (P < .05). Median overall survival was 1.1 years and differed significantly between patients aged <75 and ≥75 years (P < .05). The probability to be alive after 5 years was 32%. Together, intensified consolidation can be administered in AML patients ≥60, and those who are <75 may benefit from this therapy. Routine administration of pegfilgrastim during consolidation shortens the time of neutropenia and hospitalization in these patients.

Idarubicin Dose Escalation During Consolidation Therapy for Adult Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Purpose Higher doses of the anthracycline daunorubicin during induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have been shown to improve remission rates and survival. We hypothesized that improvements in outcomes in adult AML may be further achieved by increased anthracycline dose during consolidation therapy. Patients and Methods Patients with AML in complete remission after induction therapy were randomly assigned to receive two cycles of consolidation therapy with cytarabine 100 mg/m² daily for 5 days, etoposide 75 mg/m² daily for 5 days, and idarubicin 9 mg/m² daily for either 2 or 3 days (standard and intensive arms, respectively). The primary end point was leukemia-free survival (LFS). Results Two hundred ninety-three patients 16 to 60 years of age, excluding those with core binding factor AML and acute promyelocytic leukemia, were randomly assigned to treatment groups (146 to the standard arm and 147 to the intensive arm). Both groups were balanced for age, karyotypic risk, and FLT3-internal tandem duplication and NPM1 gene mutations. One hundred twenty patients in the standard arm (82%) and 95 patients in the intensive arm (65%) completed planned consolidation ( P < .001). Durations of severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were prolonged in the intensive arm, but there were no differences in serious nonhematological toxicities. With a median follow-up of 5.3 years (range, 0.6 to 9.9 years), there was a statistically significant improvement in LFS in the intensive arm compared with the standard arm (3-year LFS, 47% [95% CI, 40% to 56%] v 35% [95% CI, 28% to 44%]; P = .045). At 5 years, the overall survival rate was 57% in the intensive arm and 47% in the standard arm ( P = .092). There was no evidence of selective benefit of intensive consolidation within the cytogenetic or FLT3-internal tandem duplication and NPM1 gene mutation subgroups. Conclusion An increased cumulative dose of idarubicin during consolidation therapy for adult AML resulted in improved LFS, without increased nonhematologic toxicity.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (macrophage) colony-stimulating factors (G(M)-CSF) and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Current guidelines recommend the use of colony-stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20%, but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to December 2015). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications. Two review authors independently screened search results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylaxis with G(M)-CSF versus antibiotics for the prevention of infection in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy. All study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care. We included full-text, abstracts, and unpublished data if sufficient information on study design, participant characteristics, interventions and outcomes was available. We excluded cross-over trials, quasi-randomised trials and post-hoc retrospective trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to standard Cochrane methods. We did final interpretation together with an experienced clinician.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included no new randomised controlled trials. We included two trials in the review, one with 40 breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and G-CSF compared to antibiotics, a second one evaluating 155 patients with small-cell lung cancer receiving GM-CSF or antibiotics.We judge the overall risk of bias as high in the G-CSF trial, as neither patients nor physicians were blinded and not all included patients were analysed as randomised (7 out of 40 patients). We considered the overall risk of bias in the GM-CSF to be moderate, because of the risk of performance bias (neither patients nor personnel were blinded), but low risk of selection and attrition bias.For the trial comparing G-CSF to antibiotics, all cause mortality was not reported. There was no evidence of a difference for infection-related mortality, with zero events in each arm. Microbiologically or clinically documented infections, severe infections, quality of life, and adverse events were not reported. There was no evidence of a difference in frequency of febrile neutropenia (risk ratio (RR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.84). The quality of the evidence for the two reported outcomes, infection-related mortality and frequency of febrile neutropenia, was very low, due to the low number of patients evaluated (high imprecision) and the high risk of bias.There was no evidence of a difference in terms of median survival time in the trial comparing GM-CSF and antibiotics. Two-year survival times were 6% (0 to 12%) in both arms (high imprecision, low quality of evidence). There were four toxic deaths in the GM-CSF arm and three in the antibiotics arm (3.8%), without evidence of a difference (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.30 to 5.69; P = 0.71; low quality of evidence). There were 28% grade III or IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 18% in the antibiotics arm, without any evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.80; P = 0.15, low quality of evidence). There were 5 episodes out of 360 cycles of grade IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 3 episodes out of 334 cycles in the cotrimoxazole arm (0.8%), with no evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 6.42; P = 0.55; low quality of evidence). There was no significant difference between the two arms for non-haematological toxicities like diarrhoea, stomatitis, infections, neurologic, respiratory, or cardiac adverse events. Grade III and IV thrombopenia occurred significantly more frequently in the GM-CSF arm (60.8%) compared to the antibiotics arm (28.9%); (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.12; P = 0.0002; low quality of evidence). Neither infection-related mortality, incidence of febrile neutropenia, nor quality of life were reported in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As we only found two small trials with 195 patients altogether, no conclusion for clinical practice is possible. More trials are necessary to assess the benefits and harms of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics for infection prevention in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Prophylaxis of infectious complications with colony-stimulating factors in adult cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy-evidence-based guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party AGIHO of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

BACKGROUND

Current evidence on myelopoietic growth factors is difficult to overview for the practicing haematologist/oncologist. International guidelines are sometimes conflicting, exclude certain patient groups, or cannot directly be applied to the German health system. This guideline by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) gives evidence-based recommendations for the use of G-CSF, pegylated G-CSF, and biosimilars to prevent infectious complications in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, including those with haematological malignancies.

METHODS

We systematically searched and evaluated current evidence. An expert panel discussed the results and recommendations. We then compared our recommendations to current international guidelines.

RESULTS

We summarised the data from eligible studies in evidence tables, developed recommendations for different entities and risk groups.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive literature search and expert panel consensus confirmed many key recommendations given by international guidelines. Evidence for growth factors during acute myeloid leukaemia induction chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim use in haematological malignancies was rated lower compared with other guidelines.

Colony-stimulating factors for prevention and treatment of infectious complications in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia

BACKGROUND

Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) is a fatal bone marrow cancer. Colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are frequently administered during and after chemotherapy to reduce complications. However, their safety with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in AML is unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of CSFs on patient outcomes, including survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety/efficacy of CSFs with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in patients with AML.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search strategy. We identified relevant randomized clinical trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 7), MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2010), LILACS (up to December 2009), databases of ongoing trials and relevant conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared the addition of CSFs during and following chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in patients with AML. We excluded trials evaluating the role of CSFs administered for the purpose of stem cell collection and/or priming (e.g. before and/or only for the duration of chemotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. For each trial, we expressed results as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We analyzed time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HRs).

MAIN RESULTS

The search yielded 19 trials including 5256 patients. The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy yielded no difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days and at the end of follow up (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.18 and RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05, respectively) or in overall survival (HR 1.00; 95% 0.93 to 1.08). There was no difference in complete remission rates (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.07), relapse rates (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05) and disease-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.13). CSFs did not decrease the occurrence of bacteremias (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12), nor the occurrence of invasive fungal infections (RR 1.40; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.19). CSFs marginally increased adverse events requiring discontinuation of CSFs as compared to the control arm (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In summary, colony-stimulating factors should not be given routinely to acute myelogenous leukemia patients post-chemotherapy since they do not affect overall survival or infectious parameters including the rate of bacteremias and invasive fungal infections.

Colony-stimulating factors for prevention and treatment of infectious complications in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia

BACKGROUND

Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) is a fatal bone marrow cancer. Colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are frequently administered during and after chemotherapy to reduce complications. However, their safety with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in AML is unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of CSFs on patient outcomes, including survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety/efficacy of CSFs with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in patients with AML.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted a comprehensive search strategy. We identified relevant randomized clinical trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 7), MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2010), LILACS (up to December 2009), databases of ongoing trials and relevant conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared the addition of CSFs during and following chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in patients with AML. We excluded trials evaluating the role of CSFs administered for the purpose of stem cell collection and/or priming (e.g. before and/or only for the duration of chemotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. For each trial, we expressed results as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We analyzed time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HRs).

MAIN RESULTS

The search yielded 19 trials including 5256 patients. The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy yielded no difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days and at the end of follow up (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.18 and RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05, respectively) or in overall survival(HR 1.00; 95% 0.93 to 1.08). There was no difference in complete remission rates(RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.07), relapse rates(RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05) and disease-free survival(HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.13). CSFs did not decrease the occurrence of bacteremias(RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12), nor the occurrence of invasive fungal infections(RR 1.40; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.19). CSFs marginally increased adverse events requiring discontinuation of CSFs as compared to the control arm(RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy does not adversely influence all-cause mortality, complete remission or relapse rates in patients with AML. Although the benefit of CSFs is limited to reduction of neutropenic and febrile days, they can be administered safely when necessary.

Diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia in adults: recommendations from an international expert panel, on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet

In 2003, an international working group last reported on recommendations for diagnosis, response assessment, and treatment outcomes in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Since that time, considerable progress has been made in elucidating the molecular pathogenesis of the disease that has resulted in the identification of new diagnostic and prognostic markers. Furthermore, therapies are now being developed that target disease-associated molecular defects. Recent developments prompted an international expert panel to provide updated evidence- and expert opinion–based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of AML, that contain both minimal requirements for general practice as well as standards for clinical trials. A new standardized reporting system for correlation of cytogenetic and molecular genetic data with clinical data is proposed.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (G-CSF) or granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factors (GM-CSF); and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Important current guidelines recommend the use of colony stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20% but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of G-CSF or GM-CSF with antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myeloablative chemotherapy with respect to preventing fever, febrile neutropenia, infection, infection-related mortality, early mortality and improving quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to 2007). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with G-CSF or GM-CSF versus antibiotics in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy or bone marrow or stem cell transplantation were included for review. Both study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial eligibility and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were done in duplicate. Authors were contacted to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two eligible randomised controlled trials with 195 patients. Due to differences in the outcomes reported, the trials could not be pooled for meta-analysis. Both trials showed non-significant results favouring antibiotics for the prevention of fever or hospitalisation for febrile neutropenia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence for or against antibiotics compared to G(M)-CSFs for the prevention of infections in cancer patients.

Expression of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor and its receptor in human Ewing sarcoma cells and patient tumor specimens: potential consequences of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor administration

BACKGROUND

Ewing sarcoma (ES) is a highly vascular malignancy. It has been demonstrated that both angiogenesis and vasculogenesis contribute to the growth of ES tumors. Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), a cytokine known to stimulate bone marrow (BM) stem cell production and angiogenesis, is routinely administered to ES patients after chemotherapy. Whether ES cells and patient tumor samples express G-CSF and its receptor (G-CSFR) and whether treatment with this factor enhances tumor growth was examined.

METHODS

Human ES cell lines were analyzed for expression of G-CSF and G-CSFR in vitro and in vivo. Sixty-eight paraffin-embedded and 15 frozen tumor specimens from patients with ES were also evaluated for the presence of G-CSF and G-CSFR. The in vivo effect of G-CSF on angiogenesis and BM cell migration was determined. Using a TC/7-1 human ES mouse model, the effect of G-CSF administration on ES tumors was investigated.

RESULTS

G-CSF and G-CSFR protein and RNA expression was identified in all ES cell lines and patient samples analyzed. In addition, G-CSF was found to stimulate angiogenesis and BM cell migration in vivo. Tumor growth was found to be significantly increased in mice treated with G-CSF. The average tumor volume for the group treated with G-CSF was 1218 mm(3) compared with 577 mm(3) for the control group (P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings that ES cells and patient tumors expressed both G-CSF and its receptor in vitro and in vivo and that the administration of G-CSF promoted tumor growth in vivo suggest that the potential consequences of G-CSF administration should be investigated further.

Review of the value of colony stimulating factors for prophylaxis of febrile neutropenic episodes in adult patients treated for haematological malignancies

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a major dose-limiting toxicity of systemic cancer chemotherapy that can lead to fever and infection, requiring prompt analysis and in-patient treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics. Complicated neutropenia may lead to reduction and/or delay of systemic anti-cancer treatment, which may compromise outcome. Haematopoietic growth factors have the ability to augment haematopoietic cell cycling and are used to facilitate more dose-intense treatments and to decrease treatment-related complications. This review focuses on randomised trials that investigated the use of colony-stimulating factors (CSF) to prevent treatment-related febrile complications in haematological malignancies in (younger) adult patients. In general, these studies demonstrated that CSF reduced the duration of severe neutropenia but not always its febrile complications; therefore inconsistent results regarding clinically relevant reduction of hospitalisation, duration of therapeutic antibiotics, infection-related or disease-related mortality and economic effects were reported. Current developments in treatment of haematological malignancies will pose new challenges as a shift in infectious pathogens can be expected.

Current status of growth factors in the treatment of acute myeloid and lymphoblastic leukemia

The safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in patients with acute leukemia has been well established in numerous clinical trials. The primary aim of these studies was to determine whether CSFs, when used as adjuncts to intensive chemotherapy, reduced the duration of neutropenia, prevented febrile neutropenia, infections, and hospitalization rates, and improved response and overall outcome in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Despite considerable efforts in divers clinical settings, the potential advantages of hematopoietic growth factors in the management of these leukemias remain inconclusive. In general, individual published trials have shown declines in the incidence and/or duration of neutropenia but have not consistently demonstrated a reduction in the overall frequency of infectious complications or the duration of hospitalization. Most protocols also have failed to show a benefit in terms of disease-free or overall survival. Nevertheless, improvements in "soft" clinical end points, such as incidence of severe infections, may be clinically important and contribute, even if only incrementally, to the patient's quality of life. Selection of those patients likely to benefit from growth factors in a specific clinical setting is a worthwhile endeavour.

Role of cytokines in the treatment of acute leukemias: a review

Myeloid growth factors, such as granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, have been used to decrease the duration of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and thereby reduce the incidence and severity of infections in various regimens used to treat acute myeloid leukemia and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. These growth factors have also been used to recruit dormant myeloid leukemia cells into the S phase of cell cycle in order to increase their susceptibility to the antileukemic effects of agents such as cytarabine. Multiple prospective randomized trials have examined the benefit and safety of the addition of growth factors before, during, and after chemotherapy. A reduction in the duration of neutropenia has been the most consistent finding; this has not been associated with stimulation of leukemia cells, the main concern of using this strategy. Unfortunately, few studies have reported a benefit in prolonging the duration of disease-free survival or overall survival. Other cytokines, including interleukins and thrombopoietin, have also been evaluated for their theoretical ability to recruit immune mechanisms to eradicate residual leukemia burden after chemotherapy, and to stimulate platelet production. In this review, we summarize the clinical experience with these growth factors in treating acute leukemias.

Long-term survival data from a phase 3 study of Filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in adults with de novo acute myeloid leukemia

We previously reported the results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of Filgrastim in patients with de novo AML undergoing induction and consolidation chemotherapy. The study demonstrated that Filgrastim was effective and well tolerated and had no impact on complete remission or survival. We now report follow-up data on these patients, assessing long-term effects with emphasis on prognostic indicators. After a median follow-up of 7 years, 434 (83%) patients were dead, 73 (14%) were alive, and 14 (3%) were lost to follow-up. The proportions of deaths were similar in the Filgrastim (83%) and placebo (84%) groups. No differences in median time to death (1.04 years Filgrastim, 1.13 years placebo; P = 0.97) or median disease-free survival (0.86 years Filgrastim, 0.79 years placebo; P = 0.52) were evident. Proportional hazard modeling identified age, performance status, and French-American-British subtype as independent predictors for survival (P < 0.001, P = 0.005, and P = 0.036, respectively), whereas cytogenetic status was not (P = 0.118). Filgrastim had no effect on overall survival in any of these subgroup analyses as none of the treatment comparisons were statistically significant. These findings indicate that Filgrastim can be effectively used to support patients with AML undergoing induction and consolidation chemotherapy without worsening long-term disease outcome.

Cost-benefit analysis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in the management of elderly cancer patients

Health care costs continue to rise, and hospitalization represents the single largest component of direct medical costs associated with cancer care. Neutropenia and its complications including febrile neutropenia (FN) remain the major dose-limiting toxicity of systemic cancer chemotherapy. The risk of FN varies considerably across treatment regimens but appears to be significantly higher among elderly patients. The colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) have been used effectively in a variety of clinical settings to prevent or treat FN and to assist patients receiving dose-intensive chemotherapy with or without stem cell support. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the clinical efficacy of the prophylactic use of CSFs. A recently presented meta-analysis of the available RCTs has confirmed the efficacy of prophylactic CSFs. The cost of these agents, along with their large-scale clinical use, has prompted a number of economic investigations. Economic models based on measures of resource utilization derived from RCTs have provided FN risk threshold estimates for the cost-saving use of prophylactic CSF. A number of important studies concerning the clinical and economic impact of these agents in elderly cancer patients have been reported during the past year. Continuing clinical and economic evaluation along with an updating of clinical practice guidelines especially related to elderly patients is recommended because of rapid technologic and clinical advances.