Pegfilgrastim on febrile neutropenia in pediatric and adolescent cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

There is no meta-analysis about the effects of pegfilgrastim on the occurrence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in pediatric/adolescent cancer patients. The study explored the efficacy of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in preventing FN in children/adolescents with cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published before April 7, 2020. The primary outcome was the rate of FN. Effect size (ES) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate the outcome. The ES represented the rate of FN, and the STATA 'metaprop' command was used to synthesize the rate.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included, comprising 167 patients and 550 courses of treatment. There was no difference between pegfilgrastim and filgrastim for the rate of FN in children receiving chemotherapy (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.20-2.23, P = 0.520). In patients receiving pegfilgrastim, the rate of FN was 25.6% (95% CI: 14.9%-36.3%), the rate of grade 4 FN was 38.3% (95% CI: 19.2%-59.5%), the rate of severe neutropenia (SN) was 40.5% (95% CI: 35.1%-46.1%), and the rate of treatment delays due to FN was 4.8% (95% CI: 0.8%-11.3%).

DISCUSSION

The number of studies that could be included was small; therefore, a specific type of cancer or a specific treatment could be studied. Heterogeneity was high.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference between pegfilgrastim and filgrastim for the rate of FN. The use of pegfilgrastim was still associated with rates of FN, grade 4 FN, severe neutropenia, and treatment delays due to FN in pediatric cancer patients.

Impact of primary prophylaxis by pegfilgrastim in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) are common conditions that lead to dose reduction or delayed chemotherapy in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Primary prophylaxis (PP) with long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was introduced in South Korea in 2014. We aimed to investigate the effects of PP on FN-related hospitalization and death in patients with DLBCL receiving rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Korean individuals (n = 11,491) with incident DLBCL and receiving R-CHOP during 2010-2016 were followed for FN-related hospitalization and mortality. The PP exposure group (patients during 2014-2015, n = 3599), patients during 2010-2016 (n = 11,491), and patients receiving PP during 2014-2016 (n = 4421) were compared with the non-exposure group (patients during July 2011-June 2013, n = 3017), patients in 2013 (n = 1596), and patients not receiving PP during 2014-2016 (n = 1289), respectively. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using the Cox model. The PP exposure group had 16% lower FN-related hospitalizations than the non-exposure group (HR = 0.84, P < 0.001). PP exposure had no beneficial effect on 1-year (HR = 0.98, P = 0.782) and 5-year mortality (HR = 0.97, P = 0.474). Patients in 2014 (HR = 0.85, P < 0.001), 2015 (HR = 0.88, P = 0.003), and 2016 (HR = 0.80, P < 0.001) had a decreased risk of FN-related hospitalizations compared with those in 2013. Among patients receiving their first R-CHOP cycle during 2014-2016, the HR for FN-related hospitalization was 0.90 (P = 0.014) in PP users compared with non-users. PP with a long-acting G-CSF lowered the FN-related hospitalization risk but did not benefit survival in patients with DLBCL receiving R-CHOP.

Effectiveness of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in preventing febrile neutropenia during R-FC chemoimmunotherapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A multicenter prospective phase II study

Background

A chemotherapy of rituximab, fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (R-FC) has been accepted as a promising frontline chemotherapy in selected patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Although R-FC regimen is a relatively dose-dense regimen and neutropenia incidence is more than 50%, primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim was not fully recommended in the clinical field. Therefore, the study evaluated the prophylactic effectiveness of pegfilgrastim to reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia associated with R-FC of patients with CLL.

Patients and methods

A single-arm, multicenter, prospective phase II study was designed to assess the efficacy of prophylactic pegfilgrastim. Thirty-four CLL patients were enrolled and analyzed for neutropenia and other related factors, and comparative analysis was performed with historical cohort.

Results

Compared with our historical cohort, incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia was remarkably reduced during any cycle of chemotherapy (14.7% vs. 48.2% of study cohort vs. historical cohort during C1, 5.9% vs. 65.8% during C2, 12.9% vs. 80.6% during C3, 10% vs. 84.6% during C4, 3.4% vs. 83.6% during C5, and 10.7% vs. 85.7% during C6, p &lt;0.001). Also, cumulative incidence of disrupted chemotherapy was noticeably reduced in study cohort on any cycles of R-FC regimen (8.8% vs. 22.2% of study cohort vs. historical cohort on C2, 9.7% vs. 25.2% on C3, 13.4% vs. 26.9% on C4, 13.8% vs. 45.2% on C5, 17.9% vs. 47.3% on C6, p=0.007). In addition, treatment-related mortality was 5.9%, which significantly reduced compared to 9.6% of our historical cohort (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42–0.79, P = 0.032).

Conclusion

Primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim is effective in the prevention of neutropenia/febrile neutropenia, and infection-related mortality during R-FC regimen in patients with CLL.

Tumor-associated neutrophils and neutrophil-targeted cancer therapies

Neutrophils are the frontline cells in response to microbial infections and are involved in a range of inflammatory disorders in the body. In recent years, neutrophils have gained considerable attention in their involvement of complex roles in tumor development and progression. Tumor-associated neutrophils (TANs) that accumulate in local region could be triggered by external stimuli from tumor microenvironment (TME) and switch between anti- and pro-tumor phenotypes. The anti-tumor neutrophils kill tumor cells through direct cytotoxic effects as well as indirect effects by activating adaptive immune responses. In contrast, the pro-tumor phenotype of neutrophils might be associated with cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and immunosuppression in TME. More recently, neutrophils have been proposed as a potential target in cancer therapy for their ability to diminish the pro-tumor pathways, such as by immune checkpoint blockade. This review discusses the complex roles of neutrophils in TME and highlights the strategies in neutrophil targeting in cancer treatment with a particular focus on the progresses of ongoing clinical trials involving neutrophil-targeted therapies.

rhG-CSF is associated with an increased risk of metastasis in NSCLC patients following postoperative chemotherapy

Background

Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) reduces neutropenia events and is widely used in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. However, the effects of rhG-CSF on distant organ metastasis (DOM) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients following postoperative chemotherapy are not clear.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed on NSCLC patients who underwent complete surgical resection and postoperative systemic chemotherapy at The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2017. The effect of rhG-CSF on DOM was assessed with other confounding factors using Cox regression analyses.

Results

We identified 307 NSCLC patients who received postoperative systemic chemotherapy (n = 246 in the rhG-CSF group, n = 61 in the No rhG-CSF group). The incidence of DOM in postoperative NSCLC patients with rhG-CSF treatment was observably higher than in patients without rhG-CSF treatment (48.3% vs. 27.9%, p < 0.05). Univariate regression analysis revealed that rhG-CSF and pathological stage were independent risk factors for metastasis-free survival (MFS) (p < 0.05). RhG-CSF users had a higher risk of DOM (adjusted HR: 2.33, 95% CI: 1.31–4.15) than nonusers of rhG-CSF. The association between rhG-CSF and the risk of DOM was significant only in patients presenting with myelosuppression (HR: 3.34, 95% CI: 1.86–6.02) and not in patients without myelosuppression (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.17–2.94, Interaction p-value< 0.01). The risk increased with higher dose density of rhG-CSF compared to rhG-CSF versus no users (p for trend< 0.001).

Conclusion

These analyses indicate that rhG-CSF use is related to DOM following postoperative chemotherapy in NSCLC.

G-CSF/GM-CSF-induced hematopoietic dysregulation in the progression of solid tumors

There are two types of abnormal hematopoiesis in solid tumor occurrence and treatment: pathological hematopoiesis, and myelosuppression induced by radiotherapy and chemotherapy. In this review, we primarily focus on the abnormal pathological hematopoietic differentiation in cancer induced by tumor-released granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). As key factors in hematopoietic development, G-CSF/GM-CSF are well-known facilitators of myelopoiesis and mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). In addition, these two cytokines can also promote or inhibit tumors, dependent on tumor type. In multiple cancer types, hematopoiesis is greatly enhanced and abnormal lineage differentiation is induced by these two cytokines. Here, dysregulated hematopoiesis induced by G-CSF/GM-CSF in solid tumors and its mechanism are summarized, and the prognostic value of G-CSF/GM-CSF-associated dysregulated hematopoiesis for tumor metastasis is also briefly highlighted.

Use of Pegfilgrastim in Japanese Pediatric Patients With Solid Tumors: A Retrospective Analysis

There are no detailed analyses of regarding pegfilgrastim usage in Japanese pediatric solid tumor patients. The approved dose of pegfilgrastim in Japan is 3.6 mg. We retrospectively evaluated the incidence of dose delays and dose reductions due to neutropenia in pediatric patients with solid tumors receiving chemotherapy with pegfilgrastim between 2015 and 2018. The effects of the timing of pegfilgrastim administration were evaluated. In chemotherapies administered every 2 and 3 weeks, prolongation of chemotherapy cycles was analyzed. Fifty-nine patients received chemotherapy with prophylactic pegfilgrastim for a total 247 cycles. No significant incidence of dose delays was observed with pegfilgrastim administration during the first 1 to 3 days after chemotherapy. When 77 cycles in 2-week regimens were compared with 166 cycles in 3-week regimens, mean cycle durations were 15.19±2.06 and 21.97±2.88 days, respectively (P<0.001). A total of 77 chemotherapy cycles administered every 14 days were subdivided. The incidence of dose delays in pediatric patients receiving chemotherapy for 5 consecutive days was similar to that for 1 day and 2 consecutive days. Pegfilgrastim prophylaxis could be of use for Japanese pediatric patients with solid tumors receiving chemotherapy, including administration every 2 weeks. Its use aids in maintaining the chemotherapy schedule.

[G-CSF for prophylaxis of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia, anemia in cancer : Guidelines on supportive treatment part 1]

Infections in patients with neutropenia following chemotherapy are mostly manifested as fever (febrile neutropenia, FN). Some of the most important determinants of the risk of FN are the type of chemotherapy, the dose intensity and patient-specific factors. When the risk of FN is 20% or more granulopoiesis is prophylactically stimulated with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) after the treatment. Anemia should always be clarified and if necessary be treated according to the cause when symptomatic. If an absolute or functional iron deficiency is present, intravenous iron substitution is mostly necessary. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents can be used after chemotherapy with hemoglobin (Hb) levels less than 10 g/dl (6.2 mmol/l). In cases of chronic anemia and Hb levels less than 7-8 g/dl (<4.3-5.0 mmol/l) the indications for transfusion of erythrocyte concentrates should be assessed primarily based on the individual clinical symptoms.

Efficacy and Safety of Filgrastim and Its Biosimilars to Prevent Febrile Neutropenia in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Febrile neutropenia is the serious side-effect associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Filgrastim, the first granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of neutropenia. Subsequently, pegfilgrastim (long-acting G-CSF) and filgrastim biosimilars were developed to have comparable efficacy to filgrastim. Therefore, it is necessary to produce a systematic review and meta-analysis that provides evidence that filgrastim is more efficacious than placebo/no-treatment, as it provides evidence on the comparable efficacy of filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim and biosimilar filgrastim.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to identify, assess, meta-analyze and summarize the comparative effectiveness and safety of filgrastim in head-to-head trials with placebo/no treatment, pegfilgrastim (and biosimilar filgrastim to update advances in the field. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses PRISMA statement were applied, and a random-effect model was used. Primary endpoints were the rate and duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, and an incidence rate of febrile neutropenia. Secondary endpoints were time to absolute neutrophil count ANC recovery, depth of ANC nadir (lowest ANC), neutropenia-related hospitalization and other neutropenia-related complications. For filgrastim versus biosimilar filgrastim comparison, the primary efficacy endpoint was the mean difference in duration of severe neutropenia DSN. Results: A total of 56 studies were considered that included data from 13,058 cancer patients. The risk of febrile neutropenia in filgrastim versus placebo/no treatment was not statistically different. The risk ratio for febrile neutropenia was 0.58, a 42% reduction in favor of filgrastim. The most reported adverse event with FIL was bone pain. For pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim, no statistically significant difference was noted. The risk ratio was 0.90 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.12). The overall difference in duration of severe neutropenia between filgrastim and biosimilar filgrastim was not statistically significant. The risk ratio was 1.03 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.13). Conclusions: Filgrastim was effective and safe in reducing febrile neutropenia and related complications, compared to placebo/no treatment. No notable differences were found between pegfilgrastim and filgrastim in terms of efficacy and safety. However, a similar efficacy profile was observed with FIL and its biosimilars.

Conversion from pegfilgrastim with on-body injector to pegfilgrastim-jmdb: cost-efficiency analysis and budget-neutral expanded access to prophylaxis and treatment

AIMS

Therapeutic guidelines recommend prophylaxis against chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia (CIN/FN). Pegfilgrastim (Neulasta), biosimilar pegfilgrastim-jmdb (Fulphila), and pegfilgrastim with on-body injector (OBI; Neulasta Onpro) are options for CIN/FN prophylaxis. We aimed to simulate the cost-savings and budget-neutral expanded access to CIN/FN prophylaxis or anticancer treatment achieved through conversion from pegfilgrastim-OBI to pegfilgrastim-jmdb and to evaluate the economic impact of FN-related hospitalization costs due to pegfilgrastim-OBI failure.

METHODS

Cost-savings from conversion from pegfilgrastim-OBI to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-jmdb were simulated in a panel of 15,000 patients with cancer from the US payer perspective. The primary analyses included conversion rates of 10% to 100%. Adjusted analyses also considered OBI device failure rates of 1% to 7% and associated costs of FN-related hospitalization. Simulations of budget-neutral expanded access to prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim-jmdb or to rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) were also performed.

RESULTS

In a 15,000-patient panel, conversion from pegfilgrastim-OBI to pegfilgrastim-jmdb resulted in cost-savings ranging from $481,259 (10% conversion) to $4,812,585 (100% conversion) in a single cycle. Over 6 cycles at 100% conversion, savings were $28,857,510 and could provide 9,191 additional doses of pegfilgrastim-jmdb or 4,463 cycles of R-CHOP to patients with DLBCL. Adjusted for OBI failure, cost-savings over 6 cycles ranged from $2,935,565 (10% conversion; pegfilgrastim-OBI failure rate of 1%) to $32,236,499 (100% conversion; 7% failure). These cost-savings could provide 943 doses of pegfilgrastim-jmdb or 454 doses of R-CHOP (10% conversion; 1% pegfilgrastim-OBI failure) or provide 10,261 doses of pegfilgrastim-jmdb or 4,982 cycles of R-CHOP (100% conversion; 7% failure).

CONCLUSION

Conversion from pegfilgrastim to pegfilgrastim-jmdb is associated with significant cost-savings which increase markedly when also accounting for pegfilgrastim-OBI failure and associated FN-related hospitalizations. These general and failure-related cost-savings could be allocated on a budget-neutral basis to provide more patients with additional CIN/FN prophylaxis or antineoplastic treatment.

Primary Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Prophylaxis in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Patients Treated with FOLFIRINOX as the First-Line Treatment

Simple Summary

Because FOLFIRINOX shows high prevalence of hematologic toxicity, it is meaningful to investigate of usefulness of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. In this retrospective study, a total of 165 patients were divided into G-CSF user group (n = 57) and non-user group (n = 105). Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between two groups, which included initial absolute neutrophil counts and metastatic burden. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis reduced the risk of neutropenia (55.6% to 31.6%, p = 0.003) and febrile neutropenia (18.5% to 1.8%, p = 0.002) and improved OS (8.8 to 14.7 months; hazard ratio (HR): 1.766, 95% CI: 1.257–2.481, p = 0.001). When administering FOLFIRINOX for MPC, primary G-CSF prophylaxis could be rationalized to reduced AEs and improve survival, and more prospective studies are needed.

Abstract

Although FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) has been proven efficacious in metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC), physicians hesitate to administer it due to its hematologic toxicities. We investigated the usefulness of primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. We reviewed electronic medical records of MPC patients with good performance status who were administered FOLFIRINOX as the first-line treatment from 2011 to 2017. The patients were divided into primary G-CSF prophylaxis users (group A) and non-users or therapeutic/secondary users (group B). Cumulative relative dose (cRDI), adverse effects (AEs), and overall survival (OS) were compared. A total of 165 patients (group A (57) vs. group B (108)) were investigated. Intergroup differences in baseline characteristics were not significant, although the cRDI and the number of treatment cycles were both higher in group A than in group B (cRDI: 80.6% vs. 73.9%, p = 0.007; 9 vs. 6 cycles, p = 0.004). Primary G-CSF prophylaxis reduced the risk of neutropenia (55.6% to 31.6%, p = 0.003) and febrile neutropenia (18.5% to 1.8%, p = 0.002) and improved OS (8.8 to 14.7 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.766, 95% CI: 1.257–2.481, p = 0.001). When administering FOLFIRINOX for MPC, primary G-CSF prophylaxis could be rationalized to reduced AEs and improve survival; more prospective studies are needed.

Appropriateness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in patients receiving chemotherapy by febrile neutropenia risk level

OBJECTIVE

Inappropriate granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use with myelosuppressive chemotherapy has been reported. Using the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records electronic medical record database, prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim/filgrastim) use in cancer patients was assessed by febrile neutropenia risk level.

METHODS

Patients with nonmetastatic or metastatic breast, head/neck, colorectal, ovarian/gynecologic, lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy from June 2013 to May 2014 were included. Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use with high-risk, intermediate-risk, and low-risk chemotherapy and distribution of National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk factors with intermediate-risk regimens were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 86,189 patients received ∼4.2 million chemotherapy cycles (high risk, 9%; intermediate risk, 48%; low risk, 43%). Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given in 24% of cycles (high risk, 59%; intermediate risk, 29%; low risk, 11%). For nonmetastatic solid tumors, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given in 78% (high risk), 31% (intermediate risk), and 6% (low risk) of cycles. For metastatic solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given in 50% (high risk), 27% (intermediate risk), and 11% (low risk) of cycles. Among patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, febrile neutropenia risk factors were identified in 56% (95% confidence interval, 51.1-60.9%) of patients with nonmetastatic solid tumors (n = 400) and in 70% (64.5-73.5%) of patients with metastatic solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 400).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use was appropriately highest for high-risk regimens and lowest for low-risk regimens yet still potentially underused in high risk regimens, overused in low-risk regimens, and not appropriately targeted in intermediate-risk regimens, indicating a need for further education on febrile neutropenia risk evaluation and appropriate granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use.

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) in patients with solid tumors: considerations for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor treatment

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) have been shown to contribute to tumor escape from host immune surveillance and to cancer progression by production of tumor-promoting soluble factors. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a principle cytokine controlling granulocyte number. Recombinant human G-CSF (rhG-CSF) has become the main therapeutic agent for the treatment of neutropenia and prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients. However, we show here that rhG-CSF triggers accumulation of granulocytic and monocytic subsets. Consequently, we discuss the pharmacological use of granulopoiesis stimulating factors not only in the context of febrile neutropenia but also from the perspective of MDSC-dependent and MDSC-independent mechanisms of immunosuppression and cancer angiogenesis.

The dark side of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor: a supportive therapy with potential to promote tumour progression

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is one of several cytokines that can expand and mobilize haematopoietic precursor cells from bone marrow. In particular, G-CSF mobilizes neutrophils when the host is challenged by infection or tissue damage. Severe neutropenia, or febrile neutropenia is a life-threatening event that can be mitigated by administration of G-CSF. Consequently, G-CSF has been used to support patients undergoing chemotherapy who would otherwise require dose reduction due to neutropenia. Over the past 10-15 years it has become increasingly apparent, in preclinical tumour growth and metastasis models, that G-CSF can support tumour progression by mobilization of tumour-associated neutrophils which consequently promote tumour dissemination and metastasis. With the increasing use of G-CSF in the clinic, it is pertinent to ask if there is any evidence of a similar promotion of tumour progression in patients. Here, we have reviewed the preclinical and clinical data on the potential contribution of G-CSF to tumour progression. We conclude that, whilst the evidence for a promotion of metastasis is strong in preclinical models and that limited data indicate that high serum G-CSF levels in patients are associated with poorer prognosis, no studies published so far have revealed evidence of increased tumour progression associated with supportive G-CSF use during chemotherapy in patients. Analysis of G-CSF receptor positive cohorts within supportive trials, as well as studies of the role of G-CSF blockade in appropriate tumours in the absence of chemotherapy could yield clinically translatable findings.

Predictive factors in patients eligible for pegfilgrastim prophylaxis focusing on RDI using ordered logistic regression analysis

Although pegfilgrastim prophylaxis is expected to maintain the relative dose intensity (RDI) of chemotherapy and improve safety, information is limited. However, the optimal selection of patients eligible for pegfilgrastim prophylaxis is an important issue from a medical economics viewpoint. Therefore, this retrospective study identified factors that could predict these eligible patients to maintain the RDI. The participants included 166 cancer patients undergoing pegfilgrastim prophylaxis combined with chemotherapy in our outpatient chemotherapy center between March 2015 and April 2017. Variables were extracted from clinical records for regression analysis of factors related to maintenance of the RDI. RDI was classified into four categories: 100% = 0, 85% or < 100% = 1, 60% or < 85% = 2, and < 60% = 3. Multivariate ordered logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors in patients eligible for pegfilgrastim prophylaxis to maintain the RDI. Threshold measures were examined using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis curve. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.11; P < 0.0001], anemia (grade) (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.10-2.84; P = 0.0184), and administration 24-72 h after chemotherapy (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22-0.89; P = 0.0224) were factors that significantly correlated with RDI maintenance. ROC curve analysis of the group that failed to maintain the RDI indicated that the threshold for age was 70 years and above, with a sensitivity of 60.0% and specificity of 80.2% (area under the curve: 0.74). In conclusion, younger age, anemia (less), and administration of pegfilgrastim 24-72 h after chemotherapy were significant factors for RDI maintenance.

A systematic literature review of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of filgrastim

Purpose

Filgrastim (NEUPOGEN^®) is the originator recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor widely used for preventing neutropenia-related infections and mobilizing hematopoietic stem cells. This report presents findings of a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of originator filgrastim to update previous reports.

Methods

A literature search of electronic databases, congress abstracts, and bibliographies of recent reviews was conducted to identify English-language reports of clinical trials and observational studies evaluating filgrastim in its US-approved indications up to February 2015. Two independent reviewers assessed titles/abstracts and full texts of publications, and extracted data from studies that compared originator filgrastim vs placebo or no treatment. For outcomes with sufficient homogeneous data reported across studies, meta-analysis was performed and relative risk (RR) determined. Data were summarized descriptively for all other evaluated outcomes.

Results

A total of 1194 unique articles evaluating originator filgrastim were identified, with 25 meeting eligibility criteria for data extraction: 18 randomized controlled trials, 2 nonrandomized clinical trials, and 5 observational studies. In chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN), filgrastim vs placebo or no treatment significantly reduced febrile neutropenia incidence (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53–0.75) and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia incidence (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37–0.68). The most commonly reported adverse event (AE) with filgrastim was bone pain (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.29–5.27 in CIN). Additional efficacy and safety outcomes are described within indications.

Conclusions

This systematic literature review and meta-analysis confirms and updates previous reports on the efficacy and safety of originator filgrastim. Bone pain was the commonly reported AE associated with filgrastim use.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-017-3854-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A phase I study of different doses and frequencies of pegylated recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (PEG rhG-CSF) in patients with standard-dose chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

Objective

The recommended dose of prophylactic pegylated recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (PEG rhG-CSF) is 100 μg/kg once per cycle for patients receiving intense-dose chemotherapy. However, few data are available on the proper dose for patients receiving less-intense chemotherapy. The aim of this phase I study is to explore the proper dose and administration schedule of PEG rhG-CSF for patients receiving standard-dose chemotherapy.

Methods

Eligible patients received 3-cycle chemotherapy every 3 weeks. No PEG rhG-CSF was given in the first cycle. Patients experienced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia would then enter the cycle 2 and 3. In cycle 2, patients received a single subcutaneous injection of prophylactic PEG rhG-CSF on d 3, and received half-dose subcutaneous injection in cycle 3 on d 3 and d 5, respectively. Escalating doses (30, 60, 100 and 200 μg/kg) of PEG rhG-CSF were investigated.

Results

A total of 26 patients were enrolled and received chemotherapy, in which 24 and 18 patients entered cycle 2 and cycle 3 treatment, respectively. In cycle 2, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia for patients receiving single-dose PEG rhG-CSF of 30, 60, 100 and 200 μg/kg was 66.67%, 33.33%, 22.22% and 0, respectively, with a median duration less than 1 (0-2) d. No grade 3 or higher neutropenia was noted in cycle 3 in all dose cohorts.

Conclusions

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of PEG rhG-CSF used in cancer patients were similar to those reported, as well as the safety. Double half dose administration model showed better efficacy result than a single dose model in terms of grade 3 neutropenia and above. The single dose of 60 μg/kg, 100 μg/kg and double half dose of 30 μg/kg were recommended to the phase II study, hoping to find a preferable method for neutropenia treatment.

Hematopoietic growth factors in lung cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Most patients affected by lung cancer are treated with chemotherapy, and hence are at risk of myelosuppression. Hematopoietic growth factors have a relevant role in this setting, as they can improve quality of life, reduce the rate of chemotherapy-induced complications and allow the administration of full-dose chemotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most data of hematologic growth factors in lung cancer come from dated publications or large trials involving different malignancies, thus limiting specific information for lung neoplasms. Nonetheless, most studies consistently identified myeloid growth factors as effective on specific end-points such as the duration and severity of neutropenia, or complications such as hospitalizations and febrile neutropenia; on the other hand, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) consistently improved anemia-specific end-points including hemoglobin values, transfusions rate and fatigue, although some specific safety issues characterized this drug class. The most recent international guidelines address these characteristics and include the main indications for hematologic growth factors in solid neoplasms, including lung cancer.

SUMMARY

Myeloid growth factors and ESAs have a relevant role in selected patients undergoing chemotherapy for nonsmall cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. Notably, a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment is required in the specific case of ESAs.

Results of a prospective dose intensity and neutropenia prophylaxis evaluation programme (DIEPP) in cancer patients at risk of febrile neutropenia due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and use of pegfilgrastim in cancer patients with high overall risk of FN and to investigate the relationship between granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) guideline adherence and chemotherapy delivery in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Austria.

METHODS

Dose Intensity Evaluation Program and Prophylaxis (DIEPP) was a multicentre, prospective, and observational study of adult patients with breast cancer, lymphoma, lung cancer, gastric cancer, and ovarian cancer, who received chemotherapy with pegfilgrastim support and who had an overall risk of FN ≥ 20 %. Physicians assessed patient risk factors and reported their reasons for administering pegfilgrastim.

RESULTS

Patients were enrolled from 113 centres in CEE and Austria between August 2010 and July 2013, and data were analysed from 1072 patients. The most common tumour types were breast cancer (50 %) and lymphoma (24 %). FN incidence was 5 % overall. FN occurred in 3 % of patients (28/875) who received pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis (PP) and 13 % of patients (19/142) who received it as secondary prophylaxis (SP); 79 % of FN events in SP patients occurred in the first cycle before pegfilgrastim was administered. The three most frequently chosen reasons for using pegfilgrastim were planned chemotherapy with high FN risk, female gender, and advanced disease. Overall, 40 % of patients received > 90 % of their planned chemotherapy dose within 3 days of the planned schedule.

CONCLUSION

FN incidence was relatively low with pegfilgrastim PP in patients with a physician-assessed overall FN risk of ≥ 20 %. The most important reasons for pegfilgrastim use were consistent with the investigators' risk assessment and international guidelines.

The impact of chemotherapy dose intensity and supportive care on the risk of febrile neutropenia in patients with early stage breast cancer: a prospective cohort study

Background

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a major dose-limiting toxicity of cancer chemotherapy resulting in considerable morbidity, mortality, and cost. This study evaluated the time course of neutropenic events and patterns of supportive care interventions in patients receiving chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer treated in oncology community practices.

Methods

A prospective cohort study of adult cancer patients initiating a new chemotherapy regimen was conducted at 115 US sites. Toxicity associated with chemotherapy including neutropenic and infectious complications was recorded over four cycles. Clinical interventions were recorded including reductions in chemotherapy dose intensity and use of supportive care measures.

Results

A total of 1,202 patients with stage I–III breast cancer were evaluated. The majority of neutropenic (116 of 196) and infection events (179 of 325) occurred in the initial cycle. A decrease in occurrence of FN and infection was observed in the subsequent cycles, along with an increase in utilization of colony stimulating factors (CSFs), antibiotics and reductions in chemotherapy dose intensity. The overall risk of FN in all patients was 16.3%. In patients who started treatment at or near full dose intensity, the FN risk reached 21.0% without primary CSF prophylaxis and it was 9.0% with prophylaxis. There was no significant difference in FN rates by menopausal or hormone receptors status.

Conclusions

The risk of neutropenic complications is greatest in the initial cycle when most patients receive full-dose chemotherapy. A decrease in neutropenic events during subsequent cycles is associated with reduced dose intensity or increased use of supportive care measures. However, the cumulative risk of FN remains high in patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving full dose chemotherapy without prophylactic measures.

Similar survival benefits of a good response and stable disease to platinum-based chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer

The present study aimed to evaluate the similar survival benefits of a good response [complete response or partial response (CR/PR)] and stable disease (SD) to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in clinical practice. All 322 patients who were treated between 1999 and 2012 with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. Tumor responses were classified according to the response evaluation criteria for solid tumors. A total of 67 (20.8%) patients experienced CR/PR and 165 (51.2%) achieved SD. There was no difference in progression-free survival between the patients with CR/PR and those with SD (P=0.347). There was also no difference between the two groups with regard to overall survival time (P=0.878). In multivariate analysis, disease-control (more than SD) was one of the favorable prognostic factors. In clinical practice, a survival benefit would be provided not only for the patients who have good response, but also for those with SD.