Prophylactic use of myelopoietic growth factors in children after myelosuppressive chemotherapy: does it pay?

Randomized Trial of Prophylactic Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor During Rapid COJEC Induction in Pediatric Patients With High-Risk Neuroblastoma: The European HR-NBL1/SIOPEN Study

Purpose

To reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia during rapid COJEC (cisplatin, vincristine, carboplatin, etoposide, and cyclophosphamide given in a rapid delivery schedule) induction. In the High-Risk Neuroblastoma-1 (HR-NBL1) trial, the International Society of Paediatric Oncology European Neuroblastoma Group (SIOPEN) randomly assigned patients to primary prophylactic (PP) versus symptom-triggered granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF; filgrastim).

Patients and Methods

From May 2002 to November 2005, 239 patients in 16 countries were randomly assigned to receive or not receive PPGCSF. There were 144 boys with a median age of 3.1 years (range, 1 to 17 years) of whom 217 had International Neuroblastoma Staging System (INSS) stage 4 and 22 had stage 2 or 3 MYCN-amplified disease. The prophylactic arm received a single daily dose of 5 μg/kg GCSF, starting after each of the eight COJEC chemotherapy cycles and stopping 24 hours before the next cycle. Chemotherapy was administered every 10 days regardless of hematologic recovery, provided that infection was controlled.

Results

The PPGCSF arm had significantly fewer febrile neutropenic episodes (P = .002), days with fever (P = .004), hospital days (P = .017), and antibiotic days (P = .001). Reported Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) graded toxicity was also significantly reduced: infections per cycle (P = .002), fever (P < .001), severe leucopenia (P < .001), neutropenia (P < .001), mucositis (P = .002), nausea/vomiting (P = .045), and constipation (P = .008). Severe weight loss was reduced significantly by 50% (P = .013). Protocol compliance with the rapid induction schedule was also significantly better in the PPGCSF arm shown by shorter time to completion (P = .005). PPGCSF did not adversely affect response rates or success of peripheral-blood stem-cell harvest.

Conclusion

Following these results, PPG-GSF was advised for all patients on rapid COJEC induction.

Sequential administration of sargramostim and filgrastim in pediatric allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients undergoing myeloablative conditioning

G-CSF and GM-CSF both hasten myeloid engraftment post-MA-alloSCT; however, GM-CSF is earlier acting and less expensive. The objective was to evaluate efficacy/safety of sequential administration of GM-CSF followed by G-CSF in children post-MA-alloSCT. From January 2001 to June 2005, 31 children received 32 MA-alloSCT: mean age 6.65 yr; MRD BM or PBSC vs. related or unrelated UCB 11:21; malignant vs. non-malignant disorders 22:10. GM-CSF (250 microg/m(2) IV QD) began on day of stem cell infusion. GM-CSF was switched to G-CSF (10 microg/kg IV QD) when WBC >or= 300/mm(3) x 2 days. G-CSF continued until ANC >or= 2500/mm(3) x 2 days, then tapered to maintain ANC >or= 1000/mm(3). Median time to myeloid engraftment (ANC >or= 500/mm(3) x 3 days) was 17 days [13 days vs. 24 days, MRD BM/PBSC vs. UCB (p < 0.0001)], occurring at a median time of two days after switch to G-CSF. Clinically relevant adverse events were bone pain (n = 8) and large pleural effusion (n = 1). It was estimated that sequential GM-CSF/G-CSF was cost-effective compared with G-CSF alone [cost-savings of $1311/patient ($41,952/study), 2007 Red Book Average Wholesale Price]. In summary, it was demonstrated that sequential administration of GM-CSF/G-CSF post-MA-alloSCT was safe, cost-effective and resulted in prompt myeloid engraftment.

Prophylactic colony-stimulating factors in children receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are widely utilized to prevent neutropenic complications in both adults and children, but randomized controlled trials in the pediatric setting have reported varied results. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis were conducted to definitively assess the impact of prophylactic CSFs on the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) in pediatric oncology patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched and references hand-searched through July 2004 for randomized controlled trials of prophylactic G-CSF or GM-CSF in pediatric oncology patients. Objectives, outcomes, and quality of the 16 included studies were extracted by two reviewers. Weighted summary estimates of relative risks (RR) were calculated for FN and documented infection (DI). Mean differences in hospitalization, antibiotic use, and duration of neutropenia were calculated.

RESULTS

FN occurred in 68% of 400 controls and 59% of 404 CSF patients. The estimated RR was 0.88 [0.81-0.97; (P=0.01)] favoring the CSFs for leukemia and high grade lymphoma studies and 0.71 [0.51-0.97; (P=0.03)] for solid tumor studies. DI occurred in 25% of controls and 20% of CSF patients for an estimated RR of 0.80 [0.61-1.06; (P=0.12)]. The mean decrease in duration of neutropenia was 3.5 days [2.2-4.7; (P<0.0001)]. Mean decreases favoring CSF use were also observed for hospital stay of 1.7 days [0.9-2.5 (P<0.01)] and antibiotic use of 2.0 days [0.4-3.6; P=0.02].

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic CSFs significantly decrease the incidence of FN and the durations of severe neutropenia, hospitalization, and antibiotic use in pediatric cancer patients, but they do not significantly decrease documented infections.

Prophylactic Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor and Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor Decrease Febrile Neutropenia After Chemotherapy in Children With Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Purpose

To determine whether prophylactic hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) used in children with cancer reduce the rate of febrile neutropenia, hospitalization duration, documented infection rate, parenteral antibiotic duration, amphotericin B use, or infection-related mortality.

Methods

We included studies in this meta-analysis if their populations consisted of children, if there was randomization between CSFs and placebo or no therapy, if CSFs were administered prophylactically (before neutropenia or febrile neutropenia), and if chemotherapy treatments preceding CSFs and placebo or no therapy were identical. From 971 reviewed study articles, 16 were included.

Results

The mean rate of febrile neutropenia in the control arms was 57% (range, 39% to 100%). Using a random effects model, CSFs were associated with a reduction in febrile neutropenia, with a rate ratio of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95; P = .01), and a decrease in hospitalization length, with a weighted mean difference of −1.9 days (95% CI, −2.7 to −1.1 days; P < .00001). CSF use was also associated with reduction in documented infections (rate ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.97; P = .02) and reduction in amphotericin B use (rate ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.87; P = .02). There was no difference in duration of parenteral antibiotic therapy (weighted mean difference, −4.3; 95% CI, −10.6 to 2.0 days; P = .2) or infection-related mortality (rate ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.34 to 3.06; P = .97).

Conclusion

CSFs were associated with a 20% reduction in febrile neutropenia and shorter duration of hospitalization; however, CSFs did not reduce infection-related mortality.

Economic evaluations of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

The prevailing uncertainty about the pharmacoeconomic positioning of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia has resulted in a number of pharmacoeconomic evaluations published in the past 10 years. These studies vary considerably regarding the approaches used and the results presented. In order to contribute to a clearer pharmacoeconomic positioning of G-CSF, a systematic review of economic evaluations was carried out. The focus of the review was prophylaxis and therapy of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with cancer. A computerised bibliography search of several databases was conducted yielding 33 studies. The findings demonstrated the cost-saving potential of G-CSF in standard-dose chemotherapy to be limited, with lower costs often seen in the control group. The results of these studies were too heterogeneous to extract a clear recommendation from a cost-saving point of view. The administration of G-CSF after high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell support resulted more often in cost savings in the G-CSF group as compared with standard-dose chemotherapy, illustrating a possible cost-saving potential of G-CSF. In the treatment of established chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia, cost savings were found in all studies. This result is surprising but hampered by the small number of studies (n = 5) and remains to be confirmed by more rigourously designed prospective economic analyses. Despite the substantial research on this topic, the economic evaluation of G-CSF is far from being settled and needs further investigation.