Controlled trial of filgrastim for acceleration of neutrophil recovery after allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation from human leukocyte antigen–matched related donors

Neutrophil antigen antibodies affect engraftment and secondary graft failure in hematopoietic progenitor cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Research is limited on the role of antibodies against human neutrophil antigen (HNA) in hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) transplantation outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on medical records of patients at the NIH Clinical Center enrolled in six research protocols. This case-control study included 21 patients tested for HNA antibodies from January 2010 to March 2022 who underwent HPC transplantation. In addition, 42 patients following the same research protocols were randomly selected as a control group.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of time to neutrophil engraftment was significantly impacted by the patients' anti-HNA status (p = .042), with the patients with anti-HNA experiencing delayed engraftment. Secondary graft failure occurred in 4 out of 42 patients (9.52%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7-22.1) of the control group, while 5 out of 9 patients (55.5%; 95% CI: 26.7-81.1) with anti-HNA experienced secondary graft failure (p = .005). Furthermore, patients with anti-HNA had a lower proportion (p = .008 for full and p = .002 for partial chimerism) and cumulative incidence (p = .016 for full and p = .010 for partial chimerism) of achieving donor chimerism compared to the control group.

DISCUSSION

The study reveals a potential link between anti-HNA and HPC transplantation outcomes not previously reported. Patients with anti-HNA had a lower proportion and cumulative incidence of achieving donor chimerism. Additionally, anti-HNA status affected the time for neutrophil engraftment, with a slower rate of neutrophil engraftment and increased risk of secondary failure in patients with anti-HNA.

Impact of cladribine, cytarabine, and G-CSF (CLAG) as a bridging therapy prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia

The combination of cladribine, cytarabine, and G-CSF (CLAG) has exhibited robust synergistic anti-leukemia activity as an induction therapy (IT) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, the impact of CLAG as a bridging therapy (BT) administered between IT and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML remains uncertain. In this retrospective study, we examined the efficacy of CLAG as a transitional strategy prior to allo-HSCT in R/R AML. We included 234 patients with R/R AML who received the modified busulfan plus cyclophosphamide conditioning regimen for allo-HSCT in our center during the past 6 years, performed a propensity-score matching analysis, partitioned them into four distinct cohorts, and further integrated them into the CLAG group and non-CLAG group based on response to IT and utilization of CLAG. Our cohorts encompassed 12 patients in Cohort A (modified composite complete remission (mCRc) after IT, CLAG), 31 in Cohort B (mCRc after IT, non-CLAG), 35 in Cohort C (non-complete remission (non-CR) after IT, CLAG), and 80 in Cohort D (non-CR after IT, non-CLAG). Intriguingly, among patients with non-CR status, the administration of CLAG correlated with a notably statistically diminished risk of relapse and improved survival at 2-year follow-up (Cohort C vs. Cohort D). Employing CLAG as a BT prior to allo-HSCT demonstrates substantial effectiveness, a relative degree of safety, and manageable toxicity in selected R/R AML cases.

Day 4 vs. day 12 G-CSF administration following reduced intensity peripheral blood allogeneic stem cell transplant

INTRODUCTION

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) hastens neutrophil engraftment and reduces infections after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT), yet the optimal start date is unknown. Additionally, concurrent G-CSF and methotrexate for graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis may potentiate myelosuppression, and prolonged G-CSF is costly. Our institution changed from day + 4 to day + 12 G-CSF initiation following reduced intensity (RIC) alloHCT with methotrexate GVHD prophylaxis.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared day + 4 and day + 12 G-CSF initiation after RIC alloHCT from 2017-2021. The primary endpoint was the time to neutrophil engraftment. Secondary endpoints included length of stay (LOS) and the time to platelet engraftment as well as the incidence of infectious events, acute GVHD (aGVHD), and mucositis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were included in each group with similar baseline characteristics. We observed faster neutrophil engraftment (median 12 vs. 15 days, p = 0.01) and platelet engraftment (median 13 vs. 15 days, p = 0.026) with day + 4 vs. day + 12 G-CSF initiation. Median LOS was 23 days (range, 19-32) with day + 4 initiation vs. 24 days (21-30) with day + 12 (p = 0.046). The incidence of culture-negative febrile neutropenia (p = 0.12), any grade aGVHD (p = 0.58), and grade 2-4 mucositis (p = 0.8) were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared to day + 4, day + 12 G-CSF initiation following RIC alloHCT had a longer time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment. Day + 12 initiation also resulted in longer LOS, which while statistically significant, was potentially of limited clinical significance. These findings are hypothesis generating.

G-CSF use post peripheral blood stem cell transplant is associated with faster neutrophil engraftment, shorter hospital stay and increased incidence of chronic GVHD

The use of G-CSF post allogeneic transplant has become a common practice to accelerate neutrophil engraftment. There is some controversy in its use. To further evaluate the effectiveness, we compared outcomes in patients who underwent PBSCT, either with or without the planned use of G-CSF post SCT. Among consecutive 162 patients from October 2012 to October 2014, 65 patients received G-CSF post-PBSCT, and 97 did not. More patients in G-CSF group received MAC (78% vs. 55%). Patients who received G-CSF had earlier neutrophil engraftment (median days 11 vs. 14) and shorter post-transplant hospital stay (median days 16 vs. 20, p = 0.001). G-CSF use was associated with a higher rate of extensive chronic GVHD (44.3% vs.61.5%, p = 0.027). G-CSF cost the equivalent of 0.25 hospital days but shortened the initial transplant admission by 4 days. Early cost-benefit may be later offset by the economic burden of chronic GVHD and associated complications.

The Effect of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Use on Hospital Length of Stay after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is administered after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) to aid neutrophil recovery. We compared the effect of empiric G-CSF administration on the duration of index inpatient hospitalization stay after HCT for patients aged ≥18 years with a hematologic malignancy. G-CSF was considered empiric if administered between day -3 and day +6 in relation to graft infusion. We studied 3562 HCTs (1487 HLA-matched sibling donor HCTs and 2075 HLA-matched unrelated donor HCTs) between 2007 and 2016. Three hundred and thirteen (21%) recipients of HLA-matched sibling donor HCT and 417 (20%) recipients of HLA-matched unrelated donor HCT received empiric G-CSF therapy. The effect of G-CSF therapy on the index hospitalization stay was examined in generalized linear models (GLMs) with adjustment for other patient, disease, and transplantation characteristics and acute graft-versus-host disease and infection post-transplantation. The duration of index hospitalization by treatment group did not differ for HLA-matched sibling donor HCT but was shorter with G-CSF for HLA-matched unrelated donor HCT (15 days versus 19 days; P < .001). Our GLMs confirmed shorter hospitalization with the use of G-CSF therapy for HLA-matched unrelated donor HCT (P = .01). G-CSF therapy was not associated with early survival for either donor type, and there was no benefit or disadvantage of giving G-CSF to promote neutrophil recovery.

Filgrastim following HLA-Identical Allogeneic Bone Marrow Transplantation: Long-Term Outcomes of a Randomized Trial

Human recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor reduces the duration of neutropenia following HLA-identical allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. However, its use remains controversial due to the risk of increasing the incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and slower platelet recovery. To clarify these risks, we conducted a prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial of filgrastim 5 µg/kg/day i.v. from day 7 post-transplant until neutrophil recovery in 145 consecutive adults undergoing HLA-identical allogeneic bone marrow transplantation, with cyclosporine and methotrexate as GVHD prophylaxis. The primary endpoint was the incidence of acute GVHD; hematological recovery, nonrelapse mortality, and post-transplant complications were secondary endpoints. Filgrastim had no significant effect on the incidence of acute GVHD, platelet recovery, platelet transfusion requirements, chronic GVHD, or survival. Filgrastim accelerated granulocyte recovery significantly (with absolute neutrophil counts >.5 × 10⁹/L achieved after a median of 16 days versus 23 days for placebo; P < .0001), and reduced both early nonrelapse mortality (2.9% versus 10.5%; P = .042) and the duration of i.v. antibiotic therapy (18 days versus 26 days; P = .001) and hospitalization (27 versus 34 days; P = .017). In conclusion, in this setting, filgrastim reduced significantly the duration of neutropenia, i.v. antibiotic therapy, hospitalization, and early nonrelapse mortality, without increasing the risk of acute and chronic GVHD or relapse, or delaying platelet recovery.

Novel strategies for improving hematopoietic reconstruction after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or intensive chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

High-dose conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) as well as intensive poly-chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) induce prolonged periods of neutropenia. The duration of the neutropenia is particularly long following umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT). Areas covered: After briefly reviewing the impact of hematopoietic growth factors administration to hasten hematologic reconstitution after allo-HCT or intensive AML chemotherapy, this article summarizes recent approaches that have been investigated to prompt hematologic reconstruction after UCBT or intensive AML chemotherapy. Expert opinion: In the allo-HCT setting, administration of G-CSF or GM-CSF shortened the duration of the neutropenia but failed to decrease infection-related mortality or to improve survival. Novel approaches to hasten hematological reconstruction after UCBT such as double UCBT with expansion of one of the 2 UCB units with Notch ligand, mesenchymal stromal cells, nicotinamide, or StemRegenin 1, co-transplanting a single UCB unit with HLA-haploidentical CD34+ cells, or increasing UCB HSC homing to marrow niches via direct intra bone UCB administration, pulse treatment with dmPGE2 or enforced fucosylation are promising and deserve further investigations in prospective phase III studies. In the AML setting, G-CSF or GM-CSF administration after intensive chemotherapy decreased the duration of the neutropenia without improving survival.

Outcomes of allogeneic stem cell transplantation among patients with acute myeloid leukemia presenting active disease: Experience of a single European Comprehensive Cancer Center

Introduction:

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) representes a potentially curative approach for patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We report the outcome of relapsed/refractory AML patients treated with ASCT.

Method:

A retrospective cohort from 1994 to 2013 that included 61 patients with diagnosis of relapsed/refractory AML. Outcomes of interest were transplant-related mortality (TRM), incidence of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), relapse incidence, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

Results:

The median age was 61 years (range 1 to 65). The cumulative incidence of 90 days, 1 year, and 3 years TRM were 60%, 26.7%, and 13.3%, respectively (p<0.001). The incidence of relapse was 21.7% at 1 year, 13% at 3 years, and 8.7% at 5 years. Median OS was estimated to be 8 months (95CI 3.266-12.734) and median PFS, 3 months (95CI 1.835-4.165).

Conclusion:

In our cohort, TRM in first years after ASCT remains considerable, but ASCT in this setting seems to be a good choice for AML patients with active disease. However, novel approaches are needed to reduce TRM and relapse in this set of patients.

Administration of G-CSF from day +6 post-allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in children and adolescents accelerates neutrophil engraftment but does not appear to have an impact on cost savings

G-CSF post-allogeneic HSCT accelerates neutrophil engraftment, but evidence that it impacts on cost-related outcomes is lacking. We performed a retrospective child and adolescent single-center cohort study examining G-CSF administration from Day +6 of allogeneic HSCT vs. ad hoc G-CSF use where clinically indicated. Forty consecutive children and adolescents undergoing allogeneic HSCT were included. End-points were as follows: time to engraftment; incidence of acute and chronic GvHD; number of patients alive at Day +100; 180-day TRM; post-transplant days in hospital; and cost of antimicrobials, TPN, and G-CSF usage. Neutrophil engraftment occurred earlier in the group that received G-CSF from Day +6. There was no difference between groups in any of the other end-points with the following exception: the cost of GCSF was significantly higher in the D + 6 G-CSF group. However, median G-CSF cost in this group amounted to only €280. There was a trend towards reduced cost of antimicrobials in the D + 6 G-CSF group, although this did not reach significance (p = 0.13). The median cost per patient of antimicrobial agents between groups differed by €1116. This study demonstrated the administration of G-CSF on Day +6 in pediatric HSCT to be safe. A further study using a larger cohort of patients is warranted to ascertain its true clinico-economic value.

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.

High incidence of severe acute graft-versus-host disease with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil in a large cohort of related and unrelated allogeneic transplantation patients

Both acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) are major causes of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). The optimal pharmacological regimen for GVHD prophylaxis is unclear, but combinations of a calcineurin inhibitor (cyclosporin or tacrolimus [Tac]) and an antimetabolite (methotrexate or mycophenolate mofetil [MMF]) are typically used. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of 414 consecutive patients who underwent AHSCT from sibling (SD) or unrelated donors (UD) with Tac/MMF combination, between January 2005 and August 2010. The median follow-up was 60 months. Less than one third of the patients received a reduced-intensity chemoregimen. The incidence of grades III and IV acute GVHD was 22.3% and 36.5% in SD and UD groups, respectively (P = .0007). The incidence of chronic GVHD was 47.1% and 52.7% in the SD and UD groups, respectively. Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) at 60 months was 33.3% and 46.5% in the SD and UD groups, respectively (P = .0016). The incidence of relapse was 22.4% for UD and 28.8% for SD. Five-year overall survival was 43% and 34% in the SD and UD groups, respectively (P = .0183). GVHD was the leading cause of death for the entire cohort. Multivariable analysis showed that 8/8 HLA match, patient's age < 60, and low-risk disease were associated with better survival. The use of Tac/MMF for GVHD prophylaxis was associated with a relatively high incidence of severe acute GVHD and NRM in AHSCT from sibling and unrelated donors.

Effects of prophylactic hematopoietic colony stimulating factors on stem cell transplantations: meta-analysis

Hematopoietic growth factors are often given for prevention of febrile neutropenia (FN), infections, and other complications by hastening neutrophil recovery in the treatment of malignancies after high dose chemotherapy (HDCT). Although several meta-analyses have already demonstrated beneficial effects of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) administration, the effects of G-CSF have not been confirmed in cancer patients receiving stem cell transplantation (SCT) after HDCT. Therefore, we performed a statistical combination of controlled clinical trials to investigate the efficacy of prophylactic use of G-CSF in preventing the neutropenic complications associated with SCT following HDCT in cancer patients. We searched PubMed to identify potentially relevant references and finally selected seven randomized controlled trials that met all of the eligibility criteria. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that prophylactic G-CSF reduced the risk of documented infections and time to hematologic recovery manifested by days to absolute neutrophil count (ANC) ≥ 0.5 × 10(9)/L, days to ANC ≥ 1.0 × 10(9)/L, and days to platelets ≥ 20 × 10(9)/L in SCT patients with cancer following HDCT. The G-CSF treated group also showed a decrease in the length of hospital stay. However, there was no difference between G-CSF treatment group and placebo group in regard to all-cause mortality, infection-related mortality, grade 2∼4 acute graft-versus-host-disease, and episode of fever.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for hepatitis C therapy-associated neutropenia: systematic review and economic evaluation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment requires maximal adherence to pegylated interferon (Peg-IFN) and ribavirin to achieve a sustained virologic response (SVR). Neutropenia is the most common cause for Peg-IFN dose reduction. Our objectives were to evaluate the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) versus Peg-IFN dose reduction for HCV therapy-associated neutropenia in treatment naïve adults. We conducted a systematic review to identify controlled trials and observational studies. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were completed independently by two investigators. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses compared G-CSF with dose reduction. Nineteen studies were included. In one trial, the SVR for those receiving G-CSF was 54.5% (95% CI: 34.7-73.1) compared with 26.3% (95% CI: 11.8-48.8) for dose reduction. The remaining studies were case series or retrospective cohorts and provided weak evidence for the relationship between SVR and G-CSF. The risk of adverse events, including infection, associated with G-CSF was low (13.1%; 95% CI: 8.0-20.8) and clinically insignificant. G-CSF had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $41,701 per SVR achieved in genotype 1, and $16,115 per SVR achieved in genotype 2 or 3. Estimates were robust under a variety of resource and intervention scenarios. While administration of G-CSF may enable patients to remain on or resume optimal HCV therapy, there was weak evidence that this improves the likelihood of SVR compared with dose reduction. Adverse effects of G-CSF are mild. The economic evaluation was inconclusive.

Review and revision of clinical practice of using G-CSF after autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation at UCSD

There was no consensus on the optimal use of G-CSF after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In this study, the practice of using G-CSF, based on the CD34(+) cell number, at the University of California, San Diego Blood and Marrow Transplant Unit (UCSD BMT) was evaluated by performing a five-year retrospective analysis of data from patients undergoing autologous and allogeneic transplantation. Various outcomes, such as time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment and length of post-transplant hospital stay are assessed in relation to use of G-CSF and number of CD34(+) cells infused. It has been found that the use of G-CSF is associated with faster neutrophil engraftment and shorter length of post-transplant hospital stay without affecting time to platelet engraftment in patients undergoing autologous transplantation. In addition, the number of CD34(+) cells do not influence outcomes in autologous and allogeneic transplant patients if they are treated with G-CSF. As a result of this evaluation, the G-CSF protocol at UCSD BMT Unit is revised. The main change is to implement the use of G-CSF in all patients undergoing autologous transplantation regardless of the number of CD34( +) cells. No changes in the allogeneic transplantation protocol are made as a result of this analysis.

Optimal use of G-CSF administration after hematopoietic SCT

After hematopoietic SCT (HSCT), G-CSF is commonly used to enhance stem cell engraftment to minimize the morbidity and mortality associated with prolonged neutropenia. However, there is no consensus on the optimal use of G-CSF after high-dose chemotherapy followed by HSCT. This review was performed to evaluate the evidence regarding the use of G-CSF after autologous and allogeneic HSCT. Studies investigating the use of G-CSF in comparison to control (observation or placebo), early vs delayed initiation of G-CSF, and other approaches driven by patient-specific parameters to identify optimal use of G-CSF have been reviewed. Various outcomes such as neutrophil and platelet engraftment, post-transplant length of hospital stay, post-transplant complications such as infection and GVHD, and survival have been assessed. Finally, we provide the level of evidence for each of the outcomes analyzed while evaluating strategies for using G-CSF in patients undergoing autologous or allogeneic HSCT.

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.

Little impact of donor/recipient major mismatch for neutrophil-specific antigen NA2 on neutrophil recovery after allogeneic SCT

The Fcgamma receptor IIIb (FcgammaRIIIb), a receptor for the Fcgamma region of IgG, is specifically expressed on neutrophils. It has two allelic polymorphisms, NA1 and NA2, which are highly immunogenic and act as targets in alloimmune or autoimmune neutropenia. Thus, neutrophil antigens (NA) compatibility of donor/recipient pairs might be expected to affect the engraftment of neutrophils after allogeneic SCT (allo-SCT). Here, the impact of NA compatibility of 17 patients and their donors undergoing allo-SCT with a myeloablative regimen was determined. Leukocyte depletion filters were used for all transfusions before and post-SCT; most patients received G-CSF after transplant. Major mismatches for NA1 and NA2 were present in 1 and 7 patient/donor pairs, respectively. These eight patients receiving NA major-mismatched allo-SCT were compared with nine patients who received NA compatible allo-SCT. Engraftment of neutrophils and the incidence of post-engraftment neutropenia were found to be identical in the two groups. Despite the limitations in statistical power because of the small number of patients analyzed, these observations suggest that the major mismatching for NA2 antigen has little impact on the engraftment of neutrophils after myeloablative allo-SCT, at least in patients transfused using leukocyte depletion filters and receiving G-CSF after transplantation.

A Phase 3, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial of Filgrastim in Patients with Haematological Malignancies Undergoing Matched-related Allogeneic Bone Marrow Transplantation

Introduction

Recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) may aid engraftment post high-dose chemo-/radiotherapy in patients with haematological malignancies undergoing allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT); however, the effects of G-CSF on graft-versus-host disease (GvHD), relapse, and survival are not well defined.

Methods

In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study, the effects of the G-CSF Filgrastim on neutrophil and platelet recovery, and on clinical outcomes were evaluated. Patients (12–55 years) receiving an allogeneic BMT for a haematological malignancy were randomized to receive Filgrastim 5 µg/kg or placebo. Study treatment was continued until patients achieved an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) ≥0.5 × 10⁹/L, or until day 42.

Results

Fifty-one patients (Filgrastim, N = 25; placebo, N = 26) were evaluable. Patients treated with Filgrastim had significantly faster engraftment with ANC ≥0.5 × 10⁹/L being achieved after a median (range) of 15.0 (1.0–22.0) days vs. 19.0 (15.0–28.0) days for placebo (P< 0.0001). The incidence of GvHD was comparable for both groups. During the limited follow-up (2 years), Filgrastim had no adverse effect on mortality and possibly reduced the rate of relapse.

Granulocyte and erythropoietic stimulating proteins after high-dose chemotherapy for myeloma

High-dose chemotherapy is an established treatment for patients with myeloma. In randomized trials it has been shown to prolong disease-free survival by around 1 year compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone. Physically and psychologically high-dose therapy takes its toll on the patient who may be in hospital for around 3 weeks and take some weeks or months to convalesce after discharge. Granulocyte colony stimulating factors and erythropoietic stimulating agents will speed neutrophil and red cell recovery, respectively, when used at an appropriate time after the high-dose chemotherapy. The clinical value of these laboratory findings is uncertain and the role of these agents after high-dose chemotherapy remains a subject for debate.

Immune reconstitution following hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation

Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation is associated with a profound immune deficiency manifested as an increased propensity to develop infections and probably also malignancies. Innate immunity, including epithelial barriers and phagocytes, typically recovers within weeks after grafting, and B-cell counts and CD8 T-cell counts recover within months. CD4 T-cell counts are low for years, and their recovery is particularly slow in older patients with poor thymic function. Therapies to improve immune function include vaccinations, immunoglobulins for recurrent infections, cytokines, and antigen-specific donor lymphocyte infusions.

Thrombocytopenia in association with splenomegaly during granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor treatment in mice is not caused by hypersplenism and is resolved spontaneously

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is used for hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) mobilization. Platelet (PLT) counts decrease during G-CSF administration. The mechanisms have not been determined, however. Because splenic pooling of PLTs caused thrombocytopenia in patients with splenomegaly and splenic enlargement was observed in G-CSF-treated donors, it was hypothesized that hypersplenism might cause G-CSF-induced thrombocytopenia.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Mice were treated with several concentrations of G-CSF, and PLT count was measured. Because transfused PLTs should be cleared rapidly from the blood stream under hypersplenic state, PLT life span was studied. To determine direct role of spleen on thrombocytopenia, G-CSF was given to splenectomized mice. Because PLT count did not decrease in G-CSF-expressing transgenic mice, G-CSF was given to mice for a longer period of time and PLT count was investigated.

RESULTS

PLT counts decreased while spleen weight increased in a dose-dependent manner by G-CSF treatment. No significant difference in PLT life span was found between G-CSF-treated and control mice. Histologic analysis showed no significant increase in PLT numbers trapped in either spleen or other tissue after PLT transfusion in G-CSF-treated mice. In splenectomized mice as well as in normal mice, G-CSF caused thrombocytopenia. When G-CSF was given to mice for a longer period of time, PLT counts decreased during the first 7 days and thereafter began to increase followed by returning to baseline on Day 15.

CONCLUSION

Thrombocytopenia coincided with splenomegaly during G-CSF treatment, but hypersplenism was not responsible for thrombocytopenia. G-CSF-induced thrombocytopenia was a transient event and improved spontaneously despite continual G-CSF treatment.

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Prophylactic Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor and Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor After Autologous and Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Purpose

The primary objective of our meta-analysis was to determine whether prophylactic hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) after hematopoietic autologous and allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (SCT) reduced documented infections. Our secondary objectives were to determine whether prophylactic CSFs affected other outcomes including parenteral antibiotic therapy duration, infection-related mortality, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), or treatment-related mortality.

Methods

We included studies if there was random assignment between CSFs and placebo/no therapy and CSFs were given after SCT and before recovery of neutrophils. From 3,778 reviewed study articles, 34 were included based on predefined inclusion criteria. All analyses were conducted using a random effects model.

Results

CSFs reduced the risk of documented infections (relative risk [RR] 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.00; P = .05) and duration of parenteral antibiotics (weighted mean difference, −1.39 days, 95% CI, −2.56 to −0.22; P = .02) but did not reduce infection-related mortality (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.44; P = .4). CSFs did not increase grade 2 to 4 acute GVHD (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.31; P = .8) or treatment-related mortality (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.29; P = .98).

Conclusion

CSFs were associated with a small reduction in the risk of documented infections but did not affect infection or treatment-related mortality.

Granulocyte and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factors in allografts: Uses, misuses, misconceptions, and future applications

Despite more than 10 years experience using growth factors after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT), their state in this has not been elucidated. Most studies show that they accelerate myeloid recovery, regardless of whether they are instituted on day 0 or day 10 after transplant. However, this does not correlate with an improvement in the outcome. One disadvantage is that granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis is associated with slower platelet engraftment due to an increase in platelet aggregation. There is also no agreement as regards the value of G-CSF given as prophylaxis after ASCT, the effects on graft-vs-host disease (GVHD), and the survival rate. A large retrospective study from Europe showed that patients with acute leukemia who received bone marrow from HLA-identical siblings and were treated with G-CSF ran a higher risk of acute and chronic GVHD and transplant-related mortality, while the survival and the leukemia-free survival rates were reduced. In contrast, a meta-analysis of 18 small studies showed no evidence of an increase in acute and chronic GVHD, using G-CSF as prophylaxis after ASCT. Two studies from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research showed contradictory data. When G-CSF is given to the recipient as prophylaxis, the levels of soluble interleukin-2 receptor-alpha increase, which aggravates GVHD. When it is given to the donor, G-CSF polarizes T cells to produce T-helper cell-2 cytokines, which reduce GVHD after transplantation. G-CSF has no effect on relapse. Available findings suggest that there is no indication to use G-CSF as prophylaxis after ASCT.

Relationships between hematological recovery and overall survival in older adults undergoing allogeneic bone marrow transplantation

OBJECTIVE

The advancement of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation techniques and the increase in frequency of hematological malignancy in older patients are expected to expand the indications to include more elderly patients. We investigated the problem of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (allo-BMT) in patients over 40 years old.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 21 consecutive patients (13 males and 8 females) over 40 years old who underwent allo-BMT at our center during the past 12 years.

RESULTS

The patients had a median age of 46 years, and 5 patients were over 50 years old. There were 8 cases of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), 5 cases of acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), 6 cases of chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and 2 cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). The 3-year overall survival rate was 43.0%. Overall survival was associated with recovery of platelets in less than 30 days and recovery of neutrophil counts in less than 15 days. We did not observe any severe graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) or regimen-related toxicities. Twelve patients died of transplantation-related diseases.

CONCLUSION

A faster recovery of the neutrophil and platelet counts was significantly associated with overall survival. Decreasing transplantation-related death, particularly by infection control, in allo-BMT in patients over age 40 is an important problem.

Higher mortality after allogeneic peripheral-blood transplantation compared with bone marrow in children and adolescents: the Histocompatibility and Alternate Stem Cell Source Working Committee of the International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry

PURPOSE

Peripheral-blood stem cells (PBSC) may be used as an alternative to bone marrow (BM) for allogeneic transplantation. Despite lack of data on PBSC transplantation in children, there has been a change in clinical practice, with increasing numbers of children receiving PBSC allografts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We compared the results of 143 PBSC and 630 BM transplants from human leukocyte antigen-identical sibling donors in children aged 8 to 20 years with acute leukemia. PBSC transplant recipients were older, and were more likely to have advanced leukemia, receive growth factors post-transplantation, and have undergone transplantation more recently. Risks of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), treatment-related mortality, relapse, treatment failure (relapse or death), and overall mortality were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for potentially confounding factors.

RESULTS

Hematopoietic recovery was faster after PBSC transplantation. Risks of grade 2 to 4 acute GVHD were similar, but chronic GVHD risk was higher after PBSC transplantation (relative risk [RR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.28 to 2.66; P = .001). In contrast to reports in adults, treatment-related mortality (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.28 to 2.80; P = .001), treatment failure (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.68; P = .03), and mortality (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.79; P = .01) were higher after PBSC transplantation. Risks of relapse were similar.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest poorer outcomes after PBSC compared with BM transplantation in children after adjusting for relevant risk factors. Given the trend toward increased use of PBSC allografts in children, prospective clinical trials are required to determine their appropriate role in this group of patients.

PREDICTING THE COSTS OF ALLOGENEIC SIBLING STEM-CELL TRANSPLANTATION: RESULTS FROM A PROSPECTIVE, MULTICENTER, FRENCH STUDY

BACKGROUND

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation is a widely used, cost-intensive procedure. Our purpose was to estimate costs and determine cost predictors.

METHODS

We used data from a prospective French study comparing four doses of immunoglobulins. Resource use of hematopoietic stem-cell transplant recipients during the first 6 months posttransplant, both inpatient and ambulatory costs, in 85 patients from five centers were collected prospectively and costed. Baseline data and clinical events were retrieved. Protocol-driven costs were excluded. Multivariable analysis evaluated the association between costs and patient's pretransplant status and transplant-related complications. Because of the absence of differences in outcome among the four randomization groups, cost data for all patients were pooled.

RESULTS

Total costs per patient were the following: mean 76,237 Euros; standard deviation 32,565 Euros; median 69,516 Euros; range 183,758 to 14,761Euros. The major cost driver was hospital days. No association was found between costs and baseline status. The "predictors" of higher costs (adding an average 20,000 Euros/patient) were the occurrence of transplant-related complications: graft-versus-host disease and repeated infections that were unpredictable before transplant in this homogeneous group of patients.

CONCLUSION

Our data highlight the discrepancy between the Diagnosis Related Group prospective payment system and actual costs. The actual cost of geno-identical stem-cell transplantation results from posttransplant complications that cannot be predicted prospectively and require ex post cost adjustment.

Immunoablative reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation: potential role of donor Th2 and Tc2 cells

Allogeneic reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation (RISCT) decreases regimen-associated morbidity and mortality, but it is unfortunately still constrained by the same immune T-cell reactions that limit myeloablative transplantation, including graft rejection, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), and suboptimal graft-versus-leukemia (GVL) or graft-versus-tumor (GVT) effects. Graft rejection is mediated by host T cells, whereas GVHD and GVL/GVT effects are initiated by donor T cells, and to this extent, future advances in RISCT will likely benefit from an ability to modulate both donor and host T-cell immunity. As a step in this direction, we have developed a RISCT approach that first involves chemotherapy-induced host T-cell ablation, and second involves administration of allogeneic inocula enriched for donor CD4(+) Th2 and CD8(+) Tc2 T-cell subsets that in murine studies mediate reduced GVHD. In a pilot clinical trial, "immunoablative" RISCT with human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched related allografts resulted in rapid and complete donor chimerism and GVL effects early post-transplant, with GVHD being the primary toxicity. Using this immunoablative RISCT approach, we are now evaluating the feasibility and safety of augmenting allografts with additional donor CD4(+) Th2 cells that are generated in vitro via CD3/CD28 costimulation in the presence of interleukin (IL)-4. We review the biology of host and donor T-cell immunity during allogeneic RISCT and discuss the strategies of host immunoablation and donor Th2 and Tc2 cell therapy as potential means to improve the clinical results in RISCT.

Immunological and clinical effects of post-transplant G-CSF versus placebo in T-cell replete allogeneic blood transplant patients: Results from a randomized double-blind study

BACKGROUND

Immunological and clinical effects of post-transplant growth factor administration have not been well studied. This report describes the outcome and immune functions of a total of 50 HLA-matched related donor allogeneic blood stem-cell transplantation patients who received post-transplant G-CSF (10 microg/kg) or placebo.

METHODS

Immune status, including number of lymphocyte subsets and their functions, and serum immunoglobulin levels and clinical status--including GvHD, rate of relapse, event-free survival, and overall survival--were determined in the patients enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients survived 1 year after transplant, and 15 patients had available results to compare immune function by randomization assignment. At 12 months post-transplant, immune parameters in G-CSF versus placebo groups showed no statistically significant differences in number of circulating lymphocyte subsets CD3, CD4, CD8, CD19 and CD56 in the two groups. There was no significant (NS) difference in immunoglobulin IgG, IgA and IgM levels, NK or LAK cell-mediated cytotoxicity levels, and mitogen-induced proliferation between post-transplant G-CSF and placebo group. In addition, the analyses of immune parameters at earlier time-points on Days 28, 100, 180, and 270 revealed that, except for LAK cytotoxicity at Day 100, there was no differences between the two groups. Fourteen of 26 patients are alive in the G-CSF arm and nine of 24 in the placebo arm. Median follow-up of surviving patients is 43 months. Four year overall and event-free survival in the G-CSF and the placebo group were 53% and 35% (NS), and 44% and 36% (NS) respectively. Bacterial or fungal infections were the cause of six of 12 deaths in the G-CSF arm (all bacterial) and of four of 15 deaths in the placebo arm (two deaths from Aspergillus) (P=0.26). Two patients relapsed in the G-CSF arm and three in the placebo arm. Four year cumulative incidences of relapse were 8% versus 13% in G-CSF versus placebo arms, respectively, (NS). Chronic GvHD developed in 14 of 19 100-day survivors after G-CSF (11 extensive stage), and in 17 of 20 (14 extensive stage) in the placebo arm. The 4-year cumulative incidence of chronic GvHD was 56% [95% confidence interval (CI) 24-88%] after G-CSF and 71% (95% CI 48-94%) after placebo; this difference was not statistically significant (log rank P=0.41).

CONCLUSION

In summary, there were no significant immunological or alterations in clinical benefit of post-transplant G-CSF administration in T-replete allotransplant recipients.

The effect of hematopoietic growth factors on the risk of graft-vs-host disease after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a meta-analysis

The effect of hematopoietic growth factors on neutrophil recovery after allogeneic transplantation is well-recognized. Recent laboratory studies demonstrated that these cytokines may also modify T-cell and dendritic cell function, but whether the effect is strong enough to alter the risk of GVHD is unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the effect of G-CSF or GM-CSF on the risk of nonhematopoietic outcomes after allogeneic transplantation. A search of the literature from 1986 to present yielded 18 publications in which data were provided for cohorts receiving growth factor vs either placebo or no therapy. These included nine prospective randomized studies, eight retrospective cohort studies, and one case-control study comprising a total of 1198 patients. The publication types were heterogeneous with regard to demographic and treatment characteristics, although within publications, comparative groups were generally balanced. The pooled risk ratio estimates with use of growth factor was 1.08 (95% CI 0.87-1.33, P=0.48) for grades 2-4 acute GVHD, 1.22 (95% CI 0.80-1.86, P=0.99) for grades 3-4 acute GVHD, and 1.02 (95% CI 0.82-1.26, P=0.87) for chronic GVHD. This analysis did not detect a significant change in the risk of acute or chronic GVHD after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation when hematopoietic growth factors were used to shorten the initial period of neutropenia.

Late G-CSF after allogeneic bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell transplantation: a prospective controlled trial

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used to accelerate neutrophil recovery after allogeneic BMT or PBSC transplantation. The optimal time to start G-CSF treatment is not known. Forty-two patients undergoing allogeneic BMT or PBSC transplantation for hematological malignancies received G-CSF either on day 6 or on day 9 post transplant. The time to hematological recovery was monitored and the two groups were compared with respect to peritransplant morbidity and mortality. Recovery of the neutrophil counts to >0.1 x 10(9)/l, > 0.5 x 10(9)/l and >1.0 x 10(9)/l were not significantly different in either group. There was no difference in recovery of red blood cell and platelet counts and no difference between the two groups with respect to the number of febrile days or number of days on antibiotic treatment. Documented bacterial, viral or fungal infections did not occur more often when G-CSF treatment was started on day 9. Delaying treatment with G-CSF resulted in a significant reduction in the length of treatment from 13 to 10 days (23.1% reduction). Reducing the length of the treatment by 3 days lowered the costs by 395.40 Euro per patient. Delaying G-CSF treatment and starting on day 9 after BMT or PBSC transplantation is safe and results in a clear economic benefit.

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.