The use of chemotherapy regimens carrying a moderate or high risk of febrile neutropenia and the corresponding management of febrile neutropenia: an expert survey in breast cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

The occurrence and risk factors of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with breast cancer not receiving primary G-CSF prophylaxis

Background

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is a substantial side effect in chemotherapy of breast cancer patients. Administration of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) that may reduce CIN occurrence is not commonly available to many local cases.

Objectives

To investigate the occurrence of grade 4 CIN and the influencing factors in breast cancer patients not receiving G-CSF prophylaxis.

Methods

One-hundred and eighty-six newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who received a 3-weekly (neo)adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy without primary G-CSF prophylaxis were included. Grade 4 CIN was defined as absolute neutrophil count (ANC) <0.5 × 103/mm3 during any chemotherapy cycle. We used logistic regression to explore the association of clinical, pathological and treatment factors with the risk of grade 4 CIN in the first cycle and in any given cycle.

Results

Fifty-seven (30.6%) patients experienced grade 4 CIN in the first cycle and 145 (78%) had it at least once during chemotherapy. In the first cycle, haemoglobin, ANC, and albumin levels were associated with grade 4 CIN (OR = 1.48, p = 0.031; OR = 0.68, p = 0.006; and OR = 2.07, p = 0.042). In any cycle, pre-treatment ANC levels and anthracycline-taxane combination regimen were associated with grade 4 CIN (OR = 0.78, p = 0.032 and OR = 3.64, p = 0.012).

Conclusions

A significant proportion of the local breast cancer cases undergoing chemotherapy without primary G-CSF prophylaxis experienced grade 4 CIN. Haemoglobin, ANC, and albumin levels are the risk factors for first cycle CIN, while pre-treatment ANC levels and anthracycline-taxane chemotherapy regimen are associated with CIN in any given cycle. These risk factors may be used to direct a recommendation of G-CSF prophylaxis to the most at-risk individuals in the local setting or other settings in similar situations.

Two decades of pegfilgrastim: what have we learned? Where do we go from here?

Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) is a medical emergency that may occur in patients with malignancies receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. FN requires early therapeutic intervention since it is associated with increased hospitalizations and high mortality risk of 5%-20%. FN-related hospitalizations are higher in patients with myeloid malignancies than in those with solid tumors due to the myelotoxicity of chemotherapy regimens and the compromised bone marrow function. FN increases the burden of cancer by causing chemotherapy dose reductions and delays. The administration of the first granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), filgrastim, reduced the incidence and duration of FN in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Filgrastim later evolved into pegfilgrastim, which has a longer half-life than filgrastim and was associated with a lower rate of severe neutropenia, chemotherapy dose reduction, and treatment delay. Nine million patients have received pegfilgrastim since its approval in early 2002. The pegfilgrastim on-body injector (OBI) is an innovative device facilitating the time-released auto-injection of pegfilgrastim approximately 27 hours after chemotherapy, as clinically recommended for the prevention of FN, thus eliminating the need for a next-day hospital visit. Since its introduction in 2015, one million patients with cancer have received pegfilgrastim using the OBI. Subsequently, the device has been approved in the United States (US), European Union, Latin America, and Japan, with studies and a postmarketing commitment demonstrating device reliability. A recent prospective observational study conducted in the US demonstrated that the OBI substantially improved the adherence to and compliance with clinically recommended pegfilgrastim therapy; patients receiving pegfilgrastim via the OBI experienced a lower incidence of FN than those receiving alternatives for FN prophylaxis. This review discusses the evolution of G-CSFs leading to the development of the OBI, current recommendations for G-CSF prophylaxis in the clinic, continued evidence supporting next-day pegfilgrastim administration, and improvements in patient care made possible with the OBI.

Nurses' knowledge of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and its management: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess nurses' level of knowledge of CIN and its association with socio-demographic factors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey design was used.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of 34.1 years (SD = 7.1 years) and were predominantly female (78%) and with a bachelor's degree in nursing (95.6%). The nurses had a moderate level of knowledge about neutropenia and its management (mean total score 16.3 out of 30, SD = 3.7). Those who had a post-graduate degree (P = .048), had received an oncology educational course (P = .011), had attended a course on neutropenia (P = .007), who were working in an oncology unit (P = .002), and had more oncology experience (P = 001) were more likely to have a higher level of knowledge of CIN and its management compared to their other counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of a moderate level of knowledge of CIN among nurses, the findings call for the need for further education and training. As a long-term plan, this might be accomplished by encouraging nurses to pursue post-graduate education or oncology-specialized certification and supporting them with scholarship grants. However, deliberate plans for short courses, training and workshops on oncology or CIN are other choices with a more immediate impact on nurses' knowledge and clinical practice. Finally, integrating oncology nursing education within nursing curricula is urgently needed.

A prospective study to evaluate febrile neutropenia incidence in patients receiving pegfilgrastim on-body injector vs other choices

Purpose

We evaluated the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and related clinical outcomes among patients treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy for nonmyeloid malignancies who received pegfilgrastim on-body injector (OBI) or other options (Other) for FN prophylaxis.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, adult patients with breast, prostate, or lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma at risk for FN were stratified into subgroups based on FN prophylaxis used in the first chemotherapy cycle: pegfilgrastim OBI vs Other (pegfilgrastim or biosimilar pegfilgrastim prefilled syringe, daily filgrastim, or no granulocyte colony–stimulating factor [G-CSF]) for up to 4 planned chemotherapy cycles.

Results

This US study enrolled 2575 eligible patients (OBI, 1624; Other, 951). FN incidence was lower in the OBI group (6.4% [95% CI, 5.2–7.6%]) than in the Other group (9.4% [7.5–11.2%]), with a relative risk (RR) of 0.66 (0.47–0.91; p = .006). A decreased risk of dose delays among patients receiving pegfilgrastim OBI vs Other was observed (RR for ≥ 5 days: 0.64 [0.42–0.96], p = .023; RR for ≥ 7 days: 0.62 [0.40–0.91], p = .016). Adherence, defined as G-CSF support for all chemotherapy cycles, was 94.0% (92.9–95.2%) in the OBI group compared with 58.4% (55.2–61.5%) in the Other group. Compliance with pegfilgrastim, defined as administration the day after chemotherapy, was 88.3% in the OBI group and 48.8% in the prefilled syringe group.

Conclusion

Patients receiving pegfilgrastim OBI had a lower incidence of FN compared with those receiving alternatives. The OBI was associated with improved adherence to and compliance with clinically recommended G-CSF prophylaxis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07226-9.

A questionnaire survey on evaluation for penetration and compliance of the Japanese Guideline on Febrile Neutropenia among hematology-oncology physicians and surgeons

PURPOSE

The Japanese Society of Medical Oncology published a guideline (GL) on febrile neutropenia (FN) in 2017. The study's purpose is to reveal how widely GL penetrated among physicians and surgeons providing chemotherapy.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey was conducted with SurveyMonkey™ for members of the Japanese Association of Supportive Care in Cancer and relevant academic organizations. Each question had four options (always do, do in more than half of patients, do in less than half, do not at all) and a free description form. Responses were analyzed with statistical text-analytics.

RESULT

A total of 800 responses were retrieved. Major respondents were experts with more than 10-year experience, physicians 54%, and surgeons 46%. Eighty-seven percent of respondents knew and used GL. Forty-eight percent assessed FN with Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score "always" or "more than half." Eighty-one percent chose beta-lactam monotherapy as primary treatment in high-risk patients. Seventy-seven percent did oral antibacterial therapy in low-risk patients ambulatorily. Seventy-eight percent administered primary prophylactic G-CSF (ppG-CSF) in FN frequency ≥ 20% regimen. Fifty-nine percent did ppG-CSF for high-risk patients in FN frequency 10-20% regimen. Ninety-seven percent did not use ppG-CSF in FN frequency < 10% regimen. The medians of complete and complete plus partial compliance rates were 46.4% (range 7.0-92.8) and 77.8% (range 35.4-98.7). The complete compliance rates were less than 30% in seven recommendations, including the MASCC score assessment.

CONCLUSION

GL is estimated to be widely utilized, but some recommendations were not followed, presumably due to a mismatch with actual clinical practices in Japan.

First-line combination chemotherapy with etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin for the treatment of disseminated germ cell cancer: Efficacy and feasibility in current clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of first-line etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin and primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim as first-line chemotherapy for disseminated germ cell cancer.

METHODS

This study reviewed 154 consecutive patients with previously untreated disseminated germ cell cancer who received first-line etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin between 1995 and 2020. Of these, 54 patients were managed with primary prophylaxis using pegfilgrastim (primary prophylaxis group), and 100 were managed with the therapeutic use of short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (non-primary prophylaxis group).

RESULTS

The International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group classification identified 90 (58%)/40 (26%)/24 (16%) patients with good/intermediate/poor prognosis, respectively. Overall, 139 patients (90%) were disease free after etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin with/without post-chemotherapy surgery. The median relative dose intensity of etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin was 96%, and there was a significant difference between the primary prophylaxis and non-primary prophylaxis groups (100% vs 90%, P < 0.01). The 5-year salvage treatment-free and overall survival rates were 83% and 94%, respectively. In total, 138 patients (90%) developed grade 4 hematological toxicities, and there were no treatment-related deaths due to myelosuppression. Grade 4 neutropenia was less commonly observed in the primary prophylaxis group compared with the non-primary prophylaxis group (80% vs 95%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study of first-line etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin, and its sufficient efficacy and safety profiles are confirmed in current clinical practice. Primary prophylaxis using pegfilgrastim might further improve the feasibility of etoposide, ifosfamide and cisplatin.

Introduction of biosimilar pegfilgrastim in France: Economic analysis of switching from originator

Objectives

To assess the economic impact of introducing biosimilar pegfilgrastim compared to the current standard granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) practice in France.

Methods

A budget impact model was developed to investigate the impact of introducing pegfilgrastim biosimilar over 5 years. The model analysed drug acquisition costs, ambulatory costs, as well as costs associated with poor outcomes, and compared the current standard practice of long-acting and short-acting G-CSF to a revised practice including pegfilgrastim biosimilar in addition to standard practice treatments. The cost of switching to pegfilgrastim biosimilar, within a pharmacy setting, was analysed within the model using data from a survey of French pharmacists.

Results

The budget impact model calculated a cost saving of €51,007,531 over 5 years switching from the current standard practice to pegfilgrastim biosimilar. A sensitivity analysis accounting for variation in pegfilgrastim biosimilar uptake of 1) 15% in year 1 and 1% in years 2–5 and 2) 15% in years 1–5, estimated savings ranging between €29,377,784 and €79,847,194, respectively. A further analysis predicted cost savings of €287,344,835 over 5 years with the extension of pegfilgrastim biosimilar, at an uptake of 15% in year 1 and 7% in years 2–4, to both long-acting and short-acting G-CSF groups compared to unchanged current practice.

Conclusions

The introduction of pegfilgrastim biosimilar will help to reduce cost and alleviate some of the financial pressure on the French healthcare system.

Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia with lipegfilgrastim in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NADIR study)

OBJECTIVE

The prospective non-interventional study (NIS) NADIR was designed to evaluate both effectiveness and safety of prophylactic use of lipegfilgrastim (Lonquex^® ), a glycopegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, in cancer patients with different tumor entities undergoing chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. The primary objective was incidence of severe neutropenia, febrile neutropenia (FN), and neutropenia-associated complications.

METHOD

NADIR was a national, multicenter, prospective NIS.

RESULTS

Here, we present the data on patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Final analysis comprised 337 NHL patients having received ≥1 administration of lipegfilgrastim. Primary prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim was documented in 78.7% of patients with high risk to develop FN. In total, ≥1 severe neutropenia (grade 3/4) was reported in 115 (34.1%) patients and ≥1 event of FN documented in 15 (4.5%) patients. Grade 3/4 infections were reported in 22 (6.5%) patients overall. Most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) related to lipegfilgrastim in total were bone pain (5.4%), leukocytosis (2.1%), back pain (1.8%), platelet count decreased (1.2%), and myalgia (1.2%). Fatal serious AEs were documented in 9 (2.7%) patients; none were attributable to lipegfilgrastim.

CONCLUSION

Prophylaxis or therapeutic intention with lipegfilgrastim in NHL patients in routine clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety as demonstrated in the pivotal trials.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) occurrence outside of clinical trials: occurrence and predictive factors in adult patients treated with chemotherapy and an expected moderate FN risk. Rationale and design of a real-world prospective, observational, multinational study

Background

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common occurrence during chemotherapy. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) can significantly reduce the risk of FN. International guidelines recommend G-CSF for patients receiving chemotherapy with FN risk of ≥20% or 10% to 20% with defined risk factors. Prophylaxis is not typically recommended for FN risk of < 10%; however, few studies have investigated FN incidence in lower-risk patients in real-world settings and tried to identify higher-risk subgroups.

Methods

This real-world prospective, observational, multinational study aims to estimate the rate of development of FN with a chemotherapy line expected to be associated with a 10% to 20% risk of FN. Eligible patients (> 18 years of age) will have a solid tumour or Hodgkin/non-Hodgkin lymphoma and a planned chemotherapy regimen with expected risk of FN of 10% to 20% (according to published guidelines). Patients will be observed for the duration of the chemotherapy line (first cycle administered without FN prophylaxis). Primary endpoint is incidence of FN after the first chemotherapy cycle. Secondary outcomes include: FN-associated morbidity and mortality; time to first FN occurrence; other FN risk factors and impact of FN on quality of life. A risk model using occurrence of FN as a binary outcome will be developed. Data will be stratified by age, comorbidities and other risk factors.

Discussion

This study will provide insight into the real FN risk for common chemotherapy regimens and predictive factors for FN, including patients generally excluded from randomised clinical trials, from which reported FN rates have been variable. This study builds on knowledge of predictive factors from other research and will provide information on patients with 10% to 20% FN risk.

Real-world use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in ambulatory breast cancer patients: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

To prevent febrile neutropenia (FN), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (PPG) for patients at high risk (≥ 20%) of FN. In Belgium, the use of PPG is restricted by specific reimbursement criteria. The impact of these criteria on PPG use and adherence to guidelines is unknown.

METHODS

This multicentre, cross-sectional, observational study aimed to describe PPG use by FN risk category in breast cancer patients who were scheduled to receive myelosuppressive chemotherapy in outpatient clinics in Belgium during a 2-week period between 13 October and 12 December 2014.

RESULTS

In total, 490 patients were enrolled. Median age was 57.0 years. Based on their chemotherapy regimen, 53.9, 5.1 and 41.0% of patients were at a low, intermediate and high risk of FN, respectively. Overall, 39.8% of patients received PPG (17.0, 12.0 and 73.1% of those receiving low-, intermediate- and high-risk regimens, respectively). In the high-risk category, PPG was used in 89.9% of dose-dense and in 25.0% of classical chemotherapy regimens. PPG use was adherent to EORTC guidelines in 75.3% of patients (30.6% appropriate use, 44.7% appropriate non-use). EORTC guidelines would recommend PPG use in 46.1% of this study population (n = 226), and its use was reimbursable in Belgium in 76.1% of these patients (n = 172), but only 66.4% of them received PPG (n = 150).

CONCLUSIONS

Both Belgian reimbursement criteria and physician decision-making led to a proportion of patients for whom PPG treatment was recommended but finally not receiving it.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prophylaxis Treatment Strategies to Reduce the Incidence of Febrile Neutropenia in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer or Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of no prophylaxis, primary prophylaxis (PP), or secondary prophylaxis (SP) with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), i.e., pegfilgrastim, lipegfilgrastim, filgrastim (6- and 11-day), or lenograstim (6- and 11-day), to reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with stage II breast cancer receiving TC (docetaxel, cyclophosphamide) and in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) receiving R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) over a lifetime horizon from a Belgian payer perspective.

METHODS

A Markov cycle tree tracked FN events during chemotherapy (3-week cycles) and long-term survival (1-year cycles). Model inputs, including the efficacy of each strategy, risk of reduced relative dose intensity (RDI), and the impact of RDI on mortality, utilities, and costs (in €; 2014 values) were estimated from public sources and the published literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed for each strategy for costs per FN event avoided, life-year (LY) saved, and quality-adjusted LY (QALY) saved. LYs and QALYs saved were discounted at 1.5% annually. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSAs and PSAs) were conducted.

RESULTS

Base-case ICERs for PP with pegfilgrastim relative to SP with pegfilgrastim were €15,500 per QALY and €14,800 per LY saved for stage II breast cancer and €7800 per QALY and €6900 per LY saved for NHL; other comparators were either more expensive and less effective than PP or SP with pegfilgrastim or had lower costs but higher ICERs (relative to SP with pegfilgrastim) than PP with pegfilgrastim. Results of the DSA for breast cancer and NHL comparing PP and SP with pegfilgrastim indicate that the model results were most sensitive to the cycle 1 risk of FN, the proportion of FN events requiring hospitalization, the relative risk of FN in cycles ≥2 versus cycle 1, no history of FN, and the mortality hazard ratio for RDI (<90% vs ≥90% [for NHL]). In the PSAs for stage II breast cancer and NHL, the probabilities that PP with pegfilgrastim was cost effective or dominant versus all other prophylaxis strategies at a €30,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold were 52% (other strategies ≤24%) and 58% (other strategies ≤24%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

From a Belgian payer perspective, PP with pegfilgrastim appears cost effective compared to other prophylaxis strategies in patients with stage II breast cancer or NHL at a €30,000/QALY threshold.

The effect of chemotherapy-induced anemia on dose reduction and dose delay

PURPOSE

To evaluate moderate (grade 2, hemoglobin <10 g/dl) and severe (grade 3+, hemoglobin <8 g/dl) anemia as potential risk factors for DDR in the first line course of chemotherapy. While chemotherapy-induced neutropenia has been shown to be associated with dose delay/reduction (DDR) in several studies, the effect of anemia is less well studied.

METHODS

We identified 3955 Kaiser Permanente patients diagnosed with incident non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 574), breast (n = 2043), lung (n = 463), gastric (n = 113), ovarian (n = 204), or colorectal cancers (n = 558) between 2010 and 2012. Generalized linear mixed effects models were used to study the effect of anemia in subsequent cycles, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, chemotherapy cycle, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and liver and renal function.

RESULTS

We found that moderate (grade 2) to severe (grade 3-4) anemia increased the risk of DDR in subsequent chemotherapy cycles [odds ratio (OR) = 1.46, 95 % CI (1.32, 1.62) and OR = 2.02 (1.41, 2.89)], respectively, compared to grade 1 or no anemia. Both stage I-III and IV patients with grade 2 or greater anemia were at higher risk for DDR than patients with grade 1 or no anemia [ORstage IV, grade 2 = 1.94 (1.58, 2.38); ORstage IV, grade 3/4 = 2.83 (1.42, 5.62) and ORstage I-III, grade 2 = 1.33 (1.18, 1.49); ORstage I-III, grade 3-4 = 1.81 (1.18, 2.76)].

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide insight into novel risk factors for chemotherapy dose modification that may inform clinicians on management strategies to optimize treatment outcomes.

The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in a Canadian outpatient setting

BACKGROUND

Data on real-life utilization of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (g-csfs) in Canada are limited. The objective of the present study was to describe the reasons for, and the patterns of, g-csf use in selected outpatient oncology clinics in Ontario and Quebec.

METHODS

In a retrospective longitudinal cohort study, a review of medical records from 9 Canadian oncology clinics identified patients being prescribed filgrastim (fil) and pegfilgrastim (peg). Patient characteristics, reasons for g-csf use, and treatment patterns were descriptively analyzed.

RESULTS

Medical records of 395 patients initiating g-csf therapy between January 2008 and January 2009 were included. Of this population, 80% were women, and breast cancer was the predominant diagnosis (59%). The most commonly prescribed g-csf was fil (56% in Ontario and 98% in Quebec). The most frequent reason for g-csf use was primary prophylaxis (42% for both fil and peg), followed by secondary prophylaxis (37% fil, 41% peg). Those proportions varied by tumour type and chemotherapy regimen. Delayed g-csf administration (more than 1 day after the end of chemotherapy) was frequently observed for fil, but rarely reported for peg, and that finding was consistent across tumours and concurrent chemotherapy regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of g-csf varies with the malignancy type and the provincial health care setting. The most commonly prescribed g-csf agent was fil, and most first g-csf prescriptions were for primary prophylaxis. Delays were frequently observed for patients receiving fil, but were rarely reported for those receiving peg.

Neutropenia management and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in patients with solid tumours receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy--findings from clinical practice

PURPOSE

Clinical practice adherence to current guidelines that recommend primary prophylaxis (PP) with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for patients at high (≥20 %) overall risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) was evaluated.

METHODS

Adult patients with breast cancer, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), or ovarian cancer were enrolled if myelotoxic chemotherapy was planned, and they had an investigator-assessed overall FN risk ≥20 %. The primary outcome was FN incidence.

RESULTS

In total, 1,347 patients were analysed (breast cancer, n = 829; NSCLC, n = 224; SCLC, n = 137; ovarian cancer, n = 157). Patients with breast cancer exhibited fewer individual FN risk factors than patients with other cancers and were far more likely to have received a high-FN-risk chemotherapy regimen. However, a substantial proportion of all patients (45-80 % across tumour types) did not receive G-CSF PP in alignment with investigator risk assessment and guideline recommendations. FN occurred in 127 patients overall (9 %, 95% confidence interval (CI) 8-11 %), and incidence was higher in SCLC (15 %) than other tumour types (8 % in ovarian and NSCLC, 9 % in breast cancer). A post hoc analysis of G-CSF use indicated that G-CSF prophylaxis was not given within the recommended timeframe after chemotherapy (within 1-3 days) or was not continued across all cycles in 39 % of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

FN risk assessment was predominantly based on clinical judgement and individual risk factors, and guidelines regarding G-CSF PP for patients at high FN risk were not consistently followed. Improved education of physicians may enable more fully informed neutropenia management in patients with solid tumours.

Real-world impact of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia

BACKGROUND

Primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (pp-g-csf) is recommended in patients undergoing chemotherapy carrying a febrile neutropenia (fn) risk of 20% or more. In the present study, we examined clinical practice patterns and the impact of pp-g-csf on fn incidence in women with early-stage breast cancer (ebc) treated with modern adjuvant chemotherapy (act).

METHODS

This single-centre retrospective cohort study of women with ebc, who were identified from the pharmacy database and who received at least 1 cycle of modern act from January 2009 to December 2011, was conducted at the Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario. Data on patient demographics, pathology, stage distribution, chemotherapy, pp-g-csf use, dose reductions, chemotherapy delays, treatment discontinuation, relative dose intensity, and fn events were collected. Chi-square tests, t-tests, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, and nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-tests were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 239 women eligible for analysis, 145 (61%) received pp-g-csf, and 50 (21%) developed at least 1 episode of fn. Use of pp-g-csf was associated with a significantly lower rate of fn (14% vs. 31%, p = 0.002) and trends to fewer dose delays (17% vs. 27%, p = 0.060) and dose reductions (19% vs. 25%, p = 0.28). Among women receiving pp-g-csf, higher fn rates were associated with an age of 65 years or older, taxane-based chemotherapy, and prophylaxis with filgrastim.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical practice patterns at our institution showed that more than 50% of ebc patients treated with modern act received pp-g-csf, which led to fewer fn episodes and increased delivery of planned act. The observed high fn risk despite pp-g-csf was linked to older age, taxane-based chemotherapy, and filgrastim.

Risk factors for refractory febrile neutropenia in urological chemotherapy

During chemotherapy, patients are more susceptible to infectious complications as a result of bone marrow suppression, leading to neutropenia. The purpose of this study is to investigate risk factors for refractory febrile neutropenia (FN) during urological chemotherapy. Our method for suppressing FN is to use granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and prevent upper respiratory infection by masking and gargling. We studied 47 episodes of FN in 39 patients that occurred during urological chemotherapy for urothelial cancer, testicular cancer, and prostate cancer. Among our cases, there were 5 patients with refractory FN; we set risk factors for refractory FN and performed statistical analyses. The average age of the 39 patients was 60.6 years (range, 18-80 years). In 47 FN episodes, the chemotherapy regimen before the occurrence of FN included 15 (31.9 %) MVAC (methotrexate, vinblastine, adriamycin, cisplatin) for urothelial cancer, 5 (10.6 %) DE (docetaxel, estramustin) for prostate cancer, and 3 (6.4 %) TIP (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, cisplatin) for testicular cancer. The antibiotics used to treat FN included 17 (36.3 %) meropenem and 23 (49.0 %) cefepime, and the average duration of antibiotics was 4.4 days (range, 1-12). We investigated risk factors for refractory FN and showed a significant relationship between refractory FN and indwelling urinary catheter or smaller Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer score by multivariate analysis. A future prospective study is needed for further evaluation for risk factors and establishing treatment protocols and guidelines for FN.

Primary G-CSF prophylaxis for adjuvant TC or FEC-D chemotherapy outside of clinical trial settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Variable febrile neutropenia (FN) rates reported with adjuvant TC (taxotere®, cyclophosphamide) and FEC-D (5-flurouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide, docetaxel) outside of clinical trials have precluded definitive recommendations for primary G-CSF (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) prophylaxis in most jurisdictions. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess: (a) FN rates associated with TC and FEC-D without primary G-CSF prophylaxis outside of clinical trial settings, and (b) the potential impact of G-CSF prophylaxis on FN prevention.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was conducted and major conference abstracts were reviewed up to June 15th 2011 to identify all relevant English-language studies. Random- and fixed-effects meta-analysis models were performed.

RESULTS

Nine hundred two patients treated with TC and 1342 with FEC-D from 13 to 9 studies, respectively, were included. The pooled random-effects meta-analysis estimates of FN rates for TC and FEC-D without G-CSF were 29% (95% CI 24-35%) and 31% (95% CI 27-35%), with a 76% (RR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.14-0.41) and 63% (RR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.11-1.24) relative risk reduction with G-CSF, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In routine clinical practice, TC and FEC-D without G-CSF are associated with FN rates exceeding the 20% threshold for which primary G-CSF prophylaxis is commonly recommended, and are considerably higher than those reported in pivotal clinical trials.

Prevention of neutropenia-related events in elderly patients with hematological cancer

The aging of the population makes it necessary to define more precisely the needs of elderly patients in terms of anticancer therapy as the number of older cancer patients is expected to increase. There is evidence that many elderly cancer patients can benefit from relatively aggressive treatments, provided major side effects can be prevented or treated. In patients with hematological malignancies, infection is the most common and threatening complication resulting from chemotherapy administration. Discussion of the prevention of infection in the setting described above is the aim of this paper.