XM02 is superior to placebo and equivalent to Neupogen in reducing the duration of severe neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia in cycle 1 in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/doxorubicin chemotherapy

Effect of lithium on chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in Egyptian breast cancer patients; a prospective clinical study

PURPOSE

Myelosuppressive chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) remains a major limitation of cancer treatment efficacy, necessitating very expensive supportive care. Lithium carbonate, an inexpensive drug, can increase the number of neutrophils, possibly providing an efficacious and cost-effective alternative for treating CIN. The aim of this study was to determine whether lithium therapy can attenuate chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and leukopenia in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A total of 50 breast cancer patients were enrolled in this prospective, interventional, randomized, controlled, and single-blind study. The patients were divided into two groups: a control group (group 1, N = 25 patients) and a lithium-treated (treatment) group (group 2, N = 25 patients). Group 1 patients were further subclassified into a non-neutropenic control group (N = 16) and a neutropenic control (N = 9) based on the subsequent development of severe neutropenia, or not. The control group received 4 cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by 2 cycles of paclitaxel. The treatment group received the same regimen as the control group as well as oral lithium carbonate throughout the chemotherapy cycles.

RESULTS

The results showed that the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was increased in the lithium-treated group, while it was markedly reduced in both the non-neutropenic and neutropenic control groups (by 55.56% and 65.42% post-4 chemotherapy cycles, and by 19.57% and 39.90% post-6 cycles, respectively). The same pattern of alterations was observed for the total white blood cell count in both the control and treatment groups. In addition, the incidence and period prevalence were greatly reduced in the lithium-treated group compared to non-neutropenic and neutropenic control groups.

CONCLUSION

Lithium therapy ameliorated chemotherapy-induced leukopenia and neutropenia in breast cancer patients. This may provide a new strategy for cost-effective treatment of CIN, particularly in Egyptian cancer patients.

Comparative Study of Adverse Drug Reactions Associated with Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim Using the EudraVigilance Database

Simple Summary

The most commonly reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to filgrastim (FIL) and pegfilgrastim (PEG-F) were obtained and analyzed from the European EudraVigilance (EV) database. Frequently reported ADRs for FIL and PEG-F are pyrexia, bone pain, back pain, neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. No statistical difference in the probability of bone pain between FIL and PEG-F was observed. To further depict the safety of FIL and PEG-F, there is a further need to examine the real-life data.

Abstract

The primary prophylaxis with filgrastim (FIL) and pegfilgrastim (PEG-F) is recommended to decrease the severity of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN). The commonly reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) with FIL and PEG-F is bone pain. ADRs pertaining to FIL and PEG-F were extracted from the European EudraVigilance (EV) database. The Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) obtained from EV database that reported FIL and PEG-F as the suspected drug were analyzed. Registered ADRs (from the groups “General disorders and administration site conditions”, “Blood and lymphatic system disorders”, “Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders” and “Investigations”) for FIL and PEG-F were collected from EV database from 2007 to 5 June 2021. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was used to calculate ICSRs with most common ADRs related to FIL and PEG-F. A total of 17,403 ICSRs described the incidence of most common ADRs of FIL and PEG-F. The commonly reported ADRs for both drugs were pyrexia, bone pain, back pain, neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. The odds ratio of ICSRs belonging to the System Organ Class (SOC) “Investigations” (ROR 1.01 (CI 0.93–1.10)) revealed no significant difference in FIL and PEG-F. However, for the SOCs (General disorders and administration site conditions” and “Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders” ((ROR 1.14 (CI 1.06–1.21); ROR 1.21 (CI 1.18–1.32), respectively), an increased reporting probability with PEG-F was found. The authors reported a lower reporting probability for the SOC “Blood and lymphatic system disorders” for FIL versus PEG-F (ROR 0.75 (CI 0.70–0.80)). Our results have demonstrated that the occurrence of bone pain was similar with FIL and PEG-F. For the incidence of pyrexia and back pain, PEG-F was associated with a higher reporting probability as compared to FIL. However, the incidence of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia was higher in FIL compared to PEG-F. Further evaluation of data from real life is needed.

Triglyceride-Mimetic Structure-Gated Prodrug Nanoparticles for Smart Cancer Therapy

Off-target drug release and insufficient drug delivery are the main obstacles for effective anticancer chemotherapy. Prodrug-based self-assembled nanoparticles bioactivated under tumor-specific conditions are one of the effective strategies to achieve on-demand drug release and effective tumor accumulation. Herein, stimuli-activable prodrugs are designed yielding smart tumor delivery by combination of the triglyceride-mimic (TG-mimetic) prodrug structure and disulfide bond. Surprisingly, these prodrugs can self-assemble into uniform nanoparticles (NPs) with a high drug loading (over 40%) and accumulate in tumor sites specifically. The super hydrophobic TG structure can act as a gate that senses lipase to selectively control over NP dissociation and affect the glutathione-triggered prodrug activation. In addition, the impacts of the double bonds in the prodrug NPs on parent drug release and the following cytotoxicity, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor efficiency are further demonstrated. Our findings highlight the promising potential of TG-mimetic structure-gated prodrug nanoparticles for tumor-specific drug delivery.

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

Simple Summary

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

Abstract

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

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Hematopoietic Growth Factors, Version 1.2020

Management of febrile neutropenia (FN) is an integral part of supportive care for patients undergoing cancer treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Hematopoietic Growth Factors provide suggestions for appropriate evaluation, risk determination, prophylaxis, and management of FN. These NCCN Guidelines are intended to guide clinicians in the appropriate use of growth factors for select patients undergoing treatment of nonmyeloid malignancies. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight important updates to the NCCN Guidelines regarding the incorporation of newly FDA-approved granulocyte-colony stimulating factor biosimilars for the prevention and treatment of FN.

Commentary - A comprehensive safety understanding of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor biosimilars and Intended Copy Biologics in treating chemotherapy associated febrile neutropenia

Filgrastim, human white cell growth factor, Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), is a core medicine in the WHO list of Essential Medicines. For this reason, recent reporting of statistically significant safety and efficacy differences between reference and Biosimilar brands of filgrastim by Rastogi and the Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission in Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology in 2020 is of great concern [Shruti Rastogi et al. Towards a comprehensive safety understanding of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor biosimilars in treating chemotherapy associated febrile neutropenia: Trends from decades of data. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology Volume 395, 15 May 2020, 114,976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2020.114976]. This commentary shows that the alarming report is a result of incorrect statistical tests misapplied to inappropriate data sets compounded by a further problem relating to the strict regulatory definition of a Biosimilar Medicine as opposed that of an Intended Copy Biologic. In contrast, the body of evidence from more than seven and a half thousand participants in Confirmatory Clinical Studies and Post Approval Clinical Studies as well as the Periodic Safety Update Reports confirms that European approved filgrastim Biosimilars show no meaningful difference in quality, safety or efficacy compared to the reference brand.

Probing the Superiority of Diselenium Bond on Docetaxel Dimeric Prodrug Nanoassemblies: Small Roles Taking Big Responsibilities

The current state of chemotherapy is far from satisfaction, restricted by the inefficient drug delivery and the off-target toxicity. Prodrug nanoassemblies are emerging as efficient platforms for chemotherapy. Herein, three docetaxel dimeric prodrugs are designed using diselenide bond, disulfide bond, or dicarbide bond as linkages. Interestingly, diselenide bond-bridged dimeric prodrug can self-assemble into stable nanoparticles with impressive high drug loading (≈70%, w/w). Compared with disulfide bond and dicarbide bond, diselenide bond greatly facilitates the self-assembly of dimeric prodrug, and then improves the colloidal stability, blood circulation time, and antitumor efficacy of prodrug nanoassemblies. Furthermore, the redox-sensitive diselenide bond can specifically respond to the overexpressed reactive oxygen species and glutathione in tumor cells, leading to tumor-specific drug release. Therefore, diselenide bond bridged prodrug nanoassemblies exhibit discriminating cytotoxicity between tumor cells and normal cells, significantly alleviating the systemic toxicity of docetaxel. The present work gains in-depth insight into the impact of diselenide bond on the dimeric prodrug nanoassemblies, and provides promising strategies for the rational design of the high efficiency-low toxicity chemotherapeutical nanomedicines.

Biosimilars in oncology: key role of nurses in patient education

Biosimilars have the potential to lower costs and increase patient access to life-saving cancer therapies. However, lack of familiarity with biosimilars can be a barrier to their adoption, limiting their health and economic benefits. As highly trusted healthcare providers, nurses play integral roles in patient education. This review aims to help prepare nurses to respond to potential questions from patients on biosimilars. The regulation, use and potential benefits of biosimilars are discussed, with a focus on biosimilars in oncology. Overall, biosimilars are highly regulated medicines that provide comparable benefits to available biologics. Nurses can influence the adoption of biosimilars through patient education and can impact the future of the field in their expanding roles within health care systems.

Towards a comprehensive safety understanding of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor biosimilars in treating chemotherapy associated febrile neutropenia: Trends from decades of data

Filgrastim, a biopharmaceutical listed on WHO model list of essential medicines, was approved in USA in 1991 for patients with non-myeloid malignancies associated with severe neutropenia and fever. Several filgrastim biosimilars have now been approved in USA, Europe and elsewhere since 2008, based on the reference product which has lost patent exclusivity; however their immunogenicity and safety is controversial. We conducted a retrospective, post market study between 1991 and May 2018 using VigiBase®. The study included all adverse events with case reports ≥150. Overall, 11,183 adverse drugs reaction reports were identified during observation period; of which 5764; 51.5% reports concerned to Neupogen®, the originator, and rest consists of Leucostim® (N = 680), Zarzio® (N = 622), Grasin® (N = 545), Nivestim® (N = 359) and Tevagrastim® (N = 152) biosimilars. When compared with the originator, Grasin® was associated with higher reporting of pyrexia (11.5% vs 7.9%, ROR 1.52, IC₀₂₅ 1.12), myalgia (37% vs 2.2%, ROR 25.94, IC₀₂₅ 2.11) and back pain (11.3% vs 4%, ROR 3.09, IC₀₂₅ 2.32). Zarzio® was associated with increased reporting of arthralgia (4.5% vs 2.9%, ROR 1.59, IC₀₂₅ 1.25) and neutropenia (11.4% vs 4%, ROR 2.59, IC₀₂₅ 3.07). Bone pain was reported more often with Nivestim® (14.4% vs 8.3%, ROR 1.87, IC₀₂₅ 5.30). Drug ineffectiveness was reported in cases with Zarzio® (35.9%), Nivestim® (19.4%) and Tevagrastim® (42.2%). Authors observed significant differences among originator and biosimilars in particular to efficacy, adverse events reported and time to onset of occurrences. Large epidemiologic studies are needed to further confirm these finding and provide additional insights.

Extrapolation in Practice: Lessons from 10 Years with Biosimilar Filgrastim

Biosimilar filgrastim (Sandoz) was approved in Europe in 2009 and, in 2015, was the first biosimilar approved in the USA. These authorizations were based on the "totality of evidence" concept, an approach that considers data from structural and functional characterization and comparability analysis and non-clinical and clinical studies. For biosimilar filgrastim, phase III confirmatory clinical studies were performed in the most sensitive population, patients with breast cancer undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy. In Europe and the USA, approval was granted for all indications of the reference biologic. Hence, stem cell mobilization and severe chronic neutropenia indications were approved on the basis of extrapolation, with no clinical data available at the time of market authorization in the EU. Although extrapolation is well-accepted in biologic development and regulatory contexts, it remains a misunderstood part of the biosimilarity concept in the medical community. Since approval, more than a decade of obtained clinical experience supports the totality of evidence and reassures clinicians regarding the efficacy and safety of biosimilar filgrastim. This includes real-world data from MONITOR-GCSF, a multicenter, prospective, observational study describing treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with cancer (n = 1447) receiving biosimilar filgrastim for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Evidence is also available from unrelated healthy donors and those with severe chronic neutropenia. Together, the experience from a decade of use of biosimilar filgrastim includes over 24 million patient-days of exposure, which can help reassure oncologists that extrapolation is based on strong scientific evidence and works in practice.

Clinical role of filgrastim in the management of patients at risk of prolonged severe neutropenia: An evidence-based review

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing chemotherapy are at risk of toxicity, especially of haematological origin. Granulocyte depletion, although often underestimated, can lead to the occurrence of an event defined as febrile neutropenia (FN). Neutropenic fever syndromes are dangerous because they cause major complications in around 25%-30% of patients and have a mortality rate of up to 11%. Treatment for FN was limited to antibiotics and supportive therapies until filgrastim was approved for use in the 1990s.

OBJECTIVES

The present systematic review focuses on the efficacy and safety of this haematopoietic growth factor.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

For this review, a systematic literature search of electronic databases and references from recent reviews up to December 2018 was carried out to identify clinical trials, observational studies and case reports evaluating filgrastim efficacy and safety. English language was defined as a restriction. Published randomised controlled trials (RCTs), case reports and reviews analysing the effects of filgrastim on severe neutropenia and its limits were considered. Four review authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted study data.

RESULTS

As reported in ASCO guidelines, the efficacy of filgrastim with respect to placebo or no treatment in RCTs is based on its prevention of FN. A recent meta-analysis analysed nine RCTs with 2197 patients, revealing a reduction in the incidence of FN with filgrastim (risk ratio [RR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.53-0.75). These findings were further confirmed in two observational studies. Bone pain is the most commonly reported adverse event with filgrastim, while other toxicities are associated with filgrastim efficacy and with an increased neutrophil count.

KEY FINDINGS

In conclusion, our findings attest to the previous results on the efficacy and safety of filgrastim.

Efficacy and tolerability of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in cancer patients after chemotherapy: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

The optimum granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) treatment for cancer patients after being treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy remains unknown. Therefore, a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of 11 G-CSF drugs on patients after chemotherapy. A total of 73 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) containing 15,124 cancer patients were included for the final network meta-analysis. Compared with pegfilgrastim, there were a higher risk with filgrastim for incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) (OR [95% CI]: 1.63 [1.07, 2.46]), and a higher risk with short-acting G-CSF (S-G-CSF) biosimilar and lenograstim for incidence of bone pain (BP) (OR [95% CI]: 6.45 [1.10, 65.73], 5.12 [1.14, 26.12], respectively). Mecapegfilgrastim, lipegfilgrastim and balugrastim were best G-CSF drugs in reducing FN (cumulative probabilities: 58%, 15%, 11%, respectively). S-G-CSF biosimilar, empegfilgrastim, and long-acting G-CSF (L-G-CSF) biosimilar were best G-CSF drugs in reducing severe neutropenia (SN) (cumulative probabilities: 21%, 20%, 15%, respectively). Mecapegfilgrastim, balugrastim, lipegfilgrastim and L-G-CSF biosimilar were best G-CSF drugs in reducing BP (cumulative probabilities: 20%, 14%, 8%, 8%, respectively). Mecapegfilgrastim, lipegfilgrastim and balugrastim might be the most appreciate G-CSF drugs with both good efficacy and tolerability when treating cancer patients after cytotoxic chemotherapy.

A Phase 2, International, Multicenter, Open-label Clinical Trial of Subcutaneous Tbo-Filgrastim in Pediatric Patients With Solid Tumors Undergoing Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy

This phase 2, multicenter, open-label trial investigated the safety and tolerability of tbo-filgrastim in pediatric patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. In total, 50 patients 1 month to below 16 years of age with solid tumors without bone marrow involvement were stratified into 3 age groups (2 infants, 30 children, 18 adolescents) and prophylactically administered tbo-filgrastim 5 µg/kg body weight once daily subcutaneously. The administration started after the last chemotherapy treatment in week 1 of the first cycle and continued until the expected neutrophil nadir had passed, and the neutrophil count had recovered to 2.0×10/L. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability of tbo-filgrastim; secondary endpoints included efficacy. The mean (SD) number of doses administered was 9.2 (2.83) in children and 7.3 (1.88) in adolescents. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 24% of patients; the most common were febrile neutropenia (FN) (12%), anemia (8%), and thrombocytopenia (8%). Nine patients (18%) experienced mild treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events; the most common were musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (8%). No deaths or withdrawals occurred. The incidence of severe neutropenia (SN) was 52% and the mean (SD) duration of SN was 1.8 (2.21) days; FN incidence was 26%. A daily dose of tbo-filgrastim 5 μg/kg body weight administered to pediatric patients demonstrated a safety profile consistent with the safety profile in adult patients. The incidence of FN was on the lower end of the range reported in the literature and the SN results provide supportive data on the efficacy of tbo-filgrastim in pediatric patients.

Biosimilars in oncology: A decade of experience with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and its implications for monoclonal antibodies

Biosimilars offer the potential for improved sustainability of cancer care. In oncology, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and erythropoiesis-stimulating agent biosimilars have been available for almost a decade, with biosimilars of monoclonal antibodies a more recent development. Sandoz biosimilar filgrastim was approved based on Phase III confirmatory studies conducted in patients with breast cancer experiencing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, with other indications granted based on extrapolation. Despite the fact that extrapolation is a well-established scientific principle in regulation of biological medicines, it is a commonly misunderstood part of the biosimilar concept. Broad experience from almost a decade of use of Sandoz biosimilar filgrastim includes >21 million patient-days exposure and >9 years of real-world clinical evidence, indicates extrapolation successfully at work. Together, this can help reassure oncologists that extrapolation is based on sound scientific principles. Efforts to improve understanding of extrapolation are critical to ensure the acceptance of future oncology biosimilar monoclonal antibodies.

Filgrastim prophylaxis in elderly cancer patients in the real-life setting: a French multicenter observational study, the TULIP study

Purpose

Few studies are currently available among elderly patients, justifying the need for better understanding of daily medical practices in terms of use of growth factors to prevent chemotherapy (CT)-induced neutropenia. The primary objective of this study was to describe the use of filgrastim in the elderly.

Methods

Cancer patients aged 65 years and above, undergoing CT and initiating a prophylactic treatment with filgrastim, were enrolled. Patients were followed according to routine medical practice from filgrastim initiation until the end of the CT or after a maximum of 6 cycles.

Results

One thousand one hundred nineteen evaluable patients were documented in the study (mean age 73.9 ± 6.2 years, 52.1% men). The majority were suffering from solid tumor (73%) with ECOG 0–1 for 80% of them. Approximately two-third had a global risk for FN ≥ 20%, and one third < 20%. Through all CT cycles, no differences were observed between age classes ([65–74], [75–85], or > 85) in dose, duration, and time to first injection from CT start. Most patients (84%) received primary prophylaxis (PP) and 70% were administered during the first CT cycle. The median time from CT start until filgrastim was 4 days. The median duration of filgrastim treatment was 5 days. Dose reductions and CT delays were less frequent in patients receiving PP (4.8% and 7.1% respectively) than secondary prophylaxis (9.2% and 13.3% respectively).

Conclusions

Filgrastim use was consistent with French Market Authorization terms. No difference was shown compared with younger patients. Safety data were consistent with the known safety profile.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-019-04725-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Randomized phase 3 efficacy and safety trial of proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar MYL-1401H in the prophylactic treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

Pegfilgrastim is indicated for reducing the duration of neutropenia and incidence of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy. Here, safety and efficacy of MYL-1401H, a proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar, were investigated as prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. This was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group equivalence trial of MYL-1401H vs European Union–sourced reference pegfilgrastim. Patients with newly diagnosed stage II/III breast cancer eligible to receive (neo) adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide every 3 weeks for 6 cycles were enrolled and randomized 2:1 to 6 mg of MYL-1401H or reference pegfilgrastim 24 h (+ 2-h window after the first 24 h) after the end of chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was the duration of severe neutropenia in cycle 1 (i.e., days with absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 0.5 × 10⁹/L). Mean (standard deviation (SD)) duration of severe neutropenia in MYL-1401H and reference pegfilgrastim groups was 1.2 days (0.93) and 1.2 days (1.10), respectively. The 95% CI for least squares mean difference (− 0.285, 0.298) was within the predefined equivalence range of ± 1 day. Secondary endpoints, including grade ≥ 3 neutropenia (frequency, 91% and 82% for MYL-1401H and reference pegfilgrastim, respectively), time to ANC nadir (mean (SD), 6.2 (0.98) and 6.3 (1.57) days), and duration of post-nadir recovery (mean (SD), 1.9 (0.85) and 1.7 (0.91) days) were comparable. Overall safety profiles of the study drugs were comparable. MYL-1401H demonstrated equivalent efficacy and similar safety to reference pegfilgrastim and may be an equivalent option for reducing incidence of neutropenia. (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02467868; EudraCT, 2014-002324-27).

Patient-Administered Biologic and Biosimilar Filgrastim May Offer More Affordable Options for Patients with Nonmyeloid Malignancies Receiving Chemotherapy in the United States: A Budget Impact Analysis from the Payer Perspective

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are often administered to reduce the incidence, severity, and duration of febrile neutropenia (FN) in chemotherapy patients. Tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz represent a follow-on biologic and a biosimilar version, respectively, of the short-acting G-CSF filgrastim with comparable efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the budget impact of increasing use of patient-(home-) administered tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz from a U.S. payer perspective.

METHODS

An interactive budget impact model was developed to estimate the changes in drug cost associated with projected increases in the market share of tbo-filgrastim from 5% to 10% and of filgrastim-sndz from 10% to 12% (with a corresponding decrease in filgrastim market share from 85% to 78%) for a 1 million-member health plan among patients with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving chemotherapy with a high risk of FN. Patient self-administration at home was assumed for 20% of patients receiving short-acting G-CSF treatment; all products were purchased through the patient's pharmacy benefit and were assumed to have tier 3 formulary status with a patient copay of $54 per prescription. Base-case data were derived from publicly available resources. The total plan budget impact was calculated using a 1-year time horizon, along with the differences in per member per month and per member per year (PMPY) costs between the current and future scenarios.

RESULTS

The effective annual per-patient drug cost to the plan totaled between $16,961 and $27,199, depending on dosage and packaging, for tbo-filgrastim; between $16,216 and $26,015 for filgrastim-sndz; and between $19,134 and $30,663 for filgrastim. The estimated total annual plan cost associated with patient-administered short-acting G-CSFs was $53,298,217 (PMPY = $53.30) in the current scenario and $52,828,832 (PMPY = $52.82) in the future scenario. Cost savings totaled $469,385 (PMPY = $0.48). The model was most sensitive to changes in the percentage of patients self-administering G-CSF at home and to the wholesale acquisition cost for filgrastim.

CONCLUSIONS

The effective annual plan per-patient drug costs for tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz were 11% and 15% lower than filgrastim, respectively. The present analysis estimated an annual U.S. health plan cost savings approaching $0.5 million following increases in market shares of approximately 5% for tbo-filgrastim and 2% for filgrastim-sndz.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R & D, which participated in the study design, data interpretation and analysis, the writing of the report, and the decision to submit. Aventine Consulting received consulting fees from Teva Pharmaceuticals and developed the cost model and provided data analysis support. Trautman and James are employed by Aventine Consulting. Szabo and Tang are employed by Teva Pharmaceuticals.

Real-world safety experience of tevagrastim/ratiograstim/biograstim and tbo-filgrastim, short-acting recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factors

PURPOSE

Recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (rG-CSFs), such as filgrastim, are administered to prevent complications in patients receiving chemotherapy. In Europe, a biosimilar to filgrastim, tevagrastim/ratiograstim/biograstim, was approved in 2008. In the USA, the same product was approved as tbo-filgrastim under a 351(a) biologic license application in 2012 with the brand name Granix®. Postmarket surveillance remains a priority for monitoring the safety of biologics and biosimilars to identify rare and immunogenicity-related events. We report the global and US pharmacovigilance data for tevagrastim/ratiograstim/biograstim and tbo-filgrastim, respectively.

METHODS

Cumulative exposure and adverse event data from initial approval in Europe to December 31, 2016, were collected globally from spontaneous reports submitted by healthcare professionals and consumers, scientific literature, competent authorities, and solicited case reports from non-interventional studies. A separate search was conducted on the global data set to identify reports originating from the USA and Puerto Rico to describe the US experience.

RESULTS

Overall, the global safety profile of tevagrastim/ratiograstim/biograstim in the postmarket, real-world setting was comparable to clinical trial experience. Postmarket safety experience of tbo-filgrastim in the USA was consistent with global data. The most common SAEs were febrile neutropenia and decreased white blood cell count. The most common non-serious event was bone pain. There was no evidence of immunogenicity.

CONCLUSIONS

This pharmacovigilance analysis indicates that postmarket experience of tevagrastim/ratiograstim/biograstim and tbo-filgrastim is consistent with clinical trials. Adverse reactions associated with the originator rG-CSF (capillary leak syndrome and glomerulonephritis) have not been observed with tevagrastim/ratiograstim/biograstim or tbo-filgrastim during the postmarket period.

Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Model of Neutropenia in Patients With Myeloma Receiving High-Dose Melphalan for Autologous Stem Cell Transplant

High-dose melphalan (HDM) is part of the conditioning regimen in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) receiving autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, individual sensitivity to melphalan varies, and many patients experience severe toxicities. Prolonged severe neutropenia is one of the most severe toxicities and contributes to potentially life-threatening infections and failure of ASCT. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is given to stimulate neutrophil proliferation after melphalan administration. The aim of this study was to develop a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model capable of predicting neutrophil kinetics in individual patients with MM undergoing ASCT with high-dose melphalan and G-CSF administration. The extended PK/PD model incorporated several covariates, including G-CSF regimen, stem cell dose, hematocrit, sex, creatinine clearance, p53 fold change, and race. The resulting model explained portions of interindividual variability in melphalan exposure, therapeutic effect, and feedback regulation of G-CSF on neutrophils, thus enabling simulation of various doses and prediction of neutropenia duration.

Immunogenicity assessment of tbo-filgrastim in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

AIM

This integrated analysis examined the immunogenicity of tbo-filgrastim and its potential clinical impact in three Phase III randomized studies in patients with breast cancer, lung cancer and non-Hodgkin lymphoma receiving chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies (ADA) occurred in 3/213 (1.4%) breast cancer patients, 2/160 (1.3%) lung cancer patients and 1/63 (1.6%) patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. None of the treatment-emergent ADA showed cross-reactivity toward native granulocyte-colony stimulating factors or exhibited neutralizing activity against tbo-filgrastim. Among patients with treatment-emergent ADA, there was no treatment-related hypersensitivity or anaphylaxis and no evidence of loss of clinical efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Tbo-filgrastim has demonstrated low immunogenicity in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and ADA response does not impact safety and efficacy in the patients.

Determination of Similarity Margin in Comparative Clinical Studies to Support the Development of Biosimilar Products of Neupogen® (Filgrastim, Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor [G-CSF])

To demonstrate a biological product is biosimilar to a reference product, the applicant needs to show that the product is highly similar and has no clinically meaningful differences. Comparative clinical studies are often conducted to support the conclusion of no clinically meaningful differences, as a part of totality of evidence. The FDA has published several guidance documents to facilitate the development of biosimilar products. While the guidance documents define the role and objective of comparative clinical studies, they do not provide details about the determination of the similarity margin. In this paper, we illustrate a similarity margin derivation for a surrogate endpoint in comparative clinical studies conducted to assess whether clinically meaningful differences exist between Neupogen^® (Filgrastim, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) and products proposed to be biosimilar to Neupogen^®.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of neutrophil response to G-CSF in healthy subjects and patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

AIM

The objective of the present study was to use pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling to characterize the effects of chemotherapy on the granulopoietic system and to predict the absolute neutrophil counts (ANCs) for patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia treated with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim.

METHODS

Data were extracted from 10 phase I-III studies conducted in 110 healthy adults, and 618 adult and 52 paediatric patients on chemotherapy following administration of filgrastim or pegfilgrastim. The structural model accounted for ANC dynamics and the effects of filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, chemotherapy and corticosteroids. The impact of neutrophils on drug disposition was based on a drug receptor-binding model that assumed quasi-equilibrium and stimulation of the production and maturation of neutrophils upon treatment. The chemotherapy and corticosteroid effects were represented by kinetic-pharmacodynamic-type models, where chemotherapy stimulated elimination of neutrophil precursors at the mitotic stage, and corticosteroids stimulated neutrophil production.

RESULTS

The systemic half-lives of filgrastim (2.6 h) and pegfilgrastim (10.1 h) were as expected. The effective half-life of chemotherapy was 9.6 h, with a 2-day killing effect. The rate of receptor elimination from mitotic compartments exhibited extreme interindividual variability (% coefficient of variation >200), suggesting marked differences in sensitivity to chemotherapy effects on ANCs. The stimulatory effects of pegfilgrastim were significantly greater than those of filgrastim. Model qualification confirmed the predictive capability of this model.

CONCLUSION

This qualified model simulates the time course of ANC in the absence or presence of chemotherapy and predicts nadir, time to nadir and time of recovery from different grades of neutropenia upon treatment with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim.

Biosimilar filgrastim vs filgrastim: a multicenter nationwide observational bioequivalence study in patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

Background

We studied the comparative effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim vs original filgrastim in patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

Patients and methods

This multicenter, observational study was conducted at 14 centers. The study included 337 patients experiencing neutropenia under chemotherapy. Patients were given either filgrastim 30 MIU or 48 MIU (Neupogen^®) or biosimilar filgrastim 30 MIU (Leucostim^®). Data regarding age, chemotherapeutic agents used, number of chemotherapy courses, previous diagnosis of neutropenia, neutrophil count of patients after treatment, medications used for the treatment of neutropenia, and duration of neutropenia were collected. Time to absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovery was the primary efficacy measure.

Results

Ambulatory and hospitalized patients comprised 11.3% and 45.1% of the enrolled patients, respectively, and a previous diagnosis of neutropenia was reported in 49.3% of the patients, as well. Neutropenia occurred in 13.7% (n=41), 45.5% (n=136), 27.4% (n=82), 11.4% (n=34), and 2.0% (n=6) of the patients during the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth cycles of chemotherapy, respectively. While the mean neutrophil count was 0.53±0.48 before treatment, a significant increase to 2.44±0.66 was observed after treatment (p=0.0001). While 90.3% of patients had a neutrophil count <1.49 before treatment, all patients had a neutrophil count ≥1.50 after treatment. Neutropenia resolved within ≤4 days of filgrastim therapy in 60.1%, 56.7%, and 52.6% of the patients receiving biosimilar filgrastim 30 MIU, original filgrastim 30 MIU, and original filgrastim 48 MIU, respectively. However, there was no significant difference between the three arms (p=0.468). Similarly, time to ANC recovery was comparable between the treatment arms (p=0.332).

Conclusion

The results indicate that original filgrastim and biosimilar filgrastim have comparable efficacy in treating neutropenia. Biosimilar filgrastim provides a valuable alternative; however, there is need for further studies comparing the two products in different patient subpopulations.

Quantitative Relationship Between AUEC of Absolute Neutrophil Count and Duration of Severe Neutropenia for G-CSF in Breast Cancer Patients

The aim of the study was to evaluate the quantitative relationship between duration of severe neutropenia (DSN, the efficacy endpoint) and area under effect curve of absolute neutrophil counts (ANC-AUEC, the pharmacodynamic endpoint), based on data from filgrastim products, a human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Clinical data from filgrastim product comparator and test arms of two randomized, parallel-group, phase III studies in breast cancer patients treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy were utilized. A zero-inflated Poisson regression model best described the negative correlation between DSN and ANC-AUEC. The models predicted that with 10 × 10⁹ day/L of increase in ANC-AUEC, the mean DSN would decrease from 1.1 days to 0.93 day in Trial 1 and from 1.2 days to 1.0 day in Trial 2. The findings of the analysis provide useful information regarding the relationship between ANC and DSN that can be used for dose selection and optimization of clinical trial design for G-CSF.

Clinical equivalence with G-CSF biosimilars: methodologic approach in a (neo)adjuvant setting in non-metastatic breast cancer

Biosimilars are biological medicines that have been shown to be similar to a reference biological medicine that has already been approved for use. Development of biosimilars is based on a "totality of evidence" approach that involves a series of steps by which biosimilars must demonstrate similarity to a reference product in all aspects of the drug and eliminate any remaining uncertainties. Clinical studies are then considered confirmatory and are performed to show that there are no clinically meaningful differences compared with the reference product in a sensitive patient population. The recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) biosimilar EP2006/Zarxio® (filgrastim-sdnz) became the first FDA-approved biosimilar in 2015. This review evaluates how clinical equivalence can be demonstrated with G-CSF biosimilars through the identification of "sensitive" study populations and endpoints. Patients with non-metastatic breast cancer treated in the (neo)adjuvant setting represent a potentially homogenous population, making this a suitable sensitive indication for assessing filgrastim and pegfilgrastim biosimilars compared with reference products. This review includes clinical trials of G-CSF biosimilars in breast cancer, focusing on key aspects of the trials that were necessary to accurately demonstrate clinical equivalence and enable extrapolation to relevant indications, based on guidelines and biostatistical principles.

Conversion from Filgrastim to Tbo-filgrastim: Experience of a Large Health Care System

BACKGROUND

In 2008, tbo-filgrastim was approved as a biosimilar in Europe and then approved in the United States by the FDA in 2012 as a biologic product with 1 similar indication to filgrastim. Because tbo-filgrastim was less expensive than filgrastim, and clinical information and expert opinion supported similarity, the Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committee of a large health care system approved tbo-filgrastim as the preferred granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) product in March 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) assess the use of filgrastim and tbo-filgrastim products by comparing baseline characteristics, setting of care, indication for use, and payer type and (b) understand potential barriers of conversion to tbo-filgrastim.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of filgrastim and tbo-filgrastim use was conducted on all patients (N = 204) who received the drugs between July 2015 and December 2015 at the 2 largest hospitals in the health system. Baseline characteristics, indication requiring use of filgrastim or tbo-filgrastim, setting of care, and payer information were collected from electronic medical records, and descriptive analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Overall, G-CSFs were administered to 204 patients for 261 episodes of care (filgrastim and tbo-filgrastim were used in 65 and 196 episodes of care, respectively). Baseline characteristics were similar between the 59 patients who received filgrastim and the 174 patients who received tbo-filgrastim. G-CSF was primarily used in the inpatient setting (163 episodes of care, 63%) with 90% of patients using tbo-filgrastim. In the outpatient setting (98 episodes of care, 38%), filgrastim and tbo-filgrastim were each used by 50% of patients. Tbo-filgrastim was the preferred G-CSF by clinical providers for all indications, except for stem cell mobilization, where filgrastim use was higher (55% vs. 45% of 71 episodes of care). In the outpatient setting, analysis by payers showed that the majority of patients on commercial plans were using filgrastim (58%), while half of Medicare patients were using filgrastim (50%, n = 12). Twelve patients were self-paid, and all were using tbo-filgrastim. Subgroup analysis by hospital showed differences in utilization patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tbo-filgrastim was the preferred G-CSF in our formulary, 29% of patients continued to receive filgrastim. Conversion to tbo-filgrastim has been largely successful, but extra steps may be needed to achieve full conversion to biosimilars.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. Agboola was employed by Partners Healthcare at the time of the study. The authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed equally by Agboola and Reddy. Agboola collected the data, and data interpretation was performed by both authors. The manuscript was written primarily by Agboola, with assistance from Reddy. Both authors revised the manuscript.

Effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim vs. original granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in febrile neutropenia prevention in breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to describe the effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim and original granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), lenograstim and pegfilgrastim, in febrile neutropenia (FN) prevention in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (TAC) as adjuvant/neoadjuvant treatment and to analyze their treatment patterns.

METHODS

A pharmacoepidemiology cohort study was developed in a university hospital (with 23 healthcare centers) with retrospective data collection (2012-2014). Effectiveness of G-CSFs was assessed by the FN incidence. Other parameters analyzed were as follows: moderate and severe neutropenia incidence, neutropenia-related hospitalizations, dosage, and duration. Data was analyzed using each cycle as a unit of analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 98 patients representing 518 chemotherapy cycles, 215 with original G-CSFs (35 lenograstim and 180 pegfilgrastim) and 303 with biosimilar filgrastim. The FN incidence was similar in both groups (3.7% original vs. 3.3% biosimilar; p = 0.79). No statistically significant differences were found in moderate and severe neutropenia incidence (4.7 vs. 6.3%; p = 0.43) or neutropenia-related hospitalizations (3.3 vs. 3.6%; p = 0.19). When the three drugs were evaluated separately, a higher FN incidence was observed with lenograstim than with pegfilgratim or biosimilar (p = 0.024). The dosage and duration of biosimilar were lower than lenograstim (4.9 vs. 5.7 μg/kg/day; 5 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

An abbreviated 5-day course of biosimilar filgrastim provided optimal primary prophylaxis against FN post-chemotherapy TAC in patients with breast cancer. The clinical relevance of the highest FN incidence in the lenograstim cohort needs further attention.

What is the role of biosimilar G-CSF agents in hematopoietic stem cell mobilization at present?

Mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells, which has largely replaced bone marrow harvesting as a source of hematopoietic stem cells, using recombinant agents such as filgrastim or lenograstim has become a standard procedure in both patients and healthy donors prior to peripheral blood stem cell collection for autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Published literature data suggest that mobilization with recombinant granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is safe and mobilization outcomes are satisfactory. In recent years, besides G-CSF originators, biosimilar G-CSF agents have been approved by the regulatory agencies for the same indications. Current data showed that by using the biosimilar G-CSF, similar results regarding safety and efficacy of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization may be achieved compared to the originator G-CSF. Although the issues such as the similarity to a licenced biological medicine, differences in manufacturing processes, the potential to cause immunogenicity, extrapolation and interchangeability of these biosimilar products are still being discussed by the scientific area, however, more experience with these agents now exists in approved endications and there seems to be no reason to expect significant differences between biosimilar G-CSF and originator G-CSF regarding their efficacy and safety in both patients and healthy donors. Also, the significant cost savings of biosimilars in real life setting may enhance the use of these agents in the future. Nonetheless, the collection of long-term follow-up data is mandatory for both patients and healthy donors, and multicentre randomized clinical trials that directly compare biosimilar G-CSF with the originator G-CSF are needed in order to allow the transplant community to make informed decisions regarding the choice of G-CSF.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Electronic supplementary material

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

Optimizing Symptoms and Management of Febrile Neutropenia among Cancer Patients: Current Status and Future Directions

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common and serious complication among cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy. FN should be treated as a medical emergency because it can lead to life-threatening complications if appropriate treatment is not initiated immediately. This study provides a critical review on the current management of FN and identifies possible directions to optimize FN management.

Comparative study of the number of report and time-to-onset of the reported adverse event between the biosimilars and the originator of filgrastim

PURPOSE

The objective of this study is to specify the most reported adverse events as preferred terms (PTs) and to compare the reported adverse events about some properties including the number of report and time-to-onset (TTO) distribution of the originator of filgrastim Neupogen® and its biosimilars in Europe, using VigiBase®.

METHODS

We identified the biosimilar which was reported as the suspected drug in more than 100 individual case safety reports in Europe. Then, we specified the top ranking 10 PTs in the cases reported with Neupogen® or each biosimilar as the suspected drug. We also compared the TTO of the most reported PTs using the data about the onset date of the PT and the start date of filgrastim. We used Kolmogorov-Smirnov method to detect significant difference.

RESULTS

The total ICSR numbers with Neupogen® and 3 biosimilars, Zarzio®, Nivestim®, and Tevagrastim® were 1,301, 295, 156, and 127, respectively, in Europe. The most reported PTs with Neupogen® were bone pain, pyrexia, and dyspnoea. The TTO of bone pain and pyrexia with Zarzio® (N: 22 and 16, median: 1 and 0.5 days) were significantly shorter than those with Neupogen® (P < 0.01, N: 72 and 33, median: 3.5 and 3 days), respectively. The most reported PTs with biosimilars were drug ineffective and neutropenia.

CONCLUSION

The difference in the TTO was identified between originator filgrastim Neupogen and its biosimilar regarding some PTs, which may suggest the difference in their safety profile. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Meta-analysis and indirect treatment comparison of lipegfilgrastim with pegfilgrastim and filgrastim for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia-related events

Background

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are effective at reducing the risk and duration of neutropenia. The current meta-analysis compared the neutropenia-related efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim to those of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim.

Methods

Embase was searched for trials examining the efficacy/safety of lipegfilgrastim, pegfilgrastim, or filgrastim. Outcomes included febrile neutropenia, severe neutropenia, duration of severe neutropenia, time to recovery of absolute neutrophil count, and incidence of bone pain. Direct comparisons were made using random-effects models. No trials directly compared lipegfilgrastim and filgrastim. Indirect comparisons were made between lipegfilgrastim and filgrastim with pegfilgrastim as the common comparator.

Results

This meta-analysis included a total of 5769 patients from 24 studies. Over all cycles, lipegfilgrastim showed a lower, nonsignificant risk of febrile neutropenia compared with pegfilgrastim. Lipegfilgrastim has a lower risk of febrile neutropenia versus filgrastim but was also not statistically significant. The risk ratio for severe neutropenia in cycle 1 was 0.80, a 20% reduction in favor of lipegfilgrastim. For cycles 2–4, the risk ratio was 0.53 (0.35, 0.79) for lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim. The risk of severe neutropenia in cycles 2–4 was also significantly lower for lipegfilgrastim (risk ratio 0.45, 0.27, 0.75, respectively). No significant differences were found for febrile neutropenia and severe neutropenia in cycle 1. However, in cycles 2–4, lipegfilgrastim was associated with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in risk of severe neutropenia versus either pegfilgrastim or filgrastim.

Conclusions

Compared with pegfilgrastim or filgrastim, lipegfilgrastim has a statistically significantly lower absolute neutrophil count recovery time; however, differences in duration of severe neutropenia and bone pain were nonsignificant.

Safety and immunogenicity of neoadjuvant treatment using WT1-immunotherapeutic in combination with standard therapy in patients with WT1-positive Stage II/III breast cancer: a randomized Phase I study

Purpose

This Phase I, multicenter, randomized study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01220128) evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of recombinant Wilms’ tumor 1 (WT1) protein combined with the immunostimulant AS15 (WT1-immunotherapeutic) as neoadjuvant therapy administered concurrently with standard treatments in WT1-positive breast cancer patients.

Methods

Patients were treated in 4 cohorts according to neoadjuvant treatment (A: post-menopausal, hormone receptor [HR]-positive patients receiving aromatase inhibitors; B: patients receiving chemotherapy; C: HER2-overexpressing patients on trastuzumab–chemotherapy combination; D: HR-positive/HER2-negative patients on chemotherapy). Patients (cohorts A–C) were randomized (2:1) to receive 6 or 8 doses of WT1-immunotherapeutic or placebo together with standard neoadjuvant treatment in a double-blind manner; cohort D patients received WT1-immunotherapeutic in an open manner. Safety was assessed throughout the study. WT1-specific antibodies were assessed pre- and post-vaccination.

Results

Sixty-two patients were randomized; 60 received ≥ one dose of WT1-immunotherapeutic. Two severe toxicities were reported: diarrhea (cohort C; also reported as a grade 3 serious adverse event) and decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (cohort B; also reported as a grade 2 adverse event). Post-dose 4 of WT1-immunotherapeutic, 10/10 patients from cohort A, 0/8 patients from cohort B, 6/11 patients from cohort C, and 2/3 patients from cohort D were humoral responders. The sponsor elected to close the trial prematurely.

Conclusions

Concurrent administration of WT1-immunotherapeutic and standard neoadjuvant therapy was well tolerated and induced WT1-specific antibodies in patients receiving neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitors. In patients on neoadjuvant chemotherapy or trastuzumab–chemotherapy combination, the humoral response was impaired or blunted, likely due to either co-administration of corticosteroids and/or the chemotherapies themselves.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10549-017-4130-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Identification of Low-Level Product-Related Variants in Filgrastim Products Presently Available in Highly Regulated Markets

BACKGROUND

Filgrastim is a recombinant, non-glycosylated form of human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, used to stimulate leukocyte proliferation in patients suffering from neutropenia. Since the expiration of patents associated with Amgen's filgrastim biopharmaceutical, Neupogen(®), in 2006, a number of filgrastim products have been marketed; however, a detailed characterization and comparison of variants associated with these products have not been publically reported.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to identify and quantify product-related variants in filgrastim reference products and biosimilars thereof that are presently available in highly regulated markets.

METHODS

In this study, we used intact and top-down mass spectrometry to identify and quantify product-related variants in filgrastim products. Mass spectrometry has become the method of choice for physicochemical characterization of biopharmaceuticals, allowing accurate and sensitive characterization of product-related variants.

RESULTS

In addition to modifications ubiquitously present in biopharmaceuticals, such as methionine oxidation and asparagine/glutamine deamidation, we identified six different low-level, product-related variants present in some, but not all, of the tested products. Two variants, an acetylated filgrastim variant and a filgrastim variant containing an additional C-terminal tryptophan extension, are newly identified variants.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that filgrastim products already in widespread clinical use in highly regulated markets differ in low-level, product-related variants present at levels mostly below 1 % relative abundance. This study provides a comprehensive catalog of minor differences between filgrastim products and suggests that the filgrastim product-related variants described here are not clinically relevant when present at low abundance.

Evaluation of a biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim XM02) for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and transplantation: a single center experience in Japan

Background

Biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has recently been introduced into clinical practice. G-CSFs are used to mobilize CD34⁺ cells and accelerate engraftment after transplantation. However, in Asia, particularly in Japan, data for peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilization by this biosimilar G-CSF are currently lacking. Therefore, the clinical efficacy and safety of biosimilar G-CSF for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation needs to be evaluated in a Japanese context.

Materials and methods

The subjects included two groups of patients with malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma. All patients received chemotherapy priming for the mobilization of PBSCs. All patients were treated with chemotherapy followed by the administration of either the biosimilar G-CSF, filgrastim XM02 (FBNK), or the originators, filgrastim, or lenograstim.

Results

There were no significant differences among FBNK, filgrastim, and lenograstim treatments in the numbers of CD34⁺ cells in harvested PBSCs, the scores for granulocyte/macrophage colony forming units, or for malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients evaluated as separate or combined cohorts. In addition, there were no significant differences in safety, side effects, complications, or the time to engraftment after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Conclusion

Biosimilar FBNK shows the same efficacy and safety as originator G-CSFs for facilitating bone marrow recovery in Japanese malignant lymphoma and multiple myeloma patients undergoing stem cell transplantation. In addition, it is less expensive than the originators, reducing hospitalization costs.

What do oncologists need to know about biosimilar products?

Many biologic products have improved the outcomes of cancer patients, but the costs can substantially burden healthcare systems. Biosimilar products can potentially reduce drug costs and increase patient access to beneficial treatments. Approval of a biosimilar product relies on the demonstration of "comparability" or "no clinically meaningful differences" as compared to its reference biologic product. Biosimilar products for erythropoietin, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, trastuzumab, and rituximab are already available, and the regulatory processes in various countries are constantly evolving. It is important that oncologists be familiar with the potential issues surrounding the clinical use of biosimilar products. In this review article, we provide background information about biosimilar products and their regulatory approval processes, followed by a discussion of individual biosimilar drugs.

Clinical research in febrile neutropenia in cancer patients: Past achievements and perspectives for the future

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. It can also be the reason for delaying or changing potentially effective treatments and generates substantial costs. It has been recognized for more than 50 years that empirical administration of broad spectrum antibiotics to patients with FN was associated with much improved outcomes; that has become a paradigm of management. Increase in the incidence of microorganisms resistant to many antibiotics represents a challenge for the empirical antimicrobial treatment and is a reason why antibiotics should not be used for the prevention of neutropenia. Prevention of neutropenia is best performed with the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs). Prophylactic administration of G-CSFs significantly reduces the risk of developing FN and consequently the complications linked to that condition; moreover, the administration of G-CSF is associated with few complications, most of which are not severe. The most common reason for not using G-CSF as a prophylaxis of FN is the relatively high cost. If FN occurs, in spite of prophylaxis, empirical therapy with broad spectrum antibiotics is mandatory. However it should be adjusted to the risk of complications as established by reliable predictive instruments such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer. Patients predicted at a low level of risk of serious complications, can generally be treated with orally administered antibiotics and as out-patients. Patients with a high risk of complications should be hospitalized and treated intravenously. A short period of time between the onset of FN and beginning of empirical therapy is crucial in those patients. Persisting fever in spite of antimicrobial therapy in neutropenic patients requires a special diagnostic attention, since invasive fungal infection is a possible cause for it and might require the use of empirical antifungal therapy.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of original filgrastim (Neupogen®), biosimilar filgrastim (Leucostim®) and Lenograstim (Granocyte®) in CD34(+) peripheral hematopoietic stem cell mobilization procedures for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant donors

OBJECTIVES AND AIM

In this study, we aimed to compare the potency of different G-CSF agents including original filgrastim (Neupogen®), biosimilar filgrastim (Leucostim®) and Lenograstim (Granocyte®) on CD34(+) cell mobilization in patients that underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The data of 243 donors for alloHSCT recipients diagnosed with mostly acute leukemia and myelodsyplastic syndromes (MDS) were analyzed, retrospectively. Data for stem cell mobilization have been recorded from patients' files. Donors who received Filgrastim (Neupogen®, Group I), biosimilar Filgrastim (Leucostim®, Group II) and Lenograstim (Granocyte®, Group III) were analyzed for total CD34(+) cell count at the end of mobilization procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 243 donors and patients for alloHSCT were analyzed retrospectively. The diagnosis of the patients were; acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (110 patients, 45.2%), acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL) (61 patients, 25.1%), aplastic anemia (AA) (38 patients, 15.6%), lymphomas (14 patients, 5.7%) and others (20 patients, 8.4%). The median number of total collected PB CD34(+) cells (×10(6)/kg) was 7.12 (min-max: 5.38-7.90) in the Neupogen® group, 7.27 (min-max: 6.79-7.55) in the Leucostim® group and 7.15 (min-max: 5.34-7.58) in the Granocyte® group. There was no statistically significant difference among groups in terms of total collected PB CD34(+) cells (p = 0.919). The median doses of G-CSF agents (µg/kg/day) in PBSC collection in Neupogen® group was; 11.00 (10.00-12.00) in Leucostim® group10.35 (min-max: 10.00-11.10) and in Granocyte® group11.00 (min-max: 10.00-11.00). There was no statistical significance among groups (p = 0.215).

CONCLUSION

Biosimilar filgrastim (Leucostim®) was found comparable to original Filgrastim (Neupogen®) and Lenograstim (Granocyte®) for PBSC mobilization in donors of the patients that underwent alloHSCT.

Efficacy and safety of CT-P13 (biosimilar infliximab) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: comparison between switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 and continuing CT-P13 in the PLANETRA extension study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of switching from the infliximab reference product (RP; Remicade) to its biosimilar CT-P13 (Remsima, Inflectra) or continuing CT-P13 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for an additional six infusions.

METHODS

This open-label extension study recruited patients with RA who had completed the 54-week, randomised, parallel-group study comparing CT-P13 with RP (PLANETRA; NCT01217086). CT-P13 (3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously every 8 weeks from weeks 62 to 102. All patients received concomitant methotrexate. Endpoints included American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response, ACR50, ACR70, immunogenicity and safety. Data were analysed for patients who received CT-P13 for 102 weeks (maintenance group) and for those who received RP for 54 weeks and then switched to CT-P13 (switch group).

RESULTS

Overall, 302 of 455 patients who completed the PLANETRA study enrolled into the extension. Of these, 158 had received CT-P13 (maintenance group) and 144 RP (switch group). Response rates at week 102 for maintenance versus switch groups, respectively, were 71.7% vs 71.8% for ACR20, 48.0% vs 51.4% for ACR50 and 24.3% vs 26.1% for ACR70. The proportion of patients with antidrug antibodies was comparable between groups (week 102: 40.3% vs 44.8%, respectively). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in similar proportions of patients in the two groups during the extension study (53.5% and 53.8%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Comparable efficacy and tolerability were observed in patients who switched from RP to its biosimilar CT-P13 for an additional year and in those who had long-term CT-P13 treatment for 2 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01571219; Results.

Tbo-Filgrastim: A Review in Neutropenic Conditions

Tbo-filgrastim (filgrastim XM02; Biograstim(®), Ratiograstim(®), Tevagrastim(®)) is approved in the EU as a biosimilar of filgrastim (Neupogen(®)) for use in all indications for which reference filgrastim is approved, including chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, neutropenia in patients undergoing myeloablative therapy followed by bone marrow transplantation, mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs), severe chronic neutropenia, and neutropenia in HIV infection. Tbo-filgrastim (Granix(®)) is also approved as a biologic in the USA for neutropenia associated with chemotherapy. Tbo-filgrastim has demonstrated bioequivalence to reference filgrastim in terms of its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. In phase III trials, tbo-filgrastim was equivalent to reference filgrastim in ameliorating severe neutropenia in patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer, lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In addition, the efficacy of tbo-filgrastim for PBSC mobilization in the allogeneic and autologous settings has been demonstrated in several small studies. Tbo-filgrastim was generally well tolerated, with a similar safety profile to that of reference filgrastim. Most adverse events were of mild or moderate severity. Biosimilars such as tbo-filgrastim have the potential to reduce healthcare costs compared with those of reference filgrastim; this may provide patients with more cost-effective treatment options. Current evidence indicates that tbo-filgrastim is a useful alternative to reference filgrastim in patients requiring filgrastim therapy for various neutropenic conditions.

Prognostic Value of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia at the First Cycle in Invasive Breast Cancer

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) was the most apparent side effects of bone marrow suppression with adjuvant chemotherapy. Recently, several studies revealed that CIN may predict better outcomes. However, the researches upon breast cancer were still indefinite. We reviewed the female patients with pathologically diagnosed invasive breast cancer at the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, between Jan 2008 and Dec 2010. The lowest neutrophil counts in the second week after the first cycle of chemotherapy were collected. Clinicopathological characteristics and survival rates were compared and analyzed between the CIN group and non-CIN group. The median follow-up time was 62 months. The differences of over-all survival and local recurrence-free survival between the 2 groups were nonsense (P = 0.938, P = 0.695, respectively). But the disease-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival of the CIN group were statically significantly better (HR = 0.391, P = 0.009, and HR = 0.315, P = 0.005, respectively). The bone metastasis-free survival may be responsible for the differences (HR = 0.469, P = 0.005). Subgroup analyses showed the CIN may predict lower bone metastases rates with ER positive status, premenopause or younger age (≤ 40) (P = 0.002, P = 0.004, and P = 0.0001, respectively). Cox analysis showed younger ages, N staging, and the presence of CIN were associated with bone metastasis-free survival independently adjusting to peritumoral vascular invasion (P < 0.05). CIN may predict a decreased recurrence risk of breast cancer, especially bone metastases.

Clinical safety of tbo-filgrastim, a short-acting human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor

The recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) known as filgrastim (Tevagrastim(®), Ratiograstim(®), Biograstim(®)) in Europe (approved in 2008) and tbo-filgrastim (Granix(®)) in the USA (approved in 2012; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Petach Tikva, Israel) is indicated to reduce the duration of severe neutropenia in patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anti-cancer drugs associated with a clinically significant incidence of febrile neutropenia. This article presents pooled clinical data for tbo-filgrastim compared with Neupogen(®) (Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA) as well as tbo-filgrastim post-marketing safety data. The safety and efficacy of tbo-filgrastim were evaluated in three phase III studies in 677 patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy and study drug (348 patients with breast cancer, 237 with lung cancer, 92 with non-Hodgkin lymphoma). In each study, the efficacy of tbo-filgrastim was similar to that of Neupogen. Overall, 633 (93.5 %) patients receiving the study drug experienced 6093 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), most of which were related to chemotherapy. Adverse events related to the study drug (tbo-filgrastim or Neupogen) were experienced by 185 (27.3 %) patients; 19 (2.8 %) had severe drug-related AEs, 5 (0.7 %) had drug-related serious AEs, and 6 (0.9 %) discontinued the study due to drug-related AEs. Overall, the most common drug-related AEs were bone pain (7.1 %), myalgia (4.0 %), and asthenia (4.4 %). The post-marketing safety profile of tbo-filgrastim was consistent with that observed during the clinical studies. The availability of tbo-filgrastim, a G-CSF with safety and efficacy comparable to those of Neupogen, provides physicians with an alternative treatment option for supportive care of patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

A Phase III Study of Balugrastim Versus Pegfilgrastim in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Chemotherapy With Doxorubicin and Docetaxel

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-per-cycle balugrastim versus pegfilgrastim for neutrophil support in breast cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients (n = 256) were randomized to 40 or 50 mg of subcutaneous balugrastim or 6 mg of pegfilgrastim ≈24 hours after chemotherapy (60 mg/m(2) doxorubicin and 75 mg/m(2) docetaxel, every 21 days for up to 4 cycles). The primary efficacy parameter was the duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) in cycle 1. Secondary parameters included DSN (cycles 2-4), absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir, febrile neutropenia rates, and time to ANC recovery (cycles 1-4). Safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean cycle 1 DSN was 1.0 day with 40 mg of balugrastim, 1.3 with 50 mg of balugrastim, and 1.2 with pegfilgrastim (upper limit of 95% confidence intervals for between-group DSN differences was <1.0 day for both balugrastim doses versus pegfilgrastim). Between-group efficacy parameters were comparable except for time to ANC recovery in cycle 1 (40 mg of balugrastim, 2.0 days; 50 mg of balugrastim, 2.1; pegfilgrastim, 2.6). Median terminal elimination half-life was ≈37 hours for 40 mg of balugrastim, ≈36 for 50 mg of balugrastim, and ≈45 for pegfilgrastim. Antibody response to balugrastim was low and transient, with no neutralizing effect.

CONCLUSION

Once-per-cycle balugrastim is not inferior to pegfilgrastim in reducing cycle 1 DSN in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy; both drugs have comparable safety profiles.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This paper provides efficacy and safety data for a new, once-per-cycle granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, balugrastim, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. In this phase III trial, balugrastim was shown to be not inferior to pegfilgrastim in the duration of severe neutropenia in cycle 1 of doxorubicin/docetaxel chemotherapy, and the safety profiles of the two agents were similar. Once-per-cycle balugrastim is a safe and effective alternative to pegfilgrastim for hematopoietic support in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy associated with a greater than 20% risk of developing febrile neutropenia.

Growth factor use in medication-induced hematologic toxicity

Myelosuppression is a dose-limiting adverse effect with antineoplastic therapy and nonchemotherapy medications. Clinicians have data and guidelines to provide direction for the management of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in patients with malignancies. Clinical situations outside oncology extrapolate these data along with limited data sets for those patients who demonstrate myelosuppressive effects from medications that are not traditionally considered cytotoxic. Pharmacological treatments can be used to help ameliorate the myelosuppressive toxicities. Recombinant technology has provided growth factors to counteract or lessen the degree of toxicity from myelosuppressive medications including chemotherapy. Clinical strategies and future trends on how to mitigate medication-related myelosuppression are discussed.

The impact of primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors on febrile neutropenia during chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

The study aims to assess the relative efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) products administered as primary prophylaxis (PP) to patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified publications (January 1990 to September 2013) of randomized controlled trials evaluating PP with filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, lenograstim, or lipegfilgrastim in adults receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy for solid tumors or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Direct, indirect, and mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) were used to estimate the odds ratio and 95 % credible interval of febrile neutropenia (FN) during cycle 1 and all cycles of chemotherapy combined without adjusting for differences in relative dose intensity (RDI) between study treatment arms.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven publications representing 30 randomized controlled trials were included. Using MTC over all chemotherapy cycles, PP with filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, lenograstim, and lipegfilgrastim versus no G-CSF PP or placebo were associated with statistically significantly reduced FN risk. FN risk was also significantly reduced with pegfilgrastim PP versus filgrastim PP. Over all chemotherapy cycles, there was a numerical but statistically nonsignificant increase in the FN risk for lipegfilgrastim PP versus pegfilgrastim PP. Using MTC in cycle 1, PP with filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, and lipegfilgrastim versus no G-CSF PP or placebo were associated with statistically significantly reduced FN risk.

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis, using MTC without adjustment for RDI, PP with all G-CSFs evaluated reduced the FN risk in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Future studies are needed to assess the influence of RDI on FN outcomes and to eliminate potential bias between G-CSF arms receiving more intensive chemotherapy than control arms.