Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF, filgrastim) after or during an intensive remission induction therapy for adult acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: effects, role of patient pretreatment characteristics, and costs

Advances in Supportive Care for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Tremendous advances have been made in the treatment armamentarium for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in recent years, which have substantially improved outcomes for these patients. At the same time, unique toxicities have emerged, and without early intervention, are life-threatening. This article will review the novel therapies in acute leukemias and highlight the clinically relevant supportive care advances.

RECENT FINDINGS

The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT) has put forth the most recent recommendations in managing the cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity after chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) and blinatumomab. The hepatic injury incurred by inotuzumab, and the vascular toxicity of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, other relatively novel agents, require subspecialist intervention and multidisciplinary care. Asparaginase, a long-established and key element of pediatric regimens, has made a comeback in the young adult leukemia population. Updated guidelines have been outlined for management of asparaginase thrombotic complications. Lastly, although there have been few changes in the applications of growth factor, antimicrobial prophylaxis, and management of neuropathy, these encompass exceedingly important aspects of care. While the rapidly changing treatment paradigms for acute lymphoblastic leukemia have transformed leukemia-specific outcomes, treatment emergent toxicities have forced much necessary attention to better definitions of these toxicities and on improving supportive care guidelines in acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Costo- Efectividad Del Uso Profiláctico Del Factor Estimulante De Colonias De Granulocitos En Adultos Con Leucemia Linfoblástica Aguda en Colombia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic administration of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) compared with no use of it, during the induction phase of chemotherapy in Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) in Colombia.

METHODS

A decision tree with a time horizon of 30 days was built under colombian health system perspective including only direct costs. The costs of procedures and medications were taken from official sources and an institution of national reference of oncology services. The safety and effectiveness data were taken from the literature and two Colombian cohorts with patients older than 15 years. The unit of outcome was the proportion of deaths avoided.

RESULTS

Base-case results on a clinical trial indicate that using factor is a dominant strategy. The variable that most impacted the outcome was the incidence of febrile neutropenia. Considering a threshold of $22.228 USD in 80% of cases using factor was cost effective. However, the use of factor is not cost-effective for the country for incidences of febrile neutropenia > 48%. It was not possible to establish cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim because no information was found.

CONCLUSION

As per Colombian data, the use of prophylactic factor under chemotherapeutic induction in adults with ALL, turns out to be not cost effective. The difference in the results suggests the need of a careful extrapolation of information from clinical trials (ideal world) for developing economic evaluations in Colombia.

Prophylaxis of infectious complications with colony-stimulating factors in adult cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy-evidence-based guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party AGIHO of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

BACKGROUND

Current evidence on myelopoietic growth factors is difficult to overview for the practicing haematologist/oncologist. International guidelines are sometimes conflicting, exclude certain patient groups, or cannot directly be applied to the German health system. This guideline by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) gives evidence-based recommendations for the use of G-CSF, pegylated G-CSF, and biosimilars to prevent infectious complications in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, including those with haematological malignancies.

METHODS

We systematically searched and evaluated current evidence. An expert panel discussed the results and recommendations. We then compared our recommendations to current international guidelines.

RESULTS

We summarised the data from eligible studies in evidence tables, developed recommendations for different entities and risk groups.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive literature search and expert panel consensus confirmed many key recommendations given by international guidelines. Evidence for growth factors during acute myeloid leukaemia induction chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim use in haematological malignancies was rated lower compared with other guidelines.

Current status of growth factors in the treatment of acute myeloid and lymphoblastic leukemia

The safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in patients with acute leukemia has been well established in numerous clinical trials. The primary aim of these studies was to determine whether CSFs, when used as adjuncts to intensive chemotherapy, reduced the duration of neutropenia, prevented febrile neutropenia, infections, and hospitalization rates, and improved response and overall outcome in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Despite considerable efforts in divers clinical settings, the potential advantages of hematopoietic growth factors in the management of these leukemias remain inconclusive. In general, individual published trials have shown declines in the incidence and/or duration of neutropenia but have not consistently demonstrated a reduction in the overall frequency of infectious complications or the duration of hospitalization. Most protocols also have failed to show a benefit in terms of disease-free or overall survival. Nevertheless, improvements in "soft" clinical end points, such as incidence of severe infections, may be clinically important and contribute, even if only incrementally, to the patient's quality of life. Selection of those patients likely to benefit from growth factors in a specific clinical setting is a worthwhile endeavour.

Impact of primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia and mortality in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) have demonstrated a significant reduction in febrile neutropenia (FN) after systemic chemotherapy. Several RCTs have been published recently that investigate the impact of G-CSF on mortality and relative dose-intensity (RDI).

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of all reported RCTs comparing primary prophylactic G-CSF with placebo or untreated controls in adult solid tumor and malignant lymphoma patients was undertaken without language restrictions, using electronic databases, conference proceedings, and hand-searching techniques. Two reviewers extracted data independently. Summary estimates of relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs were estimated based on the method of Mantel-Haenszel and DerSimonian and Laird.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs were identified including 3,493 patients. For infection-related mortality, RR reduction with G-CSF compared with controls was 45% (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.90; P = .018); for early mortality (all-cause mortality during chemotherapy period), it was 40% (RR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83; P = .002); and for FN, it was 46% (RR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.67; P < .001). Average RDI was significantly higher in patients who received G-CSF compared with control patients (P < .001). Bone or musculoskeletal pain was reported in 10.4% of controls and 19.6% of G-CSF patients (RR = 4.03; 95% CI, 2.15 to 7.52; P < .001). Significant reductions in FN with G-CSF were observed in studies allowing secondary G-CSF prophylaxis in controls and in the three trials with concurrent prophylactic antibiotics in both treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic G-CSF reduces the risk of FN and early deaths, including infection-related mortality, while increasing RDI and musculoskeletal pain. There are insufficient data to assess the impact of G-CSF on disease-free and overall survival.

Economic evaluations of leukemia: A review of the literature

Objectives:Leukemia, together with lymphoma and multiple myeloma, are hematological malignancies, malignancies of the blood-forming organs. There are four major types of leukemia: acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). There is a growing amount of literature of the health economic aspects of leukemia. However, no comprehensive review is yet performed on the health economic evidence for the disease. Hence, our aim was to review and analyze the existing literature on economic evaluations of the different types of leukemia.

Methods:A systematic literature search used electronic databases to identify published cost analyses and economic evaluations of leukemia treatments. After reviewing all identified studies, sixty studies were considered relevant for the purpose of the review.

Results:The identified studies were published after 1990, with a few exceptions. Many of the identified economic evaluations in leukemia, particularly for ALL and AML, may be defined as cost-minimization analyses, where only the costs of different treatment strategies are compared. In CML, a new treatment, imatinib, was introduced in 2001 and several cost-effectiveness analyses have since then been conducted comparing imatinib with previous first line treatments.

Conclusions:This review indicates that there is a shortage of cost-effectiveness information in leukemia. The introduction of new therapies will stress the need for new economic evaluations in this group of diseases. More information about the total costs, that is, including indirect costs, and quality of life effects would be valuable in future evaluations in leukemia.

Role of cytokines in the treatment of acute leukemias: a review

Myeloid growth factors, such as granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, have been used to decrease the duration of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and thereby reduce the incidence and severity of infections in various regimens used to treat acute myeloid leukemia and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. These growth factors have also been used to recruit dormant myeloid leukemia cells into the S phase of cell cycle in order to increase their susceptibility to the antileukemic effects of agents such as cytarabine. Multiple prospective randomized trials have examined the benefit and safety of the addition of growth factors before, during, and after chemotherapy. A reduction in the duration of neutropenia has been the most consistent finding; this has not been associated with stimulation of leukemia cells, the main concern of using this strategy. Unfortunately, few studies have reported a benefit in prolonging the duration of disease-free survival or overall survival. Other cytokines, including interleukins and thrombopoietin, have also been evaluated for their theoretical ability to recruit immune mechanisms to eradicate residual leukemia burden after chemotherapy, and to stimulate platelet production. In this review, we summarize the clinical experience with these growth factors in treating acute leukemias.

Adult acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) in adults is a relatively rare neoplasm with a curability rate around 30% at 5 years. This consideration makes it imperative to dissect further the biological mechanisms of disease, in order to selectively implement an hitherto unsatisfactory success rate. The recognition of discrete ALL subtypes (some of which deserve specific therapeutic approaches, like T-lineage ALL (T-ALL) and mature B-lineage ALL (B-ALL)) is possible through an accurate combination of cytomorphology, immunophenotytpe and cytogenetic assays and has been a major result of clinical research studies conducted over the past 20 years. Two-three major prognostic groups are now easily identifiable, with a survival probability ranging from <10 to 20% (Philadelphia-positive ALL) to about 50-60% (low-risk T-ALL and selected patients with B-lineage ALL). These issues are extensively reviewed and form the basis of current knowledge. The second major point relates to the emerging importance of studies that reveal a dysregulated gene activity and its clinical counterpart. It is now clear that prognostication is a complex matter ranging from patient-related issues to cytogenetics to molecular biology, including the evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD) and possibly gene array tests. On these bases, the role of a correct, highly personalised therapeutic choice will soon become fundamental. Therapeutic progress may be obtainable through a careful integration of chemotherapy, stem cell transplantation, and the new targeted treatments with highly specific metabolic inhibitors and humanised monoclonal antibodies.

The burden and outcomes associated with four leukemias: AML, ALL, CLL and CML

Given the recent advances in the treatment of hematologic malignancies and the many other treatments on the horizon, physicians and payers will be faced with the critical decisions of when to use new treatments in the clinical pathway and how to allocate healthcare resources. This review will provide an overall context for the clinical, economic and quality of life burden of leukemia, as well as provide cross-analysis among the four major types of leukemia: acute lymphocytic leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, acute myeloid leukemia and chronic myeloid leukemia.

G-CSF administered in time-sequenced setting during remission induction and consolidation therapy of adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia has beneficial influence on early recovery and possibly improves long-term outcome: a randomized multicenter study

Sixty-four untreated adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients were randomized to receive chemotherapy alone, n = 31 or chemotherapy and granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), n = 33. During induction patients received G-CSF for 5 days between four weekly Epirubicin+Vcr administrations, starting 36 h after each application and finishing 48 h before the next one with the intention to possibly generate a cell cycle dependent protection of normal hematopoietic progenitors and to stimulate granulopoiesis. The complete remission (CR) rate equaled 94% in the G-CSF group and 87% in controls. Patients who received G-CSF, if compared to the controls, had shorter granulocytopenia during induction and consolidation, displayed a lower infection rate, completed the induction-consolidation quicker and stayed shorter in hospital during induction, p < 0.001-0.04. Follow-up at 2 years revealed a rather higher probability of survival (59 vs. 27%, p = 0.04) and a lower relapse rate (32 vs. 60%) in G-CSF arm than in controls. The beneficial influence of G-CSF administered in time-sequenced fashion on survival needs further confirmation.

Comparison of two different schedules of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor during treatment for acute lymphocytic leukemia with a hyper-CVAD (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and dexamethasone) regimen

BACKGROUND

Although the safety and efficacy of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) (filgrastim) in the treatment of hematologic malignancies has been well established, to the authors' knowledge the optimal timing of filgrastim administration during remission induction chemotherapy and consolidation chemotherapy has not been determined. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether a delay in the administration of filgrastim from Day 5 to Day 10 during chemotherapy with a hyper-CVAD (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and dexamethasone) regimen resulted in a longer time to neutrophil or platelet count recovery or increased the incidence of infection.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-nine patients who achieved complete disease remission after a single course of induction chemotherapy were considered for evaluation. Induction chemotherapy was with hyper-CVAD (fractionated cyclophosphamide, 300 mg/m2, twice daily for Days 1-3; doxorubicin, 50 g/m2, on Day 4; vincristine, 2 mg, on Days 4 and 11; and dexamethasone, 40 mg, on Days 1-4 and Days 11-14), which also was given in odd-numbered consolidation Courses 3, 5, and 7. Even-numbered courses (Courses 2, 4, 6, and 8) were comprised of methotrexate, 200 mg/m2, over 2 hours followed by 800 mg/m2 over 24 hours on Day 1; cytarabine, 3 g/m2, every 12 hours for 4 doses over 2 days (Days 2 and 3); and intravenous methylprednisolone, 50 mg, twice daily on Days 1-3 (MTX/ara-C regimen). Two sequential treatment groups were assessable based on timing of the filgrastim administration; 151 patients received filgrastim starting on Day 5 (D5) of induction chemotherapy and 48 patients received filgrastim starting on Day 10 (D10).

RESULTS

Time to neutrophil recovery was shorter for the D5 group than for the D10 group during induction chemotherapy (18 days vs. 19 days; P = 0.04) and hyper-CVAD Courses 3 and 5 (12 days vs. 15 days during Course 3, P < 0.001; and 13 days vs. 16 days during Course 5, P = 0.002). There was no apparent significant difference between the two groups with regard to time to neutrophil recovery during the MTX/ara-C courses or the last hyper-CVAD course. Delay in the administration of filgrastim did not appear to result in an increase in time to platelet count recovery or in the incidence of infection; however, there was an increased incidence of mucositis during induction chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

For a hyper-CVAD and MTX/ara-C regimen, the results of the current study have shown that the administration of filgrastim can be delayed until Day 10 without increasing the risk of treatment-related morbidity during consolidation chemotherapy. During induction chemotherapy, delay in the administration of filgrastim may result in a slight increase in the time to neutrophil count recovery and risk of mucositis, but there is no apparent associated increase in the risk of infection.

Economic analysis of filgrastim use for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia in the UK: a comparison of collection methods of resource use data

BACKGROUND

A clinical trial of patients with de novo acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) showed that haematopoietic support with filgrastim (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, G-CSF) following induction and consolidation chemotherapy accelerated recovery from neutropenia. The clinical benefits included reductions in infections, anti-infective therapy and length of hospital stay.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this economic analysis is 2-fold. First, it aims to determine if the observed clinical benefits from the use of filgrastim would lead to cost savings from the perspective of a healthcare institution in the UK. Second, the analysis compares the results of two methods on collection of resource use data.

DESIGN

A retrospective cost-minimisation analysis was undertaken based on the clinical results of all UK patients enrolled in the trial. Two cost models were developed: a model based only on the medical resource use collected in the case report forms (the CRF model); and a model based on all medical resources collected from patient medical files (the PF Model). Treatment costs of AML between filgrastim and the placebo arm were compared for the first induction cycle as well as the first induction and the first consolidation cycles combined. Results from the two models were compared.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

The CRF model was applied to two samples of patients: all UK patients (n = 82) and patients enrolled at one centre [the Manchester Royal Infirmary (MRI) (n = 30)], whereas the PF model was applied to the MRI patient sample only.

RESULTS

For all UK patients, using the CRF model, the filgrastim-treated arm produced cost savings of 747 pounds sterling (9.0%) and 2135 pounds sterling (14.4%) [1998 values] per patient in the first induction cycle and in the induction and consolidation cycles combined, respectively. For the patients at MRI the CRF model resulted in cost savings with filgrastim of 177 pounds sterling (2.2%) and 414 pounds sterling (3.2%) per patient respectively. Using the PF model the savings at MRI were 910 pounds sterling (8.6%) and 1285 pounds sterling (8.0%) per patient, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Use of filgrastim in the treatment of AML in the UK may result in net cost savings. A retrospective analysis using total resources obtained through patient files produced higher cost savings estimates than that obtained by resources noted in the CRFs. The models based on PF resource data may be more reliable because they are more comprehensive. However, the cost estimates in this study may have been impacted by sample size, site characteristics, disease and treatment settings. Therefore, further evaluation on the methods for collecting resource use data in larger, multicentred studies is warranted.

Treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia in older adults

The overall strategy for the treatment of older adults is summarized in Table 8. Soon after the birth of effective chemotherapy for acute leukemia, the perspective for all patients was summarized as follows: 'With all humility it may be claimed that there are, at least, grounds for hope and encouragement in this recently acquired ability occasionally to halt for a while the formerly unrelenting malignant process known as acute leukemia'. In reviewing the overall survival data for older adults one may feel that we are at a similar juncture in assessing the outcome for this particular population. It is hoped that some of the potential advances may provide greater hope and improved results over the next decade.

Induction-consolidation with an idarubicin-containing regimen, unpurged marrow autograft, and post-graft chemotherapy in adult acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

Between 1991 and 1993 we conducted a collaborative trial in adult acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, introducing an idarubicin (IDA)-containing regimen for induction and early consolidation, and increasing consolidation intensity with an autologous bone marrow transplantation phase (ABMT, patients aged <51 years) followed by further chemotherapy for 12 weeks and low-dose maintenance for 6 months (ABMT patients) or 18 months. 96 patients were evaluable for antileukaemic response after induction with vincristine-prednisone-L-asparaginase plus cumulative IDA 36 or 20 mg/m2 (IVAP-1 and IVAP-2), and for disease-free survival (DFS) after a minimum follow-up >3.5 years with an off-therapy interval >1.5 years. The response rate was 44% (7/16) with IVAP-1 and 90% (72/80) with IVAP-2 (P=0.0001), due to regimen-related toxicities. Post-remission therapy was administered as planned to most cases but protocol violation was registered in some patients eligible to ABMT and post-graft chemotherapy. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 31%. Multivariate analysis indicated that DFS was improved in patients receiving a transplant (11 allogeneic, DFS 70%; 32 ABMT, 36%; 37 neither, 17%; P < 0.001) and was negatively affected by high-risk features such as blast cell count >25x10(9)/l, T-cell or mature B-cell immunophenotype, and t(9;22)/t(4;11) (all P values <0.05). The 5-year DFS rate was 54% for 26 patients with no high-risk factor, 26% for 35 patients with any one, and 6% for 18 patients with any two (P<0.005). IVAP-2 brought about a high complete response rate and post-remission treatment including ABMT was feasible and modestly toxic. In spite of the short post-graft chemotherapy phase, the long-term DFS rate was good in cases with no high-risk feature. However, because autografting may be redundant in the standard-risk category, its role requires further investigation for high-risk cases.

Growth factors in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia

The safety of G-CSF and GM-CSF in adult and pediatric patients with ALL has been well established. In addition, prophylactic administration of G-CSF was shown to significantly accelerate neutrophil recovery in most clinical trials. This was associated with a substantially reduced incidence and duration of febrile neutropenia and of severe infections in selected high risk patients receiving multiple treatment cycles, whereas the clinical benefit appears to be negligible in patients at low risk of infectious complications. There is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of GM-CSF as an adjunct to treatment for ALL outside of clinical trials. Apart from patient characteristics and type of CSF, it has become evident that scheduling of growth factor administration in relation to the type of chemotherapy, and use of different study end points influence the clinical efficacy of HGF administration. Although no studies have so far shown that use of growth factors is associated with reduced mortality, higher complete remission rates or superior survival, improvements in other clinical endpoints, e.g. infection rate, duration of i.v. antibiotics, and length of hospital stays were frequently perceived as clinically important and felt to contribute substantially to the patient's quality of life. It will become increasingly important to select those patients likely to benefit from growth factor support and to identify additional predictive criteria. Scheduling of CSFs, e.g. early versus delayed and prophylactic versus interventional administration, the type of growth factor used and the duration of administration need to be optimized in the context of specific treatment protocols. Although myeloid growth factors presently can not be expected to have a major impact on overall treatment outcome in patients with ALL, they facilitate important incremental improvement; in supportive care when appropriately applied. As the remaining open questions are resolved, clinical benefits may be achieved consistently and with a favorable cost benefit ratio.