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

The effect of leptin gene polymorphisms (LEP rs7799039 and LEPR rs1137101) on febrile neutropenia

Background and aim

Leptin is mainly produced in adipose tissue and released into systemic circulation. Leptin and its receptor LEPR activate the Janus kinase/signal transducers and activators of transcription signaling cascade and increase cytokine discharge. In our study, we aimed to examine the role of leptin gene (LEP) rs7799039 and LEPR rs1137101 polymorphisms on the susceptibility for febrile neutropenia (FEN) attacks and their relationship with clinical findings during the course of FEN.

Methods

This study included pediatric patients with a diagnosis of malignancy who applied to the pediatric emergency department between December 2019 and June 2022 and healthy controls. The genotypes of the LEP rs7799039 and LEPR rs1137101 genes were statistically compared between patients and healthy controls. In addition, the relationship between the genotype distribution of LEP rs7799039 and LEPR rs1137101 polymorphisms and clinical features during the course of FEN was investigated.

Results

In the statistical analysis in terms of LEP rs7799039 and LEPR rs1137101 genotype distributions between the patient and healthy groups, there was no significant difference. Patients with the AA genotype of LEPR rs1137101 polymorphism had significantly more commonly a body mass index (BMI) value of <25, and all the patients with the AG/GG genotype had a BMI value of 25 and above. LEP rs7799039 and LEPR rs1137101 genotype distributions were not statistically significant with other clinical features.

Conclusions

It was revealed that leptin gene polymorphisms did not have a significant effect during the course of FEN.

Supportive therapies in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and appropriate use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors: a Delphi consensus statement

PURPOSE

Data indicate that the use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) in routine practice is not consistent with guideline recommendations. The initiative "supportive care for febrile neutropenia prevention and appropriateness of G-CFS use" was undertaken to address the issue of inappropriate prescription of G-CSFs and to improve guideline adherence in the treatment of FN.

METHODS

In a two-round Delphi procedure, 36 medical oncologists reviewed clinically relevant recommendations on risk assessment, the appropriate use of G-CSFs, and the prevention of FN based on available literature and individual clinical expertise.

RESULTS

The consensus was reached on 16 out of 38 recommendations, which are backed by evidence from randomised clinical trials and routine clinical practice. The medical oncologists agreed that the severity of neutropenia depends on patients' characteristics and chemotherapy intensity, and therefore, the risk of severe neutropenia or FN should be assessed at each chemotherapy cycle so as to initiate prophylaxis with G-CSFs if required. The use of biosimilar G-CSFs, with similar efficacy and safety profiles to the originator biologic, has improved the availability and sustainability of cancer care. The timing of supportive therapy is crucial; for example, long-acting G-CSF should be administered 24-72 h after chemotherapy administration. Each biological agent has a recommended administration dose and duration, and it is important to follow these recommendations to avoid complications associated with under-prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

It is hoped that these statements will help to increase adherence to guideline recommendations for appropriate G-CSF use and improve patient care.

Use of MASCC score in the inpatient management of febrile neutropenia: a single-center retrospective study

Purpose

The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score is used to risk stratify outpatients with febrile neutropenia (FN). However, it is rarely used in hospital settings. We aimed to describe management, use of MASCC score, and outcomes among hospitalized patients with FN.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and FN. We collected patient demographics, cancer characteristics, microbiological profile, MASCC score, utilization of critical care therapies, documentation of goals of care (GOC), and inpatient deaths. Outcomes associated with low- (≥ 21) versus high-risk (< 21) MASCC scores are presented as absolute differences.

Results

Of 193 patients, few (2%, n = 3) had MASCC scores documented, but when calculated, 52% (n = 101) had a high-risk score (< 21). GOC were discussed in 12% (n = 24) of patients. Twenty one percent (n = 40) required intermediate/ICU level of care, and 12% (n = 23) died in the hospital. Those with a low-risk score were 33% less likely to require intermediate/ICU care (95% CI 23 to 44%) and 19% less likely to die in the hospital (95% CI 10% to 27%) compared to those with high-risk score.

Conclusions

MASCC score was rarely used for hospitalized patients with FN, but high-risk score was associated with worse outcomes. Education efforts to incorporate MASCC score into the workflow may help identify patients at high risk for complications and help clinicians admit these patients to a higher level of care (e.g., intermediate/ICU care) or guide them to initiate earlier GOC discussions.

Febrile neutropenia management in pediatric cancer patients at Ethiopian Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital

Objective

This study aimed at assessing the management practice of febrile neutropenia (FN) in pediatric cancer patients at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital (TASH), Ethiopia by reviewing patients’ charts from 135 participants retrospectively. Data was entered into Epi-info 7 and exported to SPSS 20 for analysis.

Results

Empiric antibiotics therapy (EAT) was given to all patients in which ceftriaxone with gentamycin constituted of 71.8% followed by ceftriaxone monotherapy. EATs were converted to others in 20 (14.8%) and 2 (1.5%) patients for the first and second times respectively, mainly based on poor clinical response without conducting culture and sensitivity tests. These tests were done only for 13 (9.6%) participants and growth was seen in 5 patients; and definitive therapy was given for 2 patients. ANC value was above 500 cell/mm³ in 80.7% of patients and 98.5% of study participants were afebrile after completion FN treatment. Most of them (70.4%) were treated for FN and 7 of patients died due to all case mortality. The hospital should not rely mainly only on ceftriaxone with gentamycin as EAT and should do culture and sensitivity test to optimize therapy based on susceptibility result before conversion and modification of therapy in management of FN.

Validation of the Clinical Index of Stable Febrile Neutropenia (CISNE) model in febrile neutropenia patients visiting the emergency department. Can it guide emergency physicians to a reasonable decision on outpatient vs. inpatient treatment?

Advances in oncology have enabled physicians to treat low-risk febrile neutropenia (FN) in outpatient settings. This study was aimed to explore the usefulness of the CISNE model and identify better triage in the emergency setting. This is a retrospective cohort study on 400 adult FN patients presenting to the Emergency Department of National Cancer Center, Korea from January 2010 to December 2016. All had been treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy for solid tumors in the previous 30 days. The primary outcome was the frequency of any serious complications during the duration of illness. Apparently stable patients numbered 299 (74.8%) of 400, and the remainder comprised clinically unstable patients. The stable patients fell into three cohorts according to the risk scores: CISNE I (low risk), 56 patients (18.7%); CISNE II (intermediate), 124 (41.5%) and CISNE III (high), 119 (39.8%). The primary outcome occurred in 10.7%, 19.4% and 33.6%, respectively, according to the cohort. Compared with the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer Risk Index Score (MASCC RIS), CISNE I stratum had significantly lower sensitivity (0.22 vs. 0.95 of MASCC low risk) but higher specificity (0.91 vs. 0.17) to predict zero occurrence of the primary outcome. The CISNE model was useful for identifying low-risk FN patients for outpatient treatment. The combination of the CISNE and MASCC RIS may help emergency physicians cope with FN more confidently.

A cohort study on protocol-based nurse-led out-patient management of post-chemotherapy low-risk febrile neutropenia

PURPOSE

International guidelines adopt risk stratification approach to manage patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia patients. We developed this out-patient program using shared-care model with professional input and patient empowerment, so as to reduce patients' psychological burden from hospitalization and to improve the cost-effectiveness of management.

METHOD

This is a prospective cohort study to compare the efficacy and safeness of the out-patient program when compared with traditional in-patient care. Patients with solid tumors, developed febrile neutropenia with Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer score of at least 21, and good performance status were included. After initial assessment and the first dose of oral antibiotics, patients were observed in the ambulatory center. Stable patients were discharged home after 4 h of observation and nurse counseling. Patients' condition and clinical progress were regularly reviewed by specialist nurses within the following week by telephone and nurse clinic follow-up. The primary objective of the study is success rate, which defined as the resolution of fever and infection, without hospitalization or any change in antibiotics.

RESULTS

From September 2014 to December 2016, a total of 38 patients were enrolled. Majority were female with breast cancer (97%). Two patients required hospitalization due to persistent fever. The success rate of the out-patient program was not significantly different from the historical in-patient cohort (94.9 versus 97.4%, p = 0.053). No mortality was observed. Patients' compliance to the program was 100%, to telephone follow-up, nurse clinic visits, and daily temperature record.

CONCLUSION

Out-patient management of patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia is effective and safe through implementation of a structured protocol with joint inputs and engagement from clinicians, oncology nurses, and patients.