Role of Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor on the Short-Term Outcome of Children with Acute on Chronic Liver Failure

BACKGROUND

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) results in very high mortality in children. We aimed to evaluate the role of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) on short-term outcome of children with ACLF in a nontransplant unit.

METHODS

Children (aged > 1 year) diagnosed with ACLF over a 15 month period were randomised. Group A was given GCSF therapy along with standard medical care (SMC - details in supplementary data) and group B was given only SMC. The outcome was evaluated as survival at 30 and 60 days of therapy.

RESULT

Thirty-one children with ACLF were enrolled, with a mean age of 6.92 ± 4.3yrs. A total of 15 patients were randomised to group A and 16 to group B. The overall mortality was 54.83%. The intervention group showed survival rates of 80%, 66.67% and 53.3%, whereas the control group had survival rates of 43.75%, 37.5% and 37.5% at 14, 30 and 60 days, respectively. A significant survival benefit was noted on day 14 (p = 0.043) of therapy in group A with significant difference in Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) and pediatric end-stage liver disease (PELD) scores in the two groups. After an initial rise in group A, the granulocyte counts fell to become comparable in the two groups by day 30 and 60, indicating that the effect of GCSF therapy wears off over time. There was no significant difference in the overall survival, median/mean CTP, PELD and MCS (Modified Cliff sequential organ failure assesment (SOFA)) scores on day 30 and 60. Mean (%) CD 34 + cells level showed a rise on day 7 in group A but was statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that GCSF therapy at 5 mcg/kg/day for 5 days seems to be ineffective in improving the survival outcome on day 30 and 60 of therapy. Studies with larger number of children enrolled and longer duration of therapy are required. (CTRI/2017/11/010420).

Real-world adjuvant TAC or FEC-D for HER2-negative node-positive breast cancer in women less than 50 years of age

PURPOSE

We compared the efficacy, toxicity, and use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (g-csf) with tac (docetaxel-doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide) and fec-d (5-fluorouracil-epirubicin-cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel) in women less than 50 years of age.

METHODS

The study included all women more than 18 years but less than 50 years of age with her2-negative, node-positive, stage ii or iii breast cancer diagnosed in Alberta between 2008 and 2012 who received tac (n = 198) or fec-d (n = 274).

RESULTS

The patient groups were well-balanced, except that radiotherapy use was higher in the tac group (91.9% vs. 79.9%, p < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 49.6 months, disease-free survival was 91.4% for tac and 92.0% for fec-d (p = 0.76). Overall survival (os) was 96% with tac and 95.3% with fec-d (p = 0.86).The incidences of grades 3 and 4 toxicities were similar in the two groups (all p > 0.05). Overall, febrile neutropenia (fn) was reported in 11.6% of tac patients and 15.7% of fec-d patients (p = 0.26). However, use of g-csf was higher in the tac group than in the fec-d group (96.4% vs. 71.5%, p < 0.001). Hospitalization for fn was required in 10.5% of tac patients and 13.0% of fec-d patients (p = 0.41). In g-csf-supported and -unsupported patients receiving tac, fn occurred at rates of 11.1% and 33.3% respectively (p = 0.08); in patients receiving the fec portion of fec-d, those proportions were 2.9% and 8.1% respectively (p = 0.24); and in patients receiving docetaxel after fec, the proportions were 4.1% and 17.6% respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In women less than 50 years of age receiving adjuvant tac or fec-d, we observed no differences in efficacy or other nonhematologic toxicities. Based on the timing and rates of fn, use of prophylactic g-csf should be routine for the docetaxel-containing portion of treatment; however, prophylactic g-csf could potentially be avoided during the fec portion of fec-d treatment.

Suboptimal duration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use and chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in women diagnosed with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is recommended for cancer patients who are at high risk of neutropenic events. However, whether the clinical effectiveness of G-CSF from randomized controlled trials translates into "real-world" clinical practice is questionable. The goal of this retrospective cohort study was to examine the impact of G-CSF prophylaxis and other potential risk factors of severe neutropenia in women with breast cancer.

METHODS

Our study subjects were women who were diagnosed with breast cancer and who received a new course of chemotherapy between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2010, at a cancer center in Taiwan. Generalized estimating equations were applied to examine the association between G-CSF prophylaxis and neutropenic events.

FINDINGS

We identified 353 women with breast cancer who received a total of 2776 cycles of chemotherapy. G-CSF was used as primary prophylaxis in 7% (n = 202) of cycles and as secondary prophylaxis in 11% (n = 319) of cycles. The mean duration of G-CSF for primary and secondary prophylaxis was 4.9 and 3.7 days, respectively. A chemotherapy regimen with high risk of febrile neutropenia was found to be a risk factor for severe neutropenic events (odds ratio, 3.22 [95% CI, 1.97-5.27]). Prophylactic use of G-CSF was not statistically significantly associated with febrile neutropenia.

IMPLICATIONS

The major determinants of neutropenic events among patients with breast cancer were the content and intensity of chemotherapy regimens. Suboptimal use of G-CSF may not be effective in preventing neutropenic events among women with breast cancer.

Allometric dose retranslation unveiled substantial immunological side effects of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor after stroke

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) showed robust neuroprotective and neuroregenerative properties after stroke in rodents but failed to meet study end points in patients. Because immunologic side effects of GCSF may have escaped preclinical testing because of nonallometric dose translation, we hypothesized those as possible reasons.

METHODS

Stroke was induced in C57BL/6 mice by 45-minute filament middle cerebral artery occlusion. GCSF was administered at 50 and 832.5 μg/kg body weight. Treatment was controlled by vehicle injection, sham surgery, and naive animals. Immune cell counts were assessed in blood, spleen, and brain by multidimensional flow cytometry 1 day after stroke.

RESULTS

High-dose GCSF significantly altered myeloid and T-cell subpopulations in blood and spleen and caused a tremendous increase of monocytes/macrophages infiltrating the ischemic brain.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-dependent immunomodulation superimposes central nervous system-specific effects of GCSF after stroke. Adaption of dose or treatment time may overcome this drawback.