Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) patterns of use in cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy

Trends in the use of granulocyte colony stimulating factors for older patients with cancer, 2010 to 2019

INTRODUCTION

Older patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive treatment are at an increased risk for developing febrile neutropenia (FN) or having chemotherapy dose-reductions or delays, resulting in suboptimal health outcomes. Granulocyte colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) are effective medications to reduce these adverse events and are recommended for patients ≥65 years receiving chemotherapy with >10 % FN risk. We sought to characterize the trends and predictors of G-CSF use between the youngest-old (66-74 years), middle-old (75-84 years), and oldest-old (≥85 years) patients with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used registry data from SEER-Medicare for breast, lung, ovarian, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, uterine, prostate, pancreatic cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) diagnoses from 2010 to 2019. Cox proportional hazard analysis was used.

RESULTS

Overall, 41.4 % of patients received G-CSF from chemotherapy initiation to three days after completion of the first chemotherapy course. The use rate remained relatively stable for all cancers, except for an increase in use for those with pancreatic cancer. G-CSF use decreased as patients got older. The oldest-old were 43.0 % (95 % confidence interval: 40.7-45.2 %) less likely to receive G-CSF compared to the youngest-old. Patients with breast cancer or NHL were more likely to receive G-CSF than those with other cancers. Patients who were female, married, White or Hispanic, and had fewer comorbidities were more likely to receive G-CSF.

DISCUSSION

G-CSF is used less often in populations at higher risk of developing FN and related complications. Improving adherence to recommendations can improve health outcomes, especially in the oldest adults, older males, and Black patients.

Attenuation of cisplatin induced myelosuppression by methanol extract of Cedrus deodara in Wistar rats

OBJECTIVE

The present study was performed to evaluate the protective effects of methanol extract of Cedrus deodara against cisplatin induced.

METHODS

Myelosuppression in albino Wistar rats. All experimental animals were administered with cisplatin on 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th day to induce bone marrow toxicity and rats were treated with methanol extract of C. deodara for 21 days. Blood samples were collected from all the animals on day 1st, 7th, 14th and 21st after 1 h before the administration of the drugs and hematological parameters like RBC, WBC, platelets, hemoglobin, hematocrit, eosinophils, basophils, neutrophils, lymphocytes, bleeding time and clotting time were determined were determined. At 21st, all rats were sacrificed and bone marrow samples were collected. The part of bone marrow samples was used for the determination of antioxidant enzymes and remaining were subjected to histopathological examination.

RESULTS

The animals of therapeutic groups administered with extract of C. deodara have exhibited significant rise in hematological parameters and shorten bleeding time and clotting time when compare to toxic control animals on the day 14 and day 21. The histopathological examination revealed the regeneration of bone marrow cells in the extract treated animals. There was significant reduction in lipid peroxidation and increase in antioxidant enzymes was found in extract treated animals.

CONCLUSIONS

The methanol extract of C. deodara of have shown significant protective effects against cisplatin induced myelosuppression in albino Wistar rats.

Effects of a Guideline-Informed Clinical Decision Support System Intervention to Improve Colony-Stimulating Factor Prescribing: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Colony-stimulating factors are prescribed to patients undergoing chemotherapy to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia. Research suggests that 55% to 95% of colony-stimulating factor prescribing is inconsistent with national guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether a guideline-based standing order for primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors improves use and reduces the incidence of febrile neutropenia.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cluster randomized clinical trial, the Trial Assessing CSF Prescribing Effectiveness and Risk (TrACER), involved 32 community oncology clinics in the US. Participants were adult patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer initiating cancer therapy and enrolled between January 2016 and April 2020. Data analysis was performed from July to October 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Sites were randomized 3:1 to implementation of a guideline-based primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factor standing order system or usual care. Automated orders were added for high-risk regimens, and an alert not to prescribe was included for low-risk regimens. Risk was based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was to find an increase in colony-stimulating factor use among high-risk patients from 40% to 75%, a reduction in use among low-risk patients from 17% to 7%, and a 50% reduction in febrile neutropenia rates in the intervention group. Mixed model logistic regression adjusted for correlation of outcomes within a clinic.

RESULTS

A total of 2946 patients (median [IQR] age, 59.0 [50.0-67.0] years; 2233 women [77.0%]; 2292 White [79.1%]) were enrolled; 2287 were randomized to the intervention, and 659 were randomized to usual care. Colony-stimulating factor use for patients receiving high-risk regimens was high and not significantly different between groups (847 of 950 patients [89.2%] in the intervention group vs 296 of 309 patients [95.8%] in the usual care group). Among high-risk patients, febrile neutropenia rates for the intervention (58 of 947 patients [6.1%]) and usual care (13 of 308 patients [4.2%]) groups were not significantly different. The febrile neutropenia rate for patients receiving high-risk regimens not receiving colony-stimulating factors was 14.9% (17 of 114 patients). Among the 585 patients receiving low-risk regimens, colony-stimulating factor use was low and did not differ between groups (29 of 457 patients [6.3%] in the intervention group vs 7 of 128 patients [5.5%] in the usual care group). Febrile neutropenia rates did not differ between usual care (1 of 127 patients [0.8%]) and the intervention (7 of 452 patients [1.5%]) groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cluster randomized clinical trial, implementation of a guideline-informed standing order did not affect colony-stimulating factor use or febrile neutropenia rates in high-risk and low-risk patients. Overall, use was generally appropriate for the level of risk. Standing order interventions do not appear to be necessary or effective in the setting of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor prescribing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02728596.

G-CSF in tumors: Aggressiveness, tumor microenvironment and immune cell regulation

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a cytokine most well-known for maturation and mobilization of bone marrow neutrophils. Although it is used therapeutically to treat chemotherapy induced neutropenia, it is also highly expressed in some tumors. Case reports suggest that tumors expressing high levels of G-CSF are aggressive, more difficult to treat, and present with poor prognosis and high mortality rates. Research on this topic suggests that G-CSF has tumor-promoting effects on both tumor cells and the tumor microenvironment. G-CSF has a direct effect on tumor cells to promote tumor stem cell longevity and overall tumor cell proliferation and migration. Additionally, it may promote pro-tumorigenic immune cell phenotypes such as M2 macrophages, myeloid-derived suppressor cells, and regulatory T cells. Overall, the literature suggests a plethora of pro-tumorigenic activity that should be balanced with the therapeutic use. In this review, we present an overview of the multiple complex roles of G-CSF and G-CSFR in tumors and their microenvironment and discuss how clinical advances and strategies may open new therapeutic avenues.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Shuanghuang Shengbai granule cures myelosuppression and suppresses lung cancer progression: mechanism and therapeutic targets from the aspect of microRNAs

BACKGROUND

Shuanghuang Shengbai granule is effective in curing cyclophosphamide-induced myelosuppression without promoting lung cancer development. This study aims to investigate its mechanism and therapeutic targets.

METHODS

Nude mice with lung cancer were treated with physiological saline (control), cyclophosphamide, or cyclophosphamide + Shuanghuang Shengbai. MicroRNA microarray was used to investigate the differentially expressed microRNAs in lung cancer stem cells or bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells between the three groups. MicroRNA expressions were confirmed using quantitative real time-polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Cyclophosphamide suppressed tumor growth and decreased the ratio of SP⁺ lung cancer stem cells (P<0.05). Shuanghuang Shengbai further decreased the ratios of SP⁺ and CD24⁺IGF1R⁺ lung cancer stem cells (P<0.05). Shuanghuang Shengbai completely reversed the cyclophosphamide-induced decreases in white blood cells, proliferation index of bone marrow cells, and the ratio of CD34⁺SCA1⁺ bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells (P<0.05). We found 45 and 343 altered microRNAs for SP⁺ lung cancer stem cells and CD34⁺SCA1⁺ bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells, respectively. Moreover, miR-32*, miR-466i-5p, and mmu-miR-669c in SP⁺ lung cancer stem cells were confirmed, as well as mmu-miR-106b*, mmu-miR-144, mmu-miR-669k*, mmu-miR-142-3p, mmu-miR-210, and mmu-miR-223 in CD34⁺SCA1⁺ bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells.

CONCLUSION

Shuanghuang Shengbai might promote the proliferation of CD34⁺SCA1⁺ bone marrow hematopoietic stem cells via up-regulating mmu-miR-106b*, mmu-miR-144, and mmu-miR-669k*, as well as down-regulating mmu-miR-142-3p, mmu-miR-210, and mmu-miR-223. Shuanghuang Shengbai might further inhibit the proliferation of SP⁺ lung cancer stem cells via enhancing the expressions of miR-32*, miR-466i-5p, and mmu-miR-669c. These might be the mechanism and therapeutic targets of Shuanghuang Shengbai granule.

Comorbidities among patients with cancer who do and do not develop febrile neutropenia during the first chemotherapy cycle

Patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy with certain comorbidities are at increased risk of febrile neutropenia. A comprehensive evaluation of febrile neutropenia-related comorbidities across cancers is needed. This study compared comorbidity prevalence among patients with cancer who did and did not develop febrile neutropenia during the first chemotherapy cycle. This case-control study used administrative claims from adult patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or breast, lung, colorectal, ovarian, or gastric cancer who received chemotherapy between 2007 and 2012. Each patient who developed febrile neutropenia (case) was matched with up to four patients without febrile neutropenia (controls) by cancer type, metastasis, chemotherapy regimen, age group, and sex. For each comorbidity (identified in the year before chemotherapy began), the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for febrile neutropenia by cancer type was evaluated using conditional logistic regression models adjusted for potential confounding factors. Of 31,331 eligible patients, 672 developed febrile neutropenia in the first chemotherapy cycle. A total of 3312 febrile neutropenia cases and matched controls were analyzed. Across tumor types, comorbidity prevalence was higher in patients who developed febrile neutropenia than in those without febrile neutropenia. Among patients with breast cancer, osteoarthritis was more prevalent in patients with febrile neutropenia (aOR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.07 to 3.18). Among patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, renal disease was more prevalent in patients with febrile neutropenia (aOR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.23 to 4.11). Patients who developed febrile neutropenia in the first chemotherapy cycle presented with comorbidities more often than otherwise similar patients who did not develop febrile neutropenia. These findings warrant further investigation and support the inclusion of comorbidities into febrile neutropenia risk models.

Changing patterns of chemotherapy relative dose intensity and supportive care for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Maintaining high relative dose intensity (RDI) is associated with improved outcomes, especially in patients with aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). To evaluate changes in practice, we examined RDI, chemotherapy treatment patterns, dose delays and reductions, neutropenia and related consequences, and supportive care in 500 patients with aggressive B-cell NHL treated between 2006-2009. We then compared the results to a previous study of patients treated between 1993-2001. Relative to the previous study, rituximab was a common addition to CHOP-21 (91% vs. 3%), more patients received an RDI ≥ 85% (68% vs. 52%), and fewer patients experienced dose reductions (21% vs. 35%), though incidences of dose delays were similar (26% vs. 23%). Incidences of febrile neutropenia (FN; 12% vs. 21%) and FN-related hospitalizations (10% vs. 16%) were lower. Finally, more patients received primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors (75% vs. 12%). Together, these results illustrate evolving practice patterns for patients with aggressive B-cell NHL.

Adherence to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) guidelines to reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy--a representative sample survey in Germany

PURPOSE

Febrile neutropenia (FN) after chemotherapy increases complications, morbidity, risk of death, reduction of dose delivery and impairs quality of life. Primary granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis after chemotherapy is recommended in the guideline (GL) if the risk of FN is high (≥20%) or intermediate (≥10-20%) with additional risk factors. This study evaluated the implementation of G-CSF GL.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sample size of the survey was calculated at 2% of the incidences of malignant lymphoma, breast cancer, and lung cancer in Germany in 2006. Patients were documented retrospectively over three to nine cycles of chemotherapy and FN risk ≥10%. Professional physician profiles were analyzed by classification and regression tree analysis (CART).

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-five hematologists-oncologists and pulmonologists and gynecologists specialized in oncology documented data of 666 lung cancer patients, 286 malignant lymphoma patients, and 976 breast cancer patients, with 7805 chemotherapy cycles; 85.1% of physicians claimed adhering to G-CSF GL. Adherence to GL in all high-FN-risk chemotherapy cycles was 15.4% in lung cancer, 84.5% in malignant lymphoma, and 85.6% in breast cancer, and in all intermediate-FN-risk chemotherapy cycles, lung cancer it was 38.8%, malignant lymphoma it was 59.4%, and breast cancer it was 49.3%. G-CSF was overused without additional patient risk factors in 7.2% lung cancer cycles, 16.8% malignant lymphoma cycles, and 17.6% breast cancer cycles. The CART analysis split pulmonologists and other specialists, with the latter adhering more to GL. Pulmonologists, trained less than 22.5 years, adhered better to GL, as did also gynecologists or hematologists-oncologists with professional experience less than 8.1 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptance of and adherence to G-CSF GL differed between lung cancer, lymphoma, and breast cancer. Physicians overestimate their adherence to the GL. Physicians adhering to the GL can be characterized.

Potential cost savings from chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with biosimilar filgrastim and expanded access to targeted antineoplastic treatment across the European Union G5 countries: a simulation study

PURPOSE

The objectives of this study were to simulate for the European Union G5 countries the potential cost savings of converting patients from originator granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) filgrastim and pegfilgrastim to a biosimilar filgrastim, to evaluate how reallocating these savings could increase patient access to antineoplastic therapy, and to estimate the number of patients needed to convert to provide antineoplastic treatment to one patient.

METHODS

Three models were built: (1) to estimate the costs of using originator G-CSFs and the savings generated from switching to a biosimilar G-CSF, (2) to estimate the incremental number of patients who could be provided antineoplastic therapy-rituximab or trastuzumab-in a hypothetical panel of 10,000 patients with cancer, and (3) to calculate the number of patients needed to convert to provide access to anticancer therapy. Scenarios were developed in which the rate of conversion was varied to estimate the effect on total cost savings. This study took the perspective of the payer in the European Union.

FINDINGS

The savings associated with the biosimilar filgrastim over the originator filgrastim ranged from €785 (day 4) to €2747 (day 14) and increased with longer duration of therapy. By contrast, the savings associated with the biosimilar filgrastim over pegfilgrastim decreased over time, ranging from €6199 (day 4) to €471 (day 14). In a hypothetical panel of 10,000 patients with cancer, the savings associated with the biosimilar filgrastim over the originator filgrastim and the expanded access to antineoplastic therapy improved over time, irrespective of conversion rates. Conversely, in the same hypothetical panel, the savings associated with the biosimilar filgrastim over pegfilgrastim reduced over time, irrespective of conversion rates, along with the expanded access to antineoplastic treatment. Under conversion of the originator filgrastim to the biosimilar filgrastim, the number needed to convert to expand access to rituximab ranged from 4 to 14 patients, and the number needed to convert to expand access to trastuzumab ranged from 11 to 38 patients. Under conversion of pegfilgrastim to the biosimilar filgrastim, the number needed to convert to expand access to rituximab ranged from 2 to 24 patients, and the number needed to convert to expand access to trastuzumab ranged from 5 to 63 patients.

IMPLICATIONS

Use of biosimilar G-CSFs for supportive cancer care could yield potential cost savings and improve patient access to antineoplastic therapy in a budget neutral way-a financial effect with an ethical perspective.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors as prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia

Myelosuppression secondary to chemotherapy remains a serious adverse effect of cancer therapy that causes high morbidity and mortality. Several current European and American guidelines recommend consideration of primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) when the risk of febrile neutropenia is higher than 20 %. The main factors associated with a high risk of febrile neutropenia include the chemotherapy regimen, tumor type, and patient-related factors such as old age and/or comorbidities. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the most relevant clinical trials and updated recommendations of the main guidelines on the role of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) in febrile neutropenia, examining whether the combination of G-CSF with chemotherapy improves overall survival. Future directions for G-CSF use are also discussed.