Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors as prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia

An observational, prospective, open label, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of pegfilgrastim as secondary prophylaxis to decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia in Korean female patients with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Pegfilgrastim is a widely used long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) that prevents febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of chemotherapy-related FN events and other adverse events (AEs) during chemotherapy in Korean patients with breast cancer treated with pegfilgrastim as secondary prophylactic support.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, open-label, prospective, observational study. A total of 1255 patients were enrolled from 43 institutions. The incidence of FN was evaluated as the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints included (1) incidence of bone pain, (2) proportion of patients with a relative dose intensity (RDI) of ≥85%, and (3) proportion of patients with AE.

RESULTS

Pegfilgrastim administration reduced FN by 11.8-1.6%. The highest incidence of bone pain was observed at the time point of the 1st day after the administration and mild bone pain was the most common of all bone pain severity. The mean RDI was 98.5 ± 7.3%, and the proportion of the patients with and RDI≥85% was 96.9% (1169/1233). AEs were reported in 52.6% of the patients, and serious drug reactions occurred in only 0.7%.

CONCLUSION

The use of pegfilgrastim as secondary prophylaxis was effective and safe for preventing FN in patients with breast cancer who were treated with chemotherapy.

A multinational, drug utilization study of lipegfilgrastim use in real-world setting in Europe

PURPOSE

Lipegfilgrastim (Lonquex, Teva Pharma B.V.) is approved for reduction in neutropenia duration and febrile neutropenia incidence. In the framework of lipegfilgrastim regulatory approval in the EU, the Health Authorities requested a drug utilization study. This study was conducted to characterize prescribing patterns of lipegfilgrastim and quantify the extent of on- and off-label use of lipegfilgrastim in real-world setting in Europe.

METHODS

Information on lipegfilgrastim use between January 2014 and March 2020 was abstracted from medical records in hospital and outpatient clinical settings. Indication for lipegfilgrastim was classified either as on-label or off-label use according to pre-determined criteria. The primary endpoint was the extent of lipegfilgrastim off-label use based on the most recent lipegfilgrastim cycle.

RESULTS

Records of 481 patients were obtained from five European countries. Lipegfilgrastim was most commonly prescribed for prevention of neutropenia by oncologists and hematologists. Patients who were administered lipegfilgrastim were primarily ≥ 55 years old (65.1%) and female (65.7%). The most frequent underlying diagnosis was breast cancer (38.3%). For the most recent lipegfilgrastim cycle, on-label use was recorded in 452/459 patients with no missing data (98.5%), while off-label use was recorded in 7/459 patients (1.5%). The majority of off-label use was attributed to use with non-cytotoxic chemotherapy (57.1%). Off-label use of lipegfilgrastim across all treatment cycles with no missing data was 11/1547 cycles (0.7%).

CONCLUSION

Using real-world data, these findings confirm the low rate of lipegfilgrastim off-label use as reported in a preceding feasibility study, indicating very high adherence to the approved indication.

Real-world cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF biosimilars in patients at intermediate/high risk of febrile neutropenia

Background: Real-world data suggests superiority of pegfilgrastim (PEG) over filgrastim (FIL) in reducing the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), probably attributable to underdosed FIL in practice. We used real-world data to assess the cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with PEG versus FIL in cancer patients at intermediate-to-high risk of FN from a US payer perspective. Methods: A Markov model with lifetime horizon. Results: For the high-risk group, PEG (vs FIL) biosimilars resulted in 0.43 FN events prevented (FNp), 0.27 quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYg) and a cost saving of USD$5703. For the intermediate-risk group, PEG biosimilar led to 0.18 FNp and 0.12 QALYg, at USD$9674/FNp and USD$14,502/QALYg. Conclusion: PEG biosimilars may provide opportunities to optimize FN management in patients with intermediate-to-high FN risk.

Risk Factors for Infections, Antibiotic Therapy, and Its Impact on Cancer Therapy Outcomes for Patients with Solid Tumors

Infections represent a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. Multiple factors related to the patient, tumor, and cancer therapy can affect the risk of infection in patients with solid tumors. A thorough understanding of such factors can aid in the identification of patients with substantial risk of infection, allowing medical practitioners to tailor therapy and apply prophylactic measures to avoid serious complications. The use of novel treatment modalities, including targeted therapy and immunotherapy, brings diagnostic and therapeutic challenges into the management of infections in cancer patients. A growing body of evidence suggests that antibiotic therapy can modulate both toxicity and antitumor response induced by chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and especially immunotherapy. This article provides a comprehensive review of potential risk factors for infections and therapeutic approaches for the most prevalent infections in patients with solid tumors, and discusses the potential effect of antibiotic therapy on toxicity and efficacy of cancer therapy.

The Efficacy of Moxibustion for Breast Cancer Patients with Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression during Adjuvant Chemotherapy: A Randomized Controlled Study

Objective

The randomized controlled clinical trial aims to investigate the clinical efficacy of moxibustion for breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) during adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

Surgically resected breast cancer patients were randomly divided into the moxibustion group (MOX; n = 48) and control group (CON; n = 44). Routine adjuvant chemotherapy (every 21 days, 4–8 cycles) and supportive recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor were given to both groups, while MOX received an additional moxibustion treatment (once daily after each cycle of chemotherapy). Primary endpoints included the grade of myelosuppression in terms of white blood cell (WBC) and absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and the incidence of myelosuppression-related serious adverse events (SAEs). Other measures included treatment compliance, adverse events (AEs), and survival.

Results

WBC counts were generally higher in MOX and were dramatically higher than those in CON at the 7^th course of chemotherapy (P=0.008), while grade 1 ANC reduction was dramatically lower than that in CON at the 7^thcourse of chemotherapy (P=0.006). These effects were particularly significant in patients receiving anthracycline-taxane combination regimens. Moreover, MOX had fewer febrile neutropenia than CON (P=0.051). MOX demonstrated a lower incidence of grade 3–4 myelosuppression (P < 0.05). AEs including grade 2–3 severe nausea, various kinds of pains, and vertigo occurred less frequently in MOX (P < 0.05). No difference in survival was observed between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Moxibustion is effective for treating CIM in breast cancer patients during adjuvant chemotherapy, especially for patients receiving high-dose, long-term, and combined chemotherapy regimens. Moxibustion can reduce the incidence of myelosuppression-related SAE and improve the compliance and safety of chemotherapy in breast cancer.

Prescribing patterns from medical chart abstraction of patients administered lipegfilgrastim: a pilot study in Europe

Purpose: The objective of this pilot study was to explore the feasibility of conducting a drug utilization study of lipegfilgrastim in Europe using medical records and to examine the pattern of lipegfilgrastim on-label and off-label use.

Methods: Data on lipegfilgrastim use between September 2014 and April 2017 were abstracted from medical records by two independent medical abstractors. Lipegfilgrastim indication was categorized either as on-label or as one of four types of off-label (I–IV) according to pre-defined criteria. An inter-rater reliability analysis was conducted to measure the degree of abstractor agreement for on-label and off-label use.

Results: Information from 46 medical records was abstracted. Lipegfilgrastim use during the first chemotherapy treatment cycle was mostly indicated for prevention of neutropenia (82.6% of patients). On-label use was documented in 42 patients (91.3%), while off-label use was documented in two patients (4.3%); all events of off-label use were attributed to use with non-cytotoxic drugs. The remaining two patients (4.3%) had missing data. Overall agreement between the abstractors was high (91.6%). For three types (Types I–III) of off-label use, the kappa values suggested a perfect agreement (κ = 1). For Type IV off-label use (use in patients treated with non-cytotoxic drugs), κ = 0, suggesting a poor agreement.

Conclusions: While recruitment was challenging, the results of this pilot study confirm the feasibility and availability of medical records and the use of pharmacists as abstractors to assess on- and off-label use of lipegfilgrastim. Lipegfilgrastim was mainly prescribed according to the approved indications.

Key points

Findings from this pilot study confirm the feasibility and availability of medical records and the use of pharmacists as abstractors to assess on-label and off-label use of lipegfilgrastim in routine clinical practice.

Lipegfilgrastim was mainly prescribed according to the approved indications, and the proportion of off-label use was low.

The high inter-rater agreement between the two abstractors suggests that one abstractor is sufficient for conducting chart abstraction of on- and off-label use.

Additional data abstraction sources other than pharmacists will need to be identified to improve response rate and center recruitment.

Findings from this pilot study are important for the successful planning and execution of subsequent drug utilization studies.

Pegfilgrastim for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients undergoing TAC chemotherapy

Purpose

Primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor can effectively prevent febrile neutropenia (FN) during breast cancer treatment. The aims of this study were to evaluate the incidence of FN and the ANC profile in patients undergoing chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim primary prophylaxis.

Methods

Patients receiving 6 cycles of adjuvant docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC) chemotherapy were included in this study. Pegfilgrastim was administered with analgesics 24 hours after treatment. Laboratory tests were performed on day 0 (before chemotherapy) and ANC was measured daily starting day 5 until it were restored to 1,000/mm³. Bone pain was checked via the numeral rating scale (NRS).

Results

A total of 61 patients and 366 cycles were evaluated. Mean age was 49.2 ± 7.1 years. FN was seen in 5 patients (16.4%) and 12 cycles (3.3%) with pegfilgrastim. Grades 3 and 4 neutropenia was seen in 91.5% of cycles with FN. The ANC nadir was most commonly seen at day 7 and the mean ANC nadir depth was 265.7/m³. Age was negatively correlated with nadir depth (r = −0.137, P = 0.009). Severe pain higher than NRS 7 occurred in less than 20% of patients after the administration of pegfilgrastim.

Conclusion

Incidence of FN was low during the chemotherapy by primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim. The ANC nadir was seen on day 7 after chemotherapy. Bone pain with pegfilgrastim was well tolerated during TAC chemotherapy.

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.

Effect of Nigella sativa seed administration on prevention of febrile neutropenia during chemotherapy among children with brain tumors

PURPOSE

Seeds of Nigella sativa (NS) are used to combat various disease conditions through their antibacterial effects. To evaluate the seeds' potential, we studied their effect on the prevention of febrile neutropenia (FN) in children with brain tumors.

METHODS

A randomized pretest-post-test control group study including 80 children (2-18 years) with brain tumors undergoing chemotherapy were equally allocated into two groups. Intervention group received 5 g of NS seeds daily throughout treatment while controls received nothing. CBC with differentials, incidence of FN, and LOS were noted on each follow-up.

RESULTS

The majority of children 38/40 (95%), of the intervention group, took the seeds for 3-9 consecutive months. Eight out of 372 (2.2%) FN episodes were experienced by children of intervention group compared to controls 63/327 (19.3%) (p = 0.001) and a shorter LOS (median = 2.5 days) vs 5 days in the control group (p = 0.006). Children in both groups belonged to almost same geographical area with similar socio-economic background. Weights of children were almost equal at diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

NS seeds showed a decrease in incidence of FN in children with brain tumors with shortening of subsequent LOS which may improve their outcome and thereby quality of life. Larger scale studies are needed to further evaluate the seeds' potential.

Hematopoietic growth factors in lung cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Most patients affected by lung cancer are treated with chemotherapy, and hence are at risk of myelosuppression. Hematopoietic growth factors have a relevant role in this setting, as they can improve quality of life, reduce the rate of chemotherapy-induced complications and allow the administration of full-dose chemotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most data of hematologic growth factors in lung cancer come from dated publications or large trials involving different malignancies, thus limiting specific information for lung neoplasms. Nonetheless, most studies consistently identified myeloid growth factors as effective on specific end-points such as the duration and severity of neutropenia, or complications such as hospitalizations and febrile neutropenia; on the other hand, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) consistently improved anemia-specific end-points including hemoglobin values, transfusions rate and fatigue, although some specific safety issues characterized this drug class. The most recent international guidelines address these characteristics and include the main indications for hematologic growth factors in solid neoplasms, including lung cancer.

SUMMARY

Myeloid growth factors and ESAs have a relevant role in selected patients undergoing chemotherapy for nonsmall cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. Notably, a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment is required in the specific case of ESAs.

G-CSF use in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) as observed in clinical practice in Italy

Treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) requires chemotherapy regimens with significant risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). For patients at ≥20% FN risk, guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis (PP) with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). This study assessed whether G-CSF use in NHL was in line with recommendations in routine practice. This was a retrospective, observational study of adult NHL patients receiving first-line (R)CHOP-like chemotherapy and G-CSF support between June 2010 and 2012, in Italy. The primary outcome was whether G-CSF was provided as PP, which was defined as G-CSF initiation on days 1-3 after chemotherapy, ≥3 days' use for daily G-CSFs and continued prophylaxis from cycle 1 across all cycles. Secondary prophylaxis was defined as continued prophylaxis from cycle 2 or later, and all other use was defined as Suboptimal. The analysis included 199 patients, 61% of whom had diffuse large B cell lymphoma and 21% follicular lymphoma. (R)CHOP-21 was given to 52% of patients and (R)CHOP-14 to 32%. Overall, 29% of patients received PP, while two-thirds received Suboptimal G-CSF. Of patients receiving daily G-CSF, 3% received PP and 94% received Suboptimal use; with pegfilgrastim, 65% received PP and 26% Suboptimal use. FN occurred in 13 patients (7%) and grade 3/4 neutropenia in 43%. Chemotherapy dose delays occurred in 22% and dose reductions in 18% of patients. Delivery of G-CSF, particularly daily G-CSFs, was not in accordance with guideline or product label recommendations in a large proportion of NHL patients receiving chemotherapy in Italy.

Comparative effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors to prevent febrile neutropenia and related complications in cancer patients in clinical practice: A systematic review

Introduction

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious side-effect of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Several clinical trials and observational studies have evaluated the effects of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) on risk of FN and related complications; however, no systematic reviews have focused on effectiveness in routine clinical practice. Here, we perform a systematic review assessing the comparative effectiveness of prophylaxis with a long-acting G-CSF (pegfilgrastim) versus short-acting G-CSFs (filgrastim, lenograstim, and filgrastim biosimilars) in cancer patients in real-world clinical settings.

Methods

A systematic review was performed based on a pre-specified protocol and was consistent with the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook (2009) and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care (2011). MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published from January 2002 to June 2014. Congress databases (MASCC/ASCO/ESMO) and Google Scholar were searched for abstracts published from January 2012 to August 2014. Filgrastim (NEUPOGEN®), lenograstim and nivestim (a filgrastim biosimilar) were the only short-acting G-CSFs and pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®) was the only long-acting G-CSF described in eligible studies. Outcomes of interest were FN, FN-related hospitalisation and other FN-related complications (death, chemotherapy dose delays and reductions, antimicrobial treatment, severe neutropenia and costs and resource use).

Results

Of 1259 unique records identified, 18 real-world observational studies met predefined inclusion criteria; 15 were retrospective studies, and 3 were prospective studies. Multiple tumour types, chemotherapy regimens and geographical regions were included. Seven studies provided statistical comparisons of the risk of FN; risk of FN among patients receiving prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim versus short-acting G-CSF was significantly lower in three studies, numerically lower in three studies, and numerically higher in one study. Six studies provided statistical comparisons of the risk of FN-related hospitalisation; risk of FN-related hospitalisation among patients receiving prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim versus short-acting G-CSF was significantly lower in all six studies, though some variation was seen in subanalyses. Data for other outcomes were sparse with available results being generally consistent with the results seen for risk of FN and FN-related hospitalisation.

Conclusions

Based on the findings from this review of real-world comparative effectiveness studies, risks of FN and FN-related complications were generally lower for prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim versus prophylaxis with short-acting G-CSFs.