Recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor reduces the infectious complications of cytotoxic chemotherapy

Effect of lithium on chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in Egyptian breast cancer patients; a prospective clinical study

PURPOSE

Myelosuppressive chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) remains a major limitation of cancer treatment efficacy, necessitating very expensive supportive care. Lithium carbonate, an inexpensive drug, can increase the number of neutrophils, possibly providing an efficacious and cost-effective alternative for treating CIN. The aim of this study was to determine whether lithium therapy can attenuate chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and leukopenia in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A total of 50 breast cancer patients were enrolled in this prospective, interventional, randomized, controlled, and single-blind study. The patients were divided into two groups: a control group (group 1, N = 25 patients) and a lithium-treated (treatment) group (group 2, N = 25 patients). Group 1 patients were further subclassified into a non-neutropenic control group (N = 16) and a neutropenic control (N = 9) based on the subsequent development of severe neutropenia, or not. The control group received 4 cycles of doxorubicin or epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by 2 cycles of paclitaxel. The treatment group received the same regimen as the control group as well as oral lithium carbonate throughout the chemotherapy cycles.

RESULTS

The results showed that the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was increased in the lithium-treated group, while it was markedly reduced in both the non-neutropenic and neutropenic control groups (by 55.56% and 65.42% post-4 chemotherapy cycles, and by 19.57% and 39.90% post-6 cycles, respectively). The same pattern of alterations was observed for the total white blood cell count in both the control and treatment groups. In addition, the incidence and period prevalence were greatly reduced in the lithium-treated group compared to non-neutropenic and neutropenic control groups.

CONCLUSION

Lithium therapy ameliorated chemotherapy-induced leukopenia and neutropenia in breast cancer patients. This may provide a new strategy for cost-effective treatment of CIN, particularly in Egyptian cancer patients.

Multi-vesicular Liposome and its Applications: A Novel Chemically Modified Approach for Drug Delivery Application

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to elaborate on all the aspects of multivesicular liposomes, including structure, function, topology, etc. Liposomes are a unique drug delivery system, in which both hydrophilic and hydrophobic drug molecules can be incorporated. Particularly, multivesicular liposomes have more advantages than other liposomes because of their unique structure. This study provides an overview of several works already performed by various researchers in this field. Numerous studies have reported on preparing and evaluating multivesicular liposomes for drug delivery applications. This study summarizes the process of formulating multivesicular liposomes and their application in drug delivery systems and provides details about how to resolve the problem of limited solubility and stability of biomolecules, along with controlled drug release kinetics, with the possibility of loading various drugs. There is no doubt that multivesicular liposome opens new avenues to develop novel drug delivery system for achieving the desired functional performances and expanding the applications in the drug delivery area.

Efficacy and Safety of Filgrastim and Its Biosimilars to Prevent Febrile Neutropenia in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Febrile neutropenia is the serious side-effect associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Filgrastim, the first granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of neutropenia. Subsequently, pegfilgrastim (long-acting G-CSF) and filgrastim biosimilars were developed to have comparable efficacy to filgrastim. Therefore, it is necessary to produce a systematic review and meta-analysis that provides evidence that filgrastim is more efficacious than placebo/no-treatment, as it provides evidence on the comparable efficacy of filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim and biosimilar filgrastim.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to identify, assess, meta-analyze and summarize the comparative effectiveness and safety of filgrastim in head-to-head trials with placebo/no treatment, pegfilgrastim (and biosimilar filgrastim to update advances in the field. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses PRISMA statement were applied, and a random-effect model was used. Primary endpoints were the rate and duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, and an incidence rate of febrile neutropenia. Secondary endpoints were time to absolute neutrophil count ANC recovery, depth of ANC nadir (lowest ANC), neutropenia-related hospitalization and other neutropenia-related complications. For filgrastim versus biosimilar filgrastim comparison, the primary efficacy endpoint was the mean difference in duration of severe neutropenia DSN. Results: A total of 56 studies were considered that included data from 13,058 cancer patients. The risk of febrile neutropenia in filgrastim versus placebo/no treatment was not statistically different. The risk ratio for febrile neutropenia was 0.58, a 42% reduction in favor of filgrastim. The most reported adverse event with FIL was bone pain. For pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim, no statistically significant difference was noted. The risk ratio was 0.90 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.12). The overall difference in duration of severe neutropenia between filgrastim and biosimilar filgrastim was not statistically significant. The risk ratio was 1.03 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.13). Conclusions: Filgrastim was effective and safe in reducing febrile neutropenia and related complications, compared to placebo/no treatment. No notable differences were found between pegfilgrastim and filgrastim in terms of efficacy and safety. However, a similar efficacy profile was observed with FIL and its biosimilars.

Preclinical immunogenicity testing using anti-drug antibody analysis of GX-G3, Fc-fused recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, in rat and monkey models

Human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF, this study used Fc-fused recombinant G-CSF; GX-G3) is an important glycoprotein that stimulates the proliferation of granulocytes and white blood cells. Thus, G-CSF treatment has been considered as a crucial regimen to accelerate recovery from chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in cancer patients suffering from non-myeloid malignancy or acute myeloid leukemia. Despite the therapeutic advantages of G-CSF treatment, an assessment of its immunogenicity must be performed to determine whether the production of anti-G-CSF antibodies causes immune-related disorders. We optimized and validated analytical tools by adopting validation parameters for immunogenicity assessment. Using these validated tools, we analyzed serum samples from rats and monkeys injected subcutaneously with GX-G3 (1, 3 or 10 mg/kg once a week for 4 weeks followed by a 4-week recovery period) to determine immunogenicity response and toxicokinetic parameters with serum concentration of GX-G3. Several rats and monkeys were determined to be positive for anti-GX-G3 antibodies. Moreover, the immunogenicity response of GX-G3 was lower in monkeys than in rats, which was relevant to show less inhibition of toxicokinetic profiles in monkeys, at least 1 mg/kg administrated group, compared to rats. These results suggested the establishment and validation for analyzing anti-GX-G3 antibodies and measurement of serum levels of GX-G3 and anti-GX-G3 antibodies, which was related with toxicokinetic profiles. Taken together, this study provides immunogenicity assessment which is closely implicated with toxicokinetic study of GX-G3 in 4-week repeated administrated toxicological studies.

Pooled Analysis on the Effectiveness and Safety of Lipegfilgrastim in Patients With Urological Malignancies in the Real-World Setting

Lipegfilgrastim is a long-acting glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) approved for the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. In general, there is little information on the use of any G-CSFs specifically in patients with urological malignancies receiving chemotherapy. This report combines information from two prospective non-interventional studies on the prophylactic use of lipegfilgrastim in urological cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the real-world setting. Data were derived from two phase IV studies (NADIR and LEOS) with similar protocols conducted in nine European countries. Analysis included 228 patients (142 prostate, 50 testicular, 27 bladder, and 9 other urological cancers). Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia risk was classified as high (43.0%), intermediate (49.1%), or low (7.5%). Lipegfilgrastim was administered as primary (n=180, 78.9%) or secondary (n=29, 12.7%) prophylaxis. The incidence of febrile neutropenia over all chemotherapy cycles (n=998) and first cycles (n=228) for which lipegfilgrastim was administered for prophylaxis was 2.6% and 1.3%, respectively. Corresponding results for Grade 3/4 neutropenia were 2.2% and 0.9%, respectively. Adverse drug reactions occurred in 24 patients (10.5%): those in more than one patient were bone pain (n=6, 2.6%) and pyrexia (n=3, 1.3%). The use of lipegfilgrastim for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia was effective and well tolerated in patients with urological malignancies in the real-world setting.

Randomized and dose-escalation trials of recombinant human serum albumin /granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in patients with breast cancer receiving anthracycline-containing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human serum albumin /granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHSA/G-CSF) in breast cancer following receipt of cytotoxic agents.

METHODS

The phase 1b trial assessed the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of dose-escalation, ranging from rHSA/G-CSF 1800 μg, 2100 μg, and 2400 μg. Randomized controlled phase 2b trial was further conducted to ensure the comparative efficacy and safety of rHSA/G-CSF 2400 μg and rhG-CSF 5 μg/kg. In multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel, phase 2 study, participants treated with anthracycline-containing chemotherapy were assigned in a ratio 1:1:1 to receive double delivery of rHSA/G-CSF 1200 μg, 1500 μg, and continuous rhG-CSF 5 μg/kg.

RESULTS

Between December 16, 2014, to July 23, 2018, a total of 320 patients were enrolled, including 25 individuals in phase 1b trial, 80 patients in phase 2b trial, and 215 participants in phase 2 study. The mean duration of agranulocytosis during the first chemotherapeutic intermission was observed as 1.14 ± 1.35 days in rHSA/G-CSF 1500 μg, which was comparable with that of 1.07 ± 0.97 days obtained in rhG-CSF control (P = 0.71). Safety profiles were assessed to be acceptable ranging from rHSA/G-CSF 1800 μg to 2400 μg, while the double delivery of HSA/G-CSF 2400 μg failed to meet the noninferiority in comparison with rhG-CSF.

CONCLUSION

The prospective randomized controlled trials demonstrated that rHSA/G-CSF was efficacious and well-tolerated with an approachable frequency and expense of application for prophylactic management of agranulocytosis. The double delivery of rHSA/G-CSF 1500 μg in comparisons with paralleling G-CSF preparations is warranted in the phase 3 trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02465801 (11/17/2014), NCT03246009 (08/08/2017), NCT03251768 (08/07/2017).

Development and Internal Validation of a Nomogram Used to Predict Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

This study was designed to develop a nomogram for predicting neutropenia caused by chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Patients and Methods

Information was collected from 376 patients between November 2017 and November 2020. The endpoint was chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count <2×10⁹/L). Logistic regression was performed to appraise the prognostic value of each potential predictor. Risk predictors from the final predictive model were used to generate a nomogram. C-index and calibration curve as well as decision curve analysis (DCA) was applied to evaluate model performance.

Results

The multivariate regression model ultimately included three predictors: previous radiotherapy, the current cycle of chemotherapy and neutrophil counts before current chemotherapy. A nomogram was developed and displayed better discrimination (with C-index of 0.875 in the development group and 0.907 in the validation group). Favorable consistency was shown between predicted probability and observed probability in the calibration curves. DCA illustrated that when the threshold probability was 8%-90%, the predictive model provided a net benefit relative to the intervention-all or the intervention-none strategy, indicating that the nomogram had favorable potential clinical utility.

Conclusion

This nomogram will be an available tool to quantify the risk of neutropenia after chemotherapy in patients who suffer from NSCLC and deserves further external validation.

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.

Cost-efficiency and expanded access of prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia: economic simulation analysis for the US of conversion from reference pegfilgrastim to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv

AIMS

In this pharmacoeconomic simulation, we: (1) modeled the cost-efficiency of converting patients from reference pegfilgrastim to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia (CIN/FN) from the US payer perspective, (2) simulated how savings enable, on a budget-neutral basis, expanded access to pegfilgrastim-cbqv, and (3) estimated the number-needed-to-convert (NNC) to purchase one additional dose of pegfilgrastim-cbqv.

METHODS

In a hypothetical panel of 20,000 patients, we modeled cost-savings utilizing: two reference formulations (pre-filled syringe [PFS] and on-body injector [OBI]), three medication cost inputs (average sales price [ASP], wholesale acquisition cost [WAC], and an age-proportionate blended ASP/WAC rate), administration cost for injection (PFS) and device application (OBI), conversion rates of 10-100%, and 1-6 cycles of prophylaxis. Cost-savings were used to estimate additional doses of pegfilgrastim-cbqv that could be purchased and the NNC to purchase one additional dose.

RESULTS

Using ASP and 10% conversion from reference OBI to pegfilgrastim-cbqv, savings range from $326,744 (1 cycle) to $2.0M (6 cycles) which could provide 93-556 additional doses of pegfilgrastim-cbqv, respectively; the NNC to purchase one additional dose of pegfilgrastim-cbqv ranges from 21.6 (1 cycle) down to 3.6 patients (6 cycles). The WAC model saves $41.1M per cycle and $246.7M over 6 cycles at 100% conversion from reference PFS which could provide 9,709-58,253 additional pegfilgrastim-cbqv doses; the NNC ranges from 2.1 (1 cycle) to 0.3 (6 cycles). Using the blended ASP/WAC rate, converting 50% from reference OBI to pegfilgrastim-cbqv would save $10.2M per cycle and $60.9M over 6 cycles providing 2,638-15,829 additional doses of pegfilgrastim-cbqv; NNCs are 3.8 (1 cycle) and 0.6 patients (6 cycles).

CONCLUSIONS

Converting 20,000 patients from reference to pegfilgrastim-cbqv over 6 cycles can generate savings up to $246.7M, enough to purchase up to 58,253 additional doses of pegfilgrastim-cbqv. This simulation provides economic justification for prophylaxis with biosimilar pegfilgrastim-cbqv.

Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with metastatic cancer not receiving granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis in US clinical practice

Objectives

To evaluate the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis in US patients with selected metastatic cancers and chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence and associated outcomes among the subgroup who did not receive prophylaxis.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at four US health systems and included adults with metastatic cancer (breast, colorectal, lung, non-Hodgkin lymphoma [NHL]) who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy (2009–2017). Patients were stratified by FN risk level based on risk factors and chemotherapy (low/unclassified risk, intermediate risk without any risk factors, intermediate risk with ≥ 1 risk factor [IR + 1], high risk [HR]). G-CSF use was evaluated among all patients stratified by FN risk, and FN/FN-related outcomes were evaluated among patients who did not receive first-cycle G-CSF prophylaxis.

Results

Among 1457 metastatic cancer patients, 20.5% and 28.1% were classified as HR and IR + 1, respectively. First-cycle G-CSF prophylaxis use was 48.5% among HR patients and 13.9% among IR + 1 patients. In the subgroup not receiving first-cycle G-CSF prophylaxis, FN incidence in cycle 1 was 7.8% for HR patients and 4.8% for IR + 1 patients; during the course, corresponding values were 16.9% and 15.9%. Most (> 90%) FN episodes required hospitalization, and mortality risk ranged from 7.1 to 26.9% across subgroups.

Conclusion

In this retrospective study, the majority of metastatic cancer chemotherapy patients for whom G-CSF prophylaxis is recommended did not receive it; FN incidence in this subgroup was notably high. Patients with elevated FN risk should be carefully identified and managed to ensure appropriate use of supportive care.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-020-05715-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Justification for a Fixed Dose of Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting G-CSF, in Patients Receiving Docetaxel-Cyclophosphamide Chemotherapy

Eflapegrastim (Rolontis) is a long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) produced by conjugating a human G-CSF analogue and a human immunoglobulin G4 Fc fragment, linked via a polyethylene glycol linker. Weight-based doses of 45 to 270 μg/kg eflapegrastim (12.3-73.6 μg/kg as G-CSF) were evaluated in a phase 2 study in patients. Based on these results, a fixed dose of 13.2 mg eflapegrastim (3.6 mg G-CSF) was compared with pegfilgrastim (6 mg G-CSF) in 2 phase 3 studies and in a pharmacokinetic single-arm multicenter study. Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) data from these 3 studies were evaluated in patients with early-stage breast cancer who were treated with docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (n = 669). Serum concentrations of eflapegrastim were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Eflapegrastim systemic exposures were higher in cycle 1 than in cycle 3, likely attributable to the higher ANC in cycle 3, increasing neutrophil-mediated clearance. Eflapegrastim elicited a greater effect on ANC than pegfilgrastim in patients at ∼60% of the G-CSF dose. Body weight had no clinically significant effect on response, justifying administration of a fixed dose of eflapegrastim. The results from 2 phase 3 studies demonstrate that eflapegrastim at a fixed dose of 13.2 mg (3.6 mg G-CSF) administered once per chemotherapy cycle is effective in prophylactic treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

A retrospective analysis of nadir-neutropenia directed pegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia rates in (neo)adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy regimens

BACKGROUND

Pegfilgrastim, a pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating-factor (GCSF), reduces chemotherapy morbidity and mortality in early stage breast cancer. The optimal approach to individual patient selection for GCSF is unknown, in particular whether secondary GCSF should be given after asymptomatic neutropenia, or only after febrile neutropenia (FN).

AIMS

To determine if preplanned nadir blood counts and subsequent nadir-neutropenia directed GCSF was effective to reduce rates of FN associated with (neo)adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. We also aimed to describe (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and GCSF prescribing practices at our institution.

METHODS

This was a retrospective electronic medical record review. The rate of FN with secondary GCSF after cycle 1 nadir-neutropenia <1.0 × 10⁹ cells/L was compared with the rate of FN in patients who did not have cycle 1 nadir blood counts or secondary GCSF, and analyzed according to patient and treatment data.

RESULTS

Between 11/4/2011 and 22/4/2018, 584 patients received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Over all rates of FN were 17%, compared with 9% in patients who received primary GCSF. Rates of FN were highest in docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab (TCH, 27%) and docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC, 27%). There were 268 patients (46%) who received primary GCSF and 238 patients (41%) who received secondary GCSF. Rates of FN did not differ between patients who received nadir-neutropenia directed secondary GCSF (6/125, 5%, 95% CI 1.1-8.6), and those who did not have nadir blood counts or secondary GCSF (0/49, 0%, 95% CI not calculable) (P = .1186). GCSF use was associated with lower rates of non-FN hospital admissions. Patients ≥65 years were more likely to have FN and non-FN admissions. Two of three treatment related deaths occurred due to FN.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, nadir-neutropenia directed secondary GCSF was not associated with reduced rates of FN. Observed rates of FN >20% in TC and TCH in routine clinical practice should guide primary GCSF use in accordance with international guidelines.

Management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with cancer: 2019 guidelines of the Italian Medical Oncology Association (AIOM)

Neutropenia is the most frequent side effect of commercially available myelosuppressive drugs and its most significant complication is febrile neutropenia. It is associated with increased hospital admissions and higher probability of death. Prophylaxis with the administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor can prevent neutropenia caused by anticancer drugs. The correct administration of these drugs and the management of febrile neutropenia are extremely important in the treatment of patients with cancer.

Prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia with colony-stimulating factors: the first 25 years

Filgrastim prophylaxis, both primary and secondary, was rapidly incorporated into clinical practice in the 1990s. When pegfilgrastim became available in 2002, it quickly replaced filgrastim as the colony-stimulating factor (CSF) of choice for prophylaxis. Use of prophylaxis increased markedly in the first decade of this century and has stabilized during the present decade. Data concerning real-world CSF prophylactic practice patterns are limited but suggest that both primary and secondary prophylaxis are common, and that use is frequently inappropriate according to guidelines. The extent of inappropriate use is controversial, as are issues concerning the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis and the cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis versus secondary prophylaxis. Nevertheless, CSF prophylaxis is firmly established as a valuable adjunct to chemotherapy and will almost certainly continue to be widely used for the foreseeable future. In this article, we chronicle the use and impact of CSF prophylaxis in US patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy for non-myeloid malignancies. We emphasize the interplay of expert opinion, clinical evidence, and economic factors in shaping the use of CSFs in clinical practice over time, and, with the recent introduction of new CSF agents and options, we aim to provide useful clinical and economic information for healthcare decision makers.

Efficacy of Jackfruit365™ Green Jackfruit Flour Fortified Diet on Pegfilgrastim to Prevent Chemotherapy-Induced Leukopenia, Irrespective of Tumor Type or Drugs Used-A Retrospective Study

Chemotherapy-Induced Leukopenia (CIL) is associated with increased mortality and economic burden on patients. This study was conducted to evaluate whether inclusion of green jackfruit flour in regular diet of those patients receiving chemotherapy, could prevent CIL. This was a retrospective study conducted among a group of patients undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumors at Renai Medicity Hospital, Palarivattom, Cochin, Kerala, India, since June 2018. The study group comprised of 50 consecutive subjects, who were supplemented with green jackfruit flour diet in their regular diet and further followed up prospectively. The control group was retrospective with 50 subjects prior to June 2018, with no diet supplements. Those who received less than three cycles were excluded from either arm. The mean age of the participants in study group and control group were 53.16 ± 11.06 and 56.96 ± 12.16 years respectively. In the study group, six patients out of 37, and 20 patients out of 50 in the control group, developed CIL. They received 38 and 105 vials of filgrastim respectively. After excluding those cycles in study group patients, where green jackfruit flour was not taken, the mean number of cycles in which CIL developed (p = 0.00) and number of vials of filgrastim taken per cycle (p = 0.00) were significantly different from control group and no patient in the study group developed CIL. Inclusion of green jackfruit flour as a dietary intervention prevents chemotherapy-induced leukopenia in patients undergoing chemotherapy along with pegfilgrastim.

Clinical role of filgrastim in the management of patients at risk of prolonged severe neutropenia: An evidence-based review

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing chemotherapy are at risk of toxicity, especially of haematological origin. Granulocyte depletion, although often underestimated, can lead to the occurrence of an event defined as febrile neutropenia (FN). Neutropenic fever syndromes are dangerous because they cause major complications in around 25%-30% of patients and have a mortality rate of up to 11%. Treatment for FN was limited to antibiotics and supportive therapies until filgrastim was approved for use in the 1990s.

OBJECTIVES

The present systematic review focuses on the efficacy and safety of this haematopoietic growth factor.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

For this review, a systematic literature search of electronic databases and references from recent reviews up to December 2018 was carried out to identify clinical trials, observational studies and case reports evaluating filgrastim efficacy and safety. English language was defined as a restriction. Published randomised controlled trials (RCTs), case reports and reviews analysing the effects of filgrastim on severe neutropenia and its limits were considered. Four review authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted study data.

RESULTS

As reported in ASCO guidelines, the efficacy of filgrastim with respect to placebo or no treatment in RCTs is based on its prevention of FN. A recent meta-analysis analysed nine RCTs with 2197 patients, revealing a reduction in the incidence of FN with filgrastim (risk ratio [RR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.53-0.75). These findings were further confirmed in two observational studies. Bone pain is the most commonly reported adverse event with filgrastim, while other toxicities are associated with filgrastim efficacy and with an increased neutrophil count.

KEY FINDINGS

In conclusion, our findings attest to the previous results on the efficacy and safety of filgrastim.

Efficacy and tolerability of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in cancer patients after chemotherapy: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

The optimum granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) treatment for cancer patients after being treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy remains unknown. Therefore, a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of 11 G-CSF drugs on patients after chemotherapy. A total of 73 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) containing 15,124 cancer patients were included for the final network meta-analysis. Compared with pegfilgrastim, there were a higher risk with filgrastim for incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) (OR [95% CI]: 1.63 [1.07, 2.46]), and a higher risk with short-acting G-CSF (S-G-CSF) biosimilar and lenograstim for incidence of bone pain (BP) (OR [95% CI]: 6.45 [1.10, 65.73], 5.12 [1.14, 26.12], respectively). Mecapegfilgrastim, lipegfilgrastim and balugrastim were best G-CSF drugs in reducing FN (cumulative probabilities: 58%, 15%, 11%, respectively). S-G-CSF biosimilar, empegfilgrastim, and long-acting G-CSF (L-G-CSF) biosimilar were best G-CSF drugs in reducing severe neutropenia (SN) (cumulative probabilities: 21%, 20%, 15%, respectively). Mecapegfilgrastim, balugrastim, lipegfilgrastim and L-G-CSF biosimilar were best G-CSF drugs in reducing BP (cumulative probabilities: 20%, 14%, 8%, 8%, respectively). Mecapegfilgrastim, lipegfilgrastim and balugrastim might be the most appreciate G-CSF drugs with both good efficacy and tolerability when treating cancer patients after cytotoxic chemotherapy.

Strategies to generate functionally normal neutrophils to reduce infection and infection-related mortality in cancer chemotherapy

Neutrophils form an essential part of innate immunity against infection. Cancer chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CCIN) is a condition in which the number of neutrophils in a patient's bloodstream is decreased, leading to increased susceptibility to infection. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) has been the only approved treatment for CCIN over two decades. To date, CCIN-related infection and mortality remain a significant concern, as neutrophils generated in response to administered GCSF are functionally immature and cannot effectively fight infection. This review summarizes the molecular regulatory mechanisms of neutrophil granulocytic differentiation and innate immunity development, dissects the biology of GCSF in myeloid expansion, highlights the shortcomings of GCSF in CCIN treatment, updates the recent advance of a selective retinoid agonist that promotes neutrophil granulocytic differentiation, and evaluates the benefits of developing GCSF biosimilars to increase access to GCSF biologics versus seeking a new mode to fundamentally advance GCSF therapy for treatment of CCIN.

Review of oncological emergencies in small animal patients

Oncological emergencies can occur at any time during the course of a malignancy and need to be recognized promptly to maximize successful outcomes. Emergencies are characterized as chemotherapy-induced, paraneoplastic syndromes, or directly related to the neoplasm. Prompt identification with treatment of these emergencies can prolong survival and improve quality of life, even in the setting of terminal illness. This review aims to educate the reader on the pathophysiology, clinical presentation and treatment of some of these emergencies, and to review the current veterinary literature to help educate veterinarians in primary and tertiary facilities to know how to diagnose and treat these serious conditions.

A Novel Paradigm Between Leukocytosis, G-CSF Secretion, Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio, Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells, and Prognosis in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Leukocytosis is a common feature of malignancies. While controversial, there appears to be an association between the degree of tumor-related leukocytosis and prognosis. In this paper, we provide evidence supporting an untapped clinical paradigm linking G-CSF secretion to the induction of leukocytosis and expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells, providing an explanation for the association between leukocytosis, elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios and prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer. Clinically validating this mechanism may identify MDSCs and G-CSF as dynamic markers of early disease progression and therapeutic response, and shed light onto novel therapeutic avenues for the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia after receipt of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in older patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), which are used for the prevention of complications from chemotherapy-related neutropenia, are linked to the risk of developing second primary myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The objective of this study was to examine the correlation between using a specific G-CSF agent and the risk of MDS/AML among older patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adults aged >65 years who were diagnosed with first primary NHL between 2001 and 2011. With data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-linked database, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for the risk of MDS/AML associated with the receipt of G-CSF(filgrastim and pegfilgrastim) in Cox proportional-hazards models, which were stratified according to treatment accounting for confounding by indication.

RESULTS

Among 18,245 patients with NHL patients who had a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 56% received chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, and G-CSF was most commonly used in those who received rituximab plus multiple chemotherapy regimens (77%). Subsequent MDS/AML diagnoses were identified in 666 patients (3.7%). A modest increased risk of MDS/AML was observed with the receipt of G-CSF (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.62) and a trend was observed with increasing doses (Ptrend < .01). When specific agents were analyzed, an increased risk of MDS/AML was consistently observed with filgrastim (≥10 doses: HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.25-2.23), but not with pegfilgrastim (≥10 + doses: HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.84-1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

A higher of MDS/AML was observed in patients with NHL risk among those who received G-CSF that was specific to the use of filgrastim (≥10 doses), but not pegfilgrastim. Neutropenia prophylaxis is an essential component of highly effective NHL treatment regimens. The differential risk related to the types of G-CSF agents used warrants further study given their increasing use and newly available, US Food and Drug Administration-approved, biosimilar products.

Filgrastim prophylaxis in elderly cancer patients in the real-life setting: a French multicenter observational study, the TULIP study

Purpose

Few studies are currently available among elderly patients, justifying the need for better understanding of daily medical practices in terms of use of growth factors to prevent chemotherapy (CT)-induced neutropenia. The primary objective of this study was to describe the use of filgrastim in the elderly.

Methods

Cancer patients aged 65 years and above, undergoing CT and initiating a prophylactic treatment with filgrastim, were enrolled. Patients were followed according to routine medical practice from filgrastim initiation until the end of the CT or after a maximum of 6 cycles.

Results

One thousand one hundred nineteen evaluable patients were documented in the study (mean age 73.9 ± 6.2 years, 52.1% men). The majority were suffering from solid tumor (73%) with ECOG 0–1 for 80% of them. Approximately two-third had a global risk for FN ≥ 20%, and one third < 20%. Through all CT cycles, no differences were observed between age classes ([65–74], [75–85], or > 85) in dose, duration, and time to first injection from CT start. Most patients (84%) received primary prophylaxis (PP) and 70% were administered during the first CT cycle. The median time from CT start until filgrastim was 4 days. The median duration of filgrastim treatment was 5 days. Dose reductions and CT delays were less frequent in patients receiving PP (4.8% and 7.1% respectively) than secondary prophylaxis (9.2% and 13.3% respectively).

Conclusions

Filgrastim use was consistent with French Market Authorization terms. No difference was shown compared with younger patients. Safety data were consistent with the known safety profile.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-019-04725-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient-Administered Biologic and Biosimilar Filgrastim May Offer More Affordable Options for Patients with Nonmyeloid Malignancies Receiving Chemotherapy in the United States: A Budget Impact Analysis from the Payer Perspective

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are often administered to reduce the incidence, severity, and duration of febrile neutropenia (FN) in chemotherapy patients. Tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz represent a follow-on biologic and a biosimilar version, respectively, of the short-acting G-CSF filgrastim with comparable efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the budget impact of increasing use of patient-(home-) administered tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz from a U.S. payer perspective.

METHODS

An interactive budget impact model was developed to estimate the changes in drug cost associated with projected increases in the market share of tbo-filgrastim from 5% to 10% and of filgrastim-sndz from 10% to 12% (with a corresponding decrease in filgrastim market share from 85% to 78%) for a 1 million-member health plan among patients with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving chemotherapy with a high risk of FN. Patient self-administration at home was assumed for 20% of patients receiving short-acting G-CSF treatment; all products were purchased through the patient's pharmacy benefit and were assumed to have tier 3 formulary status with a patient copay of $54 per prescription. Base-case data were derived from publicly available resources. The total plan budget impact was calculated using a 1-year time horizon, along with the differences in per member per month and per member per year (PMPY) costs between the current and future scenarios.

RESULTS

The effective annual per-patient drug cost to the plan totaled between $16,961 and $27,199, depending on dosage and packaging, for tbo-filgrastim; between $16,216 and $26,015 for filgrastim-sndz; and between $19,134 and $30,663 for filgrastim. The estimated total annual plan cost associated with patient-administered short-acting G-CSFs was $53,298,217 (PMPY = $53.30) in the current scenario and $52,828,832 (PMPY = $52.82) in the future scenario. Cost savings totaled $469,385 (PMPY = $0.48). The model was most sensitive to changes in the percentage of patients self-administering G-CSF at home and to the wholesale acquisition cost for filgrastim.

CONCLUSIONS

The effective annual plan per-patient drug costs for tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz were 11% and 15% lower than filgrastim, respectively. The present analysis estimated an annual U.S. health plan cost savings approaching $0.5 million following increases in market shares of approximately 5% for tbo-filgrastim and 2% for filgrastim-sndz.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R & D, which participated in the study design, data interpretation and analysis, the writing of the report, and the decision to submit. Aventine Consulting received consulting fees from Teva Pharmaceuticals and developed the cost model and provided data analysis support. Trautman and James are employed by Aventine Consulting. Szabo and Tang are employed by Teva Pharmaceuticals.

The Role of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (Filgrastim) in Maintaining Dose Intensity during Conventional-Dose Chemotherapy with Abvd in Hodgkin's Disease

Background

The aim of the study was to evaluate the role and potential benefit of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF, Filgrastim), administered following cytotoxic chemotherapy with the ABVD regimen in Hodgkin's disease, in maintaining cycle schedule and dose intensity and in decreasing neutropenia and number of infections.

Patients and Methods

Twenty-two patients affected by high-risk Hodgkin's disease (14 localized and 8 diffuse), aged 15 to 69 years (median, 34), were given ABVD chemotherapy for a total of 6 courses (for the purpose of this study, each single course of chemotherapy was considered as two 15-day periods). No patient was given G-CSF after the first cycle. After each cycle, G-CSF was administered only for: 1) absolute neutrophil count < 1 × 109/L between cycles; 2) delay in cycle schedule due to an absolute neutrophil count < 1 × 109/L on the planned day of treatment; or 3) fever or a documented infection, regardless the absolute neutrophil count. Once administered, G-CSF was maintained in the subsequent cycles.

Results

Seventeen of 22 patients (77%) required the administration of G-CSF (5 μg/kg b.w.; a median of 5 doses/cycle); most of them (13/17) before the 5th dose of chemotherapy. The main reason for introducing G-CSF into therapy was neutropenia during the interval between courses (n = 4) or on the planned day of treatment (n = 11). Comparing 112 courses where G-CSF was not administered with 124 where it was, in the latter group we observed: 1) a significantly lower (P = 0.0002) incidence of cycle delays (0 vs 13), with a median delay of 7 days (5 to 11). The main reason for cycle delay was neutropenia (n = 13); 2) a greater dose intensity delivered to the patients while on G-CSF (100% vs 95.2±8.8%; P = 0.0001); 3) an absolute neutrophil count significantly higher at day 8 (P<0.0001) and day 15 (P< 0.0001); 4) a significantly lower (P = 0.0003) incidence of neutropenia (2 vs. 17). No difference in the incidence of infections was observed between the two groups of cycles (P = 0.5889), but the duration and severity of the same were greater during chemotherapy without G-CSF, requiring antibiotic therapy and causing cycle delay.

Conclusions

In conclusion, our data suggest the use of Filgrastim in Hodgkin's disease also during conventional-dose chemotherapy with ABVD. It is not required from the first dose of therapy, but as soon as neutropenia appears between cycles or on the planned day of treatment. Then, its use allows maintenance of the chemotherapy schedule and dose intensity. It also decreases frequency, duration and severity of neutropenia and its sequelae.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and respiratory status of critically ill neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies

In patients with hematologic malignancies, respiratory status may deteriorate during neutropenia recovery. This multicenter, observational study aims to evaluate granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) impact on respiratory status in critically ill neutropenic patients. Among 1011 critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies, 288 were neutropenic and included in this study. 201 (70%) did not receive G-CSF at day 1 or 2. After propensity score matching for the probability of receiving G-CSF at day 1 or 2, there was no association between G-CSF and respiratory deterioration at day 14 (OR =1.19; 95%CI (0.57-2.51); p = .64). Additional sensitivity analysis in patients admitted for acute respiratory failure showed similar results (OR =1.34; 95%CI (0.5-3.59); p = .57). Among patients who recovered from neutropenia, 75% experienced respiratory deterioration during neutropenia recovery. This study confirms that neutropenia recovery is a situation at risk of respiratory deterioration. However, whether G-CSF is an aggravating factor cannot be supported by our results.

Pretherapeutic Inflammation Predicts Febrile Neutropenia and Reduced Progression-Free Survival after First-Line Chemotherapy in SCLC

BACKGROUND

Despite initial response to chemotherapy, the prognosis of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients is limited. Following first-line therapy, the strongest predictor of durable progression-free survival (PFS) is remission quality. Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a frequent complication after chemotherapy, and its prevention could improve treatment density and degree of remission.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 39 SCLC patients treated at a German tertiary care lung cancer center between 2013 and 2016. We extracted data sets from electronic records and analyzed anthropometric data, pretherapeutic blood values, and prognostic scores. Discriminant analysis was performed to predict FN.

RESULTS

PFS after first-line chemotherapy was significantly shorter in patients with FN (p = 0.003). Pretherapeutic albumin (p = 0.019), C-reactive protein (CRP; p < 0.001), lactate dehydrogenase (p = 0.041), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.009), prognostic nutritional index (p = 0.018), and Glasgow prognostic score (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with FN. CRP in combination with absolute neutrophil count is a strong predictor of FN (positive predictive value 79.8%).

CONCLUSION

SCLC patients with FN after chemotherapy showed significantly reduced PFS. Prevention of FN may improve treatment results. We identified pretherapeutic markers which can predict FN risk. This simple and cost-effective method could serve to identify the need for preventive measures against FN (e.g., prophylactic antibiotic treatment or granulocyte colony stimulating factor administration).

Cost-Effectiveness of Pegfilgrastim versus Six Days of Filgrastim for Preventing Febrile Neutropenia in Breast Cancer Patients

Aims and background

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a major complication of chemotherapy and is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality and costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim versus six-day filgrastim in preventing FN in Italian patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy associated with a ≥20% FN risk.

Methods

The pharmacoeconomic evaluation was based on a decision-analytic model taking into account the possible consequences of FN (e.g., death and reduction/delay of chemotherapy dose). Parameters included in the model were relative risk of FN with pegfilgrastim versus six-day filgrastim; direct costs (drug purchase and FN-related hospitalizations); relative risk of relative dose intensity <85% with pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim; impact on long-term survival due to relative dose intensity <85%; and impact of age on FN and relative dose intensity <85%.

Results

Under base-case assumptions, pegfilgrastim was cost-effective compared to six-day filgrastim in Italy. The estimated cost, life expectancy and quality-adjusted life years per person for pegfilgrastim were € 3078, 16.47 years, and 15.32; the corresponding figures for six-day filgrastim were € 3033, 16.35 years, and 15.22. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with pegfilgrastim was € 409 per life-year gained and € 429 per quality-adjusted life year gained. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the results were most sensitive to the relative risk of FN for 6-day filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim. The results were moderately sensitive to the cost of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim, cost of drug administration, cost of FN hospitalization, and number of chemotherapy cycles. Pegfilgrastim remained cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio well below the accepted limit of € 50,000 per life year gained in all one-way sensitivity analyses. A two-way sensitivity analysis on cost of drugs showed a range of pegfilgrastim dominance over six-day filgrastim.

Conclusions

At the current official price in Italy, primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim improved health outcomes with a very limited cost increase for the National Health Service payer. Even when very low prices of filgrastim and high prices of pegfilgrastim were considered in the model, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained well within the acceptable cost-effectiveness limit of € 50,000/quality-adjusted life year.

Home administration of filgrastim (Nivestim™) in primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia

BACKGROUND

The granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) biosimilar filgrastim (Nivestim™) reduces the duration and severity of neutropenia and the frequency of occurrence of febrile neutropenia (FN). Administration of this biosimilar filgrastim and the patient population receiving it at home have not been sufficiently documented in day-to-day medical practice. Insight into home administration may help optimize the management of FN in this setting, potentially at a reduced cost and patient burden vs hospital administration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, non-interventional, non-comparative, multisite study involving 171 patients across 29 sites treated with at least one dose of filgrastim. Mean age was 59.3 years, and most patients were female and G-CSF-naïve. The data collected originated from paper-based patient questionnaires and routine documentation by the treating physicians. The primary endpoint was the characterization of patients treated with filgrastim. Secondary endpoints were satisfaction with filgrastim, effectiveness, safety and tolerability, and compliance with prescription.

RESULTS

Most patients had solid tumors (95.9%), mainly located in the breast, while 4.7% had malignant hematological disease. Solid tumors were recorded as grade 1 (7.9%), grade 2 (28.0%), grade 3 (45.7%), and grade 4 (3.0%), and the majority of patients classified at TNM Stages I and II. Many patients (71.0%) could self-inject filgrastim and 72.2% found the handling instructions "extremely straightforward and easy to understand" at least once. Nearly all (99.4%) patients found the syringes "easy to use" at least once and 91.7% were willing to continue home administration. The mean patient satisfaction score for home administration was 1.9±0.9, ranging from 1 (very satisfied) to 6 (absolutely dissatisfied). No cases of neutropenia were observed and only one event of FN occurred.

CONCLUSION

Home-based prophylaxis for FN with filgrastim was found to be effective, well tolerated, and well received by patients (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02956967).

A systematic literature review of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of filgrastim

Purpose

Filgrastim (NEUPOGEN^®) is the originator recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor widely used for preventing neutropenia-related infections and mobilizing hematopoietic stem cells. This report presents findings of a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of originator filgrastim to update previous reports.

Methods

A literature search of electronic databases, congress abstracts, and bibliographies of recent reviews was conducted to identify English-language reports of clinical trials and observational studies evaluating filgrastim in its US-approved indications up to February 2015. Two independent reviewers assessed titles/abstracts and full texts of publications, and extracted data from studies that compared originator filgrastim vs placebo or no treatment. For outcomes with sufficient homogeneous data reported across studies, meta-analysis was performed and relative risk (RR) determined. Data were summarized descriptively for all other evaluated outcomes.

Results

A total of 1194 unique articles evaluating originator filgrastim were identified, with 25 meeting eligibility criteria for data extraction: 18 randomized controlled trials, 2 nonrandomized clinical trials, and 5 observational studies. In chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN), filgrastim vs placebo or no treatment significantly reduced febrile neutropenia incidence (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53–0.75) and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia incidence (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37–0.68). The most commonly reported adverse event (AE) with filgrastim was bone pain (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.29–5.27 in CIN). Additional efficacy and safety outcomes are described within indications.

Conclusions

This systematic literature review and meta-analysis confirms and updates previous reports on the efficacy and safety of originator filgrastim. Bone pain was the commonly reported AE associated with filgrastim use.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-017-3854-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Lipegfilgrastim Compared to Pegfilgrastim for the Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Patients with Stage II-IV Breast Cancer

Background: Lipegfilgrastim (Lonquex®) has demonstrated to be non-inferior to pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®) in reducing the duration of severe neutropenia (SN) in patients with stage II-IV breast cancer. Compared to pegfilgrastim, lipegfilgrastim also demonstrated statistically significant lower time to ANC recovery in cycles 1-3, lower incidence of SN in cycle 2 and lower depth of absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir in cycles 2 and 3. The aim of this study was to quantify the cost utility of lipegfilgrastim compared to pegfilgrastim in stage II-IV breast cancer patients, taking the perspective of the Belgian payer over a lifetime horizon. Methods: Two Markov models were developed to track on- and post-chemotherapy related complications, including SN, febrile neutropenia (FN), chemotherapy dose delay, chemotherapy relative dose intensity of less than 85%, infection, death rates, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Data on costs (2015 value) and effects were obtained from literature, national references, and complemented by a survey of clinical experts using a modified Delphi method. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out. Outcomes measures included costs, QALYs and life-years (LY). Results: At current equivalent price of €1,169, treatment with lipegfilgrastim was associated with overall costs of €9,845 vs. €10,208 for pegfilgrastim and overall QALYs of 13.977 vs. 13.925 for pegfilgrastim. Life expectancy was increased by 21 days (or 0.058 LY gained). The difference in costs stem from avoided infection, SN and FN cases in the lipegfilgrastim compared to the pegfilgrastim group. Similarly, the difference in QALYs was explained by the difference in the number of patients in the chemotherapy/G-CSF Markov state followed by infection and FN between lipegfilgrastim and pegfilgrastim. The probability of lipegfilgrastim to be cost-effective compared to pegfilgrastim was 68, 79, and 83% at the willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP) of €10,000, €30,000 and €50,000 per QALY gained, respectively. At a WTP threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained, lipegfilgrastim was cost-effective up to €1,500 across all age bands and cancer stages, compared to the current price. Conclusions: Lipegfilgrastim is a cost-effective use of health care resources in patients with stage II-IV breast cancer.

Evidence-Based Use of Colony-Stimulating Factors in Elderly Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Neutropenia and its complications represent the major dose-limiting toxicity of cancer chemotherapy, especially in the elderly. Hematopoietic growth factors have been shown to reduce the severity and duration of febrile neutropenia (FN) and to sustain chemotherapy dose intensity.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken of studies of the relationship between age and the risk of neutropenia and its complications. Recent studies of the "Awareness of Neutropenia in Chemotherapy Study Group" related to the impact of age on neutropenic complications are also summarized.

RESULTS

The risk of FN associated with standard regimens increases with age and appears to be greatest during the first cycle of chemotherapy. FN continues to have a considerable clinical, economic, and quality-of-life impact on affected individuals. The risk of mortality associated with hospitalization with FN also increases with age but is largely associated with the higher rate of comorbidities observed in the elderly population. Despite increasing evidence that elderly patients experience similar benefit from cancer chemotherapy, reductions in dose intensity often compromise response rates and long-term survival. The hematopoietic growth factors reduce the risk of neutropenic events and the need for reduced dose intensity in elderly cancer patients. Primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) reduces the risk of FN and its complications in elderly patients receiving moderately intensive systemic chemotherapy for responsive malignancies. CSFs also appear to reduce cost and improve quality of life in selected elderly patients receiving chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary prophylaxis with CSFs should be considered in elderly patients with responsive and potentially curable malignancies who receive moderately intensive chemotherapy.

Meta-analysis and indirect treatment comparison of lipegfilgrastim with pegfilgrastim and filgrastim for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia-related events

Background

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are effective at reducing the risk and duration of neutropenia. The current meta-analysis compared the neutropenia-related efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim to those of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim.

Methods

Embase was searched for trials examining the efficacy/safety of lipegfilgrastim, pegfilgrastim, or filgrastim. Outcomes included febrile neutropenia, severe neutropenia, duration of severe neutropenia, time to recovery of absolute neutrophil count, and incidence of bone pain. Direct comparisons were made using random-effects models. No trials directly compared lipegfilgrastim and filgrastim. Indirect comparisons were made between lipegfilgrastim and filgrastim with pegfilgrastim as the common comparator.

Results

This meta-analysis included a total of 5769 patients from 24 studies. Over all cycles, lipegfilgrastim showed a lower, nonsignificant risk of febrile neutropenia compared with pegfilgrastim. Lipegfilgrastim has a lower risk of febrile neutropenia versus filgrastim but was also not statistically significant. The risk ratio for severe neutropenia in cycle 1 was 0.80, a 20% reduction in favor of lipegfilgrastim. For cycles 2–4, the risk ratio was 0.53 (0.35, 0.79) for lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim. The risk of severe neutropenia in cycles 2–4 was also significantly lower for lipegfilgrastim (risk ratio 0.45, 0.27, 0.75, respectively). No significant differences were found for febrile neutropenia and severe neutropenia in cycle 1. However, in cycles 2–4, lipegfilgrastim was associated with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in risk of severe neutropenia versus either pegfilgrastim or filgrastim.

Conclusions

Compared with pegfilgrastim or filgrastim, lipegfilgrastim has a statistically significantly lower absolute neutrophil count recovery time; however, differences in duration of severe neutropenia and bone pain were nonsignificant.

Towards Quantitative Systems Pharmacology Models of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia

Neutropenia is a serious toxic complication of chemotherapeutic treatment. For years, mathematical models have been developed to better predict hematological outcomes during chemotherapy in both the traditional pharmaceutical sciences and mathematical biology disciplines. An increasing number of quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) models that combine systems approaches, physiology, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics have been successfully developed. Here, I detail the shift towards QSP efforts, emphasizing the importance of incorporating systems-level physiological considerations in pharmacometrics.

Predicting neutropenia risk in patients with cancer using electronic data

OBJECTIVES

Clinical guidelines recommending the use of myeloid growth factors are largely based on the prescribed chemotherapy regimen. The guidelines suggest that oncologists consider patient-specific characteristics when prescribing granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis; however, a mechanism to quantify individual patient risk is lacking. Readily available electronic health record (EHR) data can provide patient-specific information needed for individualized neutropenia risk estimation. An evidence-based, individualized neutropenia risk estimation algorithm has been developed. This study evaluated the automated extraction of EHR chemotherapy treatment data and externally validated the neutropenia risk prediction model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort of adult patients with newly diagnosed breast, colorectal, lung, lymphoid, or ovarian cancer who received the first cycle of a cytotoxic chemotherapy regimen from 2008 to 2013 were recruited from a single cancer clinic. Electronically extracted EHR chemotherapy treatment data were validated by chart review. Neutropenia risk stratification was conducted and risk model performance was assessed using calibration and discrimination.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy treatment data electronically extracted from the EHR were verified by chart review. The neutropenia risk prediction tool classified 126 patients (57%) as being low risk for febrile neutropenia, 44 (20%) as intermediate risk, and 51 (23%) as high risk. The model was well calibrated (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test = 0.24). Discrimination was adequate and slightly less than in the original internal validation (c-statistic 0.75 vs 0.81).

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy treatment data were electronically extracted from the EHR successfully. The individualized neutropenia risk prediction model performed well in our retrospective external cohort.

Effect of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on outcomes in patients with non-M3 acute myelogenous leukemia treated with anthracycline-based induction (7+3 regimen) chemotherapies

We analyzed the effects of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on outcomes in 315 anthracycline-based induction chemotherapy-treated patients with non-M3 acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). Patients were classified as follows: no G-CSF administration during induction (no G-CSF group; 112 patients); administration immediately upon neutropenia onset (absolute neutrophil counts (ANC)<1000/μL), but before febrile neutropenia (preemptive group; 74 patients); and administration following febrile neutropenia development (therapeutic group; 129 patients). G-CSF users had a shorter time to ANC recovery than the no G-CSF group (p<0.001). The chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (CIFN) duration was significantly shorter in the preemptive group than in other groups (p<0.001). The incidence of CIFN was not significantly different between preemptive and non-G-CSF users (84.8% versus 82.4%). Preemptive G-CSF administration modestly improved treatment-related mortality (TRM), compared with no G-CSF administration (p=0.076 in multivariate analysis). G-CSF administration did not affect relapse-free or overall survivals or the cumulative relapse incidence among the groups. In conclusion, preemptive G-CSF administration reduced CIFN duration and modestly improved TRM without affecting chemotherapy outcomes. These effects were not observed in the therapeutic group; therefore, initiation of G-CSF during induction therapy before the development of febrile neutropenia may be desirable.

Am80-GCSF synergizes myeloid expansion and differentiation to generate functional neutrophils that reduce neutropenia-associated infection and mortality

Neutrophils generated by granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor (GCSF) are functionally immature and, consequently, cannot effectively reduce infection and infection‐related mortality in cancer chemotherapy‐induced neutropenia (CCIN). Am80, a retinoic acid (RA) agonist that enhances granulocytic differentiation by selectively activating transcription factor RA receptor alpha (RARα), alternatively promotes RA‐target gene expression. We found that in normal and malignant primary human hematopoietic specimens, Am80‐GCSF combination coordinated proliferation with differentiation to develop complement receptor‐3 (CR3)‐dependent neutrophil innate immunity, through altering transcription of RA‐target genes RARβ_2,C/EBPε, CD66,CD11b, and CD18. This led to generation of functional neutrophils capable of fighting infection, whereas neutralizing neutrophil innate immunity with anti‐CD18 antibody abolished neutrophil bactericidal activities induced by Am80‐GCSF. Further, Am80‐GCSF synergy was evaluated using six different dose‐schedule‐infection mouse CCIN models. The data demonstrated that during “emergency” granulopoiesis in CCIN mice undergoing transient systemic intravenous bacterial infection, Am80 effect on differentiating granulocytic precursors synergized with GCSF‐dependent myeloid expansion, resulting in large amounts of functional neutrophils that reduced infection. Importantly, extensive survival tests covering a full cycle of mouse CCIN with perpetual systemic intravenous bacterial infection proved that without causing myeloid overexpansion, Am80‐GCSF generated sufficient numbers of functional neutrophils that significantly reduced infection‐related mortality in CCIN mice. These findings reveal a differential mechanism for generating functional neutrophils to reduce CCIN‐associated infection and mortality, providing a rationale for future therapeutic approaches.

Compatibility of Biosimilar Filgrastim with Cytotoxic Chemotherapy during the Treatment of Malignant Diseases (VENICE): A Prospective, Multicenter, Non-Interventional, Longitudinal Study

Introduction

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious and frequent complication of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Biosimilar filgrastim (Nivestim™, Hospira Inc, A Pfizer Company, Lake Forest, IL, USA) is a granulocyte-colony stimulating factor licensed for the treatment of neutropenia and FN induced by myelosuppressive chemotherapy. The primary goal of this VENICE study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01627990) was to observe the tolerability, safety and efficacy of biosimilar filgrastim in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy.

Methods

This was a prospective, multicenter, non-interventional, longitudinal study. Consenting adult patients with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies for whom cytotoxic chemotherapy and treatment with biosimilar filgrastim was planned were enrolled.

Results

Among the enrolled patients (N = 386), 81% were female, with a median age (range) of 61 (22–92) years, with 39% >65 years old. Most patients (n = 338; 88%) had solid tumors and the remainder (n = 49; 13%) had hematological malignancies. The majority of the patients (64%) received biosimilar filgrastim as primary prophylaxis and 36% as secondary prophylaxis. At the follow-up visits, for the majority of patients (95.6%) there had been no change in chemotherapy dose due to FN. For two patients (0.5%) the chemotherapy was discontinued due to FN and for four patients (1.0%) the chemotherapy dose was reduced due to FN. For the majority of patients (96.9%) the chemotherapy cycle following the first biosimilar filgrastim treatment was not delayed due to FN. For 3 patients (0.8%), the chemotherapy was delayed following the first biosimilar filgrastim treatment. Less than one-third (29.8%) of the patients experienced ≥1 adverse event that was at least potentially related to biosimilar filgrastim treatment.

Conclusions

Biosimilar filgrastim was effective and well-tolerated in both the primary and secondary prophylactic setting in patients undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumors and hematological malignancies.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01627990.

Funding

Hospira Inc, A Pfizer Company, Lake Forest, IL, USA.

Burden of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia Hospitalizations in US Clinical Practice, by Use and Patterns of Prophylaxis with Colony-Stimulating Factor

INTRODUCTION

Evidence suggests that many cancer chemotherapy patients who are candidates for colony-stimulating factor (CSF) prophylaxis do not receive it or receive it inconsistent with guidelines, and that such patients have a higher risk of febrile neutropenia hospitalization (FNH). Little is known about the number and consequences of FNH by use/patterns of CSF prophylaxis in US clinical practice.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort design and private healthcare claims data were employed. Study population comprised adults who received a chemotherapy course with a high-risk regimen, or an intermediate-risk regimen (if ≥1 FN risk factor present), for non-metastatic breast cancer or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL); each chemotherapy cycle within the course and each FNH episode within the cycles were identified. Consequences included mortality, inpatient days, and costs (US$2013) during FNH. Use (yes/no) and patterns (agent, administration day/duration) of CSF prophylaxis were evaluated within cycles in which FNH episodes occurred.

RESULTS

Among all FNH episodes (n=6,355; 109 episodes per 1,000 patients), 41.3% (95% CI: 40.1-42.5) occurred among patients who did not receive CSF prophylaxis in that cycle, and 8.8% (8.1-9.5) occurred among those who received CSF prophylaxis on the same day as chemotherapy. Among FNH episodes occurring in patients who received daily CSF agents (2% of CSF use), 56.1% (44.1-68.0) received prophylaxis <7 days during the cycle. Results for FNH consequences were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective evaluation, one-half of FNH episodes, outcomes, and costs among cancer chemotherapy patients who were candidates for CSF prophylaxis occurred in those who either did not receive it or received it inconsistent with guidelines.

Is pegfilgrastim appropriate for the treatment of established febrile neutropenia?

Objective. To report a case where both pegfilgrastim and filgrastim were considered in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in a hospitalized patient and assess the most cost-effective option.

Case summary. A 77-year-old white female was diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma of the anus and adjuvant chemotherapy was ordered. She subsequently developed Grade 4 neutropenia, a wound infection and her Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status declined to 4. Antibiotics were started and growth factor therapy was considered as part of her treatment. Filgrastim 480 g subcutaneously every day was chosen and her absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovered after seven days of therapy.

Discussion. This case illustrates the potential cost benefits of using filgrastim over pegfilgrastim in hospitalized patients. The choice of filgrastim in our patient resulted in only seven days of filgrastim therapy at a cost of $2205.70. A 6 mg dose of pegfilgrastim is priced similarly to 10 days of filgrastim 480 g, therefore a cost savings of $744.01 was realized in our patient.

Conclusions. Filgrastim is the most appropriate growth factor for the treatment of established high-risk febrile neutropenia given that the ANC can be monitored on a daily basis and therapy can be discontinued upon recovery.

Predictors for chemotherapy-related severe or febrile neutropenia: a review of the clinical literature

Purpose. This paper summarizes a literature review of the risk factors and predictors for chemo-therapy-related severe or febrile neutropenia (grades 3 and 4). It explores the extent to which the literature supports the current ASCO guidelines, and assesses the feasibility of developing a predictive algorithm for patients who would benefit from rHuG-CSF (Neupogen).

Methods. An electronic literature search for English articles and abstracts identified 718 abstracts for review. From these, 121 articles were reviewed in depth. The review captured risk factors and predictors for grade 3-4 and/or febrile neutropenia, study design, patient characteristics, chemotherapy treatment, and the incidence of grade 3-4 and/or febrile neutropenia.

Results. Twenty-eight potential risk factors and predictors for severe or febrile neutropenia among cancer patients were identified and could be classified as patient-related, treatment-related, or disease-related characteristics. Some results were inconsistent across studies due to a lack of standardized methods of assessment and reporting. Approximately 1/3 of the factors were mentioned in more than one study and provided information on the statistical significance of findings. Several factors had cross-study support of their value and confirmed previous findings. Strong predictors of severe/febrile neutropenia included advanced age, performance status, myelosuppressive chemotherapy regimen, early low blood counts, the depth of the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir, and a precipitous, early drop in blood counts of all hematopoietic cell types.

Conclusions. This literature review identified several key predictors and risk factors for development of grades 3 and 4 neutropenia in cancer patients. While additional confirmation is needed, there is sufficient consistency in the literature to support use of risk factors to identify patients who may need supportive care. Some of these risk factors were included in the ASCO CSF guidelines for the use of prophylactic support such as G-CSF; however, the ASCO publications have not included other important risk factors, such as age and early reduced ANC levels.

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.

Pharmaceutical care and the cancer patient

Purpose. The primary objective of this paper is to discuss pharmaceutical care of the oncology patient in the context of recent recommendations made by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) and recent changes in Health Care Reform.

Data Sources. We reviewed the literature through a MEDLINE search from 1985 to 1995. We searched the following terms: pharmaceutical care, cancer, patient, and pharmacist. We restricted the search to the English language. We also have incor porated several of our practice guidelines as examples of tools that can be used in the implementation of pharmaceutical care. We also focused on areas that the JCAHO guidelines specify as important pharma ceutical care issues in the cancer patient.

Data Extraction. Within the framework of drug prescribing, drug administration, drug monitoring, and patient education, we have provided interven tions that may potentially improve outcomes in can cer patients.

Data Synthesis. The advent of managed care will require that the pharmacist be more involved in the care and management of the cancer patient. This activity will necessitate that the pharmacist document the impact of interventions on patient outcomes. Although tumor response and survival are classic outcomes that are assessed in the cancer patient, other outcome indicators may be used to evaluate interventions made by the pharmacist.

Conclusions. This review offers strategies for implementing pharmaceutical care in the cancer pa tient. Because we did not present study results on patient outcomes, it is unknown which of these proposed pharmacist interventions are important fac tors in the implementation of pharmaceutical care in this patient population. Although pharmaceutical care is the new paradigm in pharmacy practice, we must perform prospective studies to determine its value to the cancer community.

Evaluation of the Hematologic Safety of Same Day Versus Standard Administration (24- to 72-Hour Delay) of Pegfilgrastim in Gynecology Oncology Patients Undergoing Cytotoxic Chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the safety and efficacy of administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day compared with standard administration 24 to 72 hours after chemotherapy in patients with gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on patients undergoing pegfilgrastim to mitigate the myelosuppressive consequences of chemotherapy. The primary outcome was incidence of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia following pegfilgrastim for same-day administration (D1) versus standard administration (D2+). Secondary outcomes included dose delay, regimen change, hospitalization due to neutropenia, and incidence of febrile neutropenia.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty-one patients with 2071 administrations of pegfilgrastim were included. Five hundred six administrations of pegfilgrastim were given on D1 compared with 1565 administrations on D2+. The most common malignancy was ovarian cancer (79.1%), followed by endometrial (14.5%). Comparing the D1 and D2+ cohorts, noninferiority was not established for the incidence of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (2.6% vs 1.8%, adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.6; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-3.2) or dose modification (6.5% vs 4.9%; aRR, 1.3; 90% CI, 0.9-1.8). However, the rate of treatment delays (7.3% vs 9.4%; aRR, 0.8; 90% CI, 0.6-1.1) in the D1 and D2+ groups suggested that delays in the D1 group were not more common than in the D2+ group.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of hematologic toxicities and dose modification in patients receiving same-day pegfilgrastim were not as low as in those undergoing standard administration. However, treatment delays were found to be no more frequent in those receiving same-day pegfilgrastim versus standard administration. Same-day administration of pegfilgrastim is a reasonable option.

Trajectory of absolute neutrophil counts in patients treated with pegfilgrastim on the day of chemotherapy versus the day after chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Risk of infection increases with severity and duration of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN). Pegfilgrastim is approved for use on the day after chemotherapy to reduce incidence of infection, as manifested by febrile neutropenia (FN), in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. In this study, we compared severity and duration of absolute neutrophil count (ANC) suppression in patients who received pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy versus the next day.

METHODS

We combined individual patient data from four Amgen-sponsored clinical trials in which patients with cancer were randomized to receive pegfilgrastim either the same day as chemotherapy or the next day. Severity and duration of ANC suppression were calculated using area over the curve (AOC, the area over the ANC-time response curve and below a given clinical threshold). AOC of ANC and incidences of CIN and FN were compared by day of pegfilgrastim use.

RESULTS

The analysis included 95 same-day patients and 97 next-day patients. Despite similar ANC at baseline, ANC at nadir was higher among next-day patients than same-day patients. Mean AOC of ANC (cutoff 0.5 × 10(9)/L) among next-day patients was lower by 0.30 (95 % confidence interval: 0.16, 0.43) 10(9)/L × day than same-day patients in cycle 1. Next-day patients had lower incidences of CIN than same-day patients, but there were no significant differences in incidences of FN.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received pegfilgrastim the day after chemotherapy had less severe and shorter suppression of ANC than patients who received pegfilgrastim the same day as chemotherapy.

Lipegfilgrastim in the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia of cancer patients

Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) are frequent and potentially fatal toxicities of myelosuppressive anticancer treatments. The introduction of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) in clinical practice has remarkably reduced the duration and severity of neutropenia, as well as the incidence of FN, thus allowing the administration of chemotherapeutic agents at the optimal dose and time with lower risk. The current scenario of G-CSFs in Europe includes filgrastim, lenograstim, some G-CSF biosimilars, and pegfilgrastim. Recently, a novel long-acting G-CSF, lipegfilgrastim, became available. Lipegfilgrastim is a glycopegylated G-CSF, alternative to pegfilgrastim, and has shown in randomized trials, to be equivalent to pegfilgrastim in reducing the incidence of severe neutropenia and FN in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, with a similar safety profile. Furthermore, lipegfilgrastim was more effective than the placebo in reducing the incidence of severe neutropenia, its duration, and time to absolute neutrophil count recovery, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving myelosuppressive therapy. Although the number of studies currently published is still limited, lipegfilgrastim seems to be a promising drug in the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.