Neutropenia during frontline treatment of advanced Hodgkin lymphoma: Incidence, risk factors, and management

Lower doses of dacarbazine (modified BEACODD) as a safer strategy with equal effectiveness in an intensive treatment protocol of Hodgkin's lymphoma: a preliminary retrospective analysis of a single public center in Brazil

The German Hodgkin Study Group developed the escalated BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone) protocol as a treatment strategy for advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma. In Brazil, as well as in other countries, procarbazine has been replaced with dacarbazine due to the limited availability of procarbazine. The Hematology Center at Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia in São Paulo adopted and modified the escalated BEACOPP protocol, substituting prednisone with dexamethasone and incorporating two different doses of dacarbazine: 375 mg/m2/day on Day 8 or the original dose of 250 mg/m2/day on Days 2 and 3. This adjustment was made in response to the anticipated toxicity profile. This study aimed to compare the two different doses in the protocols (375 mg/m2/cycle versus 500 mg/m2/cycle) administered to patients with advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma in similar periods. This retrospective study analyzed the data of 31 patients at a single center in Brazil from 2019 to 2021. Seventeen of the 31 patients received 500 mg/m2/cycle (500 Group), while 14 received 375 mg/m2/cycle (375 Group). At the end of the protocol, 71% of the patients in the 375 Group and 76% in the 500 Group achieved complete remission. On analyzing the number of cycles that patients presented with febrile neutropenia, the 500 Group had three times more events (17.9%) than the 375 Group (6.09% - p-value = 0.04). In the 500 Group, 47.1% needed to change the protocol to ABVD (doxorubicin hydrochloride, bleomycin sulfate, vinblastine sulfate, and dacarbazine) due to toxicity. In this limited cohort from a single public center in Brazil, the use of 375 mg/m2 of dacarbazine per cycle of the modified escalated BEACOPP protocol emerged as a safer strategy, maintaining treatment efficacy without compromising response in patients with advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma.

An Emergent Change in Epidemiologic and Microbiological Characteristics of Bloodstream Infections in Adults With Febrile Neutropenia Resulting From Chemotherapy for Acute Leukemia and Lymphoma at Reference Centers in Chile, Ecuador, and Peru

Background

Febrile neutropenia is a life-threatening condition commonly observed in patients with hematologic malignancies. The aim of this article is to provide updated knowledge about bloodstream infections in febrile neutropenia episodes within the Andean region of Latin America.

Method

This retrospective study was based in 6 hospitals in Chile, Ecuador, and Peru and included adult patients with acute leukemia or lymphoma and febrile neutropenia between January 2019 and December 2020.

Results

Of the 416 febrile neutropenia episodes, 38.7% had a bloodstream infection, 86% of which were caused by gram-negative rods, with Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa being the most frequently identified bacteria. K pneumoniae isolates were more frequently resistant than E coli to cefotaxime (65% vs 39.6%), piperacillin-tazobactam (56.7% vs 27.1%), and imipenem (35% vs 2.1%) and were more frequently multidrug resistant (61.7% vs 12.5%). Among P aeruginosa, 26.7% were resistant to ceftazidime, piperacillin-tazobactam, and imipenem, and 23.3% were multidrug resistant. Overall 30-day mortality was 19.8%, being higher with vs without a bloodstream infection (26.7% vs 15.3%, P = .005). Fever duration was also significantly longer, as well as periods of neutropenia and length of hospital stay for patients with bloodstream infection. Additionally, the 30-day mortality rate was higher for episodes with inappropriate vs appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy (41.2% vs 26.6%, P = .139).

Conclusions

Considering the high rates of bacteria-resistant infection and 30-day mortality, it is imperative to establish strategies that reduce the frequency of bloodstream infections, increasing early identification of patients at higher risks of multidrug bacteria resistance, and updating existing empirical antibiotic recommendations.

Incidence and non-genetic risk factors of irinotecan-induced severe neutropenia in Chinese adult inpatients

To analyze the incidence and nongenetic risk factors of irinotecan-induced severe neutropenia in the hospital, and provide additional reference and help for clinical treatment. A retrospective analysis of patients who received irinotecan based chemotherapy from May 2014 to May 2019 in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University was conducted. Univariate analysis and binary logistic regression analysis with the forward stepwise method were used to assess the risk factors associated with severe neutropenia induced by irinotecan. Of the 1312 patients treated with irinotecan-based regmines, only 612 patients met the inclusion criteria, and 32 patients developed irinotecan-induced severe neutropenia. In the univariate analysis, variables associated with severe neutropenia were tumor type, tumor stage, and therapeutic regimen. In the multivariate analysis, irinotecan plus lobaplatin, lung cancer or ovarian cancer, tumor stage T2, T3, and T4, were identified as risk factors that contributed independently to irinotecan-induced severe neutropenia (P < .05), respectively. The results showed that the incidence of irinotecan-induced severe neutropenia was 5.23% in the hospital. The risk factors included tumor type (lung cancer or ovarian cancer), tumor stage (T2, T3, and T4) and therapeutic regimen (irinotecan plus lobaplatin). Therefore, for patients with these risk factors, it might be advisable to actively consider optimum management to reduce the occurrence of irinotecan-induced severe neutropenia.

Nurses' knowledge of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and its management: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess nurses' level of knowledge of CIN and its association with socio-demographic factors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey design was used.

RESULTS

Participants had a mean age of 34.1 years (SD = 7.1 years) and were predominantly female (78%) and with a bachelor's degree in nursing (95.6%). The nurses had a moderate level of knowledge about neutropenia and its management (mean total score 16.3 out of 30, SD = 3.7). Those who had a post-graduate degree (P = .048), had received an oncology educational course (P = .011), had attended a course on neutropenia (P = .007), who were working in an oncology unit (P = .002), and had more oncology experience (P = 001) were more likely to have a higher level of knowledge of CIN and its management compared to their other counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of a moderate level of knowledge of CIN among nurses, the findings call for the need for further education and training. As a long-term plan, this might be accomplished by encouraging nurses to pursue post-graduate education or oncology-specialized certification and supporting them with scholarship grants. However, deliberate plans for short courses, training and workshops on oncology or CIN are other choices with a more immediate impact on nurses' knowledge and clinical practice. Finally, integrating oncology nursing education within nursing curricula is urgently needed.

Older patients (aged ≥60 years) with previously untreated advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma: a detailed analysis from the phase III ECHELON-1 study

Effective and tolerable treatments are needed for older patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma. We report results for older patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma treated in the large phase III ECHELON-1 study of frontline brentuximab vedotin plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) versus doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD). Modified progression-free survival per independent review facility for older versus younger patients (aged ≥60 vs. <60 years) was a pre-specified subgroup analysis; as the ECHELON- 1 study was not powered for these analyses, reported P-values are descriptive. Of 1,334 enrolled patients, 186 (14%) were aged ≥60 years (A+AVD: n=84, ABVD: n=102); results below refer to this age group. Modified progression-free survival per independent review facility was similar in the two arms at 24 months (A+AVD: 70.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 58.4-79.4], ABVD: 71.4% [95% CI: 60.5-79.8], hazard ratio (HR)=1.00 [95% CI: 0.58-1.72], P=0.993). After a median follow-up of 60.9 months, 5-year progression-free survival per investigator was 67.1% with A+AVD versus 61.6% with ABVD (HR=0.820 [95% CI: 0.494-1.362], P=0.443). Comparing A+AVD versus ABVD, grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy occurred in 18% versus 3%; any-grade febrile neutropenia in 37% versus 17%; and any-grade pulmonary toxicity in 2% versus 13%, respectively, with three (3%) pulmonary toxicity-related deaths in patients receiving ABVD (none in those receiving A+AVD). Altogether, A+AVD showed overall similar efficacy to ABVD with survival rates in both arms comparing favorably to those of prior series in older patients with advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Compared to ABVD, A+AVD was associated with higher rates of neuropathy and neutropenia, but lower rates of pulmonary-related toxicity. Trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01712490; EudraCT number: 2011-005450-60.

A Risk-Prediction Nomogram for Neutropenia or Febrile Neutropenia after Etoposide-Based Chemotherapy in Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to develop and validate a nomogram for predicting the risk of neutropenia or febrile neutropenia (FN) in tumor patients in the first cycle of etoposide-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used an information system to monitor patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or solid tumors receiving an etoposide regimen in the first chemotherapy cycle in our hospital from 2009 to 2020. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors of patients with neutropenia or FN. Those factors were then used to develop a nomogram.

RESULTS

A total of 1,554 patients were divided into the development group (n = 1,072) and validation group (n = 482). Variables used to predict neutropenia or FN were Karnofsky performance status (odds ratio [OR] = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.81-0.89, p < 0.01), metastatic sites ≥3 (OR = 6.33, 95% CI = 2.66-15.11, p < 0.01), comorbidity of heart disease (OR = 4.88, 95% CI = 1.74-13.67, p < 0.01), recent surgery (OR = 7.96, 95% CI = 1.96-32.36, p < 0.01), administration of alkylating agents (OR = 4.50, 95% CI = 1.10-18.48, p < 0.01), total bilirubin ≥25 μmol/L (OR = 11.42, 95% CI = 4.00-32.61, p < 0.01), and lymphocyte count <0.7 × 109/L (OR = 4.22, 95% CI = 2.00-9.75, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This model can aid the early identification and screening of the potential risk of neutropenia or FN in the first cycle of treatment for patients using etoposide-based chemotherapy.

Should we screen patients with hematologic malignancies for COVID ‐19?

The coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic has posed several challenges to the hematology community to re‐organize the medical care of patients with hematologic malignancies. Whereas the oncology societies favored a more or less conservative approach which considered the possibility of delaying treatment administration on a case‐by‐case basis, the hematology community guidelines were less stringent and recommended adequate individualized regimens. As countries are de‐escalating the lockdown and the medical community is unable to foresee the end of the current outbreak will and whether the pandemic would eventually come back as a seasonal infection, there is interest in screening of patients with hematology malignancies with COVID‐19 instead of limiting access to curative treatments. The rapidly accumulating knowledge about COVID‐19 allows a better understanding of the diagnostic tools that may be potentially used in screening. Herein, we briefly review the pathophysiology of COVID‐19, the rationale of screening of patients with hematologic malignancies, tools for screening, and available guidelines.

PF-06881894, a Proposed Biosimilar to Pegfilgrastim, Versus US-Licensed and EU-Approved Pegfilgrastim Reference Products (Neulasta®): Pharmacodynamics, Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity, and Safety of Single or Multiple Subcutaneous Doses in Healthy Volunteers

Introduction

PF-06881894 is a proposed biosimilar to pegfilgrastim (Neulasta^®). This study evaluated the pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic (PD/PK) equivalence, immunogenicity, and safety of PF-06881894 vs pegfilgrastim reference products (US- and EU-Neulasta^®) in healthy volunteers.

Methods

A phase 1, open-label, randomized, crossover study was conducted to assess the pharmacologic equivalence and safety of a single 6-mg dose of PF-06881894, pegfilgrastim-US, and pegfilgrastim-EU. The primary PD endpoints were area under the effect-versus-time curve for absolute neutrophil count (ANC) from dose administration to 288 h postdose, and maximum observed ANC value among subjects confirmed negative for anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies. Primary PK variables included area under the serum pegfilgrastim-versus-time curve from the time of dose administration to time infinity and maximum observed serum pegfilgrastim concentration. A second phase 1, open-label, randomized (1:1), parallel-group, non-inferiority study was conducted to assess the immunogenicity and safety of multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894 versus pegfilgrastim-US. The primary endpoint for the immunogenicity study was the proportion of subjects with both negative baseline and confirmed positive postdose anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies at any time during the study.

Results

Across the single- and multiple-dose studies (N = 153 and N = 420 treated subjects, respectively), demographics for age (18–65 years), male gender (n = 264/573), and white race (n = 423/573) were similar. Three-way PD/PK equivalence of PF-06881894, pegfilgrastim-US, and pegfilgrastim-EU was demonstrated with the primary PD endpoints and primary PK variables being completely contained within the predefined 90% confidence interval acceptance limits (80–125%). The non-inferiority of PF-06881894 versus pegfilgrastim-US in terms of immunogenicity was established according to the prespecified non-inferiority margin (≤10%). Overall, there were no clinically meaningful differences in safety profiles among or between study groups.

Conclusions

Single-dose PF-06881894 demonstrated PD/PK equivalence and comparable safety with US- and EU-pegfilgrastim reference products. Multiple-dose PF-06881894 demonstrated immunogenicity non-inferiority to pegfilgrastim-US with comparable safety. Both studies contributed to the totality of evidence supporting biosimilarity.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02629289 (C1221001); NCT03273842 (C1221005).

Electronic Supplementary Material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-020-01387-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.