Side effects of using granulocyte-colony stimulating factors as prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients: A systematic review

Qijiao Shengbai Capsule alleviated leukopenia by interfering leukotriene pathway: Integrated network study of multi-omics

BACKGROUND

Leukopenia could be induced by chemotherapy, which leads to bone marrow suppression and even affects the therapeutic progression of cancer. Qijiao Shengbai Capsule (QSC) has been used for the treatment of leukopenia in clinic, but its bioactive components and mechanisms have not yet been elucidated clearly.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to elucidate the molecular mechanisms of QSC in treating leukopenia.

STUDY DESIGN

Serum pharmacochemistry, multi-omics, network pharmacology, and validation experiment were combined to study the effect of QSC in murine leukopenia model.

METHODS

First, UPLC-QTOF-MS was used to clarify the absorbed components of QSC. Then, cyclophosphamide (CTX) was used to induce mice model with leukopenia, and the therapeutic efficacy of QSC was assessed by an integrative approach of multi-omics and network pharmacology strategy. Finally, molecular mechanisms and potential therapeutic targets were identified by validated experiments.

RESULTS

121 compounds absorbed in vivo were identified. QSC significantly increase the count of white blood cells (WBCs) in peripheral blood of leukopenia mice with 15 days treatment. Multi-omics and network pharmacology revealed that leukotriene pathway and MAPK signaling pathway played crucial roles during the treatment of leukopenia with QSC. Six targets (ALOX5, LTB4R, CYSLTR1, FOS, JUN, IL-1β) and 13 prototype compounds were supposed to be the key targets and potential active components, respectively. The validation experiment further confirmed that QSC could effectively inhibit the inflammatory response induced by leukopenia. The inhibitors of ALOX5 activity can significantly increase the number of WBCs in leukopenia mice. Molecular docking of ALOX5 suggested that calycosin, daidzein, and medicarpin were the potentially active compounds of QSC.

CONCLUSION

Leukotriene pathway was found for the first time to be a key role in the development of leukopenia, and ALOX5 was conformed as the potential target. QSC may inhibit the inflammatory response and interfere the leukotriene pathway, it is able to improve hematopoiesis and achieve therapeutic effects in the mice with leukopenia.

The impact of myelosuppression on quality of life of patients treated with chemotherapy

Side effects from chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression can negatively affect patients' quality of life (QoL). Neutropenia increases infection risk, and anemia frequently results in debilitating fatigue. Additionally, the bleeding risk associated with thrombocytopenia can lead to fear and anxiety. However, traditional interventions for myelosuppression fall short of the ideal. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors reduce the risk of severe neutropenia but commonly lead to bone pain. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents are not always effective and may cause thromboembolic events, while transfusions to correct anemia/thrombocytopenia are associated with transfusion reactions and volume overload. Trilaciclib, which is approved for reducing myelosuppression in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer, together with several investigational agents in development for managing myelosuppression have the potential to improve QoL for patients on chemotherapy.

Pentavalent Antimony Associated with G-CSF in the Treatment of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Caused by Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL), caused by Leishmania braziliensis, in recent decades has shown decreasing cure rates after treatment with meglumine antimoniate (MA). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a cytokine associated with epithelialization and healing processes.

METHODS

This study compares the effectiveness of G-CSF associated with MA in the treatment of CL. A total of 32 patients aged between 18 and 50 years with CL confirmed for L. braziliensis were included in this study. G-CSF or placebo (0.9% saline) was applied by intralesional infiltration at four equidistant points on the edges of the largest ulcer on days 0 and 15 of treatment associated with intravenous MA.

RESULTS

Males predominated in the G-CSF group (59%), while females predominated in the control group (53%). Injuries to the lower limbs predominated in both study groups. The cure rate in the G-CSF group was 65% and in the control group it was 47%, 90 days after initiation of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that the association of G-CSF with MA is not superior to MA monotherapy. Although not significant, the potential benefit of this combination deserves further investigation. The use of higher doses or other routes of application of G-CSF in a greater number of patients should contribute to a definitive response.

[Neutropenia - when is GCSF support indicated?]

Many systemic treatments used in genitourinary oncology negatively affect haematopoiesis, thus leading to neutropenia. Neutropenic patients are vulnerable to bacterial, and other infections. Often fever is the only symptom in these patients. Neutropenic fever is a major threat for these patients, as it may lead to life-threatening therapy complications that significantly impair the patient's quality of life, Moreover, it may also worsen the prognosis due to therapy delays or necessary dose modifications. Granulocyte colony stimulating factors (GCSF), which can improve neutrophil granulocyte formation, are used both for supportive treatment in febrile neutropenia and for its prophylaxis. The correct indication for such GCSF support depends on the general risk of febrile neutropenia of the therapy used, as well as on individual patient factors and the treatment intent (palliative vs. curative). Based on the current recommendations both of the German and international guidelines, this article aims to provide an up-to-date and practice-oriented overview of the use of GCSF in uro-oncology.

Cell-of-origin effect of polatuzumab vedotin in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: no ordinary subgroup analysis

ABSTRACT

Subgroup analysis from the POLARIX trial of polatuzumab vedotin plus chemotherapy for untreated large B-cell lymphoma suggests greater efficacy among patients with activated B-cell subtype disease. Both preclinical and additional clinical evidence support this interaction between cell-of-origin and polatuzumab efficacy.

Cost-effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for the prevention of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with cancer

PURPOSE

Clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of all approved granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), including filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in patients receiving high- or intermediate-risk regimens (in those with additional patient risk factors). Previous studies have examined G-CSF cost-effectiveness by cancer type in patients with a high baseline risk of FN. This study evaluated patients with breast cancer (BC), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) receiving therapy who were at intermediate risk for FN and compared primary prophylaxis (PP) and secondary prophylaxis (SP) using biosimilar filgrastim or biosimilar pegfilgrastim in Austria, France, and Germany.

METHODS

A Markov cycle tree-based model was constructed to evaluate PP versus SP in patients with BC, NSCLC, or NHL receiving therapy over a lifetime horizon. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a range of willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds for incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses evaluated uncertainty.

RESULTS

Results demonstrated that using biosimilar filgrastim as PP compared to SP resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) well below the most commonly accepted WTP threshold of €30,000. Across all three countries, PP in NSCLC had the lowest cost per QALY, and in France, PP was both cheaper and more effective than SP. Similar results were found using biosimilar pegfilgrastim, with ICERs generally higher than those for filgrastim.

CONCLUSIONS

Biosimilar filgrastim and pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis are cost-effective approaches to avoid FN events in patients with BC, NSCLC, or NHL at intermediate risk for FN in Austria, France, and Germany.

Combination lurbinectedin and doxorubicin versus physician's choice of chemotherapy in patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (ATLANTIS): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Lurbinectedin is a synthetic marine-derived anticancer agent that acts as a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription. Lurbinectedin monotherapy (3·2 mg/m² every 3 weeks) received accelerated approval from the US Food and Drug Administration on the basis of efficacy in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) who relapsed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The ATLANTIS trial assessed the efficacy and safety of combination lurbinectedin and the anthracycline doxorubicin as second-line treatment for SCLC.

METHODS

In this phase 3, open-label, randomised study, adult patients aged 18 years or older with SCLC who relapsed after platinum-based chemotherapy were recruited from 135 hospitals across North America, South America, Europe, and the Middle East. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by dynamic allocation to intravenous lurbinectedin 2·0 mg/m² plus doxorubicin 40·0 mg/m² administered on day 1 of 21-day cycles or physician's choice of control therapy (intravenous topotecan 1·5 mg/m² on days 1-5 of 21-day cycles; or intravenous cyclophosphamide 1000 mg/m², doxorubicin 45·0 mg/m², and vincristine 2·0 mg on day 1 of 21-day cycles [CAV]) administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary granulocyte-colony stimulating factor prophylaxis was mandatory in both treatment groups. Neither patients nor clinicians were masked to treatment allocation, but the independent review committee, which assessed outcomes, was masked to patients' treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02566993, and with EudraCT, 2015-001641-89, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 30, 2016, and Aug 20, 2018, 613 patients were randomly assigned to lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin (n=307) or control (topotecan, n=127; CAV, n=179) and comprised the intention-to-treat population; safety endpoints were assessed in patients who had received any partial or complete study treatment infusions (lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin, n=303; control, n=289). After a median follow-up of 24·1 months (95% CI 21·7-26·3), 303 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group and 289 patients in the control group had discontinued study treatment; progressive disease was the most common reason for discontinuation (213 [70%] patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group vs 152 [53%] in the control group). Median overall survival was 8·6 months (95% CI 7·1-9·4) in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group versus 7·6 months (6·6-8·2) in the control group (stratified log-rank p=0·90; hazard ratio 0·97 [95% CI 0·82-1·15], p=0·70). 12 patients died because of treatment-related adverse events: two (<1%) of 303 in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group and ten (3%) of 289 in the control group. 296 (98%) of 303 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group had treatment-emergent adverse events compared with 284 (98%) of 289 patients in the control group; treatment-related adverse events occurred in 268 (88%) patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group and 266 (92%) patients in the control group. Grade 3 or worse haematological adverse events were less frequent in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group than the control group (anaemia, 57 [19%] of 302 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group vs 110 [38%] of 288 in the control group; neutropenia, 112 [37%] vs 200 [69%]; thrombocytopenia, 42 [14%] vs 90 [31%]). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation was lower in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group than in the control group (26 [9%] of 303 patients in the lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin group vs 47 [16%] of 289 in the control group).

INTERPRETATION

Combination therapy with lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin did not improve overall survival versus control in patients with relapsed SCLC. However, lurbinectedin plus doxorubicin showed a favourable haematological safety profile compared with control.

FUNDING

PharmaMar.

Effectiveness of cell- and colony stimulating factor-based therapy for liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AIMS

Cirrhosis is the 11th leading cause of death worldwide. Because of the limitations of liver transplantation, cell- and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)-based therapies are considered potential treatment methods. This work analyzes the effectiveness of cell- and G-CSF-based therapies by network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in four databases from inception to September 10, 2021. Registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating cell-based therapies and/or G-CSF-based therapies for cirrhosis patients were included. Traditional and network meta-analyses were analyzed in terms of survival, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, alanine aminotransferase levels and aspartate aminotransferase levels.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included in this analysis. The results showed that G-CSF-based therapies (odds ratio [OR], 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-3.79, P < 0.01) and cell-based therapies (OR, 1.54, 95% CI, 1.00-2.40, P = 0.048) improved the transplantation-free survival rate compared with standard medical treatment. Network analysis results showed that G-CSF combined with erythropoietin (EPO) and growth hormone (GH) had a therapeutic advantage, and cell-based therapy with mononuclear cell (MNC) hepatic artery injection and intravenous mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) combined with G-CSF also had a relative advantage in terms of survival outcome. For the MELD score, G-CSF plus GH and MSC portal vein injection had relative advantages. G-CSF plus GH and G-CSF plus EPO had advantages in terms of CTP scores. The included strategies demonstrated no obvious improvement in liver injury indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Cell-based therapy has potential therapeutic effects for liver cirrhosis. Among cell-based therapies, intravenous MSCs and hepatic artery injection of MNCs have advantageous therapeutic effects. The use of G-CSF was also noted in regimens that improved survival outcomes. However, more well-designed, large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm this conclusion.

Real-world evaluation of supportive care using an electronic health record text-mining tool: G-CSF use in breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) is a life-threatening and chemotherapy dose-limiting adverse event. FN can be prevented with granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs). Guidelines recommend primary G-CSF use for patients receiving either high (> 20%) FN risk (HR) chemotherapy, or intermediate (10-20%) FN risk (IR) chemotherapy if the overall risk with additional patient-related risk factors exceeds 20%. In this study, we applied an EHR text-mining tool for real-world G-CSF treatment evaluation in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients receiving IR or HR chemotherapy treatments between January 2015 and February 2021 at LUMC, the Netherlands, were included. We retrospectively collected data from EHR with a text-mining tool and assessed G-CSF use, risk factors, and the FN and neutropenia (grades 3-4) and incidence.

RESULTS

A total of 190 female patients were included, who received 77 HR and 113 IR treatments. In 88.3% of the HR regimens, G-CSF was administered; 7.3% of these patients developed FN vs. 33.3% without G-CSF. Although most IR regimen patients had ≥ 2 risk factors, only 4% received G-CSF, of which none developed neutropenia. However, without G-CSF, 11.9% developed FN and 31.2% severe neutropenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Our text-mining study shows high G-CSF use among HR regimen patients, and low use among IR regimen patients, although most had ≥ 2 risk factors. Therefore, current practice is not completely in accordance with the guidelines. This shows the need for increased awareness and clarity regarding risk factors. Also, text-mining can effectively be implemented for the evaluation of patient care.

Long-term patient reported outcomes and hematologic toxicity among patients who received Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factors during chemotherapy for early breast cancer

We assessed long-term associations of Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factors (G-CSF) use with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and hematologic toxicity among chemotherapy-treated, early-stage breast cancer patients in CANTO (NCT01993498). Among 2920 patients longitudinally followed-up until year-4 after diagnosis, 49% used G-CSF. In multivariable-adjusted mixed-models, EORTC QLQ-C30 pain and summary score were not substantially different between groups (overall adjusted mean difference, use vs no-use [95%CI]: +1.27 [-0.33 to +2.87] and -1.01 [-1.98 to -0.04], respectively). PROs were slightly worse at year-4 among patients receiving G-CSF, although differences were of trivial clinical significance. No major differences were observed in leukocyte or platelet count over time.