Long-term survival data from a phase 3 study of Filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in adults with de novo acute myeloid leukemia

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.

Comparison of Long-Acting G-CSF (PD-Lasta) with Short-Acting G-CSF (PD-Grastim) in Neutrophil Recovery Following Consolidation Chemotherapy with High-Dose Cytarabine in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients are often neutropenic as a result of their disease alone or following their chemotherapy. In this randomized clinical trial the efficacy of Iranian short-acting (PD-Grastim) and long-acting G-CSF (PD-Lasta) were compared in term of time to recovery from neutropenia in de novo AML patients following the consolidation chemotherapy.

Materials andMethods: Patients (n = 51) received one or two courses of Cytarabine and Daunorubicin as an induction. If complete remission was achieved, the treatment was followed by high-dose Cytarabine as consolidation chemotherapy. Twenty- four hours after the consolidation chemotherapy, patient were randomized to receive either daily short-acting G-CSF (PD-Grastim) (300 µg/kg) or single-dose long-acting G-CSF (PD-Lasta) (6 mg).

Results: The median time to recovery of neutrophils was 11.00 and 13.00 days for short-acting G-CSF (PD-Grastim) (n=22) and long-acting G-CSF (PD-Lasta) (n=29) groups, respectively (U=186.5, P>0.05 two-tailed). Incidence of adverse effects was similar in both short-acting G-CSF (PD-Grastim) and long-acting G-CSF (PD-Lasta) groups.

Conclusion: Overall, data show that Iranian long-acting G-CSF (PD-Lasta) was not significantly different with Iranian short-acting G-CSF (PD-Grastim).

Efficacy and cost-benefit of filgrastim administered after early assessment bone marrow biopsy during induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia

The role of filgrastim during acute myeloid leukemia (AML) induction therapy remains controversial. At our institution, newly diagnosed AML patients from 2003 through 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were stratified on whether they received filgrastim within 5 days after early assessment bone marrow (BMBx) and divided into early GCSF group (eGCSF) and no-eGCSF group. A total of 121 patients were included. We found significantly shorter hospital stay (median 24 vs 26 days, p < .01), absolute neutrophil count recovery days (median 23 vs 25 days, p = .03), and intravenous antibiotics days (mean 18.5 vs 21.4 days, p = .01) in patients with eGCSF comparing with no-eGCSF. There was no significant difference regarding complete response rates; however, for those failed to achieve remission, eGCSF was associated with higher blast count. There was no significant difference regarding overall survival or progression-free survival. The use of eGCSF was associated with cost savings of $5199 per patient over no-eGCSF.

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.

Relationship between PK/PD of Cefepime and Clinical Outcome in Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Normal Renal Function

The efficacy of cefepime (CFPM) is known to depend on the ratio of the time that the serum levels exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) to the dosing interval (%T>MIC). The objective of this study was to clarify the relation between %T>MIC and clinical outcome of CFPM, and to identify the optimal dosage regimen. We investigated the outcome of CFPM treatment for febrile neutropenia (FN) patients with normal renal function. Treatment success was defined as the completion of FN therapy with CFPM only. And we calculated %T>MIC for each case based on population pharmacokinetic parameters. The MIC value for simulation was set as 8 μg/mL. In logistic regression analysis, treatment success was significantly associated with the elevation of %T>MIC in the group with persistent neutropenia, yielding a receiver operating characteristic curve with an optimal cutoff value of 73.1%. Next, we simulated %T>MIC for each case under various dosing regimens. For patients whose creatinine clearance (CLcr) exceeded 100 mL/min, it was found to be difficult to attain the objective under the current regimen. In contrast, it was calculated that treatment with 2 g three times a day (t.i.d.) could attain the objective for most of the patients with 3 h of infusion. These results suggest that CFPM treatment under the current regimen is ineffective for FN patients with normal or augmented renal function, and that 2 g t.i.d. is necessary in quite a lot cases, although such use is off-label.

Colony-stimulating factors for prevention and treatment of infectious complications in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia

BACKGROUND

Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) is a fatal bone marrow cancer. Colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are frequently administered during and after chemotherapy to reduce complications. However, their safety with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in AML is unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of CSFs on patient outcomes, including survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety/efficacy of CSFs with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in patients with AML.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search strategy. We identified relevant randomized clinical trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 7), MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2010), LILACS (up to December 2009), databases of ongoing trials and relevant conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared the addition of CSFs during and following chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in patients with AML. We excluded trials evaluating the role of CSFs administered for the purpose of stem cell collection and/or priming (e.g. before and/or only for the duration of chemotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. For each trial, we expressed results as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We analyzed time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HRs).

MAIN RESULTS

The search yielded 19 trials including 5256 patients. The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy yielded no difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days and at the end of follow up (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.18 and RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05, respectively) or in overall survival (HR 1.00; 95% 0.93 to 1.08). There was no difference in complete remission rates (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.07), relapse rates (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05) and disease-free survival (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.13). CSFs did not decrease the occurrence of bacteremias (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12), nor the occurrence of invasive fungal infections (RR 1.40; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.19). CSFs marginally increased adverse events requiring discontinuation of CSFs as compared to the control arm (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In summary, colony-stimulating factors should not be given routinely to acute myelogenous leukemia patients post-chemotherapy since they do not affect overall survival or infectious parameters including the rate of bacteremias and invasive fungal infections.

The Safety Profile of Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim

The discovery of endogenous proteins that regulate hematopoiesis led to the identification of human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). With the advent of recombinant DNA technology, it became possible to manufacture bioactive recombinant proteins for medicinal use. Since the approval of recombinant human G-CSF (rHuG-CSF), such as filgrastim in 1991 and pegfilgrastim in 2002, millions of patients at risk for severe myelosuppression have received these products. Overall, filgrastim and pegfilgrastim have a high margin of safety for short-term use; however, rare severe adverse events have emerged and questions remain regarding the long-term safety and consequences of use of these products. This chapter primarily focuses on the safety and adverse event profile of the most widely used commercially available rHuG-CSF, Neupogen (filgrastim) and Neulasta [a modified (pegylated) filgrastim, pegfilgrastim]. As safety information can change rapidly, we suggest readers consult the latest package inserts for any changes that have occurred from the time of this writing. Other chapters in this volume discuss key studies in specific disease settings in greater detail than is the purview of this chapter, and we encourage the interested reader to reference them for further information.

Colony-stimulating factors for prevention and treatment of infectious complications in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia

BACKGROUND

Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) is a fatal bone marrow cancer. Colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are frequently administered during and after chemotherapy to reduce complications. However, their safety with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in AML is unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of CSFs on patient outcomes, including survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety/efficacy of CSFs with regard to disease-related outcomes and survival in patients with AML.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted a comprehensive search strategy. We identified relevant randomized clinical trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 7), MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2010), LILACS (up to December 2009), databases of ongoing trials and relevant conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared the addition of CSFs during and following chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in patients with AML. We excluded trials evaluating the role of CSFs administered for the purpose of stem cell collection and/or priming (e.g. before and/or only for the duration of chemotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. For each trial, we expressed results as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We analyzed time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HRs).

MAIN RESULTS

The search yielded 19 trials including 5256 patients. The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy yielded no difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days and at the end of follow up (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.18 and RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05, respectively) or in overall survival(HR 1.00; 95% 0.93 to 1.08). There was no difference in complete remission rates(RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.07), relapse rates(RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05) and disease-free survival(HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.13). CSFs did not decrease the occurrence of bacteremias(RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12), nor the occurrence of invasive fungal infections(RR 1.40; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.19). CSFs marginally increased adverse events requiring discontinuation of CSFs as compared to the control arm(RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.56).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of CSFs to chemotherapy does not adversely influence all-cause mortality, complete remission or relapse rates in patients with AML. Although the benefit of CSFs is limited to reduction of neutropenic and febrile days, they can be administered safely when necessary.

Levels of care: defining best supportive care in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia

This article reviews published data on best supportive care (BSC) in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and proposes improvements in defining this critical aspect of treatment. A clinical challenge is to prospectively identify patients who could benefit from existing therapies and to optimize their treatment tolerance by improving BSC. Advanced age and poor performance status consistently emerge as reliable indicators of poor outcome in older AML patients and have historically been the most important variables used to stratify treatment. Performance status is notoriously difficult to assess, and a "snapshot" view at the time of initial presentation can be misleading. Comorbidity scales may be a better predictor of outcome, but studies looking at their effectiveness are variable. New methods are needed to stratify patients. Although the prognosis of older AML patients is generally dismal, selected patients benefit from treatment and can have prolonged survival. Because it has never been shown that BSC as a sole therapeutic approach is kinder, less expensive, or better for older AML patients, it should be reserved for select clinical situations.

Randomized placebo-controlled trial of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) as supportive care after induction chemotherapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a study of the United Kingdom Medical Research Council Adult Leukaemia Working Party

The role of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) as supportive therapy following intensive induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) in adults was investigated in a randomized trial. G-CSF (Lenograstim, 263 microg/d) or placebo was administered from day 8 after the end of chemotherapy until neutrophil recovery to 0.5 x 10(9)/l (or for up to 10 d). Eight hundred and three patients were entered. Neutrophil recovery was quicker with G-CSF (P < 0.0001), but this did not lead to differences in the number, severity or duration of infections. There were no substantial supportive care savings, although G-CSF patients spent 2 d less in hospital (P = 0.01). Complete remission (CR) rates were similar between arms (73% G-CSF, 75% placebo, P = 0.5), as were reasons for failure (induction death: P = 0.7; resistant disease: P = 0.5) and, for remitters, 5-year disease-free survival (34% vs. 38%, P = 0.3). Overall survival at 5 years was 29% with G-CSF vs. 36% with placebo (P = 0.10). Both CR rate (P = 0.006) and overall survival (P = 0.006) were worse with G-CSF in patients aged <40 years, but this may be a chance effect. There is some evidence from this trial of an adverse effect of G-CSF but these data need to be viewed in the context of the evidence from the other trials.

A single dose of pegfilgrastim compared with daily filgrastim for supporting neutrophil recovery in patients treated for low-to-intermediate risk acute myeloid leukemia: results from a randomized, double-blind, phase 2 trial

Background

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are often neutropenic as a result of their disease. Furthermore, these patients typically experience profound neutropenia following induction and/or consolidation chemotherapy and this may result in serious, potentially life-threatening, infection. This randomized, double-blind, phase 2 clinical trial compared the efficacy and tolerability of pegfilgrastim with filgrastim for assisting neutrophil recovery following induction and consolidation chemotherapy for de novo AML in patients with low-to-intermediate risk cytogenetics.

Methods

Patients (n = 84) received one or two courses of standard induction chemotherapy (idarubicin + cytarabine), followed by one course of consolidation therapy (high-dose cytarabine) if complete remission was achieved. They were randomized to receive either single-dose pegfilgrastim 6 mg or daily filgrastim 5 μg/kg, beginning 24 hours after induction and consolidation chemotherapy.

Results

The median time to recovery from severe neutropenia was 22.0 days for both pegfilgrastim (n = 42) and filgrastim (n = 41) groups during Induction 1 (difference 0.0 days; 95% CI: -1.9 to 1.9). During Consolidation, recovery occurred after a median of 17.0 days for pegfilgrastim versus 16.5 days for filgrastim (difference 0.5 days; 95% CI: -1.1 to 2.1). Therapeutic pegfilgrastim serum concentrations were maintained throughout neutropenia. Pegfilgrastim was well tolerated, with an adverse event profile similar to that of filgrastim.

Conclusion

These data suggest no clinically meaningful difference between a single dose of pegfilgrastim and multiple daily doses of filgrastim for shortening the duration of severe neutropenia following chemotherapy in de novo AML patients with low-to-intermediate risk cytogenetics.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00114764

Canadian supportive care recommendations for the management of neutropenia in patients with cancer

Hematologic toxicities of cancer chemotherapy are common and often limit the ability to provide treatment in a timely and dose-intensive manner. These limitations may be of utmost importance in the adjuvant and curative intent settings. Hematologic toxicities may result in febrile neutropenia, infections, fatigue, and bleeding, all of which may lead to additional complications and prolonged hospitalization. The older cancer patient and patients with significant comorbidities may be at highest risk of neutropenic complications. Colony-stimulating factors (csfs) such as filgrastim and pegfilgrastim can effectively attenuate most of the neutropenic consequences of chemotherapy, improve the ability to continue chemotherapy on the planned schedule, and minimize the risk of febrile neutropenia and infectious morbidity and mortality. The present consensus statement reviews the use of csfs in the management of neutropenia in patients with cancer and sets out specific recommendations based on published international guidelines tailored to the specifics of the Canadian practice landscape. We review existing international guidelines, the indications for primary and secondary prophylaxis, the importance of maintaining dose intensity, and the use of csfs in leukemia, stem-cell transplantation, and radiotherapy. Specific disease-related recommendations are provided related to breast cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, lung cancer, and gastrointestinal cancer. Finally, csf dosing and schedules, duration of therapy, and associated acute and potential chronic toxicities are examined.

Review of the value of colony stimulating factors for prophylaxis of febrile neutropenic episodes in adult patients treated for haematological malignancies

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a major dose-limiting toxicity of systemic cancer chemotherapy that can lead to fever and infection, requiring prompt analysis and in-patient treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics. Complicated neutropenia may lead to reduction and/or delay of systemic anti-cancer treatment, which may compromise outcome. Haematopoietic growth factors have the ability to augment haematopoietic cell cycling and are used to facilitate more dose-intense treatments and to decrease treatment-related complications. This review focuses on randomised trials that investigated the use of colony-stimulating factors (CSF) to prevent treatment-related febrile complications in haematological malignancies in (younger) adult patients. In general, these studies demonstrated that CSF reduced the duration of severe neutropenia but not always its febrile complications; therefore inconsistent results regarding clinically relevant reduction of hospitalisation, duration of therapeutic antibiotics, infection-related or disease-related mortality and economic effects were reported. Current developments in treatment of haematological malignancies will pose new challenges as a shift in infectious pathogens can be expected.

Current status of growth factors in the treatment of acute myeloid and lymphoblastic leukemia

The safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in patients with acute leukemia has been well established in numerous clinical trials. The primary aim of these studies was to determine whether CSFs, when used as adjuncts to intensive chemotherapy, reduced the duration of neutropenia, prevented febrile neutropenia, infections, and hospitalization rates, and improved response and overall outcome in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Despite considerable efforts in divers clinical settings, the potential advantages of hematopoietic growth factors in the management of these leukemias remain inconclusive. In general, individual published trials have shown declines in the incidence and/or duration of neutropenia but have not consistently demonstrated a reduction in the overall frequency of infectious complications or the duration of hospitalization. Most protocols also have failed to show a benefit in terms of disease-free or overall survival. Nevertheless, improvements in "soft" clinical end points, such as incidence of severe infections, may be clinically important and contribute, even if only incrementally, to the patient's quality of life. Selection of those patients likely to benefit from growth factors in a specific clinical setting is a worthwhile endeavour.