Investigation of the Solid-State Interactions in Lyophilized Human G-CSF Using Hydrogen-Deuterium Exchange Mass Spectrometry

Hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) previously elucidated the interactions between excipients and proteins for liquid granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) formulations, confirming predictions made using computational structure docking. More recently, solid-state HDX mass spectrometry (ssHDX-MS) was developed for proteins in the lyophilized state. Deuterium uptake in ssHDX-MS has been shown for various proteins, including monoclonal antibodies, to be highly correlated with storage stability, as measured by protein aggregation and chemical degradation. As G-CSF is known to lose activity through aggregation upon lyophilization, we applied the ssHDX-MS method with peptide mapping to four different lyophilized formulations of G-CSF to compare the impact of three excipients on local structure and exchange dynamics. HDX at 22 °C was confirmed to correlate well with the monomer content remaining after lyophilization and storage at -20 °C, with sucrose providing the greatest protection, and then phenylalanine, mannitol, and no excipient leading to progressively less protection. Storage at 45 °C led to little difference in final monomer content among the formulations, and so there was no discernible relationship with total deuterium uptake on ssHDX. Incubation at 45 °C may have led to a structural conformation and/or aggregation mechanism no longer probed by HDX at 22 °C. Such a conformational change was observed previously at 37 °C for liquid-formulated G-CSF using NMR. Peptide mapping revealed that tolerance to lyophilization and -20 °C storage was linked to increased stability in the small helix, loop AB, helix C, and loop CD. LC-MS HDX and NMR had previously linked loop AB and loop CD to the formation of a native-like state (N*) prior to aggregation in liquid formulations, suggesting a similar structural basis for G-CSF aggregation in the liquid and solid states.

[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.

Supportive Care in Older Lymphoma Patients to Reduce Toxicity and Preserve Quality of Life

The treatment paradigm in older patients with malignant hemopathies is the choice between an effective conservative treatment that preserves quality of life and an intensive, potentially curative treatment with more toxicities. For each patient, it is important to determine the risk/benefit ratio. The patient should be involved in the discussion, sufficiently informed and able to express himself and his expectations in terms of quality of life. However, this informed consent is conditioned by the ability of the patient to understand the risks and benefits of the treatment. Decline in quality of life is an important parameter for older patients with cancer and many prospective trials have now confirmed the impact of different side effects of treatment, such as recurrent hospitalization, loss of autonomy in daily activities, loss of contact with grandchildren and loss of cognitive functions. Interventions oriented to vulnerabilities detected in the older patients (by comprehensive geriatric assessment) and an optimal approach, including preventive measures to reduce treatment-related toxicity and mortality, are directly correlated to improvement in quality of life.

Cost comparison of filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim and pegfilgrastim biosimilars for inpatient prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia

INTRODUCTION

The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center (The James) uses daily subcutaneous filgrastim as the inpatient granulocyte colony-stimulating factor of choice. The coordination of care associated with filgrastim can often be a barrier to patient discharge. The purpose of this study was to compare the inpatient cost of daily filgrastim to single dose pegfilgrastim and biosimilars.

METHODS

Adult patients admitted to The James who received at least one dose of filgrastim between June 1, 2021 and August 31, 2021 were retrospectively identified. This study compared the inpatient cost of filgrastim and biosimilars associated with one chemotherapy cycle to the potential inpatient cost of pegfilgrastim and biosimilars based on average sales price (ASP). Additionally, the number and duration of discharge prescriptions for filgrastim was determined.

RESULTS

Of the 44 unique patient encounters that met inclusion criteria, 19 received 300-mcg doses of filgrastim and 25 received 480-mcg doses. The median number of doses administered per admission was eight. If each of these patients were to instead receive the most inexpensive biosimilar, pegfilgrastim reference product, the cost would be 216% higher than with filgrastim-sndz. At discharge, 15 patients (34%) received a prescription for filgrastim to be continued for a median duration of 6 days.

CONCLUSION

Based on ASP, pegfilgrastim was more costly than filgrastim. Potential rebates and negotiation power may alter the financial outlook of adding pegfilgrastim to inpatient formulary. Exploration of delays in discharge due to insurance coordination for filgrastim continuation in the outpatient setting may also impact formulary decisions.

A prospective, randomized clinical trial of emergency treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia by pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF)

AIMS

As one of the mainstays of breast cancer therapy, chemotherapy inevitably induces neutropenia. In this study, we explored the role of PEG-rhG-CSF (pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) in the emergency treatment of chemotherapy-induced grades 3-4 neutropenia.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients with breast cancer were randomized (1:1) into the study. Fifty patients randomized to the experimental group were treated with PEG-rhG-CSF after grades 3-4 neutropenia following the first cycle of chemotherapy, while 50 patients randomized to the control group received a daily injection of rhG-CSF (recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor). The primary endpoint was the recovery time of grades 3-4 neutropenia.

RESULTS

Compared with patients in the control group, the mean ± SD recovery time of grades 3-4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) was significantly shorter for patients in the experimental group (grades 3-4, P = .000; grade 4, P = .000; FN, P = .038). There is no significant difference in the incidence of FN for the two groups. In the experimental group, the duration of grades 3-4 neutropenia in patients aged <60 years and ≥60 years was 2.15 and 3.20 days, respectively (P = .037). Adverse events (AEs) of any grade were reported in 37 (75.5%) and 28 (59.6%) patients from the two groups, respectively. No grade ≥3 AEs were reported.

CONCLUSION

This study supported that the PEG-rhG-CSF was more effective and convenient than rhG-CSF for treating grades 3-4 neutropenia and FN in patients with breast cancer and had manageable toxicity.

Cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim for prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with lymphoma: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a prevalent and potentially life-threatening complication in patients with lymphoma receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Pegfilgrastim is more effective than filgrastim as prophylaxis for FN. However, its usage has been limited because of its higher cost. Pegfilgrastim's value for money remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim compared to filgrastim as a primary or secondary prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced FN among patients with lymphoma.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases, and Google Scholar. The most widely used economic evaluations (cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis and cost-benefit analysis) were included in the review. Data extraction was guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist, and the quality of reviewed articles was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. Cost-effectiveness data were rigorously summarized and synthesized narratively. Costs were adjusted to US$ 2020.

RESULTS

We identified eight economic evaluation studies (two cost-utility analyses, three cost-effectiveness analyses, and three studies reporting both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses). Half of these studies were from Europe (n = 4), the other half were from Iran, USA, Canada, and Singapore. Six studies met > 80% of the JBI quality assessment criteria. Cost-effectiveness estimates in the majority (n = 6) of these studies were for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy with high-risk of FN (> 20%). The studies considered a wide range of baseline FN risk (17-97.4%) and mortality rates (5.8-8.9%). Reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from US$ 2199 to US$ 8,871,600 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, dominant to US$ 44,358 per FN averted, and US$ 4261- US$ 7251 per life-years gained. The most influential parameters were medication and hospitalization costs, the relative risk of FN, and assumptions of mortality benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies showed that pegfilgrastim is cost-effective compared to filgrastim as primary and secondary prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced FN among patients with lymphoma at a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$ 50,000 per QALY gained. The findings could assist clinicians and healthcare decision-makers to make informed decisions regarding resource allocation for the management of chemotherapy-induced FN in settings similar to those studied.

Real-World Use of Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor in Patients with Breast Cancer from Alberta, Canada

BACKGROUND

There are limited published data in the Canadian healthcare system on the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) among patients with breast cancer. This study characterized real-world G-CSF use during the period surrounding the introduction of filgrastim biosimilar.

METHODS

Electronic medical records were reviewed retrospectively for patients with breast cancer who received moderately or highly myelosuppressive (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2019 in Alberta, Canada. Trends in G-CSF usage were plotted to elucidate temporal variations and multivariable regression models were constructed to identify clinical factors associated with G-CSF use.

RESULTS

We included 6662 patients in our analyses. G-CSF was used in 57.1% of patients during their treatment trajectory. Among the 3801 patients who were treated with G-CSF, the majority received pegfilgrastim only (91.5%; n = 3477) versus filgrastim only (5.7%; n = 217). G-CSF use increased linearly more than two-fold over the 11-year study period. Predictors of G-CSF use included younger age, south zone of residence, higher neighborhood education, inferior disease stage, highly neutropenic risk chemotherapy, and more recent chemotherapy initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing G-CSF usage over time, an appreciable proportion of patients for whom G-CSF prophylaxis is recommended did not receive it. G-CSF use could be further optimized to align with supportive care clinical guidelines and reduce the impact of neutropenia and its associated complications.

Neonatal sepsis and transient immunodeficiency: Potential for novel immunoglobulin therapies?

Neonates, especially preterm neonates, have the highest risk of sepsis of all age groups. Transient immaturity of the neonatal immune system is an important risk factor. Neonates suffer from hypogammaglobulinemia as nor IgA nor IgM is transferred over the placenta and IgG is only transferred over the placenta late in gestation. In addition, neutrophil numbers and complement function are also decreased. This mini-review focuses on strategies to improve neonatal host-defense. Both clinical and preclinical studies have attempted to boost neonatal immunity to lower the incidence of sepsis and improve outcome. Recent advances in the development of (monoclonal) antibodies show promising results in preclinical studies but have yet to be tested in clinical trials. Strategies to increase complement activity seem efficient in vitro but potential disadvantages such as hyperinflammation have held back further clinical development. Increase of neutrophil numbers has been tested extensively in clinical trials but failed to show improvement in mortality. Future research should focus on clinical applicability of promising new prevention strategies for neonatal sepsis.

Effectiveness and Safety of Filgrastim (Neupogen™) versus Filgrastim-aafi (Nivestim™) in Primary Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia: An Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Despite the demonstrated efficacy and safety of biosimilar filgrastim-aafi (Nivestim™), few studies have compared its use in real-life clinical practice to the originator filgrastim (Neupogen™).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of filgrastim and filgrastim-aafi for the primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy induced-febrile neutropenia in the real-life setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study included all adult cancer patients at the King Hussein Cancer Centre requiring primary prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia between 2014 and 2016. Two cohorts were selected: patients who received filgrastim and those who received filgrastim-aafi. The primary endpoint was the incidence of febrile neutropenia; the secondary endpoints were the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), hospital admissions due to febrile neutropenia, and the mean length of hospitalization. Chi-squared tests were performed to evaluate differences between groups. Logistic regression was conducted to adjust for confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 268 patients were identified, with 88 in the filgrastim cohort and 180 in the filgrastim-aafi cohort; 64%were females. The mean age was 47 (±15) years. The incidence of febrile neutropenia was 21.6% in the filgrastim cohort and 15% in the filgrastim-aafi cohort (P = 0.179). No statistically significant differences were detected in the incidence of hospital admission (P = 0.551) or ADRs (P = 0.623) between the two cohorts. Upon adjusting for the confounding factors, results remained statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSION

Filgrastim and filgrastim-aafi had comparable effectiveness and safety as primary prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia. More extensive prospective studies with additional insight on the cost implications are required.

Patterns of primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in older Medicare patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Guidelines recommend primary prophylactic (PP) granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for prevention of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy with high risk (HR: > 20%), or intermediate risk (IR:10-20%) of FN and ≥ 1 patient risk factor (e.g., age ≥ 65y). The current retrospective cohort study describes patterns of PP-G-CSF in older Medicare patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy with HR/IR of FN.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 66y initiating chemotherapy regimens with HR/IR of FN to treat breast, colorectal, lung, or ovarian cancer, or Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma were selected using Medicare 20% sample (2013-2015) and 100% cancer patient (2014-2017) data. PP-G-CSF use was identified in the first cycle. Timing of pegfilgrastim pre-filled syringe (PFS) administration, proportion of patients completing all cycles (adherence) with pegfilgrastim PFS or on-body injector (OBI), and duration of short-acting G-CSF (sG-CSF) was described across all cycles.

RESULTS

Of 64,893 patients receiving HR/IR for FN, 71% received HR and 29% IR regimens. Overall, PP-G-CSF use in the first cycle was 53% (HR: 74%; IR: 44%) and varied across cancers. Adherence with pegfilgrastim was slightly higher among OBI initiators (78%) than PFS (74%). Number of PP-sG-CSF administrations (mean [SD]) per cycle was 5.1 (SD: 2.7) overall, 5.4 (2.6) for HR, and 4.9 (2.7) for IR.

CONCLUSION

Despite cancer treatment guidelines recommending PP-G-CSF use to reduce risk of FN associated with HR and IR (with ≥ 1 patient risk-factor) regimens, PP-G-CSF remains underutilized in older patients, across cancer types and regimens. Opportunities exist for improvement in use of PP-G-CSF.

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

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

Supportive therapies in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and appropriate use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors: a Delphi consensus statement

PURPOSE

Data indicate that the use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) in routine practice is not consistent with guideline recommendations. The initiative "supportive care for febrile neutropenia prevention and appropriateness of G-CFS use" was undertaken to address the issue of inappropriate prescription of G-CSFs and to improve guideline adherence in the treatment of FN.

METHODS

In a two-round Delphi procedure, 36 medical oncologists reviewed clinically relevant recommendations on risk assessment, the appropriate use of G-CSFs, and the prevention of FN based on available literature and individual clinical expertise.

RESULTS

The consensus was reached on 16 out of 38 recommendations, which are backed by evidence from randomised clinical trials and routine clinical practice. The medical oncologists agreed that the severity of neutropenia depends on patients' characteristics and chemotherapy intensity, and therefore, the risk of severe neutropenia or FN should be assessed at each chemotherapy cycle so as to initiate prophylaxis with G-CSFs if required. The use of biosimilar G-CSFs, with similar efficacy and safety profiles to the originator biologic, has improved the availability and sustainability of cancer care. The timing of supportive therapy is crucial; for example, long-acting G-CSF should be administered 24-72 h after chemotherapy administration. Each biological agent has a recommended administration dose and duration, and it is important to follow these recommendations to avoid complications associated with under-prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

It is hoped that these statements will help to increase adherence to guideline recommendations for appropriate G-CSF use and improve patient care.

Effects of Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound on Myelosuppression of Rats Induced by Chemotherapy Drugs With Cell Cycle Specificity

OBJECTIVES

To explore the ameliorating effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) on Sprague Dawley rat myelosuppression induced by cell cycle specificity drugs (docetaxel, mitotic phase sensitive; and etoposide, gap 2 phase sensitive).

METHODS

Rats were respectively administered docetaxel (100 mg/kg) or etoposide (110 mg/kg) by intraperitoneal injection for 4 consecutive days. Then the rats were divided randomly into a LIPUS group and a non-LIPUS group. In the LIPUS group, the right femoral metaphysis of rats was treated by LIPUS (acoustic intensity, 200 mW/cm² ; frequency, 0.3 MHz; and duty cycle, 20%) for 20 minutes on 7 consecutive days from day 5. The rats of the non-LIPUS group were treated without ultrasound output. A blood cell count, an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, a real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and hematoxylin-eosin staining were applied to detect the results.

RESULTS

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound significantly promoted the counts of bone marrow nucleated cells, white blood cells, immunoglobulin A (IgA), IgG, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, stem cell factor, and intercellular cell adhesion molecule 1 and reduced the counts of vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 whether in the docetaxel or etoposide group (P < .05). Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound only increased the expression level of IgM in the docetaxel group but decreased the level of interleukin 6 in the etoposide group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound has potential to be a noninvasive treatment for myelosuppression caused by different cell cycle-sensitive chemotherapy drugs.

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.

Effects of filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim on outcomes of DA-R-EPOCH for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

PURPOSE

Our study aimed to compare the median and average last dose level reached with DA-R-EPOCH, which includes the chemotherapy agents etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab, in patients using filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim as febrile neutropenia primary prophylaxis.

METHODS

A retrospective, single-center chart review from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2019, at The University of Kansas Health System identified patients > 18 years old who received at least four cycles of DA-R-EPOCH in an inpatient or outpatient setting for any subtype of lymphoma along with at least one dose of filgrastim or pegfilgrastim. Data was collected to compare dosing levels reached, appropriate discontinuation of daily filgrastim when ANC > 5000 cells/mm³, completion of at least twice weekly complete blood count (CBC) monitoring after chemotherapy administration, the incidence of infections, FN, hospitalizations from infections or FN, and bone pain.

RESULTS

We hypothesized that patients receiving pegfilgrastim will achieve similar median and average dose levels of DA-EPOCH, event-free survival rates, overall response rates, completion of at least twice weekly CBC monitoring, and incidence of infections, FN, hospitalizations for infections or FN, and bone pain compared to patients receiving filgrastim.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of pegfilgrastim as a supportive care agent resulted in similar efficacy and safety outcomes compared to filgrastim with DA-R-EPOCH in terms of dose intensity levels and incidence of infections, FN, and bone pain.

Analysis of ANC Levels after Filgrastim Therapy in Acute Leukemia Children with Neutropenia

Cytotoxic chemotherapy suppresses the hematopoietic system, and the most serious hematologic toxicity is neutropenia. This can decrease a risk of infection that causes delays in treatment and reduction of dose intensity, which reduces therapeutic outcome. Filgrastim is used to increase neutrophils level whose therapeutic effect is unknown. The effectiveness of filgrastim is based on the ANC level pre- and post-therapy. This study aimed to analyze the use of filgrastim on ANC level changes in acute leukemia children with neutropenia, and to analyze the patient that achieve ANC level’s targeted therapy = 1000 cell/mm3. A prospective observational study with a longitudinal design was conducted from June to October 2016. The inclusion criteria of the study were patients who diagnosed acute leukemia with neutropenia and received filgrastim 10 µg/kgBW for 3, 4, 5 days. Patients’ ANC levels were measured before and after filgrastim therapy. This study has been approved its ethical clearance by Dr. Saiful Anwar Hospital, Malang. Data were obtained on the basis of neutropenic episodes, followed by 7 episodes of obtaining filgrastim for 3 days, 1 episode of obtaining filgrastim for 4 days, and 7 episodes of obtaining filgrastim for 5 days. Thus, it consists of 15 episodes. In 3 days, ANC levels increased by 9.5 fold from 381.3 ± 91.8 cell/mm3 to 3984.9 ± 426.8 cell/mm3, but in 5 days, ANC levels decreased by 0.9 fold from 200.9 cell/mm3 ± 98.2 to 189.7 ± 14.2 cell/mm3. Filgrastim was able to increased the ANC levels around nine fold for 3 days of theraphy. There were 53% neutropenia patients who achieved the goal of therapy. Filgrastim therapy with dose 10 µg/kgBW for 3 to 5 days has been able to reach the therapeutic target of 53% in acute leukemia children with neutropenia. The increased levels of ANC maximum was reached on the third day with increased levels of 9.5 fold.

Biosimilar pegfilgrastim may offer affordable treatment options for patients in France: a budget impact analysis on the basis of clinical trial and real-world data

BACKGROUND

NYVEPRIA, a pegfilgrastim (a long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) biosimilar, was recently recommended for marketing authorization in Europe for decreasing the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anti-cancer drugs. The present study aimed to evaluate the financial impact of introducing a new pegfilgrastim biosimilar from a French healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

An Excel-based budget impact model was developed to estimate the financial impact by introducing a new pegfilgrastim biosimilar (NYVEPRIA) to France over a 5-year time horizon. Comparators included existing long-acting and short-acting G-CSFs. The burden of FN was obtained from existing literature. Costs (2021 Euros) included drug acquisition and administration, estimated based on drug dosage in both clinical trial and real-world settings. Scenario analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of key model assumptions.

RESULTS

In a total French population of 67.19 million, 79,873 patients were estimated to be treated with G-CSFs annually. The annual number of patients to be treated with NYVEPRIA was estimated to be 1593, 3195, 3674, 3782, and 4052 in years 1 to 5, respectively. Using real-world data, NYVEPRIA resulted in total annual cost savings of €8,620, €868,498, €868,498, €814,102, and €958,952 over years 1 to 5, respectively, leading to a cumulative 5-year cost savings of €3,518,669. Using data from clinical trials, NYVEPRIA resulted in total annual cost savings of €14,366, €1,447,496, €1,447,496, €1,356,836, and €1,598,253 over years 1 to 5, respectively, leading to a cumulative 5-year cost savings of €5,864,448.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of a new pegfilgrastim biosimilar (NYVEPRIA) is potentially associated with substantial cost savings for the French healthcare system.

Current management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in adults: key points and new challenges: Committee of Neoplastic Supportive-Care (CONS), China Anti-Cancer Association Committee of Clinical Chemotherapy, China Anti-Cancer Association

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is a potentially fatal and common complication in myelosuppressive chemotherapy. The timing and grade of CIN may play prognostic and predictive roles in cancer therapy. CIN is associated with older age, poor functional and nutritional status, the presence of significant comorbidities, the type of cancer, previous chemotherapy cycles, the stage of the disease, specific chemotherapy regimens, and combined therapies. There are many key points and new challenges in the management of CIN in adults including: (1) Genetic risk factors to evaluate the patient's risk for CIN remain unclear. However, these risk factors urgently need to be identified. (2) Febrile neutropenia (FN) remains one of the most common reasons for oncological emergency. No consensus nomogram for FN risk assessment has been established. (3) Different assessment tools [e.g., Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), the Clinical Index of Stable Febrile Neutropenia (CISNE) score model, and other tools] have been suggested to help stratify the risk of complications in patients with FN. However, current tools have limitations. The CISNE score model is useful to support decision-making, especially for patients with stable FN. (4) There are still some challenges, including the benefits of granulocyte colony stimulating factor treatment and the optimal antibiotic regimen in emergency management of FN. In view of the current reports, our group discusses the key points, new challenges, and management of CIN.

Clinical Impact of Primary Prophylactic Pegfilgrastim in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Adjuvant Docetaxel-Doxorubicin-Cyclophosphamide Chemotherapy

Purpose

The regimen including concurrent docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (TAC) has been categorized as an important risk factor for febrile neutropenia (FN). This comparative study examined the clinical impact of long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) (pegfilgrastim) during adjuvant TAC chemotherapy in Korean patients with advanced breast cancer.

Methods

We analyzed data from 239 patients who received 6 cycles of adjuvant TAC chemotherapy. We categorized patients into 2 groups according to the use of primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim and compared the incidence and risk of FN, hospital care costs, and survival in the 2 groups.

Results

The incidence of FN decreased from 54.2% to 21.2% in all patients, after the use of pegfilgrastim. The analysis of a total of 1,432 chemotherapy cycles showed that the incidence of FN decreased from 36.1% to 9.1% after the use of pegfilgrastim. Moreover, the decrease in the incidence of FN with the use of pegfilgrastim resulted in a significant decrease in the mean duration of neutropenia (4.15 to 1.29 days), the risk of hospitalization (99.5% to 29.7%) and the mean total hospital care cost (USD 3,038 to USD 2,347). High relative dose intensity (RDI) in patients treated with pegfilgrastim than in those not treated with pegfilgrastim (99.18% vs. 93.85%) was associated with a better overall survival (p = 0.033).

Conclusions

The use of pegfilgrastim during adjuvant TAC chemotherapy was significantly associated with a decrease in the incidence and risk of FN, hospital care costs, and risk of death compared to the use of adjuvant TAC without primary prophylaxis.

Is PEGylated G-CSF superior to G-CSF in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

PEGylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a safe alternative to G-CSF to improve chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN). This superiority has resulted in its increased use by physicians; however, the superiority of PEGylated G-CSF for CIN in breast cancer has not been conclusively determined.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the superiority of PEGylated G-CSF for CIN in breast cancer in terms of effectiveness and safety via a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was performed for eligible studies published from database inception to December 2019. All studies comparing PEGylated G-CSF and G-CSF for CIN of breast cancer were reviewed. After literature selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers independently. Meta-analysis was conducted using Revman, version 5.2.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials were finally identified. The publication bias of these studies was acceptable. For the endpoint of effectiveness, analysis of the incidence/duration of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, the duration of grade 4 neutropenia, the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), and the time to absolute neutrophil count recovery showed no advantage of PEGylated G-CSF over G-CSF for CIN of breast cancer (P > 0.05), with the premise of a sufficient dose of G-CSF according to the guidelines. No significant differences in grade 4 adverse events were observed between the groups (P = 0.29), and PEGylated G-CSF did not increase the incidence of skeletal and/or muscle pain compared with G-CSF (P = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

PEGylated G-CSF was as effective and safe as G-CSF to reduce CIN in breast cancer but did not show an obvious superiority. However, in clinical practice, PEGylated G-CSF has an obvious advantage in terms of convenience, which could improve patient's quality of life.

Introduction of biosimilar pegfilgrastim in France: Economic analysis of switching from originator

Objectives

To assess the economic impact of introducing biosimilar pegfilgrastim compared to the current standard granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) practice in France.

Methods

A budget impact model was developed to investigate the impact of introducing pegfilgrastim biosimilar over 5 years. The model analysed drug acquisition costs, ambulatory costs, as well as costs associated with poor outcomes, and compared the current standard practice of long-acting and short-acting G-CSF to a revised practice including pegfilgrastim biosimilar in addition to standard practice treatments. The cost of switching to pegfilgrastim biosimilar, within a pharmacy setting, was analysed within the model using data from a survey of French pharmacists.

Results

The budget impact model calculated a cost saving of €51,007,531 over 5 years switching from the current standard practice to pegfilgrastim biosimilar. A sensitivity analysis accounting for variation in pegfilgrastim biosimilar uptake of 1) 15% in year 1 and 1% in years 2–5 and 2) 15% in years 1–5, estimated savings ranging between €29,377,784 and €79,847,194, respectively. A further analysis predicted cost savings of €287,344,835 over 5 years with the extension of pegfilgrastim biosimilar, at an uptake of 15% in year 1 and 7% in years 2–4, to both long-acting and short-acting G-CSF groups compared to unchanged current practice.

Conclusions

The introduction of pegfilgrastim biosimilar will help to reduce cost and alleviate some of the financial pressure on the French healthcare system.

Amelioration of cyclophosphamide-induced myelosuppression during treatment to rats with breast cancer through low-intensity pulsed ultrasound

To investigate the alleviating effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) on myelosuppression of Sprague–Dawley rats with breast cancer induced by cyclophosphamide (CTX). Breast cancer in rats was triggered by intragastric gavage with 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (150 mg/kg). Then, the rats with breast cancer were randomly allocated to the LIPUS group (n=50) and the control group (n=50). The LIPUS group was injected intraperitoneally with CTX (50 mg/kg) for 4 consecutive days and underwent LIPUS treatment at femoral metaphysis 20 min per day from the first day of injection for 7 consecutive days. The control group was injected with CTX (50 mg/kg) and treated with LIPUS without energy output. Blood, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction, Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining, and scanning electron microscopy were applied to detect the changes. The results indicated that LIPUS significantly promoted the proliferation of bone marrow nucleated cells, white blood cells (WBCs), IgA, IgG, and IgM in the peripheral blood (P<0.05) without the damage to liver and kidney function simultaneously. The mechanisms may result from the LIPUS alleviation effect on bone marrow hematopoietic function through regulating cytokines such as LIPUS can increase the expression of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), stem cell factor, transforming growth factor-β, and intercellular cell adhesion molecule-1, meanwhile LIPUS will decrease the expression of interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1. LIPUS has potential to be a new adjuvant therapy method in clinic for ameliorating chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression.

Efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim in elderly patients with aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL): results of the randomized, open-label, non-inferiority AVOID neutropenia study

Background

Lipegfilgrastim has been shown to be non-inferior to pegfilgrastim for reduction of the duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) in breast cancer patients. This open-label, non-inferiority study assessed the efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim in elderly patients with aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at high risk for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

Patient and methods

One hundred and one patients (median age, 75 years) were randomized to lipegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim (6 mg/cycle) during six cycles of R-CHOP21.

Results

Lipegfilgrastim was non-inferior to pegfilgrastim for the primary efficacy endpoint, reduction of DSN in cycle 1. In the per-protocol population, mean (standard deviation) DSN was 0.8 (0.92) and 0.9 (1.11) days in the two groups, respectively; the adjusted mean difference between groups was − 0.3 days (95% confidence interval, − 0.70 to 0.19). Non-inferiority was also demonstrated in the intent-to-treat population. The incidence of severe neutropenia in cycle 1 was 51% (21/41) in the lipegfilgrastim group and 52% (23/44) in the pegfilgrastim group. Very severe neutropenia (ANC < 0.1 × 10⁹/L) in cycle 1 was reported by 5 (12%) patients in the lipegfilgrastim group and 8 (18%) patients in the pegfilgrastim group. However, over all cycles, febrile neutropenia (strict definition) was reported by only 1 (2%) patient in each treatment group (during cycle 1 in the lipegfilgrastim group and cycle 6 in the pegfilgrastim group). The mean time to absolute neutrophil count recovery (defined as ≥ 2.0 × 10⁹/L) was 8.3 and 9.4 days in the two groups, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 46% of patients in each group; none were considered treatment-related. Eight patients died during the study (2 in the lipegfilgrastim group, 5 in the pegfilgrastim group, and 1 who died before starting study treatment). No deaths occurred during the treatment period, and all were considered to be related to the underlying disease.

Conclusions

This study shows lipegfilgrastim to be non-inferior to pegfilgrastim for the reduction of DSN in elderly patients with aggressive B cell NHL receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, with a comparable safety profile.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02044276; EudraCT number 2013-001284-23

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-020-05711-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Duration of short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for primary prophylaxis and risk of neutropenia-related hospitalization in older patients with cancer

PURPOSE

Evaluate the relationship between duration of primary prophylactic short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PP-sG-CSF) and risk of neutropenia-related hospitalization (NRH) in older patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

METHODS

Using the Medicare claims database, we conducted a nested case-control study in a cohort of patients aged ≥66 years with breast, colorectal, lung, ovarian, or prostate cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma who initiated a first cycle of any myelosuppressive chemotherapy January 1, 2008-September 30, 2016, and received PP-sG-CSF. We matched up to four controls to each NRH case by age, cancer type, regimen febrile neutropenia (FN) risk category, and year using incidence density sampling. We used conditional logistic regression adjusted for race, sex, and modified Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) to estimate relative risk of NRH related to duration of PP-sG-CSF categorized as <5 and ≥ 5 days.

RESULTS

Of 2148 patients receiving PP-sG-CSF, 108 (5%) experienced NRH in the first cycle. We matched 333 controls to 96 cases. Cases were similar to controls in mean age, tumor type, and intermediate/high-risk regimen, but were more likely to have CCI ≥5 and less likely to use PP-sG-CSF ≥5 days (31% vs. 39%). Adjusted ORs (95% CI) for NRH were 0.69 (0.40-1.19) for ≥5 vs. <5 days of PP-sG-CSF among patients receiving any myelosuppressive chemotherapy, 0.43 (0.21-0.89) for intermediate/high-risk regimen, and 0.42 (0.19-0.89) for any myelosuppressive chemotherapy with all agents given on cycle day one only.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older patients with cancer who are receiving PP-sG-CSF, ≥5 days of use was associated with substantial reduction in NRH risk.

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.

Immunogenicity and safety of a proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar MSB11455 versus the reference pegfilgrastim Neulasta® in healthy subjects: A randomized, double-blind trial

MSB11455 is a proposed biosimilar to the currently licensed reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta^®). This study was designed primarily to compare the immunogenicity of MSB11455 and Neulasta^®. As secondary objectives, the safety and tolerability of MSB11455 and Neulasta^® were also compared. Healthy adult subjects were randomized to either MSB11455 or Neulasta^®, stratified by antipolyethylene glycol (PEG) antibody status at screening and study site. Subjects received a single subcutaneous dose of MSB11455 or Neulasta^® (both 6 mg/0.6 mL) on day 1 of each of two study periods (same product in both periods), separated by a washout of 28‐35 days. Immunogenicity samples were taken predose and up to day 84 post–first dose. Noninferiority was confirmed if the upper limit of the exact one‐sided adjusted 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in antidrug antibody (ADA)‐positive rates was < 10%. Safety was assessed throughout the study. Overall, 336 subjects were randomized and treated (N = 168 in each group). Noninferiority of MSB11455 over Neulasta^® was demonstrated for immunogenicity; the difference in confirmed treatment‐induced ADA‐positive rate between MSB11455 and Neulasta^® was −0.6% (upper limit of the exact one‐sided adjusted 95% CI: 6.25%). ADAs were mostly directed against the PEG moiety of pegfilgrastim. No filgrastim‐specific neutralizing antibodies were detected in either treatment group. Safety and tolerability were as expected for pegfilgrastim, and comparable between treatments. This study supports and strengthens the available evidence for the biosimilarity of MSB11455 to Neulasta^®.

The role of granulocyte colony‑stimulating factor in breast cancer development: A review

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a member of the hematopoietic growth factor family that primarily affects the neutrophil lineage. G-CSF serves as a powerful mobilizer of peripheral blood stem cells and recombinant human G-CSF (rhG-CSF) has been used to treat granulocytopenia and neutropenia after chemotherapy for cancer patients. However, recent studies have found that G-CSF plays an important role in cancer progression. G-CSF expression is increased in different types of cancer cells, such as lung cancer, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, invasive bladder carcinoma, glioma and breast cancer. However, it is unclear whether treatment with G-CSF has an adverse effect. The current review provides an overview of G-CSF in malignant breast cancer development and the data presented in this review are expected to provide new ideas for cancer therapy.

Neutropenic complications in the PANTHER phase III study of adjuvant tailored dose-dense chemotherapy in early breast cancer

Introduction: Myelosuppresion is a common side effect of chemotherapy and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is often used to reduce the risk of neutropenic events. The purpose of this exploratory analysis was to investigate neutropenic complications in the phase III PANTHER trial of standard 3-weekly chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide plus docetaxel (FEC/D) versus bi-weekly tailored dose-dense EC/D adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.Patients and methods: Febrile neutropenia, neutropenic infection and infection grade 3-4 according to CTC AE 3.0, were explored in relation to G-CSF use. Per cycle analysis was performed concerning dose reduction and dose delays in conjunction with G-CSF administration.Results: In the experimental group, 98.9% of patients received primary G-CSF support during EC and 97.4% during docetaxel, compared with 49.7% during FEC and 63.88% during docetaxel in the standard group. Overall, the use of G-CSF was associated with a lower risk for developing neutropenic events (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.35-0.55, p < .001). Chemotherapy delays due to neutropenia and leukopenia were significantly decreased among patients that received G-CSF (OR 0.098, 95% CI 0.06-0.15 and OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18-0.58, respectively).Discussion: In conclusion, G-CSF support reduces neutropenic events and permits increased relative dose intensity, which is essential for improved survival outcomes.

Mecapegfilgrastim in Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia: A Profile of Its Use in China

Mecapegfilgrastim (HHPG-19K) is a long-acting pegylated recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) that is administered subcutaneously as prophylaxis once per chemotherapy cycle as a weight-adjusted dose of 100 µg/kg or as a 6 mg fixed dose. It is approved in China to reduce the incidence of infection, as manifested by febrile neutropenia, in patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anti-cancer therapy associated with a clinically significant incidence of febrile neutropenia. In phase III trials, once per cycle prophylaxis with mecapegfilgrastim was more effective than placebo in reducing the incidence of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia in cycle 1 in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and was more effective than filgrastim at reducing the mean duration of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia in cycle 1 in patients with breast cancer. The tolerability and safety profiles of mecapegfilgrastim were similar to those of filgrastim, with no unexpected adverse events (AEs); most adverse reactions in cycle 1 were mild or moderate in severity. Thus, mecapegfilgrastim is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment option for patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and extends the options available for managing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in China.

The prophylactic effects of long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for febrile neutropenia in newly diagnosed patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a randomised controlled study

Objective

This study explored the prophylactic effects of long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for febrile neutropenia (FN) in newly diagnosed patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Methods

Patients were randomised into a study group (long-acting G-CSF for all chemotherapy cycles) and a control group (short-acting G-CSF for first cycle and treatment per physician discretion for subsequent cycles) at a ratio of 1:2. The incidences of FN and myelosuppression and the number of clinical visits, medication doses, complete blood count (CBC) tests and adverse events were compared between the two groups. A regression model was used to determine the risk factors for FN.

Results

From 30 November 2018 to 1 April 2019, 84 cases were included in the final analysis; there were 24 (28.6%) and 60 (71.4%) patients in the study and control groups, respectively, and 605 chemotherapy cycles. The study group or chemotherapy cycles utilising long-acting G-CSF had significantly fewer utilisations and doses of short-acting G-CSF; clinical visits; CBC tests; and incidences of FN and myelosuppression; and less G-CSF-associated pain. The utilisation of G-CSF was the only independent factor for FN in a binary regression model.

Conclusion

Long-acting G-CSF could effectively reduce the incidences of FN and myelosuppression and had mild adverse effects in newly diagnosed patients with EOC receiving chemotherapy.

Trial registration number

NCT03740464.

Risk assessment of febrile neutropenia and evaluation of G-CSF use in patients with cancer: a real-life study

PURPOSE

The guidelines suggest using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) for febrile neutropenia (FN) as prophylaxis in chemotherapy protocols with the risk of 10-20% after assessment of patient's risk factors. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the risk of FN by using the Patient Risk Score (PRS) and evaluating G-CSF use and its side effects by a clinical pharmacist at an outpatient clinic.

METHODS

The study was conducted from May 2017 until November 2017 at the University Hospital oncology outpatient clinic. Patients who receive chemotherapy protocols with FN risk of 10-20% and > 20% and were initiated G-CSF were included. The patients' risk factors were assessed by the PRS, and the side effects were monitored for 3 months by a clinical pharmacist via a patient self-reported monitoring card.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients were included (286 interviews) in the study. There was a significant increase between the first and third visits on the PRS total scores of patients (p = 0.034). The patterns of G-CSF use showed that 34.7% undertreated, 22.8% overtreated, and 42.3% of patients were correctly treated for the prophylaxis. The severity of G-CSF-related musculoskeletal pain was increased on the second and third days of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of G-CSFs for FN prophylaxis is recommended; however, there may be a group of patients who are inadequately or unnecessarily treated. Therefore, patients should be assessed for the risk of developing FN in each cycle of chemotherapy and a regular risk assessment by using the PRS can be implemented in the monitoring process.

A randomized multicenter phase II trial of mecapegfilgrastim single administration versus granulocyte colony-stimulating growth factor on treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mecapegfilgrastim (HHPG-19K) with different doses compared to granulocyte colony-stimulating growth factor (G-CSF) in treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients.

Methods

A total of 182 breast cancer patients were enrolled in this multi-center, randomized, phase II trial and developed neutropenia after first cycle chemotherapy. Patients were then assigned as 1:1:1 ratio to receive 100 µg/kg HHPG-19K single injection (HHPG-19K-N group), 150 µg/kg HHPG-19Ksingle injection (HHPG-19K-H group) and 5 µg/kg G-CSF daily injection (G-CSF group) at day 3 of the second cycle (cycle 2) chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia during cycle 2. Study drug-related adverse events during cycle 2 were recorded for safety assessment.

Results

During cycle 2 chemotherapy, both HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups exhibited lower incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia compared with G-CSF group, while no difference was observed between HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups. Also, better outcomes were observed in HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups compared with G-CSF group regarding to grade 4 neutropenia, duration of grade ≥3 neutropenia, duration of grade 4 neutropenia, incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and rescue application of G-CSF, time to ANC recovery, while no difference of these outcomes between HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups was observed. For safety analysis, the incidences of hematologic and non-hematologic adverse events were similar among the 3 groups.

Conclusions

HHPG-19K presents with better clinical efficacy as well as equal tolerance compared with G-CSF in treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients.

Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia as a Prognostic and Predictive Marker of Outcomes in Solid-Tumor Patients

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is one of the most common side effects seen in cancer patients. As an adverse event, it is deemed undesirable since it often constitutes a dose-limiting toxicity for cytotoxic agents leading to treatment delays and/or dose reductions. It is also associated with a financial cost component from diagnostic work-up and treatment of patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (CIFN). Neutropenia is commonly accompanied by a decrease in other hematopoietic lineages (anemia and/or thrombocytopenia). Dosing of chemotherapeutic agents is based on the severity of adverse effects seen. Depending on the degree of neutropenia, chemotherapeutic agents may be put on hold until count recovery and growth factor support might be added to allow for dosing as scheduled. However, neutropenia appears to be more than just an adverse event. While CIFN by itself constitutes an adverse event, the appearance of just CIN is not necessarily a marker of poor outcome. In fact, it rather appears to be a surrogate marker of response and/or survival in patients treated with cytotoxic regimens. Here we present evidence in different tumor types treated with different regimens on the role CIN plays as a marker for improved outcomes. If CIN is a surrogate prognostic and/or potentially predictive marker of response, chemotherapy doses may need to be escalated to achieve neutropenia. In addition, instead of reducing treatment doses for safety concerns, the addition of growth factor support and alternative dosing schemes may be strategies to consider.

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.

Efficacy and safety of RGB-02, a pegfilgrastim biosimilar to prevent chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: results of a randomized, double-blind phase III clinical study vs. reference pegfilgrastim in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy

Background

Treatment with recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is accepted standard for prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. RGB-02 (Gedeon Richter) is a proposed biosimilar to pegylated G-CSF (Neulasta®, Amgen) with sustained release properties. This is a randomized, comparative, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate efficacy and safety of RGB-02 in breast cancer patients receiving cytotoxic regimen.

Methods

Two hundred thirty-nine women presenting with breast cancer were randomized to RGB-02 (n = 121) and the reference product (n = 118). All patients received up to 6 cycles of docetaxel/doxorubicin chemotherapy combination and a once-per-cycle injection of a fixed 6 mg dose of pegfilgrastim. Primary endpoint was the duration of severe neutropenia (ANC < 0.5 × 10⁹/L) in Cycle 1 (2-sided CI 95%). Secondary endpoints included incidence and duration of severe neutropenia (in cycles 2–4), incidence of febrile neutropenia, time to ANC recovery, depth of ANC nadir, and safety outcomes.

Results

The mean duration of severe neutropenia in Cycle 1 was 1.7 (RGB-02) and 1.6 days (reference), with a difference (LS Mean) of 0.1 days (95% CI -0.2, 0.4). Equivalence could be established as the CI for the difference in LS Mean lay entirely within the pre-defined range of ±1 day. This positive result was supported by the analysis of secondary endpoints, which also revealed no clinical meaningful differences. Safety profiles were comparable between groups. No neutralizing antibodies against pegfilgrastim were identified.

Conclusions

Treatment equivalence in reducing the duration of chemotherapy induced neutropenia between RGB-02 and Neulasta® could be demonstrated. Similar efficacy and safety profiles of the once-per-cycle administration of RGB-02 and the pegfilgrastim reference were demonstrated.

Trial registration

The trial was registered prospectively, prior to study initiation. EudraCT number (2013–003166-14). The date of registration was 12 July, 2013.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5329-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patterns of Use of Docetaxel-Containing Adjuvant Chemotherapy Among Chinese Patients with Operable Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Adjuvant docetaxel-based chemotherapy is frequently used in the treatment of operable early breast cancer (EBC). This study investigated patterns of docetaxel use in patients with EBC in real-world clinical practice in China.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study of Chinese women with operable breast cancer in tier 1 non-oncology-specific hospitals and other city hospitals in China. Adult Chinese female patients (≥ 18 years) with newly diagnosed breast cancer who underwent surgery and received docetaxel-containing adjuvant chemotherapy were eligible for inclusion. The primary end point of the study was to assess patterns of docetaxel use for adjuvant therapy in Chinese clinical practice. Secondary end points included factors associated with treatment selection, patterns of G-CSF use and safety.

RESULTS

In total, 502 patients were enrolled, 475 of whom were included in the analysis. The results showed that 31.6% of patients received docetaxel and anthracyclines in combination, 47.2% received docetaxel and anthracyclines sequentially, 18.5% received docetaxel and other medication either in combination or sequentially and 2.7% received 'other' chemotherapy regimens. Factors influencing selection of docetaxel/anthracycline in combination versus sequentially included age, breast cancer subgroup, PR status, and preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A total of 258 (54.3%), 35 (7.4%), and 108 (22.7%) patients received G-CSF as primary prevention, secondary prevention and treatment, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 54.5% (259) of patients, and the most frequently reported TEAEs (≥ 5% of patients) included bone marrow failure (10.1%), granulocytopenia (9.9%), nausea (8.8%) and vomiting (6.9%). Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were reported by 10 and 12 patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Docetaxel for adjuvant chemotherapy of operable EBC in China was most commonly given in combination or sequentially with anthracyclines. The study also showed that in China G-CSF is most frequently used as primary prophylactic, and no unexpected safety events were observed during docetaxel treatment.

FUNDING

Sanofi (China).

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Short- versus Long-Acting Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors for Reduction of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia

Introduction

Short- and long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are approved for the reduction of febrile neutropenia. A systematic literature review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs reporting the use of G-CSFs following chemotherapy treatment.

Methods

Medline^®/Medline in-process, Embase^®, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2003 and June 2016. A hand-search of relevant conference proceedings was conducted for meetings held between 2012 and 2016. Eligible studies were restricted to those reporting a direct, head-to-head comparison of short- versus long-acting G-CSFs for reduction of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia. Risk-of-bias assessments were performed for full publications only.

Results

The search strategy yielded 4044 articles for electronic screening. Thirty-six publications were evaluated for the meta-analysis: 11 of 12 RCTs and 2 of 24 non-RCTs administered doses of the short-acting G-CSF filgrastim for ≥ 7 days. In RCT studies, there was no statistically significant difference in outcomes of interest between short- and long-acting G-CSFs. In non-RCTs, the overall risk was lower with long-acting G-CSF than with short-acting G-CSF for incidence of febrile neutropenia [overall relative risk (RR) = 0.67, P  = 0.023], hospitalizations (overall RR = 0.68, P  < 0.05), and chemotherapy dose delays (overall RR = 0.68, P  = 0.020).

Conclusions

Overall, the weight of evidence from RCTs indicates little difference in efficacy between the short- and long-acting G-CSFs if dosed according to recommended guidelines. There is some evidence for greater efficacy for long-acting G-CSFs in non-RCTs, which may be a result of under-dosing of short-acting G-CSFs in general practice in real-world usage.

Funding

Hospira Inc, which was acquired by Pfizer Inc in September 2015, and Pfizer Inc.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-018-0798-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Isoxazole Derivatives as Regulators of Immune Functions

In this review, we present reports on the immunoregulatory properties of isoxazole derivatives classified into several categories, such as immunosuppressive, anti-inflammatory, immunoregulatory, and immunostimulatory compounds. The compounds were tested in various models using resident cells from rodents and humans, cell lines, and experimental animal disease models corresponding to human clinical situations. Beneficial features of the described isoxazole derivatives include low toxicity and good bioactivity at low doses. In a majority of studies, the activities of investigated compounds were comparable or even higher than registered reference drugs. Whenever possible, a plausible mechanism of action of the investigated compounds and their potential therapeutic utility were proposed. Among the described compounds, particular attention was paid to the class of immune stimulators with a potential application in chemotherapy patients.

Pooled analysis of two randomized, double-blind trials comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in breast cancer

Background

Following the functional and physicochemical characterization of a proposed biosimilar, comparative clinical studies help to confirm biosimilarity by demonstrating similar safety and efficacy to the reference product in a sensitive patient population.

Patients and methods

LA-EP2006 is a proposed biosimilar that has been developed for pegfilgrastim, a long-acting form of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for the prevention of neutropenia. The current analysis reports data pooled from two independent, multinational, prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind phase III studies of similar design comparing the safety and efficacy of reference pegfilgrastim with LA-EP2006 in patients with breast cancer receiving myelotoxic (neo)adjuvant TAC (docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy and requiring granulocyte colony-stimulating factor.

Results

A total of 624 patients were randomized in the PROTECT-1 and PROTECT-2 studies (NCT01735175; NCT01516736) (LA-EP2006: n = 314; reference: n = 310). Baseline characteristics of patients were well balanced across treatment groups. The primary end point, mean duration of severe neutropenia in the first chemotherapy cycle was similar in both the LA-EP2006 and reference groups (1.05 ± 1.055 days versus 1.01 ± 0.958 days), with a treatment difference of - 0.04 days [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.19 to 0.11] that met the equivalence criteria (the 95% CI were within the defined margin of ±1 day). Secondary end points, such as the nadir of absolute neutrophil count and the incidence of febrile neutropenia, were also similar between LA-EP2006 and reference pegfilgrastim. The safety and tolerability profile of LA-EP2006 was similar to that observed with reference pegfilgrastim, and there were no reports of neutralizing antibodies.

Conclusions

This pooled analysis confirms, as a part of totality of evidence approach, that the proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim LA-EP2006 has a comparable efficacy and safety profile to reference pegfilgrastim in patients with breast cancer receiving TAC chemotherapy.

Clinical trial numbers

NCT01735175 and NCT01516736.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Treatment patterns for adjuvant docetaxel-based chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer in China: A pooled retrospective analysis of four observational studies

Objective

Adjuvant docetaxel-based chemotherapy is frequently used for operable early breast cancer (EBC). This study investigated patterns of use of docetaxel (T) in real-life clinical practice in China.

Methods

This was a retrospective pooled analysis of the Asia-Pacific Breast Initiatives (APBI) I (2006-2008) and II (2009-2011) registries, and two Chinese observational studies; BC STATE (2011-2014) and BC Local Registry (2007-2010). Female Chinese adults (≥18 years) with operable breast cancer treated with docetaxel-based adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the analysis. Patients with metastatic disease were excluded. The primary endpoint was assessment of treatment patterns and patient profiles. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with choice of adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.

Results

Data from 3,020 patients were included. The most frequently used adjuvant regimen was docetaxel/anthracycline combination [n=1,421 (47.1%); of whom 52.0% received T/epirubicin (E)/cyclophosphamide (C)], followed by docetaxel/other [n=705 (23.3%); of whom 72.8% received TC], docetaxel/anthracycline sequential [n=447 (14.8%); of whom 40.9% and 39.6% received 5-Fu/EC-T and EC-T, respectively], and " other" [n=447 (14.8%); of whom 91.5% received T]. A significant association was found between adjuvant therapy with docetaxel/anthracycline combination and patient weight, menopausal status and estrogen receptor status.

Conclusions

Real-world data revealed that docetaxel/anthracycline combination is the most commonly used category of docetaxel-based adjuvant therapy for patients with operable breast cancer in China; of which TEC is the most frequently used regimen.

Effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim vs. original granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in febrile neutropenia prevention in breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to describe the effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim and original granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), lenograstim and pegfilgrastim, in febrile neutropenia (FN) prevention in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (TAC) as adjuvant/neoadjuvant treatment and to analyze their treatment patterns.

METHODS

A pharmacoepidemiology cohort study was developed in a university hospital (with 23 healthcare centers) with retrospective data collection (2012-2014). Effectiveness of G-CSFs was assessed by the FN incidence. Other parameters analyzed were as follows: moderate and severe neutropenia incidence, neutropenia-related hospitalizations, dosage, and duration. Data was analyzed using each cycle as a unit of analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 98 patients representing 518 chemotherapy cycles, 215 with original G-CSFs (35 lenograstim and 180 pegfilgrastim) and 303 with biosimilar filgrastim. The FN incidence was similar in both groups (3.7% original vs. 3.3% biosimilar; p = 0.79). No statistically significant differences were found in moderate and severe neutropenia incidence (4.7 vs. 6.3%; p = 0.43) or neutropenia-related hospitalizations (3.3 vs. 3.6%; p = 0.19). When the three drugs were evaluated separately, a higher FN incidence was observed with lenograstim than with pegfilgratim or biosimilar (p = 0.024). The dosage and duration of biosimilar were lower than lenograstim (4.9 vs. 5.7 μg/kg/day; 5 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

An abbreviated 5-day course of biosimilar filgrastim provided optimal primary prophylaxis against FN post-chemotherapy TAC in patients with breast cancer. The clinical relevance of the highest FN incidence in the lenograstim cohort needs further attention.

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.

The First Case of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremic Pneumonia in a Cancer Patient Receiving Pegfilgrastim

A single dose of pegfilgrastim or the daily administration of colony-stimulating factors can be used to prevent febrile neutropenia. This may delay the detection of rapidly progressive infections among cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. We report a case of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremic pneumonia that occurred in a patient receiving pegfilgrastim.