Blinded, randomized, multicenter study to evaluate single administration pegfilgrastim once per cycle versus daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II or stage III/IV breast cancer

Mecapegfilgrastim for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A prospective phase II clinical study

BACKGROUND

Induction chemotherapy of docetaxel plus cisplatin (TP) is myelosuppressive, leading to severe neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN). Herein, we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of mecapegfilgrastim in the prevention of neutropenia in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma who received the TP regimen.

METHODS

A total of 30 treatment-naive patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma were included in this study. Mecapegfilgrastim 6 mg was injected 24-48 h after the completion of induction chemotherapy with the TP regimen.

RESULTS

The incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia during the three induction chemotherapy cycles was 6.7% (95% CI, 0.8%-22.1%). In the first cycle of chemotherapy, the incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia was 3.3% (95% CI, 0.1%-17.2%). No FN or antibiotic usage was reported. All 30 patients completed the induction chemotherapy cycles.

CONCLUSION

Mecapegfilgrastim effectively reduced the incidence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and FN in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Low-dose pegylated recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor as hematopoietic support for adjuvant chemotherapy in Chinese patients with breast cancer: An open-label, randomized, non-inferiority trial

AIMS

The recommended dosage of pegylated recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) for Western chemotherapy patients is 6 mg per cycle. However, for Eastern Asians, the optimal dose remains unknown.

METHODS

This open-label, randomized, non-inferiority trial (NCT05283616) enrolled Chinese female breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Participants were randomized to receive either 3 or 6 mg of PEG-rhG-CSF per cycle, stratified by body weight (BW; ≤60 kg vs. >60 kg). The primary endpoint was timely absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovery before the second cycle of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients were randomized and 116 were included for efficacy analyses. The timely ANC recovery rate in the 3 mg arm was 89.8%, compared to 93.0% in the 6 mg arm (one-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] lower limit for difference: -11.7%), meeting the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 15%. The rate was 93.3% with PEG-rhG-CSF 3 mg and 96.6% with 6 mg in patients with BW ≤ 60 kg, and 86.2% and 89.3%, respectively, in those with BW > 60 kg. Although the incidence of severe neutropenia was similar across arms, the occurrence of excessively high ANC and white blood cell counts was higher in the 6 mg arm. No grade ≥3 adverse events related to PEG-rhG-CSF occurred.

CONCLUSION

Three milligrams of PEG-rhG-CSF per cycle provided non-inferior neutrophil protection and attenuated neutrophil overshoot compared to 6 mg doses. This low-dose regimen could be a new supportive care option for Chinese breast cancer patients receiving anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy.

Comparison between a single dose of PEG G-CSF and multiple doses of non-PEG G-CSF: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022

BACKGROUD

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used for the primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN). Two types of G-CSF are available in Japan, namely G-CSF chemically bound to polyethylene glycol (PEG G-CSF), which provides long-lasting effects with a single dose, and non-polyethylene glycol-bound G-CSF (non-PEG G-CSF), which must be sequentially administrated for several days.

METHODS

This current study investigated the utility of these treatments for the primary prophylaxis of FN through a systematic review of the literature. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis or meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate six outcomes.

RESULTS

Through the first and second screenings, 23 and 18 articles were extracted for qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis, respectively. The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the PEG G-CSF group than in the non-PEG G-CSF group with a strong quality/certainty of evidence. The differences in other outcomes, such as overall survival, infection-related mortality, the duration of neutropenia (less than 500/μL), quality of life, and pain, were not apparent.

CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of PEG G-CSF is strongly recommended over multiple-dose non-PEG G-CSF therapy for the primary prophylaxis of FN.

On-body injector pegfilgrastim for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia prophylaxis: Current Status

INTRODUCTION

Myelosuppression, a challenge in cancer treatment, often results in severe complications. Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, particularly pegfilgrastim, mitigate chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. This narrative review evaluates the role of on-body injector (OBI) devices for pegfilgrastim administration. A comprehensive search strategy of PubMed and AI-powered intuitive search tools, complemented by authors' contributions, yielded a body of papers presenting evidence on OBI devices, their effectiveness and safety, the benefits and challenges of OBI versus pre-filled syringe administration, patient preferences for pegfilgrastim administration, and economic considerations.

DISCUSSION

OBI devices prove effective and safe, with advantages such as reduced clinic visits and enhanced adherence. Studies highlight cost-efficiency and expanded access, emphasizing the socioeconomic context. Patient and provider preferences underscore the potential of OBI devices in cancer care, with implications for healthcare resource utilization and pharmacoeconomics.

CONCLUSION

The value proposition of OBI devices lies in improving patient outcomes, convenience, resource optimization, and enhancing the overall cancer care experience. As biosimilar OBIs enter the market, they may offer cost savings, further influencing their adoption and their positioning as a cost-efficient alternative in cancer care. Ongoing research and technological advancements are expected to contribute to the broader acceptance of OBI devices in cancer care delivery.

The Effectiveness and Optimal Timing of PEG-rhG-CSF After Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation: A Multicenter Experience

No consensus has been made on the use of PEG-modification recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) in patients receiving autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT). To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PEG-rhG-CSF in provision of neutrophil support for lymphoma patients receiving autologous PBSCT. This retrospective study included lymphoma patients receiving either PEG-rhG-CSF or rhG-CSF after autologous PBSCT from 2018 to 2021 in two clinics. Hematologic recovery time, incidence of infectious complications and toxicity were compared between these two rhG-CSFs and among different initiation time of PEG-rhG-CSF. Of the 139 subjects included, 93 received PEG-rhG-CSF and 46 received rhG-CSF after transplantation. Compared with rhG-CSF, PEG-rhG-CSF marginally but significantly accelerated the neutrophil engraftment by 1 day (10 vs. 9 days, respectively) with no increasing on the risk of infectious complication and toxicity. In the PEG-rhG-CSF group, 50 patients received the growth factor on day 1, 19 received on day 3 and 24 received on day 5. The neutrophil engraftment was significantly shorter in day 1 and day 3 subgroup (9, 9, and 10 days, respectively), with a lower incidence of febrile neutropenia (82%, 100%, 100%) and documented infections (76%, 100%, 100%) in day 1 subgroup. PEG-rhG-CSF might be an alternative to rhG-CSF for lymphoma patients received autologous PBSCT. Administrating PEG-rhG-CSF on day 1 can achieve both faster hematologic recovery and lower infectious complications.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12288-023-01704-8.

Pegfilgrastim for the management of neutropenia during neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil in esophageal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) therapy is a new standard for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The optimal timing of pegfilgrastim with the DCF regimen to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN) remains controversial. The effectiveness of concomitant pegfilgrastim administration with continuous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) infusion in the DCF regimen was therefore assessed.

METHODS

All patients who received neoadjuvant DCF for esophageal cancer were retrospectively assessed. Patients who had been scheduled to receive pegfilgrastim on days 3-5 (early group) or days 7-9 (regular group) of the DCF regimen were included. Uni- and multivariate analyses were used to assess risk factors for FN.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients were included in the analysis. The 26 patients in the early group received pegfilgrastim as scheduled. In the 62 patients of the regular group, 51 received pegfilgrastim at a median of 7 days after starting DCF chemotherapy. However, 11 patients in the regular group could not receive pegfilgrastim. Twenty-two patients of the regular group and 2 patients of the early group developed FN after the first session of DCF. Early administration of pegfilgrastim and grade 4 neutropenia were significantly associated with onset of FN, with multivariate analysis identifying early administration of pegfilgrastim as an independent preventive factor and grade 4 neutropenia as a risk factor, after adjusting for sex and age.

CONCLUSION

Early pegfilgrastim administration is a safe approach that reduces the incidence of FN in DCF therapy. Using pegfilgrastim with continuous 5-FU infusion in the DCF regimen represents a reasonable option to prevent FN.

Achieving white blood cell equity: are the safety profiles of biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastims comparable?

Biosimilars can provide choices for patients and may provide cost savings; however, their uptake has been slow in the USA, in part due to limited knowledge. To provide additional confidence in US pegfilgrastim biosimilars, this narrative review compared the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims, currently approved or filed for approval in the USA, with the EU- and US-approved reference pegfilgrastims. Headache and bone pain were common to biosimilars and reference products and occurred at a similar incidence. Clinical trial data on the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference products have demonstrated similarity and comparability, with no unexpected safety outcomes. Overall, the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference pegfilgrastims demonstrated a high degree of similarity and comparability.

Efbemalenograstim alfa, an Fc fusion protein, long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for reducing the risk of febrile neutropenia following chemotherapy: results of a phase III trial

PURPOSE

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of efbemalenograstim alfa for reducing the risk of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

METHODS

A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted. A total of 122 subjects received up to 4 cycles of TA chemotherapy (75 mg/m2 docetaxel + 60 mg/m2 doxorubicin). Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to subcutaneously inject a single 20 mg of efbemalenograstim alfa or placebo on day 2 of cycle 1, and all subjects received efbemalenograstim alfa on day 2 of cycles 2, 3, and 4. Duration of severe (grade 4) neutropenia (DSN), depth of neutrophil nadir, incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), time to neutrophil recovery, and safety information were recorded.

RESULTS

For the primary endpoint, the mean DSN in cycle 1 was 1.3 days and 3.9 days for efbemalenograstim alfa and placebo respectively (95% CI, 2.3, 3.4). As the lower bound of the 95% CI was > 0, superiority of efbemalenograstim alfa over placebo can be declared. In addition, the incidence of FN in Cycle 1 was lower in efbemalenograstim alfa group than in placebo group (4.8% vs. 25.6%; p = 0.0016). Patients in the efbemalenograstim alfa group required less intravenous antibiotics (3.6% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.0119). Most adverse events were consistent with those expected for breast cancer patient receiving TA chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Efbemalenograstim alfa is effective and safe for significantly decreasing the duration of severe neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients who are receiving TA chemotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02872103, August 19, 2016.

An observational, prospective, open label, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of pegfilgrastim as secondary prophylaxis to decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia in Korean female patients with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Pegfilgrastim is a widely used long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) that prevents febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of chemotherapy-related FN events and other adverse events (AEs) during chemotherapy in Korean patients with breast cancer treated with pegfilgrastim as secondary prophylactic support.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, open-label, prospective, observational study. A total of 1255 patients were enrolled from 43 institutions. The incidence of FN was evaluated as the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints included (1) incidence of bone pain, (2) proportion of patients with a relative dose intensity (RDI) of ≥85%, and (3) proportion of patients with AE.

RESULTS

Pegfilgrastim administration reduced FN by 11.8-1.6%. The highest incidence of bone pain was observed at the time point of the 1st day after the administration and mild bone pain was the most common of all bone pain severity. The mean RDI was 98.5 ± 7.3%, and the proportion of the patients with and RDI≥85% was 96.9% (1169/1233). AEs were reported in 52.6% of the patients, and serious drug reactions occurred in only 0.7%.

CONCLUSION

The use of pegfilgrastim as secondary prophylaxis was effective and safe for preventing FN in patients with breast cancer who were treated with chemotherapy.

Open-labeled, multicenter phase II study of prophylactic administration of pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who received pomalidomide-based regimens (KMM170)

Introduction

Pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been widely used for preventing febrile neutropenia in various types of cancer treatment. In the present study, we prospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of pegfilgrastim as a primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia and infection among patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treated with pomalidomide-based regimens.

Methods

Thirty-three patients with RRMM who received pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) with or without cyclophosphamide (PCd) were enrolled in this study. Twenty-eight patients were treated with PCd and 5 patients were treated with Pd. All patients were given pegfilgrastim subcutaneously with a single administration performed on the first day of each cycle as primary prophylaxis until the fourth cycle.

Results

The median age of the patients was 75 (range 56-85), and the median prior line of therapy was 2 (range 2-6). Seventeen patients (51.5%) had any grade of neutropenia and 20 (60.6%) had any grade of thrombocytopenia before starting pomalidomide treatment. During the 4 cycles of treatment, grade 3 or more neutropenia occurred in 17 patients (51.5%), and 4 (12.1%) experienced grade 3 or more febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 or more infections occurred in 5 patients (15.2%). Interestingly, the patients with markedly increased ANC of more than 2 x 109/L compared to baseline ANC after 7 days of pegfilgrastim at 1st cycle of treatment showed a significantly lower incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia. The most common adverse event of pegfilgrastim was fatigue, and all the adverse events caused by pegfilgrastim were grade 1 or 2. And there was no significant change in the immune cell population and cytokines during the administration of pegfilgrastim.

Discussion

Considering that this study included elderly patients with baseline neutropenia, pegylated G-CSF could be helpful to prevent severe neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, or infection in patients with RRMM.

Assessing the Optimal Regimen: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Long-Acting Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors in Patients with Breast Cancer

Patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy are susceptible to prolonged and severe neutropenia. Multiple biosimilars of long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (LA-G-CSFs) have been newly developed to prevent this disease. Nonetheless, which LA-G-CSF regimen has the optimal balance of efficacy and safety remains controversial. Moreover, there is a lack of evidence supporting clinical decisions on LA-G-CSF dose escalation in poor conditions. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and several Chinese databases were searched (December 2022) to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about LA-G-CSFs preventing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients. No restrictions were imposed on language. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. We assessed the incidence of severe neutropenia (SN) and febrile neutropenia (FN), the duration of SN (DSN), and the absolute neutrophil account recovery time (ANCrt) for efficacy, while the incidence of severe adverse events (SAE) was assessed for safety. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022361606). A total of 33 RCTs were included. Our network meta-analysis demonstrated that lipegfilgrastim 6 mg and eflapegrastim 13.2 mg outperformed other LA-G-CSFs with high efficacy rates and few safety concerns (SUCRA of lipegfilgrastim 6 mg: ANC rt 95.2%, FN 97.4%; eflapegrastim 13.2 mg: FN 87%, SN 89.3%). Additionally, 3.6 mg, 4.5 mg, 6 mg, and 13.2 mg dosages all performed significantly better than 1.8 mg in reducing the duration of SN (3.6 mg: DSN, SMD -0.68 [-1.13, -0.22; moderate]; 4.5 mg: -0.87 [-1.57, -0.17; low]; 6 mg: -0.89 [-1.49, -0.29; moderate]; 13.2 mg: -1.02 [1.63, -0.41; high]). Increasing the dosage from the guideline-recommended 6 mg to 13.2 mg can reduce both the duration and incidence of SN (SMD -0.13 [-0.24 to -0.03], RR 0.65 [0.43 to 0.96], respectively), with no significant difference in SAE. For patients with breast cancer, lipegfilgrastim 6 mg and eflapegrastim 13.2 mg might be the most effective regimen among LA-G-CSFs. Higher doses of LA-G-CSF may enhance efficacy without causing additional SAEs.

The impact of new and emerging agents on outcomes for febrile neutropenia: addressing clinical gaps

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

While chemotherapy treatment options for patients with solid and hematologic malignancies have dramatically improved over recent years, chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and febrile neutropenia (FN) remain major barriers to delivering treatment at full doses and optimal timing. Despite concurrent advances in granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration, multiple barriers to the administration of and disparities in the access to these agents remain. The introduction of new, emerging agents, including biosimilars and novel therapies show promise in improving outcomes for CIN.

RECENT FINDINGS

The introduction of biosimilar filgrastim products has improved access to G-CSF administration by driving marketplace competition and has reduced costs for both patients and healthcare systems without sacrificing efficacy. Emerging therapies to address similar issues include long-acting G-CSF products, efbemalenograstim alfa and eflapegrastin-xnst, as well as agents with novel mechanisms of action, plinabulin and trilaciclib. These agents have shown efficacy and cost-saving benefits in certain populations and disease groups.

SUMMARY

Multiple emerging agents show promise in decreasing the burden of CIN. Use of these therapies will reduce access disparities and will improve outcomes for patients with cancer receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy. Many ongoing trials are underway to evaluate the roles of these agents for more widespread use.

Advances in engineering and delivery strategies for cytokine immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Cytokine immunotherapy is a growing field for the treatment of cancer, infectious disease, autoimmunity, and other ailments. Therapeutic cytokines are a class of secreted, small proteins that play a pivotal role in regulating the innate and adaptive immune system by provoking or mitigating immune responses. In the clinic, cytokines are frequently combined with other treatments, such as small molecules and monoclonal antibodies. However, the clinical translation of cytokine therapies is hindered by their short half-life, pleiotropic nature, and off-target effects, which cause diminished efficacy and severe systemic toxicity. Such toxicity limits dosage, thus resulting in suboptimal doses. Accordingly, numerous efforts have been devoted to exploring strategies to promote cytokine therapies by improving their tissue specificity and pharmacokinetics.

AREAS COVERED

Preclinical and clinical research into bioengineering and delivery strategies for cytokines, consisting of bioconjugation, fusion proteins, nanoparticles, and scaffold-based systems.

EXPERT OPINION

These approaches pave the way for the development of next-generation cytokine treatments with greater clinical benefit and reduced toxicity, circumventing such issues currently associated with cytokine therapy.

Grade 4 Neutropenia Frequency as a Binary Risk Predictor for Adverse Clinical Consequences of Chemotherapy‑Induced Neutropenia: A Meta-analysis

Neutropenia is the major toxicity of myelosuppressive cancer chemotherapy. Grade 4 neutropenia (Gr4N) is a measure of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) severity. We conducted a meta-analysis of CIN data. Gr4N incidence was significantly correlated with febrile neutropenia (FN), days of severe neutropenia (DSN), and nadir absolute neutrophil count (ANC), which are all important predictors of morbidity. With a Gr4N threshold of 65%, both FN and DSN were below levels for low risk of adverse CIN outcomes. Gr4N was highly predictive for adverse CIN outcomes, and a 65% threshold demarcated low vs. high risk for FN and other adverse CIN outcomes.

Outcome and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Long-acting G-CSF as Primary Prophylaxis of Neutropenia Induced by Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients, From a Retrospective Study

PURPOSE

This retrospective analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis of neutropenia caused by chemotherapy for breast cancer.

METHODS

Patients with breast cancer who received long- or short-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis of neutropenia were enrolled in this study, and incidences of neutropenia were compared between two groups. A decision-analytic and a Markov model were used to compare the health benefits and costs of utilizing long- vs short-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor as the primary prophylaxis from the perspective of the Chinese health service system. Subsequently, one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated in baseline and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Patients receiving long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor as the primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia experienced a significant lower incidence of this adverse event, compared with the short-acting one for 2 to 7 days. The outcomes of baseline analysis indicated that long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor had a gain of 0.08 quality-adjusted life years and costed $149 more than the short-acting one, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1792 per quality-adjusted life year. The sensitivity analysis proved the stability of our models and economic efficiency of long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis of neutropenia experienced lower risk of this event compared with those underusing short-acting one. The long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor may be a more cost-effective strategy for primary prophylaxis of neutropenia than short-acting one, considering the Chinese willingness-to-pay threshold of $12158.6 per quality-adjusted life year.

Can MASCC and CISNE scores predict delays of lung cancer chemotherapy after febrile neutropenia?

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) during cancer chemotherapy can lead to morbidity and mortality. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and clinical index of stable febrile neutropenia (CISNE) scores have been widely used to predict the risk of severe medical complications in patients with FN; however, there are few tools for predicting chemotherapy delays or discontinuation after FN.

METHODS

Patients admitted to two university hospitals between 2014 and 2018 with a FN diagnosis during the first cycle of chemotherapy for lung cancer were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Among 539 patients who received 813 courses of chemotherapy for lung cancer, 49 (9%) developed FN during the first treatment cycle. Although all the patients recovered from their primary infection, 19 patients (38.8%) developed serious medical complications, 11 (22.4%) were unable to resume chemotherapy and one (2.0%) declined to resume chemotherapy, and nine (18.4%) died within 90 days. Patients who failed to resume chemotherapy had a lower MASCC score (median 8.5 vs. 17, p < 0.01) and a higher CISNE score (median 3 vs. 1, p < 0.01) at the onset of FN. The specificity to predict the patient who failed to resume chemotherapy was 90% or more with MASCC score ≤9 or CISNE score ≥3, with the sensitivity of 61%. MASCC score ≤ 16 can also be a sensitive indicator with the sensitivity and specificity of 89 and 52%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The MASCC and CISNE scores are useful in identifying lung cancer patients who are unable to resume chemotherapy as scheduled after the onset of FN.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-associated aortitis in a woman with breast cancer: a case report

Background

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is increasingly used to prevent chemotherapy-associated febrile neutropenia. Generally, aortitis is not considered a side effect of G-CSF and is thought to be extremely rare. Aortitis is an inflammation of the aorta and occurs mainly in connective tissue diseases (Takayasu arteritis, giant cell arteritis, etc.) and infectious diseases (bacterial endocarditis, syphilis, etc.). We report herein a rare case of G-CSF associated with aortitis in a woman with breast cancer.

Case presentation

Here, we present a case involving a 63-year-old woman with luminal type stage IIa breast cancer. The patient’s treatment was initiated with docetaxel and cyclophosphamide, with pegfilgrastim (PEG-G) as support. After PEG-G administration on day 3, the patient developed an intermittent fever of up to 39.4 °C on day 10 and visited our outpatient clinic on day 13 with persistent high fever. Laboratory tests revealed a high neutrophil count (14,000/μL) and a high C-reactive protein (CRP) level (42.8 mg/dL) without any other abnormalities. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography scanning revealed soft tissue thickening with weak enhancement around the wall of the thoraco-abdominal aorta, aortic arch and left subclavian artery. The patient did not respond to antimicrobial agents. On the basis of these observations, the patient was diagnosed with PEG-G-induced aortitis, and her condition rapidly improved without corticosteroids.

Conclusions

Clinicians should be aware of aortitis as a potential complication in patients undergoing G-CSF chemotherapy. In cases with persistent high fever after PEG-G administration, and in the absence of infection, aortitis should be suspected.

PEG-rhG-CSF for prophylaxis of neutropenia after chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter, prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) in preventing neutropenia during multiple cycles of chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHOD

In a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial, patients with NSCLC were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to treatment group (PEG-rhG-CSF as primary prophylactic therapy) or control group. Patients in the control group were administered rhG-CSF when white blood cell count was <2.0 × 10⁹ /L or absolute neutrophil count <1.0 × 10⁹ /L. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia. Secondary endpoints included the incidence and duration of grade 3/4 neutropenia in each cycle, the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), delay rate of chemotherapy, prolonged time of chemotherapy, and safety.

RESULTS

Between January 2019 and July 2021, 130 patients were enrolled (treatment group: n = 87, control group: n = 43). The incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia in the treatment group was significantly lower than that in the control group (1.15% vs. 11.63%, p < 0.05). The mean duration of grade 3/4 neutropenia for the treatment and control group was 2.00 and 3.75 days, respectively. There were no statistical differences in the incidence of FN, delay rate of chemotherapy, prolonged time of chemotherapy, and antibiotic use between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Adverse events were reported in 47.13% of patients in the treatment group and 48.84% patients in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary prophylactic treatment with PEG-rhG-CSF could reduce the incidence of neutropenia in patients with NSCLC during multiple cycles of chemotherapy, with acceptable safety and tolerability.

Evaluating the safety and effectiveness of PegaGen® (pegfilgrastim) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: a post-marketing surveillance study

PURPOSE

Phase IV clinical trials are required to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of drugs. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of once-per-cycle administration of PegaGen^® (pegfilgrastim, CinnaGen, Iran) in cancer patients.

METHODS

In this open-label, multicenter, prospective, real-world, post-marketing surveillance study, patients with any type of cancer receiving chemotherapy regimens with a high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) were included if they were prescribed pegfilgrastim for FN prophylaxis. The primary objective of this study was to assess the safety and the secondary objective was to assess the effectiveness of pegfilgrastim in the prevention of FN in cancer patients.

RESULTS

A total of 654 patients (51.73 ± 15.12 years of age) were enrolled and 3615 cycles of pegfilgrastim injections were recorded. The most common malignancies among the study patients were breast cancer (n = 192, 29.36%), lymphoma (n = 131, 20.03%), and gastric cancer (n = 65, 9.94%). The median (Q1, Q3) number of pegfilgrastim cycles per patient was 6 (4, 7). A single 6 mg dose was injected in 99.17% of the cycles. A total number of 816 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 246 patients (37.62%). Bone pain was recorded in 141 patients (21.56%) and in 440 cycles (12.17%). Among all patients, 45 patients (6.88%) experienced FN 51 times, and FN frequency was 1.4% among cycles. Moreover, 14 (2.14%) patients were hospitalized following FN. Antibiotics were administered to 24 patients (3.67%) for FN treatment.

CONCLUSION

The results from this post-marketing surveillance study support the safety and effectiveness of PegaGen^® used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced FN in patients with various types of cancer and treatment regimens.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04460079.

A prospective study to evaluate febrile neutropenia incidence in patients receiving pegfilgrastim on-body injector vs other choices

Purpose

We evaluated the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and related clinical outcomes among patients treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy for nonmyeloid malignancies who received pegfilgrastim on-body injector (OBI) or other options (Other) for FN prophylaxis.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, adult patients with breast, prostate, or lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma at risk for FN were stratified into subgroups based on FN prophylaxis used in the first chemotherapy cycle: pegfilgrastim OBI vs Other (pegfilgrastim or biosimilar pegfilgrastim prefilled syringe, daily filgrastim, or no granulocyte colony–stimulating factor [G-CSF]) for up to 4 planned chemotherapy cycles.

Results

This US study enrolled 2575 eligible patients (OBI, 1624; Other, 951). FN incidence was lower in the OBI group (6.4% [95% CI, 5.2–7.6%]) than in the Other group (9.4% [7.5–11.2%]), with a relative risk (RR) of 0.66 (0.47–0.91; p = .006). A decreased risk of dose delays among patients receiving pegfilgrastim OBI vs Other was observed (RR for ≥ 5 days: 0.64 [0.42–0.96], p = .023; RR for ≥ 7 days: 0.62 [0.40–0.91], p = .016). Adherence, defined as G-CSF support for all chemotherapy cycles, was 94.0% (92.9–95.2%) in the OBI group compared with 58.4% (55.2–61.5%) in the Other group. Compliance with pegfilgrastim, defined as administration the day after chemotherapy, was 88.3% in the OBI group and 48.8% in the prefilled syringe group.

Conclusion

Patients receiving pegfilgrastim OBI had a lower incidence of FN compared with those receiving alternatives. The OBI was associated with improved adherence to and compliance with clinically recommended G-CSF prophylaxis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07226-9.

G-CSF induces CD15+ CD14+ cells from granulocytes early in the physiological environment of pregnancy and the cancer immunosuppressive microenvironment

Objectives

Recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is frequently administered to patients with cancer to enhance granulocyte recovery post-chemotherapy. Clinical trials have also used G-CSF to modulate myeloid cell function in pregnancy and inflammatory diseases. Although the contribution of G-CSF to expanding normal granulocytes is well known, the effect of this cytokine on the phenotype and function of immunosuppressive granulocytic cells remains unclear. Here, we investigate the impact of physiological and iatrogenic G-CSF on an as yet undescribed granulocyte phenotype and ensuing outcome on T cells in the settings of cancer and pregnancy.

Methods

Granulocytes from patients treated with recombinant G-CSF, patients with late-stage cancer and women enrolled on a trial of recombinant G-CSF were phenotyped by flow cytometry. The ability and mechanism of polarised granulocytes to suppress T-cell proliferation were assessed by cell proliferation assays, flow cytometry and ELISA.

Results

We observed that G-CSF leads to a significant upregulation of CD14 expression on CD15⁺ granulocytes. These CD15⁺CD14⁺ cells are identified in the blood of patients with patients undergoing neutrophil mobilisation with recombinant G-CSF, and physiologically in women early in pregnancy or in those treated as a part of a clinical trial. Immunohistochemistry of tumor tissue or placental tissue identified the expression of G-CSF. The G-CSF upregulates the release of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in CD15⁺CD14⁺ cells leading to the suppression of T-cell proliferation.

Conclusions

G-CSF induces a population of ROS⁺ immunosuppressive CD15⁺CD14⁺ granulocytes. Strategies for how recombinant G-CSF can be scheduled to reduce effects on T-cell therapies should be developed in future clinical studies.

Splenic and PB immune recovery in neoadjuvant treated gastrointestinal cancer patients

In recent years, immune therapy, notably immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), in conjunction with chemotherapy and surgery has demonstrated therapeutic activity for some tumor types. However, little is known about the optimal combination of immune therapy with standard of care therapies and approaches. In patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, especially pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy has increased the number of patients who can undergo surgery and improved their responses. However, most chemotherapy is immunosuppressive, and few studies have examined the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) on patient immunity and/or the optimal combination of chemotherapy with immune therapy. Furthermore, the majority of chemo/immunotherapy studies focused on immune regulation in cancer patients have focused on postoperative (adjuvant) chemotherapy and are limited to peripheral blood (PB) and occasionally tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs); representing a minority of immune cells in the host. Our previous studies examined the phenotype and frequencies of myeloid and lymphoid cells in the PB and spleens of GI cancer patients, independent of chemotherapy regimen. These results led us to question the impact of NCT on host immunity. We report herein, unique studies examining the splenic and PB phenotypes, frequencies, and numbers of myeloid and lymphoid cell populations in NCT treated GI cancer patients, as compared to treatment naïve cancer patients and patients with benign GI tumors at surgery. Overall, we noted limited immunological differences in patients 6 weeks following NCT (at surgery), as compared to treatment naive patients, supporting rapid immune normalization. We observed that NCT patients had a lower myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) frequency in the spleen, but not the PB, as compared to treatment naive cancer patients and patients with benign GI tumors. Further, NCT patients had a higher splenic and PB frequency of CD4+ T-cells, and checkpoint protein expression, as compared to untreated, cancer patients and patients with benign GI tumors. Interestingly, in NCT treated cancer patients the frequency of mature (CD45RO+) CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells in the PB and spleens was higher than in treatment naive patients. These differences may also be associated, in part with patient stage, tumor grade, and/or NCT treatment regimen. In summary, the phenotypic profile of leukocytes at the time of surgery, approximately 6 weeks following NCT treatment in GI cancer patients, are similar to treatment naive GI cancer patients (i.e., patients who receive adjuvant therapy); suggesting that NCT may not limit the response to immune intervention and may improve tumor responses due to the lower splenic frequency of MDSCs and higher frequency of mature T-cells.

Use of Pegfilgrastim in Japanese Pediatric Patients With Solid Tumors: A Retrospective Analysis

There are no detailed analyses of regarding pegfilgrastim usage in Japanese pediatric solid tumor patients. The approved dose of pegfilgrastim in Japan is 3.6 mg. We retrospectively evaluated the incidence of dose delays and dose reductions due to neutropenia in pediatric patients with solid tumors receiving chemotherapy with pegfilgrastim between 2015 and 2018. The effects of the timing of pegfilgrastim administration were evaluated. In chemotherapies administered every 2 and 3 weeks, prolongation of chemotherapy cycles was analyzed. Fifty-nine patients received chemotherapy with prophylactic pegfilgrastim for a total 247 cycles. No significant incidence of dose delays was observed with pegfilgrastim administration during the first 1 to 3 days after chemotherapy. When 77 cycles in 2-week regimens were compared with 166 cycles in 3-week regimens, mean cycle durations were 15.19±2.06 and 21.97±2.88 days, respectively (P<0.001). A total of 77 chemotherapy cycles administered every 14 days were subdivided. The incidence of dose delays in pediatric patients receiving chemotherapy for 5 consecutive days was similar to that for 1 day and 2 consecutive days. Pegfilgrastim prophylaxis could be of use for Japanese pediatric patients with solid tumors receiving chemotherapy, including administration every 2 weeks. Its use aids in maintaining the chemotherapy schedule.

Comparative Study of Adverse Drug Reactions Associated with Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim Using the EudraVigilance Database

Simple Summary

The most commonly reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to filgrastim (FIL) and pegfilgrastim (PEG-F) were obtained and analyzed from the European EudraVigilance (EV) database. Frequently reported ADRs for FIL and PEG-F are pyrexia, bone pain, back pain, neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. No statistical difference in the probability of bone pain between FIL and PEG-F was observed. To further depict the safety of FIL and PEG-F, there is a further need to examine the real-life data.

Abstract

The primary prophylaxis with filgrastim (FIL) and pegfilgrastim (PEG-F) is recommended to decrease the severity of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN). The commonly reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) with FIL and PEG-F is bone pain. ADRs pertaining to FIL and PEG-F were extracted from the European EudraVigilance (EV) database. The Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) obtained from EV database that reported FIL and PEG-F as the suspected drug were analyzed. Registered ADRs (from the groups “General disorders and administration site conditions”, “Blood and lymphatic system disorders”, “Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders” and “Investigations”) for FIL and PEG-F were collected from EV database from 2007 to 5 June 2021. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was used to calculate ICSRs with most common ADRs related to FIL and PEG-F. A total of 17,403 ICSRs described the incidence of most common ADRs of FIL and PEG-F. The commonly reported ADRs for both drugs were pyrexia, bone pain, back pain, neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. The odds ratio of ICSRs belonging to the System Organ Class (SOC) “Investigations” (ROR 1.01 (CI 0.93–1.10)) revealed no significant difference in FIL and PEG-F. However, for the SOCs (General disorders and administration site conditions” and “Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders” ((ROR 1.14 (CI 1.06–1.21); ROR 1.21 (CI 1.18–1.32), respectively), an increased reporting probability with PEG-F was found. The authors reported a lower reporting probability for the SOC “Blood and lymphatic system disorders” for FIL versus PEG-F (ROR 0.75 (CI 0.70–0.80)). Our results have demonstrated that the occurrence of bone pain was similar with FIL and PEG-F. For the incidence of pyrexia and back pain, PEG-F was associated with a higher reporting probability as compared to FIL. However, the incidence of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia was higher in FIL compared to PEG-F. Further evaluation of data from real life is needed.

Analysis of the Safety of Pegfilgrastim Addition in Bleomycin, Etoposide, and Cisplatin Treatment Patients With Germ Cell Tumors

It has been reported that chemotherapy drugs and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administered on the same day can aggravate neutropenia. In the present study, we investigated the safety of pegfilgrastim during bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) therapy. This single-center retrospective study, including 137 cycles of BEP therapy for germ cell tumors between January 2008 and April 2021, investigated safety. Short-acting G-CSF was used for 84 cycles and pegfilgrastim was used for 53 cycles. In the pegfilgrastim group, neutrophil count at nadir was significantly higher than in the G-CSF group (median 1,650/μl and 680/μl, respectively). The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was significantly higher and the duration longer in the G-CSF group. Also, there was no significant difference in the incidence of febrile neutropenia. In conclusion, concomitant use of pegfilgrastim during BEP therapy did not increase neutropenia and was effective in terms of safety.

Mimickers of Large Vessel Giant Cell Arteritis

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is a large-vessel granulomatous vasculitis occurring in patients over 50-year-old. Diagnosis can be challenging because there is no specific biological test or other diagnoses to consider. Two main phenotypes of GCA are distinguished and can be associated. First, cranial GCA, whose diagnosis is usually confirmed by the evidence of a non-necrotizing granulomatous panarteritis on temporal artery biopsy. Second, large-vessel GCA, whose related symptoms are less specific (fever, asthenia, and weight loss) and for which other diagnoses must be implemented if there is neither cephalic GCA nor associated polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) features chronic infection (tuberculosis, Coxiella burnetti), IgG4-related disease, Erdheim Chester disease, and other primary vasculitis (Behçet disease, relapsing polychondritis, or VEXAS syndrome). Herein, we propose a review of the main differential diagnoses to be considered regarding large vessel vasculitis.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Active-Controlled, Escalating Single-Dose Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Profiles of Subcutaneous Eflapegrastim in Healthy Japanese and Caucasian Subjects

Background

Eflapegrastim (Rolontis^®) is a novel long‐acting pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Eflapegrastim has been developed to reduce the duration and incidence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in cancer patients using patient-friendly, less-frequent administration.

Objective

This phase I study aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), and immunogenicity of eflapegrastim following a single subcutaneous administration to healthy Japanese and Caucasian subjects.

Methods

A randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, dose-escalation study was conducted in healthy Japanese and Caucasian subjects. Eligible subjects randomly received a single subcutaneous administration of eflapegrastim (1.1, 3.3, 10, 45, 135, and 270 μg/kg), pegfilgrastim 6 mg, or placebo in a ratio of 6:2:2 (Cohorts 1–2, Caucasian subjects only) or 12:2:2 (Cohorts 3–6, Japanese and Caucasian subjects). Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout the study. Serial blood samples were collected predose and up to day 22 postdose for PK and PD analyses. PK assessments were performed in the 45, 135, and 270 µg/kg dose groups. Antidrug antibodies to eflapegrastim were determined at baseline up to day 42 after the first dose for immunogenicity.

Results

A total of 84 subjects (42 males and 42 females) were enrolled, and 78 (31 Japanese and 47 Caucasian subjects) completed the study as planned. Japanese and Caucasian subjects showed similar PK and PD profiles. In the 45, 135, and 270 µg/kg dose groups, the maximum serum concentration (C_max) of eflapegrastim exhibited a dose-proportional increase, whereas its exposure increased greater than dose proportional in both ethnic groups. The mean area under the effect-time curve (AUEC_last) and maximum serum concentration of both absolute neutrophil count (ANC_max) and CD34⁺ cell count (CD34⁺_max) increased in a dose-dependent manner. There were no significant adverse events attributable to eflapegrastim or pegfilgrastim in both Japanese and Caucasian subjects. No neutralizing antibodies against G‐CSF were detected.

Conclusions

Eflapegrastim was safe and well tolerated at doses up to 270 μg/kg in healthy Japanese and Caucasian subjects. In both ethnic groups, eflapegrastim showed dose-dependent PK and the exposure to eflapegrastim was positively correlated with ANC and CD34⁺ cell count. The comparable PK and PD profiles of eflapegrastim in Japanese and Caucasian subjects may indicate the same dosage regimen is acceptable.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01037543 (23 December 2009).

Efficacy of Plinabulin vs Pegfilgrastim for Prevention of Docetaxel-Induced Neutropenia in Patients With Solid Tumors: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and its clinical consequences is an unmet need for which plinabulin, a selective immunomodulating microtubule-binding agent, is being tested.

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate noninferiority between plinabulin and pegfilgrastim for days of severe neutropenia in cycle 1 in patients with solid tumors treated with docetaxel.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Plinabulin vs Pegfilgrastim for the Prevention of Docetaxel-Induced Neutropenia in Patients With Solid Tumors (PROTECTIVE-1) double-blind phase 3 randomized clinical trial was performed in multiple centers in China, Russia, Ukraine, and the US. Participants included patients with breast, prostate, or non-small cell lung cancer treated with single-agent docetaxel chemotherapy. Data were collected from June 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019. The database was locked on February 18, 2021. Data analysis was based on intention to treat and safety and performed from October 5, 2018, to February 23, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Plinabulin, 40 mg, plus placebo or pegfilgrastim, 6 mg, plus placebo.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was day of severe neutropenia in cycle 1. Additional end points included clinical consequences of CIN (febrile neutropenia, hospitalizations, infections, antibiotic use, and modifications of chemotherapy dose), patient-reported outcomes for bone pain score, markers for immune suppression (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR] of >5), immature neutrophils (band, promyelocyte, and myelocyte counts >0), and safety.

RESULTS

Among the 105 patients included in the analysis (65 [6.19%] women; median age, 59 [range, 31-81] years), the primary end point was met within a noninferiority margin of 0.65 days, with a mean difference of 0.52 days (98.52% CI, 0.40-0.65 days). Grade 4 neutropenia frequency in cycle 1 was not significantly different. Plinabulin had earlier onset of action with less grade 4 neutropenia in week 1 of cycle 1. Plinabulin had fewer adverse clinical consequences with rates of febrile neutropenia (0 of 52 vs 1 of 53 [1.9%]), infections (4 of 52 [7.7%] vs 8 of 53 [15.1%]), chemotherapy dose delay of more than 7 days (2 of 52 [3.8%] vs 3 of 53 [5.7%]), and permanent chemotherapy discontinuation (7 of 52 [13.5%] vs 14 of 53 [26.4%]). Patients receiving plinabulin had significantly less bone pain (difference, -0.67 [95% CI, -1.17 to -0.16]; P = .01) and a better immunosuppressive profile (NLR >5 at day 8, 2 of 52 [3.8%] vs 24 of 51 [46.0%]; P < .001). Plinabulin was well tolerated, with comparable safety to pegfilgrastim.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Plinabulin has comparable efficacy to pegfilgrastim for the prevention of CIN, with better safety and a better immunosuppressive profile. Plinabulin's same-day dosing compared with pegfilgrastim's next-day dosing offers distinct advantages, including reducing use of health care services.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03102606.

[G-CSF for prophylaxis of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia, anemia in cancer : Guidelines on supportive treatment part 1]

Infections in patients with neutropenia following chemotherapy are mostly manifested as fever (febrile neutropenia, FN). Some of the most important determinants of the risk of FN are the type of chemotherapy, the dose intensity and patient-specific factors. When the risk of FN is 20% or more granulopoiesis is prophylactically stimulated with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) after the treatment. Anemia should always be clarified and if necessary be treated according to the cause when symptomatic. If an absolute or functional iron deficiency is present, intravenous iron substitution is mostly necessary. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents can be used after chemotherapy with hemoglobin (Hb) levels less than 10 g/dl (6.2 mmol/l). In cases of chronic anemia and Hb levels less than 7-8 g/dl (<4.3-5.0 mmol/l) the indications for transfusion of erythrocyte concentrates should be assessed primarily based on the individual clinical symptoms.

Long-acting versus short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors among cancer patients after chemotherapy in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) include long-acting ones and short-acting ones. They have been mainly applied in Chinese clinical practice for years to prevent neutropenia. However, which type of G-CSF is more superior has not been conclusively determined.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, clinical trials.gov, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WAN FANG databases for related studies published till August 2021. Revman 5.3 software was used to assess the effectiveness and safety of these 2 types of G-CSFs in patients undergoing chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1916 patients were included in our meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of long-acting G-CSFs and short-acting G-CSFs. We found that the incidence of febrile neutropenia (relative risk [RR] 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-1.17), the recovery time of the absolute neutrophil count (mean difference -0.23; 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03), and the fatigue rate (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.62-1.07) were similar between the long- and the short-acting G-CSFs. However, the long-acting G-CSFs significantly decreased the incidence (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.76-0.96) and shortened the duration (mean difference -0.19; 95% CI -0.38 to 0.00) of severe (grade ≥3) neutropenia, and decreased the rate of bone and/or muscle pain (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.58-0.98).

CONCLUSION

Primary prophylaxis with long-acting G-CSFs was more effective and safer than primary prophylaxis with short-acting G-CSFs in Chinese adults undergoing chemotherapy.

Comparison of Primary and Secondary Prophylaxis Using PEGylated Recombinant Human Granulocyte-Stimulating Factor as a Cost-Effective Measure in Malignant Neoplasms: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Purpose: The aim of the study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PEGylated recombinant human granulocyte-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) as a means of achieving primary and secondary prophylaxis against chemotherapy-induced neutropenia cancer cases. Methods: Individuals who underwent PEG-rhG-CSF therapeutics were monitored for 12 months, together with thorough examination of individual medical records for extracting medical care costs. Both prophylaxis-based therapeutic options (primary/secondary) were scrutinized for cost-effectiveness, using a decision-making analysis model which derived the perspective of Chinese payers. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of the model. Results: In summary, 130 clinical cases treated using PEG-rhG-CSF prophylaxis were included in this study: 51 within the primary prophylaxis (PP) group and 79 within the secondary prophylaxis (SP) group. Compared with SP, PP-based PEG-rhG-CSF successfully contributed to a 14.3% reduction in febrile neutropenia. In general, PP was estimated to reduce costs by $4,701.81 in comparison to SP, with a gain of 0.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Equivalent results were found in differing febrile neutropenia (FN) risk subgroups. Sensitivity analyses found the model outputs to be most affected for the average time of hospitalization and for the cost of FN. Conclusion: From the perspective of Chinese payers, PP with PEG-rhG-CSF should be considered cost-effective compared to SP strategies in patients who received chemotherapy regimens with a middle- to high-risk of FN.

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.

Polyethylene Glycol Immunogenicity: Theoretical, Clinical, and Practical Aspects of Anti-Polyethylene Glycol Antibodies

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a flexible, hydrophilic simple polymer that is physically attached to peptides, proteins, nucleic acids, liposomes, and nanoparticles to reduce renal clearance, block antibody and protein binding sites, and enhance the half-life and efficacy of therapeutic molecules. Some naïve individuals have pre-existing antibodies that can bind to PEG, and some PEG-modified compounds induce additional antibodies against PEG, which can adversely impact drug efficacy and safety. Here we provide a framework to better understand PEG immunogenicity and how antibodies against PEG affect pegylated drug and nanoparticles. Analysis of published studies reveals rules for predicting accelerated blood clearance of pegylated medicine and therapeutic liposomes. Experimental studies of anti-PEG antibody binding to different forms, sizes, and immobilization states of PEG are also provided. The widespread use of SARS-CoV-2 RNA vaccines that incorporate PEG in lipid nanoparticles make understanding possible effects of anti-PEG antibodies on pegylated medicines even more critical.

Biosimilars accessible in the market for the treatment of cancer

Biosimilars are the biological product clinically identical to a biologic reference standard regarding their strength, purity, and safety. A large segment of biosimilars has been developed for the treatment of cancer. This review aims to discuss various facets of biosimilars and explicates on biosimilars accessible in the market for cancer clinical intervention. It also illustrates the outcomes of recent clinical trial studies concerning biosimilars. Further, it also crosstalk the safety profiles, regulatory approval requirements, and allied challenges therein. The work will be of significant interest to researchers working in the field of biologics and biosimilars.

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

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

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.

Prophylaxis of neutropenia with mecapegfilgrastim in patients with non-myeloid malignancies: a real-world study

Background

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is commonly encountered in clinical practice. The management of neutropenia has been evolving from short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) to long-acting G-CSFs. However, an evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of long-acting G-CSFs in clinical practice is still lacking.

Methods

This multicenter, non-interventional study was aimed at exploring the safety and effectiveness of mecapegfilgrastim in different cancer patients in China. All patients provided written informed consent prior to the study and were treated according to routine clinical practice. Different prophylactic strategies (primary or secondary prophylaxis) were also compared.

Results

This study included 638 patients from May 2019 to November 2020. More than half of the participants were breast cancer patients. The mean age of all the patients was 56 years. White blood cell increase (6.2%) was the most frequently reported adverse event (AE) possibly related to the study drug. No unexpected AEs were reported. Grade ≥3 neutropenia in chemotherapy treatment cycle 1 was reported in 36 (5.6%) patients. Incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia in cycle 1 in the primary and secondary prophylaxis subgroups were of 4.3% and 9.2%, respectively. A decreasing trend of severe neutropenia incidence was observed from cycle 1 to cycle 4.

Conclusions

Mecapegfilgrastim was generally well tolerated, and no unexpected AEs were observed in this study. Primary administration of mecapegfilgrastim led to a lower incidence of neutropenia than did secondary administration. Continuous administration of mecapegfilgrastim could keep the incidence of neutropenia to a relatively low level.

Comparing the efficacy and side-effects of PDLASTA® (Pegfilgrastim) with PDGRASTIM® (Filgrastim) in breast cancer patients: a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of a single dose (Pegfilgrastim or PDL) or repeated six daily injections (Filgrastim or PDG) during chemotherapy courses in breast cancer patients in a non-inferiority clinical trial.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 80 patients were recruited and allocated randomly to two equal arms. In one group, a single subcutaneous dose of PDL was injected the day after receiving the chemotherapy regimen in each cycle. The second arm received a subcutaneous injection of PDG for six consecutive days in each cycle of treatment. The side effects of GCF treatment and its effect on blood parameters were compared in each cycle and during eight cycles of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Hematologic parameters showed no significant differences in any of the treatment courses between the two study groups. The comparison of WBC (p = 0.527), Hgb (p = 0.075), Platelet (p = 0.819), Neutrophil (p = 0.575), Lymphocyte (p = 705) and ANC (p = 0.675) changes during the eight courses of treatment also revealed no statistically significant difference between the two study groups. Side effects including headache, injection site reaction and muscle pain had a lower frequency in patients receiving PDL drugs.

CONCLUSION

It seems that PDL is non-inferior in efficacy and also less toxic than PDG. Since PDL can be administered in a single dose and is also less costly, it can be regarded as a cost-effective drug for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

IRCT20190504043465N1 , May 2019.

Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Mobilized With Pegylated Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Ameliorates Severe Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease Through Enrichment of Monocytic Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells in the Graft: A Real World Experience

We compared the effectiveness and safety of pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (peg-G-CSF) vs. non-peg-G-CSF for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in a real-world setting. We included 136 consecutive healthy donors treated with non–peg-G-CSF (n = 53) or peg-G-CSF (n = 83), and 125 consecutive recipients (n = 42 and 83, respectively) in this study. All harvesting was completed successfully. No significant difference in leukapheresis number and adverse events frequency was observed, nor were there severe adverse events leading to discontinuation of mobilization. The leukapheresis products mobilized by peg-G-CSF had higher total nucleated cells (p < 0.001), monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (p < 0.001), granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (p = 0.004) and B cells (p = 0.019). CD34+ cells and other lymphocyte subsets (T cells, regulatory T cells, natural killer [NK] cells, etc.) were similar in both apheresis products. Patients who received grafts mobilized by peg-G-CSF exhibited a lower incidence of grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (p = 0.001). The 1-year cumulative incidence of chronic graft-versus-host disease and relapse, 1-year probability of graft-versus-host disease-free relapse-free survival, and overall survival did not differ significantly between subgroups. Our results suggest that collecting allogeneic stem cells after the administration of peg-G-CSF is feasible and safe. Peg-G-CSF mobilized grafts may reduce severe acute graft-versus-host disease compared with non-peg-G-CSF mobilized grafts after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The beneficial effects of a peg-G-CSF graft might be mediated by increased numbers of monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

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).

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

Pharmacokinetics and safety of pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in children with acute leukaemia

AIMS

This open-label, phase I study evaluated the pharmacokinetics and safety of pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in children with acute leukaemia.

METHODS

PEG-rhG-CSF was administered as a single 100 mcg/kg (3 mg maximum dose) subcutaneous injection at the end of each chemotherapy period when neutropenia occurred. Blood samples were obtained from patients treated with PEG-rhG-CSF. PEG-rhG-CSF serum concentrations were determined by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Population pharmacokinetic (PPK) analysis was implemented using the nonlinear mixed-effects model. Short-term safety was evaluated through adverse events collection (registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 03844360).

RESULTS

A total of 16 acute leukaemia patients (1.8-13.6 years) were included, of whom two (12.5%) had grade 3 neutropenia, six (37.5%) had grade 4 neutropenia, and eight (50.0%) had severe neutropenia. For PPK modelling, 64 PEG-rhG-CSF serum concentrations were obtainable. A one-compartment model with first-order elimination was used for pharmacokinetic data modelling. The current weight was a significant covariate. The median (range) of clearance (CL) and area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) were 5.65 (1.49-14.45) mL/h/kg and 16514.75 (6632.45-54423.30) ng·h/mL, respectively. Bone pain, pyrexia, anaphylaxis and nephrotoxicity were not observed. One patient died 13 days after administration, and the objective assessment of causality was that an association with PEG-rhG-CSF was "possible".

CONCLUSIONS

The AUC of PEG-rhG-CSF (100 mcg/kg, 3 mg maximum dose) in paediatric patients with acute leukaemia were similar to those of PEG-rhG-CSF (100 mcg/kg) in children with sarcoma. PEG-rhG-CSF is safe, representing an important therapeutic option for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in paediatric patients with acute leukaemia.

Biosimilar Pegfilgrastim: Improving Access and Optimising Practice to Supportive Care that Enables Cure

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious complication of chemotherapy, which can cause significant morbidity and mortality, result in dose delays and reductions and, ultimately, reduce cancer survival. Over the past decade, the availability of biosimilar filgrastim (short-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) has transformed patient access, with clear evidence of clinical benefit at preventing FN at reduced costs. In 2019, seven biosimilar pegfilgrastims (long-acting G-CSFs) were licensed, creating optimal market conditions and choice for prescribers. FN affects up to 117 per 1000 cancer patients, with mortality rates in the range of 2–21%. By reducing FN incidence and improving chemotherapy relative dose intensity (RDI), G-CSF has been associated with a 3.2% absolute survival benefit. Guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis and that filgrastim be administered for 10–14 days, while pegfilgrastim is administered once per cycle. When taken according to the guidelines, pegfilgrastim and filgrastim are equally effective. However, in routine clinical practice, filgrastim is often under-dosed (< 7 days) and has been shown to be inferior to pegfilgrastim at reducing FN incidence, hospitalisations and maintaining RDI. Once-per-cycle administration with pegfilgrastim might also aid patient adherence. The introduction of biosimilar pegfilgrastim should instigate a rethink of neutropenia management. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim offers countries using biosimilar filgrastim opportunities to improve adherence and thus cancer survival, whilst offering economic benefits for countries using reference pegfilgrastim. These benefits can be realised in full if biosimilar pegfilgrastim becomes part of routine clinical practice supported by drug and therapeutic committees implementing guidelines with multidisciplinary support in the hospital.

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.

The incidence and clinical features of PEGylated filgrastim-induced acute aortitis in patients with breast cancer

Although PEGylated filgrastim-induced aortitis is very rare and unknown clinically, some cases were reported and increasing, especially in breast cancer patients. The present study investigated the prevalence, clinical features and treatment of aortitis induced by PEGylated filgrastim in patients with breast cancer. A total of 2068 consecutive patients who underwent neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy with PEGylated filgrastim for breast cancer were enrolled. From the medical record, clinical, laboratory, medication, and imaging evaluation findings were collected. PEGylated filgrastim-induced aortitis was established in 0.3% of the study population. Common clinical presentations included extremely high fever and chest/back pain with high levels of inflammatory markers without any signs of infection. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography scans revealed typical enhancing wall thickening and periaortic soft tissue infiltration at various levels of aorta. All patients improved rapidly after treatment with modest doses of prednisolone (0.5 mg/kg/day) without any complications. Clinicians should be aware of aortitis as a possible complication of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor therapy, especially PEGylated filgrastim, given the frequent misdiagnoses in neutropenic patients undergoing chemotherapy.

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.

A comparison of eflapegrastim to pegfilgrastim in the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy (RECOVER): A Phase 3 study

Eflapegrastim (Rolontis^®) is a novel, long‐acting hematopoietic growth factor consisting of a recombinant human granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (rhG‐CSF) analog conjugated to a human IgG4 Fc fragment via a short polyethylene glycol linker. We report results from a second pivotal, randomized, open‐label, Phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of eflapegrastim to pegfilgrastim for reducing the risk of chemotherapy‐induced neutropenia. Patients with Stage I to IIIA early‐stage breast cancer (ESBC) were randomized 1:1 to fixed‐dose eflapegrastim 13.2 mg (3.6 mg G‐CSF) or pegfilgrastim (6 mg G‐CSF) administered one day after standard docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC) therapy for four cycles. The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority (NI) of eflapegrastim compared to pegfilgrastim in mean duration of severe neutropenia (DSN; Grade 4) in Cycle 1. A total of 237 eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either eflapegrastim (n = 118) or pegfilgrastim (n = 119). Cycle 1 severe neutropenia was observed in 20.3% (n = 24) of patients receiving eflapegrastim and 23.5% (n = 28) receiving pegfilgrastim. The DSN of eflapegrastim in Cycle 1 was noninferior to pegfilgrastim with a mean difference of −0.074 days (NI P‐value < .0001). Noninferiority was maintained throughout the four treatment cycles (P < .0001 in all cycles). Other efficacy endpoints results were comparable between treatment arms, and adverse events, irrespective of causality and grade, were comparable between treatment arms. The results demonstrate noninferior efficacy and comparable safety for eflapegrastim, at a lower G‐CSF dose, vs pegfilgrastim. The potential for the increased potency of eflapegrastim to deliver improved clinical benefit warrants further clinical study.

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.