Cost effectiveness of primary pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in patients with breast cancer at risk of febrile neutropenia

Impact of primary prophylaxis by pegfilgrastim in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) are common conditions that lead to dose reduction or delayed chemotherapy in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Primary prophylaxis (PP) with long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was introduced in South Korea in 2014. We aimed to investigate the effects of PP on FN-related hospitalization and death in patients with DLBCL receiving rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Korean individuals (n = 11,491) with incident DLBCL and receiving R-CHOP during 2010-2016 were followed for FN-related hospitalization and mortality. The PP exposure group (patients during 2014-2015, n = 3599), patients during 2010-2016 (n = 11,491), and patients receiving PP during 2014-2016 (n = 4421) were compared with the non-exposure group (patients during July 2011-June 2013, n = 3017), patients in 2013 (n = 1596), and patients not receiving PP during 2014-2016 (n = 1289), respectively. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using the Cox model. The PP exposure group had 16% lower FN-related hospitalizations than the non-exposure group (HR = 0.84, P < 0.001). PP exposure had no beneficial effect on 1-year (HR = 0.98, P = 0.782) and 5-year mortality (HR = 0.97, P = 0.474). Patients in 2014 (HR = 0.85, P < 0.001), 2015 (HR = 0.88, P = 0.003), and 2016 (HR = 0.80, P < 0.001) had a decreased risk of FN-related hospitalizations compared with those in 2013. Among patients receiving their first R-CHOP cycle during 2014-2016, the HR for FN-related hospitalization was 0.90 (P = 0.014) in PP users compared with non-users. PP with a long-acting G-CSF lowered the FN-related hospitalization risk but did not benefit survival in patients with DLBCL receiving R-CHOP.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pegfilgrastim in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving ramucirumab plus docetaxel in Japan

PURPOSE

The dose-limiting factor of ramucirumab plus docetaxel (RAM + DTX) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is febrile neutropenia (FN), which has a high incidence in Asians. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim (Peg-G) in patients with NSCLC receiving RAM + DTX in Japan.

METHODS

We simulated model patients treated with RAM + DTX in Japan and developed a decision-analytical model for patients receiving Peg-G prophylaxis or no primary prophylaxis. The expected cost, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of each treatment were calculated from the perspective of a Japanese healthcare payer. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at 45,867 United States dollars (USD) (5 million Japanese yen) per QALY gained. The probabilities, utility values, and other costs were obtained from published sources. Deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and probabilistic analysis were conducted to evaluate the effect of each parameter and robustness of the base-case results.

RESULTS

The expected cost and QALYs were 20,275 USD and 0.701 for Peg-G prophylaxis and 17,493 USD and 0.672 for no primary prophylaxis, respectively. The ICER was calculated to be 97,519 USD per QALY gained. The results were most sensitive to FN risk with Peg-G. When FN risk with no primary prophylaxis exceeded 51% or the cost of Peg-G was less than 649 USD per injection, the ICER was below the WTP threshold. The probabilistic analysis revealed a 9.1% probability that the ICER was below the WTP threshold.

CONCLUSION

Peg-G is not cost-effective in patients with NSCLC receiving RAM + DTX in Japan.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Trilaciclib and the economic value of multilineage myeloprotection from chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression among patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy

AIMS

Proliferating hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) are susceptible to chemotherapy-induced damage, resulting in myelosuppressive adverse events (AEs) such as neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia that are associated with high health care costs and decreased quality of life (QoL). In this study, a trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to help assess the economic impact of administering trilaciclib, a myeloprotective therapy that protects multilineage HSPCs from chemotherapy-induced damage, prior to standard first-line chemotherapy, using data from a pivotal Phase II study of trilaciclib in the setting of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC, NCT03041311).

METHOD

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of administering trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone among patients with ES-SCLC from a United States payer perspective. Data on the rate and frequency of myelosuppressive AEs and health utility were derived from the pivotal study of trilaciclib. Costs of managing myelosuppressive AEs and costs of chemotherapy treatment were sourced from published literature. Outcomes included the number of myelosuppressive AEs, costs (in 2021 US dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost, incremental QALY, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

Administering trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy was associated with a reduction in neutropenia (82%), febrile neutropenia (75%), anemia (43%), and thrombocytopenia (96%) compared with chemotherapy alone. Additionally, trilaciclib prior to chemotherapy was cost-saving compared with chemotherapy alone ($99,919 vs $118,759, respectively) and associated with QALY improvement (0.150 vs 0.145, respectively). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed 58% of iterations projecting cost savings and QALY improvement with trilaciclib.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that the use of trilaciclib prior to first-line chemotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC can be cost-beneficial owing to fewer myelosuppressive AEs and lower costs, together with a favorable QoL profile.

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.

Febrile neutropenia and role of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in docetaxel and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for breast cancer

PURPOSE

Febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence during docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) chemotherapy, known as a high-risk regimen, differs among countries. The role of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in FN is unclear. This study aimed to investigate FN frequency and relative dose intensity (RDI) of TC chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer and identify the correct population requiring prophylactic G-CSF.

METHODS

In total, 205 patients with breast cancer were scheduled for TC chemotherapy (docetaxel/cyclophosphamide 75/600 mg/m², every 3 weeks, 4 cycles) as adjuvant chemotherapy. Trastuzumab (8 mg/kg; continued with 6 mg/kg) was administrated intravenously for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive cancer. Fifty-five patients received primary prophylactic measures (G-CSF: 20 and antibiotics: 35). We investigated the frequency of FN and hospitalization, RDI, and the factors related to FN, adverse events, hospitalization, and RDI.

RESULTS

FN occurred in 70 patients (35.7%). FN incidence was noted in 41.1% without any prophylactic measures and in 5.0% with prophylactic G-CSF. In multivariate analysis, the independent risk factors of FN were older age (≥ 60 years, P = 0.017) and without primary prophylactic G-CSF (P = 0.011). Eleven patients (5.6%) were hospitalized of which 8 (72.7%) were elderly. The median RDIs of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide were 96.7% and 99.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

FN frequency during TC chemotherapy was high, and primary prophylactic G-CSF reduced FN incidence. Primary prophylactic G-CSF is an effective therapy for preventing FN during TC chemotherapy. However, prophylactic G-CSF should be considered for elderly patients based on the low hospitalization rate and the high RDI.

The association between chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and breast cancer subtype in Japanese patients

Background Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is a common and potentially lethal side effect; therefore, predicting febrile neutropenia development is important. Objective This study examined the risk factors for febrile neutropenia development according to breast cancer subtype among Japanese patients receiving chemotherapy. Methods This single-center retrospective study evaluated 60 outpatients who received chemotherapy for breast cancer (epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide or docetaxel plus cyclophosphamide). Their characteristics were evaluated to identify factors associated with febrile neutropenia development. Results Thirty-three patients developed febrile neutropenia and 27 patients did not. The risk of developing febrile neutropenia was significantly associated with estrogen receptor negativity (p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis further confirmed that estrogen receptor negativity was an independent risk factor for febrile neutropenia development (odds ratio: 4.35, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-18.0). Moreover, the highest rate of febrile neutropenia was observed in patients with hormone receptor (estrogen and/or progesterone receptor)-negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer. Conclusion In addition to the known risk factors for febrile neutropenia, our findings revealed that the risk of developing chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is associated with the hormone receptor-negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive subtype in Japanese patients with breast cancer.

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.

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.

Systems Biology Analysis of the Effect and Mechanism of Qi-Jing-Sheng-Bai Granule on Leucopenia in Mice

Qi-Jing-Sheng-Bai granule (QJSB) is a newly developed traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) formula. Clinically, it has been used for the treatment of leucopenia. However, its pharmacological mechanism needs more investigation. In this study, we firstly tested the effects of QJSB on leucopenia using mice induced by cyclophosphamide. Our results suggested that QJSB significantly raised the number of peripheral white blood cells, platelets and nucleated bone marrow cells. Additionally, it markedly enhanced the cell viability and promoted the colony formation of bone marrow mononuclear cells. Furthermore, it reversed the serum cytokines IL-6 and G-CSF disorders. Then, using transcriptomics datasets and metabonomic datasets, we integrated transcriptomics-based network pharmacology and metabolomics technologies to investigate the mechanism of action of QJSB. We found that QJSB regulated a series of biological processes such as hematopoietic cell lineage, homeostasis of number of cells, lymphocyte differentiation, metabolic processes (including lipid, amino acid, and nucleotide metabolism), B cell receptor signaling pathway, T cell activation and NOD-like receptor signaling pathway. In a summary, QJSB has protective effects to leucopenia in mice probably through accelerating cell proliferation and differentiation, regulating metabolism response pathways and modulating immunologic function at a system level.

Reduced dose pegfilgrastim is associated with less bone pain without increased neutropenia: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy for breast cancer is associated with a high risk of neutropenia. Pegfilgrastim reduces the risk of neutropenic fever but commonly causes bone pain.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate whether a reduced dose of pegfilgrastim (3 mg) reduced the frequency of bone pain without compromising efficacy.

METHODS

Records reviewed from breast cancer patients who received at least one 3 mg dose of pegfilgrastim, white blood count (WBC), and absolute granulocyte counts (AGC) were collected. Musculoskeletal pain scale was collected at each visit.

RESULTS

265 treatments from 36 women were analyzed. There was no difference in post-treatment AGC between 3 versus 6 mg. Leukocytosis (WBC > 20,000 cells/cu mm) was more likely for those treated with 6 mg (chi-square 5.265, p = 0.0215). There was higher change in bone pain in patients who received 6 mg doses compared to none or 3 mg.

LIMITATIONS

In this retrospective, non-randomized study, we found the majority of patients received the reduced 3 mg dose after intolerance to the 6 mg dose. It is unknown if smaller or larger doses than 3 mg would achieve similar results or whether 3 mg dose would be effective as an initial therapy or for patients receiving different chemotherapy regimens. Pain is observed despite premedication with naproxen and/or loratidine.

CONCLUSION

Reduced dose of pegfilgrastim 3 mg was less likely to cause bone pain. The reduced dose was not associated with a significant difference in post-treatment AGC or rate of serious infection.

Optimizing Symptoms and Management of Febrile Neutropenia among Cancer Patients: Current Status and Future Directions

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common and serious complication among cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy. FN should be treated as a medical emergency because it can lead to life-threatening complications if appropriate treatment is not initiated immediately. This study provides a critical review on the current management of FN and identifies possible directions to optimize FN management.

Efficacy, safety and proper dose analysis of PEGylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as support for dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy in node positive Chinese breast cancer patients

For high-risk breast cancer patients with positive axillary lymph nodes, dose-dense every-two-week epirubicin/cyclophosphamide-paclitaxel (ddEC-P) regimen is the optimal postoperative adjuvant therapy. However, this regimen is limited by the grade 3/4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN). There is an urgent need to explore the efficacy, safety and proper dosage of PEGylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-G-CSF) as support for ddEC-P in Chinese breast cancer patients with positive axillary lymph nodes. Prospectively, 40 women with stage IIIA to IIIC breast cancer received ddEC-P ± trastuzumab as adjuvant treatment. PEG-G-CSF was injected subcutaneously in a dose of 6 mg or 3 mg on the 2^th day of each treatment cycle. With administration of PEG-G-CSF, all of the 40 patients completed 8 cycles of ddEC-P ± trastuzumab regimen without dose reductions or treatment delays. Moreover, no FN cases were observed. Further analysis showed that the proper dosage of PEG-G-CSF was 6 mg for ddEC treatment, and 3 mg for ddP treatment. PEG-G-CSF exhibits advantages compared with G-CSF in convenient of administration and tolerance for high risk Chinese breast cancer patients. More importantly, the proper dose of PEG-G-CSF for high risk Chinese breast cancer patients during ddEC-P chemotherapy may be 6 mg for ddEC treatment and 3 mg for ddP treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis in chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia among breast cancer and Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients under Taiwan's national health insurance system

RATIONALE, AIM AND OBJECTIVE

The beneficial effects of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis on reducing the risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (CIFN) were well documented throughout the literature. However, existing data regarding its cost-effectiveness were conflicting. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of G-CSF prophylaxis in CIFN under Taiwan's National Health Insurance (NHI) system.

METHODS

Data on clinical outcomes and direct medical costs were derived for 5179 newly diagnosed breast cancer and 629 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) patients from the NHI claims database. Patients were further categorized into three subgroups as "primary-", "secondary-" and "no -" prophylaxis based on their patterns of G-CSF use. Generalized estimating equations were applied to estimate the impact of G-CSF use on the incidence of CIFN. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of primary and secondary prophylactic G-CSF use were calculated and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Primary prophylaxis of G-CSF decreased the incidence of CIFN by 27% and 83%, while secondary prophylaxis by 34% and 22% in breast cancer and NHL patients, respectively. Compared with those with no prophylaxis, the incremental cost per CIFN reduced in primary prophylaxis is $931 and $52 among patients with breast cancer and NHL, respectively. In contrast, secondary prophylaxis is dominated by no prophylaxis and primary prophylaxis in both cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

Primary but not secondary prophylactic use of G-CSF was cost-effective in CIFN in breast cancer and NHL patients under Taiwan's NHI system.

Clinical research in febrile neutropenia in cancer patients: Past achievements and perspectives for the future

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. It can also be the reason for delaying or changing potentially effective treatments and generates substantial costs. It has been recognized for more than 50 years that empirical administration of broad spectrum antibiotics to patients with FN was associated with much improved outcomes; that has become a paradigm of management. Increase in the incidence of microorganisms resistant to many antibiotics represents a challenge for the empirical antimicrobial treatment and is a reason why antibiotics should not be used for the prevention of neutropenia. Prevention of neutropenia is best performed with the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs). Prophylactic administration of G-CSFs significantly reduces the risk of developing FN and consequently the complications linked to that condition; moreover, the administration of G-CSF is associated with few complications, most of which are not severe. The most common reason for not using G-CSF as a prophylaxis of FN is the relatively high cost. If FN occurs, in spite of prophylaxis, empirical therapy with broad spectrum antibiotics is mandatory. However it should be adjusted to the risk of complications as established by reliable predictive instruments such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer. Patients predicted at a low level of risk of serious complications, can generally be treated with orally administered antibiotics and as out-patients. Patients with a high risk of complications should be hospitalized and treated intravenously. A short period of time between the onset of FN and beginning of empirical therapy is crucial in those patients. Persisting fever in spite of antimicrobial therapy in neutropenic patients requires a special diagnostic attention, since invasive fungal infection is a possible cause for it and might require the use of empirical antifungal therapy.

Routine Primary Prophylaxis for Febrile Neutropenia with Biosimilar Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (Nivestim) or Pegfilgrastim Is Cost Effective in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients undergoing Curative-Intent R-CHOP Chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of various strategies of myeloid growth factor prophylaxis for reducing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Singapore who are undergoing R-CHOP chemotherapy with curative intent.

METHODS

A Markov model was created to compare seven prophylaxis strategies: 1) primary prophylaxis (PP) with nivestim (biosimilar filgrastim) throughout all cycles of chemotherapy; 2) PP with nivestim during the first two cycles of chemotherapy; 3) secondary prophylaxis (SP) with nivestim; 4) PP with pegfilgrastim throughout all cycles of chemotherapy; 5) PP with pegfilgrastim during the first two cycles of chemotherapy; 6) SP with pegfilgrastim; and 7) no prophylaxis (NP). The perspective of a hospital was taken and cost-effectiveness was expressed as the cost per episode of FN avoided over six cycles of chemotherapy. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Strategies 3, 6, and 7 were dominated in the base case analysis by strategy 5. The costs associated with strategies 2, 5, 1, and 4 were US$3,813, US$4,056, US$4,545, and US$5,331, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for strategy 5 vs. strategy 2, strategy 1 vs. strategy 5, and strategy 4 vs. strategy 1 were US$13,532, US$22,565, and US$30,452, respectively, per episode of FN avoided. Strategy 2 has the highest probability to be cost-effective (ranged from 48% to 60%) when the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold is lower than US$10,000 per FN episode prevented.

CONCLUSION

In Singapore, routine PP with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (nivestim or pegfilgrastim) is cost-effective for reducing the risk of FN in patients receiving R-CHOP.

Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with early discontinuation of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in US clinical practice

Purpose

Accumulating evidence suggests that not all cancer chemotherapy patients who receive first-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis continue to receive it in subsequent cycles and that these patients may be subsequently at higher risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Additional evidence from US clinical practice is warranted.

Methods

Data from two US private healthcare claims repositories were employed. The source population comprised adults who received “intermediate-risk” or “high-risk” chemotherapy regimens for solid cancers or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and first-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis. From the source population, all patients who did not receive second-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis ("comparison patients”) were matched (1:1) to those who received it (“pegfilgrastim patients”) based on cancer, regimen, and propensity score. Odds ratios (OR) for FN—broad and narrow definitions—during the second chemotherapy cycle were estimated for comparison patients versus pegfilgrastim patients using generalized estimating equations.

Results

A total of 2245 comparison patients (5.3 % of source population) were matched to pegfilgrastim patients; cohorts were well-balanced on baseline characteristics. Second-cycle FN incidence proportions for comparison and pegfilgrastim patients were 3.8 versus 2.2 % based on broad definition and 2.6 versus 0.8 % based on narrow definition; corresponding OR were 1.7 (95 % CI 1.2–2.5, p = 0.002) and 3.5 (95 % CI 2.0–6.0, p < 0.001). Results were similar within cancer/regimen-subgroups and were robust when using alternative methods for confounding adjustment.

Conclusions

In this retrospective evaluation of cancer chemotherapy patients who received first-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in US clinical practice, a clinically relevant minority did not receive second-cycle prophylaxis. Second-cycle FN odds among this subset were significantly higher than they were among those who continued prophylaxis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00520-015-3039-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

G-CSF and GM-CSF in Neutropenia

G-CSF and GM-CSF are used widely to promote the production of granulocytes or APCs. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved G-CSF (filgrastim) for the treatment of congenital and acquired neutropenias and for mobilization of peripheral hematopoietic progenitor cells for stem cell transplantation. A polyethylene glycol-modified form of G-CSF is approved for the treatment of neutropenias. Clinically significant neutropenia, rendering an individual immunocompromised, occurs when their number is <1500/μl. Current guidelines recommend their use when the risk for febrile neutropenia is >20%. GM-CSF (sargramostim) is approved for neutropenia associated with stem cell transplantation. Because of its promotion of APC function, GM-CSF is being evaluated as an immunostimulatory adjuvant in a number of clinical trials. More than 20 million persons have benefited worldwide, and >$5 billion in sales occur annually in the United States.

Pegfilgrastim for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with solid tumors

INTRODUCTION

Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia are the most common and most severe bone marrow toxicities of chemotherapy. Recombinant granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs), both daily (filgrastim and biosimilars, and lenograstim) and long-acting (pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim) formulations, are currently available to counteract the negative consequences of these side effects.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this article is to review the physiopathology of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and its consequences, and the current evidence regarding the pharmacological properties, clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim as a strategy to prevent chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with solid tumors.

EXPERT OPINION

Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and its complications are still a major health-care concern, and the inappropriate employment of G-CSFs in clinical practice can partially explain its burden. Pegfilgrastim has pharmacological advantages over daily G-CSFs that makes it easily administrable, thus reducing the chance of incorrect delivery. The once-per-cycle administration might explain the findings derived from observational studies suggesting a possible superior efficacy of pegfilgrastim over daily G-CSFs. For patients at higher risk of failure with daily G-CSF prophylaxis (e.g. risk of non-compliance, difficulties on performing regular hemograms, high risk of developing febrile neutropenia), pegfilgrastim might be the most appropriate option.

Recommendations for the Use of WBC Growth Factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update the 2006 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs).

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Update Committee and conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews from October 2005 through September 2014. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence by the Update Committee.

RESULTS

Changes to previous recommendations include the addition of tbo-filgrastim and filgrastim-sndz, moderation of the recommendation regarding routine use of CSFs in older patients with diffuse aggressive lymphoma, and addition of recommendations against routine dose-dense chemotherapy in lymphoma and in favor of high-dose-intensity chemotherapy in urothelial cancer. The Update Committee did not address recommendations regarding use of CSFs in acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes in adults.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Prophylactic use of CSFs to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia is warranted when the risk of febrile neutropenia is approximately 20% or higher and no other equally effective and safe regimen that does not require CSFs is available. Primary prophylaxis is recommended for the prevention of febrile neutropenia in patients who are at high risk on the basis of age, medical history, disease characteristics, and myelotoxicity of the chemotherapy regimen. Dose-dense regimens that require CSFs should only be used within an appropriately designed clinical trial or if supported by convincing efficacy data. Current recommendations for the management of patients exposed to lethal doses of total-body radiotherapy, but not doses high enough to lead to certain death as a result of injury to other organs, include the prompt administration of CSFs.

Emergency Room Visits and Hospital Admission Rates After Curative Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

The authors conclude that over half of all patients receiving curative chemotherapy for breast cancer visited the emergency room at least once, and 13% required hospital admissions.

Economic burden of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with lymphoma: a systematic review

The primary objective of this review was to identify the cost components that were most frequently associated with the economic burden of febrile neutropenia (FN) among patients with lymphoma. The secondary objective was to identify any parameter associated with higher FN cost. Ten cost of illness (COI) studies were identified. General characteristics on study design, country, perspective, and patient population were extracted and systematically reported. It was observed that majority (70%) of the studies employed the perspective of healthcare provider. 20% of the studies considered long-term costs. Estimated costs were adjusted to 2013 US dollars and ranged from US$5819 to US$34,756. The cost components that were most frequently associated with economic burden were ward and medication costs. Inpatient management, male gender, discharged dead, and comorbidity were positively associated with higher FN costs. Future COI studies on FN should focus on the accurate estimation on ward and medication costs.

Adjuvant Docetaxel and Cyclophosphamide (DC) with prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on days 8 &12 in breast cancer patients: a retrospective analysis

Purpose

Four cycles of docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (DC) resulted in superior survival than doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide in the treatment of early breast cancer. The original study reported a 5% incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) recommending prophylactic antibiotics with no granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support. The worldwide adoption of this protocol yielded several reports on substantially higher rates of FN events. We explored the use of growth factor (GF) support on days 8 and 12 of the cycle with the original DC protocol.

Methods

Our study included all consecutive patients with stages I–II breast cancer who were treated with the DC protocol at the Institute of Oncology, Davidoff Center (Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel) from April, 2007 to March, 2012. Patient, tumor characteristics, and toxicity were reported. Results: In total, 123 patients received the DC regimen. Median age was 60 years, (range, 25–81 years). Thirty-three patients (26.8%) were aged 65 years and older. Most of the women (87%) adhered to the planned G-CSF protocol (days 8 &12). 96% of the patients completed the 4 planned cycles of chemotherapy. Six patients (5%) had dose reductions, 6 (5%) had treatment delays due to non-medical reasons. Thirteen patients (10.6%) experienced at least one event of FN (3 patients had 2 events), all requiring hospitalization. Eight patients (6.5%) required additional support with G-CSF after the first chemotherapy cycle, 7 because of FN and one due to neutropenia and diarrhea.

In Conclusion

Primary prophylactic G-CSF support on days 8 and 12 of the cycle provides a tolerable option to deliver the DC protocol. Our results are in line with other retrospective protocols using longer schedules of GF support.

Prophylaxis of infectious complications with colony-stimulating factors in adult cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy-evidence-based guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party AGIHO of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

BACKGROUND

Current evidence on myelopoietic growth factors is difficult to overview for the practicing haematologist/oncologist. International guidelines are sometimes conflicting, exclude certain patient groups, or cannot directly be applied to the German health system. This guideline by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) gives evidence-based recommendations for the use of G-CSF, pegylated G-CSF, and biosimilars to prevent infectious complications in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, including those with haematological malignancies.

METHODS

We systematically searched and evaluated current evidence. An expert panel discussed the results and recommendations. We then compared our recommendations to current international guidelines.

RESULTS

We summarised the data from eligible studies in evidence tables, developed recommendations for different entities and risk groups.

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive literature search and expert panel consensus confirmed many key recommendations given by international guidelines. Evidence for growth factors during acute myeloid leukaemia induction chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim use in haematological malignancies was rated lower compared with other guidelines.