Efficacy and Safety of Filgrastim and Its Biosimilars to Prevent Febrile Neutropenia in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study and Meta-Analysis

Profiling risk factors for separation of infection complications in patients with gastrointestinal and nodal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for infection complications in patients with gastrointestinal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (GI-DLBCL) and nodal DLBCL (N-DLBCL) during treatment, respectively.

METHODS

Total 51 GI-DLBCL patients and 80 N-DLBCL patients were included after retrieving clinical data from a single medical center in the past ten years. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to analyze patients' data, including baseline demographics, treatments and laboratory values, to determine independent risk factors of infection in these patients.

RESULTS

Total 28 of 51 patients (54.9%) in the GI-DLBCL group and 52 of 80 patients (65%) in the N-DLBCL group were observed infection events during treatment. A multivariate logistic regression model revealed that Ann-arbor stage IV (P = 0.034; odds ratio [OR]: 10.635; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.152-142.712), extra-nodal lesions ≥ 2 (P = 0.041; OR: 23.116; 95%CI: 1.144-466.949) and high serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) at the time of diagnosis (LDH > 252U/L; P = 0.033; OR: 6.058; 95%CI: 1.159-31.659) were independent risk factors for the development of infection in patients with GI-DLBCL after systemic treatment. In the N-DLBCL group, high serum C-reactive protein (CRP) (P = 0.027; OR: 1.104; 95%CI: 1.011-1.204) and a low platelet count (P = 0.041; OR: 0.991; 95%CI: 0.982-1.000) at routine blood tests just before infection occurred were identified as significant risk factors related to infection events during treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Discordant independent risk factors induced infection may be present during the treatment in patients with GI-DLBCL and N-DLBCL. Close monitoring these risk factors is likely an effective strategy to prevent microbial infections in these patients.

Effect of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor on the Development of Spermatogenesis in the Adulthood of Juvenile AML Mice Model Treated with Cytarabine

Pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML) generally occurs de novo. The treatment of AML includes cytarabine (CYT) and other medications. The granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (GCSF) is used in the clinic in cases of neutropenia after chemotherapies. We show that the administration of GCSF in combination with CYT in AML-diagnosed mice (AML+CYT+GCSF) extended the survival of mice for additional 20 days. However, including GCSF in all treatment modalities does not affect the testis' weight or the histology of the seminiferous tubules (STs). We show that GCSF does not affect normal ST histology from AML-, CYT-, or (AML+CYT)-treated groups compared to the relevant treated group without GCSF 2, 4, and 5 weeks post-injection. However, when comparing the percentages of normal STs between the AML+CYT+GCSF-treated groups and those without GCSF, we observe an increase of 17%-42% in STs at 4 weeks and 5.5 weeks post-injection. Additionally, we show that the injection of GCSF into the normal, AML-alone, or CYT-alone groups, or in combination with AML, significantly decreases the percentage of STs with apoptotic cells compared to the relevant groups without GCSF and to the CT (untreated mice) only 2 weeks post-injection. We also show that injection of GCSF into the CT group increases the examined spermatogonial marker PLZF within 2 weeks post-injection. However, GCSF does not affect the count of meiotic cells (CREM) but decreases the post-meiotic cells (ACROSIN) within 4 weeks post-injection. Furthermore, GCSF not only extends the survival of the AML+CYT-treated group, but it also leads to the generation of sperm (1.2 ± 0.04 × 106/mL) at 5.5 weeks post-injection. In addition, we demonstrate that the injection of GCSF into the CT group increases the RNA expression level of IL-10 but not IL-6 compared to CT 2 weeks post-treatment. However, the injection of GCSF into the AML-treated group reverses the expression levels of both IL-10 and IL-6 to normal levels compared to CT 2 weeks post-injection. Thus, we suggest that the addition of GCSF to the regimen of AML after CYT may assist in the development of future therapeutic strategies to preserve male fertility in AML prepubertal patients.

Cost-efficiency analysis of conversion to biosimilar filgrastim for supportive cancer care and resultant expanded access analysis to supportive care and early-stage HER2+ breast cancer treatment in Saudi Arabia: simulation study

AIMS

This study estimated, for Saudi Arabia, the cost-efficiency of converting patients from reference Neupogen and Neulastim to one of two filgrastim biosimilars (Nivestim, Zarzio); the budget-neutral expanded access to supportive care with biosimilar filgrastim and therapeutic care to ado-trastuzumab emtansine thus afforded; and the number-needed-to-convert (NNC) to provide supportive or therapeutic treatment to one patient.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Replicating prior studies, we modeled the cost-efficiencies gained from converting varying proportions of a hypothetical panel of 4,000 patients undergoing six cycles of cancer treatment from Neupogen or Neulastim to one of the two biosimilar G-CSF formulations, using national cost inputs. Cost-savings in USD were used to estimate the additional doses of biosimilar G-CSF and expanded access to ado-trastuzumab emtansine on a budget-neutral basis, and NNC to purchase one additional dose of supportive or therapeutic treatment.

RESULTS

Savings from conversion from reference to a biosimilar filgrastim were $3,086,400 (Nivestim) and $3,460,800 (Zarzio). With reference pegfilgrastim, savings from conversion were $11,712,240 (Nivestim) and $12,086,640 (Zarzio). Biosimilar conversion from reference to biosimilar filgrastim enabled expanded access to ado-trastuzumab emtansine ranging from 61 patients (5 days, Nivestim) to 191 patients (14 days, Zarzio). For supportive care, biosimilar conversion enabled expanded access ranging from 8,244 patients (5 days, Nivestim) to 25,882 patients (14 days, Zarzio). For biosimilar conversion from daily filgrastim, the NNC for treatment with ado-trastuzumab emtansine decreased as days of injections increased [5 days: 395 (Nivestim), 352 (Zarzio); 14 days: 141(Nivestim), 126 (Zarzio)]. Alternately, for biosimilar conversion from single-injection pegfilgrastim to daily biosimilar filgrastim, the NNC for treatment with ado-trastuzumab emtansine rose as days of injections increased, being highest under the 14-day scenario (146, Nivestim; 130, Zarzio).

CONCLUSION

This simulation study demonstrated significant potential cost-savings from biosimilar conversion. These savings provide budget-neutral increased access to supportive and therapeutic cancer care.

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.