Landscape of driver mutations and their clinical effects on Down syndrome-related myeloid neoplasms.

ABSTRACT: Transient abnormal myelopoiesis (TAM) is a common complication in newborns with Down syndrome (DS). It commonly progresses to myeloid leukemia (ML-DS) after spontaneous regression. In contrast to the favorable prognosis of primary ML-DS, patients with refractory/relapsed ML-DS have poor outcomes. However, the molecular basis for refractoriness and relapse and the full spectrum of driver mutations in ML-DS remain largely unknown. We conducted a genomic profiling study of 143 TAM, 204 ML-DS, and 34 non-DS acute megakaryoblastic leukemia cases, including 39 ML-DS cases analyzed by exome sequencing. Sixteen novel mutational targets were identified in ML-DS samples. Of these, inactivations of IRX1 (16.2%) and ZBTB7A (13.2%) were commonly implicated in the upregulation of the MYC pathway and were potential targets for ML-DS treatment with bromodomain-containing protein 4 inhibitors. Partial tandem duplications of RUNX1 on chromosome 21 were also found, specifically in ML-DS samples (13.7%), presenting its essential role in DS leukemia progression. Finally, in 177 patients with ML-DS treated following the same ML-DS protocol (the Japanese Pediatric Leukemia and Lymphoma Study Group acute myeloid leukemia -D05/D11), CDKN2A, TP53, ZBTB7A, and JAK2 alterations were associated with a poor prognosis. Patients with CDKN2A deletions (n = 7) or TP53 mutations (n = 4) had substantially lower 3-year event-free survival (28.6% vs 90.5%; P < .001; 25.0% vs 89.5%; P < .001) than those without these mutations. These findings considerably change the mutational landscape of ML-DS, provide new insights into the mechanisms of progression from TAM to ML-DS, and help identify new therapeutic targets and strategies for ML-DS.

Intracellularly delivered human lactoferrin functions as an activator of Na+/H+ exchanger 7.

Here, we report that human lactoferrin (hLF), known for its anticancer properties, induced intracellular activation of the Na+/H+ exchanger (NHE) 7 in human lung cancer PC-9 cells. Compared to non-fused hLF, the fusion of human serum albumin (HSA) with hLF (hLF-HSA) facilitated its internalization into PC-9 cells in a caveolae-mediated manner, thereby exhibiting enhanced anti-proliferative effects. Although hLF alone did not exhibit any discernible effects, hLF-HSA resulted in organelle alkalization as detected using an acidotropic pH indicator. hLF-HSA-induced elevation of organelle pH and inhibition of cancer growth were abolished by NHE7 siRNA. hLF-HSA upregulated NHE7. Thus, upon cellular uptake, hLF-HSA triggers proton leakage through the upregulation of NHE7. This process led to organelle alkalization, probably in the trans-Golgi network (TGN) as suggested by the localization of NHE7 in PC-9 cells, thereby suppressing lung cancer cell growth. Forcing the cellular uptake of hLF alone using a caveolae-mediated endocytosis activator led to an increase in organelle pH. Furthermore, cell entry of hLF also activated proton-loading NHE7, leading to organelle acidification in the pancreatic cancer cell line MIA PaCa-2. Therefore, the intracellularly delivered hLF functions as an activator of NHE7.

Center effect on allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation outcomes for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

This nationwide study retrospectively examined the center effect on allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) for adult B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The cohort analyses were separated into Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-positive and -negative cases. The patients were divided into low- and high-volume groups according to the number of allo-HSCTs at each facility. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS). This study included 1156 low-volume and 1329 high-volume Ph-negative and 855 low-volume and 926 high-volume Ph-positive cases. In Ph-negative cases, 5-year OS was significantly higher in the high-volume centers at 52.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 49.9-55.5) versus 46.8% (95% CI: 43.8-49.7) for the low-volume centers (P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis identified high volume as a favorable prognostic factor (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81 [95% CI: 0.72-0.92], P < 0.01). Subgroup analysis in Ph-negative cases revealed that the center effects were more evident in patients aged ≥40 years (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.61-0.86, P < 0.01) and those receiving cord blood transplantation (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.48-0.79, P < 0.01). In Ph-positive cases, no significant difference was observed between the high and low-volume centers for 5-year OS (59.5% [95% CI: 56.2-62.7] vs. 54.9% [95% CI: 51.3-58.3], P = 0.054). In multivariate analysis, center volume did not emerge as a significant prognostic indicator. This study showed center effects on survival in Ph-negative but not in Ph-positive cases, highlighting the heterogeneity of the center effect in allo-HSCT for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Collaborative efforts among transplant centers and further validation are essential to improve outcomes.

Efficacy of adding levofloxacin to gemcitabine and nanoparticle-albumin-binding paclitaxel combination therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial (T-CORE2201).

BACKGROUND: Advanced pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths. For patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine and nanoparticle albumin-binding paclitaxel (nabPTX) combination (GEM/nabPTX) therapy is one of the recommended first-line treatments. Several retrospective studies have suggested that the addition of levofloxacin improves the efficacy of GEM/nabPTX therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. This prospective study aims to evaluate whether the addition of antibiotics improves the treatment efficacy of GEM/nabPTX as a first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, phase 2 trial will included 140 patients. Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the GEM/nabPTX therapy group or the GEM/nabPTX plus levofloxacin group. The primary endpoint for the two groups is median progression-free survival time (mPFS) for the full analysis set (FAS). The secondary endpoints for the two groups are median overall survival (mOS), response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse event (AE) for the FAS and mPFS, mOS, RR, DCR, and AE for the per-protocol set. This study will enroll patients treated with GEM/nabPTX as the first-line chemotherapy for stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma. DISCUSSION: GEM/nabPTX is a standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Recently, the superiority of 5-fluorouracil, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin combination therapy (NALIRIFOX) to GEM/nabPTX as first-line therapy for pancreatic cancer has been reported. However, the efficacy of NALIRIFOX is inadequate. Based on previous retrospective studies, it is hypothesized that treatment efficacy will improve when levofloxacin is added to GEM/nabPTX therapy. If the AEs (such as leukopenia, neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy) that occur at an increased rate with levofloxacin and GEM/nabPTX combination therapy can be carefully monitored and properly managed, this simple intervention can be expected to improve the prognosis of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT; registry number: jRCTs021230005).

Tsc2 mutation rather than Tsc1 mutation dominantly causes a social deficit in a mouse model of tuberous sclerosis complex.

BACKGROUND: Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is an autosomal dominant disorder that is associated with neurological symptoms, including autism spectrum disorder. Tuberous sclerosis complex is caused by pathogenic germline mutations of either the TSC1 or TSC2 gene, but somatic mutations were identified in both genes, and the combined effects of TSC1 and TSC2 mutations have been unknown. METHODS: The present study investigated social behaviors by the social interaction test and three-chambered sociability tests, effects of rapamycin treatment, and gene expression profiles with a gene expression microarray in Tsc1 and Tsc2 double heterozygous mutant (TscD+/-) mice. RESULTS: TscD+/- mice exhibited impairments in social behaviors, and the severity of impairments was similar to Tsc2+/- mice rather than Tsc1+/- mice. Impairments in social behaviors were rescued by rapamycin treatment in all mutant mice. Gene expression profiles in the brain were greatly altered in TscD+/- mice more than in Tsc1+/- and Tsc2+/- mice. The gene expression changes compared with wild type (WT) mice were similar between TscD+/- and Tsc2+/- mice, and the overlapping genes whose expression was altered in mutant mice compared with WT mice were enriched in the neoplasm- and inflammation-related canonical pathways. The "signal transducer and activator of transcription 3, interferon regulatory factor 1, interferon regulatory factor 4, interleukin-2R α chain, and interferon-γ" signaling pathway, which is initiated from signal transducer and activator of transcription 4 and PDZ and LIM domain protein 2, was associated with impairments in social behaviors in all mutant mice. LIMITATIONS: It is unclear whether the signaling pathway also plays a critical role in autism spectrum disorders not caused by Tsc1 and Tsc2 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that TSC1 and TSC2 double mutations cause autistic behaviors similarly to TSC2 mutations, although significant changes in gene expression were attributable to the double mutations. These findings contribute to the knowledge of genotype-phenotype correlations in TSC and suggest that mutations in both the TSC1 and TSC2 genes act in concert to cause neurological symptoms, including autism spectrum disorder.

Reduced-intensity allogenic transplantation for children and adolescents with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Survival rates of patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive ALL (Ph+ALL) have improved considerably with the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI); however, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) continues to play an important role. Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens have been widely applied particularly for older patients, but their validity for children and adolescents with Ph+ALL has not been investigated. In this study, data from patients receiving HSCT for de novo Ph+ALL in first or second remission at ages younger than 25 years and with a history of pre-HSCT TKI therapy were retrospectively collected through the nationwide registry in Japan. In 265 patients who received myeloablative conditioning (MAC) and 33 patients receiving RIC, 5-year leukemia-free survival (LFS) rates were 67.3% and 79.8%, respectively (p = 0.142). Multivariate analysis of LFS, focusing on patients with good performance status, identified RIC as a significant prognostic factor for LFS (hazard ratio 0.32, p = 0.032), as well as older age, higher leukocyte count at diagnosis, and disease with additional chromosomal abnormalities. These trends were similar when we focused on patients who received prophylactic post-HSCT TKI treatment, as 5-year LFS was 81.0% for MAC and 84.4% for RIC (p = 0.748). In summary, HSCT with RIC regimen showed at least comparable LFS to HSCT with MAC regimen, and RIC was an independent favorable prognostic factor on multivariate analysis adjusting potential prognostic factors. While patient numbers were limited, our data suggest that RIC may be safely applied in this group, particularly combined with prophylactic post-HSCT TKI maintenance therapy.

Topical therapy and skin care for transplant-associated atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: New-onset allergic diseases, such as food allergy or atopic dermatitis, can develop after allogeneic transplantation. There are limited reports of new-onset atopic dermatitis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in children and adolescents, and its treatment is yet to be established. The pathogenesis may differ from typical atopic dermatitis in terms of alloimmunity including graft-versus-host disease. METHODS: We present five children and adolescents with new-onset atopic dermatitis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The characteristics and clinical profiles of skin treatment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation are summarized. RESULTS: Graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis included systemic tacrolimus for all patients. After hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, all patients achieved complete donor chimerism of the bone marrow and had acute graft-versus-host disease of the skin. After engraftment, all patients had skin lesions that met the international consensus diagnostic criteria for atopic dermatitis. None of the patients met the diagnostic criteria for chronic graft-versus-host disease. Topical therapy and skin care based on atopic dermatitis guidelines improved skin condition and atopic dermatitis severity scores in all patients. In addition, type 2 inflammatory markers improved accordingly. CONCLUSION: Topical therapy and skin care may be effective for transplant-related atopic dermatitis after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. When extensive dermatitis is observed after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, this treatment may avoid excessive immunosuppressive therapy if it meets the diagnostic criteria for atopic dermatitis.

Scintillation properties of lithium-6 salicylate-loaded liquid scintillators.

The limited availability of conventional 3He proportional counters provides impetus for developing novel neutron detectors. As a candidate, lithium-6-loaded liquid scintillators with neutron/gamma pulse shape discrimination (n-γ PSD) capabilities have been developed. However, the trade-off relationship between the 6Li-loading amount and scintillation light yield is a significant problem. This is because 6Li-loading involves the addition of non-luminescent materials, which cause non-radiative relaxation of the excited states. Therefore, aiming to reduce non-radiative relaxation, we chose lithium-6 salicylate (6LiSal), which shows fluorescence in the visible light region, as a chemical for 6Li-loading. In this study, we analyzed the photoluminescence/scintillation properties based on the Förster resonance energy transfer and investigated the optimal content for obtaining a high light yield. By maximizing the sequential energy transfer from the solvent (toluene) to the phosphor (POPOP), a high light yield 6Li-loaded liquid scintillator (4220 photons per MeV under gamma-ray irradiation) with a 6Li concentration of approximately 0.1 wt% was developed. Thermal neutron events were successfully detected with a light yield of 3970 photons per neutron, which is more than three times higher than those of other organic scintillators. In addition, focusing on the triplet-triplet annihilation process and further optimizing the component for the n-γ PSD, the thermal neutron and gamma-ray events were successfully separated. The developed high light yield 6Li-loaded liquid scintillators show n-γ PSD capabilities and can be promising candidates as alternative detectors to the 3He proportional counter.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with Ewing sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma can lead to severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve Ewing sarcoma treatment outcomes?". METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi web databases, including English and Japanese articles published from 1990 to 2019. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival (OS), febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life (QOL), and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-five English and five Japanese articles were identified for CQ #1. After screening, a cohort study of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide chemotherapy with 851 patients was selected. Incidence of FN was 60.8% with G-CSF and 65.8% without; statistical tests were not conducted. Data on OS, infection-related mortality, QOL, or pain was unavailable. Consequently, CQ #1 was redefined as a future research question. As for CQ #2, we found two English and five Japanese papers, of which one high-quality randomized controlled trial on G-CSF use in intensified chemotherapy was included. This trial showed trends toward lower mortality and a significant increase in event-free survival for 2-week interval regimen with the G-CSF primary prophylactic use compared with 3-week interval. CONCLUSION: This review indicated that G-CSF's efficacy as primary prophylaxis in Ewing sarcoma, except in children, is uncertain despite its common use. This review tentatively endorses intensified chemotherapy with G-CSF primary prophylaxis for Ewing sarcoma.

Effectiveness and safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor priming regimen for acute myeloid leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Clinical Practice Guideline for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remain poor. Although the concomitant use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and anti-chemotherapeutic agents has been investigated to improve the antileukemic effect on AML, its usefulness remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effects of G-CSF priming as a remission induction therapy or salvage chemotherapy. METHODS: We performed a thorough literature search for studies related to the priming effect of G-CSF using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and risk ratios (RRs) with confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and summarized. RESULTS: Two reviewers independently extracted and accessed the 278 records identified during the initial screening, and 62 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility in second screening. Eleven studies were included in the qualitative analysis and 10 in the meta-analysis. A systematic review revealed that priming with G-CSF did not correlate with an improvement in response rate and overall survival (OS). The result of the meta-analysis revealed the tendency for lower relapse rate in the G-CSF priming groups without inter-study heterogeneity [RR, 0.91 (95% CI 0.82-1.01), p = 0.08; I2 = 4%, p = 0.35]. In specific populations, including patients with intermediate cytogenetic risk and those receiving high-dose cytarabine, the G-CSF priming regimen prolonged OS. CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF priming in combination with intensive remission induction treatment is not universally effective in patients with AML. Further studies are required to identify the patient cohort for which G-CSF priming is recommended.

Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with non-round cell soft tissue sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is an essential supportive agent for chemotherapy-induced severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for non-round cell soft tissue sarcoma (NRC-STS)?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve NRC-STS treatment outcomes?" for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: A literature search was performed on the primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for NRC-STSs. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival, incidence of febrile neutropenia, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 154 articles were extracted from the literature search for CQs #1 and #2, respectively. After the first and second screening, one and two articles were included in the final evaluation, respectively. Only some studies have addressed these two clinical questions through a literature review. CONCLUSION: The clinical questions were converted to future research questions because of insufficient available data. The statements were proposed: "The benefit of primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STS" and "The benefit of intensified chemotherapy with primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STSs." G-CSF is often administered as primary prophylaxis when chemotherapy with severe myelosuppression is administered. However, its effectiveness and safety are yet to be scientifically proven.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer can cause neutropenia, increasing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) and serious infections. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) as primary prophylaxis has been explored to mitigate these risks. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted according to the "Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development" using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing using G-CSF as primary prophylaxis in invasive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and FN incidence. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis, and five RCTs were meta-analyzed for FN incidence. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in FN incidence with primary G-CSF prophylaxis (risk difference [RD] = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01-0.43, p = 0.04). Evidence for improvement in OS with G-CSF was inconclusive. Four RCTs suggested a tendency for increased pain with G-CSF, but statistical significance was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prophylactic use of G-CSF is strongly recommended for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, as it has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN. While the impact on OS is unclear, the benefits of reducing FN are considered to outweigh the potential harm of increased pain.

Optimal timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF after chemotherapy administration for patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: The timing of prophylactic pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration during cancer chemotherapy varies, with Day 2 and Days 3-5 being the most common schedules. Optimal timing remains uncertain, affecting efficacy and adverse events. This systematic review sought to evaluate the available evidence on the timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF administration. METHODS: Based on the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development, we searched the PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and Cochrane Library databases for literature published from January 1990 to December 2019. The inclusion criteria included studies among the adult population using pegfilgrastim. The search strategy focused on timing-related keywords. Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the data. RESULTS: Among 300 initial search results, only four articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis for febrile neutropenia incidence suggested a potential higher incidence when pegylated G-CSF was administered on Days 3-5 than on Day 2 (odds ratio: 1.27, 95% CI 0.66-2.46, p = 0.47), with a moderate certainty of evidence. No significant difference in overall survival or mortality due to infections was observed. The trend of severe adverse events was lower on Days 3-5, without statistical significance (odds ratio: 0.72, 95% CI 0.14-3.67, p = 0.69) and with a moderate certainty of evidence. Data on pain were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Both Day 2 and Days 3-5 were weakly recommended for pegylated G-CSF administration post-chemotherapy in patients with cancer. The limited evidence highlights the need for further research to refine recommendations.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer, Japanese clinical guideline for appropriate use of G-CSF: clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel (DTX) is commonly used as a primary chemotherapy, and cabazitaxel (CBZ) has shown efficacy in patients who are DTX resistant. Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy is currently used with CBZ treatment in routine clinical care in Japan. METHODS: In this study, we performed a systematic review following the Minds guidelines to investigate the effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer and to construct G-CSF guidelines for primary prophylaxis use during chemotherapy. A comprehensive literature search of various electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi) was performed on January 10, 2020, to identify studies published between January 1990 and December 31, 2019 that investigate the impact of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during CBZ administration on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Ultimately, nine articles were included in the qualitative systematic review. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was difficult to assess in terms of correlation with overall survival, mortality from infection, and patients' quality of life. These difficulties were owing to the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing patients with and without primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during CBZ administration. However, some retrospective studies have suggested that it may reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: G-CSF may be beneficial as primary prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF after induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan society of clinical oncology.

Although granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the incidence, duration, and severity of neutropenia, its prophylactic use for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains controversial due to a theoretically increased risk of relapse. The present study investigated the effects of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for AML with remission induction therapy. 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 of pooled data was conducted, and the risk ratio with corresponding confidence intervals was calculated in the meta-analysis and summarized. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, nine of which were examined in the meta-analysis. Although G-CSF significantly shortened the duration of neutropenia, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not correlate with infection-related mortality. Moreover, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not affect disease progression/recurrence, overall survival, or adverse events, such as musculoskeletal pain. However, evidence to support or discourage the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for adult AML patients with induction therapy remains limited. Therefore, the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis can be considered for adult AML patients with remission induction therapy who are at a high risk of infectious complications.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during dose-dense chemotherapy for urothelial cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) decreases the incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia (FN); however, dose reduction or withdrawal is often preferred in the management of adverse events in the treatment of urothelial cancer. It is also important to maintain therapeutic intensity in order to control disease progression and thereby relieve symptoms, such as hematuria, infection, bleeding, and pain, as well as to prolong the survival. In this clinical question, we compared treatment with primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF to maintain therapeutic intensity with conventional standard therapy without G-CSF and examined the benefits and risks as major outcomes. A detailed literature search for relevant studies was performed using PubMed, Ichu-shi Web, and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and evaluated independently by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and the risk ratios with corresponding confidence intervals were calculated and summarized in a meta-analysis. Seven studies were included in the qualitative analysis, two of which were reviewed in the meta-analysis of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy, and one randomized controlled study showed a reduction in the incidence of FN. Primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF may be beneficial, as shown in a randomized controlled study of dose-dense MVAC therapy. However, there are no studies on other regimens, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen (dose-dense MVAC).

Effectiveness of G-CSF in chemotherapy for digestive system tumors: a systematic review of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 delineated by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reportedly reduces the risk of neutropenia and subsequent infections caused by cancer chemotherapy. Although several guidelines recommend using G-CSF in primary prophylaxis according to the incidence rate of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), the effectiveness of G-CSF in digestive system tumor chemotherapy remains unclear. To address these clinical questions, we conducted a systematic review as part of revising the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 published by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: This systematic review addressed two main clinical questions (CQ): CQ1: "Is primary prophylaxis with G-CSF effective in chemotherapy?", and CQ2: "Is increasing the intensity of chemotherapy with G-CSF effective?" We reviewed different types of digestive system tumors, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, biliary tract, colorectal, and neuroendocrine carcinomas. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for information sources. Independent systematic reviewers conducted two rounds of screening and selected relevant records for each CQ. Finally, the working group members synthesized the strength of evidence and recommendations. RESULTS: After two rounds of screening, 5/0/3/0/2/0 records were extracted for CQ1 of esophageal/gastric/pancreatic/biliary tract/colorectal/ and neuroendocrine carcinoma, respectively. Additionally, a total of 2/6/1 records were extracted for CQ2 of esophageal/pancreatic/colorectal cancer, respectively. The strength of evidence and recommendations were evaluated for CQ1 of colorectal cancer; however, we could not synthesize recommendations for other CQs owing to the lack of records. CONCLUSION: The use of G-CSF for primary prophylaxis in chemotherapy for colorectal cancer is inappropriate.

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.

Therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with febrile neutropenia: a comprehensive systematic review for clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia represents a critical oncologic emergency, and its management is pivotal in cancer therapy. In several guidelines, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is not routinely recommended except in high-risk cases. The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology has updated its clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF, incorporating a systematic review to address this clinical question. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted by performing a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web, focusing on publications from January 1990 to December 2019. Selected studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort and case-control studies. Evaluated outcomes included overall survival, infection-related mortality, hospitalization duration, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 332 records. Following two rounds of screening, two records were selected for both qualitative and quantitative synthesis including meta-analysis. Regarding infection-related mortality, the event to case ratio was 5:134 (3.73%) in the G-CSF group versus 6:129 (4.65%) in the non-G-CSF group, resulting in a relative risk of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.27-2.58; p = 0.54), which was not statistically significant. Only median values for hospitalization duration were available from the two RCTs, precluding a meta-analysis. For overall survival, quality of life, and pain, no suitable studies were found for analysis, rendering their assessment unfeasible. CONCLUSION: A weak recommendation is made that G-CSF treatment not be administered to patients with febrile neutropenia during cancer chemotherapy. G-CSF treatment can be considered for patients at high risk.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis to develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly administered to cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy, especially when incidence rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) surpasses 20%. While primary prophylaxis with G-CSF has been proven effective in preventing FN in patients with cancer, there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy in specifically, lung cancer. Our systematic review focused on the efficacy of G-CSF primary prophylaxis in lung cancer. METHODS: We extracted studies on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) using the PubMed, Ichushi Web, and Cochrane Library databases. Two reviewers assessed the extracted studies for each type of lung cancer and conducted quantitative and meta-analyses of preplanned outcomes, including overall survival, FN incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: A limited number of studies were extracted: two on NSCLC and six on SCLC. A meta-analysis was not conducted owing to insufficient data on NSCLC. Two case-control studies explored the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF in patients with NSCLC (on docetaxel and ramucirumab therapy) and indicated a lower FN frequency with G-CSF. For SCLC, meta-analysis of five studies showed no significant reduction in FN incidence, with an odds ratio of 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.03-5.56, P = 0.48). Outcomes other than FN incidence could not be evaluated due to low data availability. CONCLUSION: Limited data are available on G-CSF prophylaxis in lung cancer. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF may be weakly recommended in Japanese patients with NSCLC undergoing docetaxel and ramucirumab combination therapy.