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.

A prospective cohort study to evaluate the incidence of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving pegfilgrastim on-body injector versus other options for prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia: breast cancer subgroup analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer chemotherapy often carries a high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN); guidelines recommend prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), such as pegfilgrastim. Neulasta® Onpro® on-body injector (OBI) is a delivery device administering pegfilgrastim approximately 27 h after application. METHODS: This prospective study examined patients with breast cancer who received chemotherapy with a high risk of FN, receiving OBI ("OBI") or other options (other G-CSF or none; "other"). The primary endpoint was FN incidence; secondary endpoints included chemotherapy delivery, adherence (G-CSF in all cycles), compliance (G-CSF day after chemotherapy), and FN incidence in patients receiving curative or palliative treatment. RESULTS: A total of 1776 patients with breast cancer were enrolled (OBI, n = 1196; other, n = 580). Across all cycles, FN incidence was lower for OBI (4.4% [95% CI, 3.3-5.6%]) than other (7.4% [5.3-9.6%]). For curative treatment, the FN incidence across all cycles was lower for OBI (4.6% [3.4-5.8%]) than for other (7.1% [5.0-9.3%]). For palliative treatment (OBI, n = 33; other, n = 20), 3 patients (15%) in the other and none in the OBI group had FN. After adjusting for baseline covariates, FN incidence remained lower for OBI (4.6% [3.5-6.1%]) versus other (7.8% [5.7-10.5%]). Adherence was higher for OBI (93.8%) than for other G-CSF (69.8%), as was compliance (90.5 and 53.2%, respectively). Chemotherapy dose delays/reductions were similar for OBI (4.7%/32.3%, respectively) and other (4.7%/30.0%) groups. CONCLUSION: Pegfilgrastim OBI was associated with a lower FN incidence in patients with breast cancer compared to other options for FN prophylaxis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , NCT02178475, registered 30 June, 2014.

Carfilzomib 56 mg/m2 twice-weekly in combination with dexamethasone and daratumumab (KdD) versus daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd): a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison.

Given the increasing use of frontline lenalidomide-based therapies in multiple myeloma (MM), there is an emerging need for lenalidomide-sparing regimens at relapse. Carfilzomib plus dexamethasone and daratumumab (KdD) and daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd) are lenalidomide-sparing triplet regimens that are approved for relapsed and/or refractory MM (R/RMM). In the absence of a head-to-head trial comparing these treatments, a matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (MAIC) was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of KdD versus DVd. Results showed that treatment with KdD decreases the risk of progression or death versus DVd (HR 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.90). Time-dependent analysis demonstrated a larger benefit for KdD after the first eight cycles. Unmatched subgroup analysis indicated that KdD may be particularly effective in lenalidomide-exposed and -refractory patients. The present analysis suggests that KdD improves outcomes compared with DVd in patients with R/RMM and may provide a rationale for a preferential treatment.

Trends in use of primary prophylactic colony stimulating factors and neutropenia-related hospitalization in commercially insured patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in the United States: 2005-2017.

PURPOSE: Describe temporal changes in use of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factor, and neutropenia-related hospitalization, in commercially insured patients. METHODS: Using a large commercial administrative database, we identified annual cohorts of adult patients diagnosed with breast or lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin lymphoma and initiating myelosuppressive chemotherapy during 2005-2017. We described yearly changes in proportions of myelosuppressive chemotherapy by febrile neutropenia risk category (high, intermediate, unclassified) and proportion of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor use and unadjusted incidence of neutropenia-related hospitalization in the first cycle of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. RESULTS: Annual cohorts included 4383-5888 eligible patients during 2005-2017. The proportion of eligible patients aged ≥ 65 years increased from 26.0% in 2005 to 58.2% in 2017. Myelosuppressive chemotherapy use with regimens with high risk for febrile neutropenia increased from 15.1% in 2005 to 31.0% in 2017; and regimens with intermediate risk for febrile neutropenia decreased from 63.7% to 48.1% in 2017. Prophylactic colony-stimulating factor use increased from 41.6% in 2005 to 54.3% in 2017. Crude incidence of neutropenia-related hospitalization for all cancers increased from 2.0% to 3.1%, with a substantial increase in neutropenia-related hospitalization observed among non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients (2.8% to 8.5%) during 2005-2017. CONCLUSION: Among adult patients with breast and lung cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, use of regimens with high risk for febrile neutropenia increased, as did the use of prophylactic colony-stimulating factors after 2005. Incidence of neutropenia-related hospitalization increased slightly, particularly among non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients. Further studies are required to understand this increasing trend of neutropenia-related hospitalization, changing patient-level risk factors, and febrile neutropenia management.

Efficacy and safety profile of deep responders to carfilzomib-based therapy: a subgroup analysis from ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR.

To understand the profile of best responders (complete response or better [≥CR]) to carfilzomib, we described the characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) data, and the safety of patients who achieved ≥CR to carfilzomib-based treatment in ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR. In post hoc analyses from ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR, median PFS and OS were longer for ≥CR patients versus those who achieved a very good partial response or partial response (VGPR/PR). In the carfilzomib arm of ASPIRE, median PFS was 50.4 months for ≥CR versus 22.1 months for VGPR/PR; median OS was 67.0 versus 44.2 months, respectively. In the carfilzomib arm of ENDEAVOR, median PFS was 34.0 for ≥CR versus 20.4 months for VGPR/PR; median OS was non-estimable. Despite the longer treatment duration, fewer patients with ≥CR versus VGPR/PR experienced treatment-emergent adverse events that led to discontinuation of carfilzomib-based treatment in ASPIRE or ENDEAVOR. Low serum lactate dehydrogenase was the only factor associated with achieving ≥CR vs patients not achieving CR in ASPIRE in multivariate regression analyses. No association was found between cytogenetic risk status and reaching ≥CR. Carfilzomib treatment may lead to rapid and deep responses, irrespective of most patient characteristics.

Novel risk stratification algorithm for estimating the risk of death in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma: external validation in a retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN: A novel risk stratification algorithm estimating risk of death in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma starting second-line treatment was recently developed using multivariable Cox regression of data from a Czech registry. It uses 16 parameters routinely collected in medical practice to stratify patients into four distinct risk groups in terms of survival expectation. To provide insight into generalisability of the risk stratification algorithm, the study aimed to validate the risk stratification algorithm using real-world data from specifically designed retrospective chart audits from three European countries. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Physicians collected data from 998 patients (France, 386; Germany, 344; UK, 268) and applied the risk stratification algorithm. METHODS: The performance of the Cox regression model for predicting risk of death was assessed by Nagelkerke's R2, goodness of fit and the C-index. The risk stratification algorithm's ability to discriminate overall survival across four risk groups was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves and HRs. RESULTS: Consistent with the Czech registry, the stratification performance of the risk stratification algorithm demonstrated clear differentiation in risk of death between the four groups. As risk groups increased, risk of death doubled. The C-index was 0.715 (95% CI 0.690 to 0.734). CONCLUSIONS: Validation of the novel risk stratification algorithm in an independent 'real-world' dataset demonstrated that it stratifies patients in four subgroups according to survival expectation.

Carfilzomib and dexamethasone versus eight cycles of bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: an indirect comparison using data from the phase 3 ENDEAVOR and CASTOR trials.

In ENDEAVOR, carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd56) demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). Both agents were administered until disease progression; the EU label for Vd, however, stipulates a maximum of eight treatment cycles. Here, matching-adjusted treatment comparison was used to compare efficacy of Kd56 with Vd, if Vd was administered for 8 cycles (Vd-8). Data from ENDEAVOR and CASTOR trials (which compared daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with Vd-8) were used. Hazard ratios of PFS were estimated for Vd vs. Vd-8 and Kd vs. Vd-8. For cycles 1-8, risk reduction in PFS for Kd56 vs. Vd-8 was equal to that estimated in ENDEAVOR (HR: 0.53; 95% CI 0.44-0.65). Beyond eight cycles, risk reduction in PFS for Kd56 and Vd-8 was estimated to be 60% (HR: 0.40; 95% CI 0.26-0.63). The analysis suggested that PFS benefit of Kd56 over Vd increases when Vd is given for eight cycles only.

Development and validation of a novel risk stratification algorithm for relapsed multiple myeloma.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignancy with varying survival outcomes and drivers of disease progression. Existing MM staging tools were developed using data from newly diagnosed patients. As patient characteristics and disease-related factors change between diagnosis and the initiation of second-line (2L) treatment, an unmet need exists for a tool that can evaluate risk of death at first relapse. We have developed a risk stratification algorithm (RSA) using data from patients with MM who were at 2L. Hazard ratios for independent predictors of overall survival (OS) were derived from a Cox models, and individual patient scores were calculated for total risk. K-adaptive partitioning for survival was used to stratify patients into groups based on their scores. Relative risk doubled with ascending risk group; median OSs for patients in group 1 (lowest risk)-4 (highest risk) were 61·6, 29·6, 14·2 and 5·9 months, respectively. Differences in OS between risk groups were significant. Similar stratification was observed when the RSA was applied to an external validation data set. In conclusion, we have developed a validated RSA that can quantify total risk, frailty risk and disease aggressiveness risk, and stratify patients with MM at 2L into groups with profoundly different survival expectations.

Modeling Covariate-Adjusted Survival for Economic Evaluations in Oncology.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In economic evaluations in oncology, adjusted survival should be generated if imbalances in prognostic/predictive factors across treatment arms are present. To date, no formal guidance has been developed regarding how such adjustments should be made. We compared various covariate-adjusted survival modeling approaches, as applied to the ENDEAVOR trial in multiple myeloma that assessed carfilzomib plus dexamethasone (Cd) versus bortezomib plus dexamethasone (Vd). METHODS: Overall survival (OS) data and baseline characteristics were used for a subgroup (bortezomib-naïve/one prior therapy). Four adjusted survival modeling approaches were compared: propensity score weighting followed by fitting a Weibull model to the two arms of the balanced data (weighted data approach); fitting a multiple Weibull regression model including prognostic/predictive covariates to the two arms to predict survival using the mean value of each covariate and using the average of patient-specific survival predictions; and applying an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) derived from a Cox proportional hazard model to the baseline risk estimated for Vd. RESULTS: The mean OS estimated by the weighted data approach was 6.85 years (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.62-10.70) for Cd, 4.68 years (95% CI 3.46-6.74) for Vd, and 2.17 years (95% CI 0.18-5.06) for the difference. Although other approaches estimated similar differences, using the mean value of covariates appeared to yield skewed survival estimates (mean OS was 7.65 years for Cd and 5.40 years for Vd), using the average of individual predictions had limited external validity (implausible long-term OS predictions with > 10% of the Vd population alive after 30 years), and using the adjusted HR approach overestimated uncertainty (difference in mean OS was 2.03, 95% CI - 0.17 to 6.19). CONCLUSIONS: Adjusted survival modeling based on weighted or matched data approaches provides a flexible and robust method to correct for covariate imbalances in economic evaluations. The conclusions of our study may be generalizable to other settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01568866 (ENDEAVOR trial).

Methodology of a Novel Risk Stratification Algorithm for Patients with Multiple Myeloma in the Relapsed Setting.

INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification tools provide valuable information to inform treatment decisions. Existing algorithms for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) were based on patients with newly diagnosed disease, and these have not been validated in the relapsed setting or in routine clinical practice. We developed a risk stratification algorithm (RSA) for patients with MM at initiation of second-line (2L) treatment, based on data from the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies. METHODS: Predictors of overall survival (OS) at 2L treatment were identified using Cox proportional hazards models and backward selection. Risk scores were obtained by multiplying the hazard ratios for each predictor. The K-adaptive partitioning for survival (KAPS) algorithm defined four groups of stratification based on individual risk scores. RESULTS: Performance of the RSA was assessed using Nagelkerke's R2 test and Harrell's concordance index through Kaplan-Meier analysis of OS data. Prognostic groups were successfully defined based on real-world data. Use of a multiplicative score based on Cox modeling and KAPS to define cut-off values was effective. CONCLUSION: Through innovative methods of risk assessment and collaboration between physicians and statisticians, the RSA was capable of stratifying patients at 2L treatment by survival expectations. This approach can be used to develop clinical decision-making tools in other disease areas to improve patient management. FUNDING: Amgen Europe GmbH.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in breast cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients receiving high (> 20%) FN-risk chemotherapy: results from a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Prophylaxis for febrile neutropenia (FN) is recommended for the duration of myelosuppressive chemotherapy in high-risk patients; yet, granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) discontinuation occurs frequently in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to investigate the incidence of FN in real-world settings and the extent and impact of early pegfilgrastim discontinuation. METHODS: This prospective, observational study enrolled patients with any-stage non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) or breast cancer initiating a new chemotherapy course with a high (> 20%) FN risk, with pegfilgrastim in cycle 1. During routine clinical visits, data were collected on FN events, discontinuation of pegfilgrastim (defined as administration of G-CSF other than pegfilgrastim for ≥ 1 cycle) and all G-CSF (and reasons), neutropenic complications and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). RESULTS: Overall, 943 patients were enrolled; 844 met the eligibility criteria (full analysis set) and 814 (86%) completed the study. Twenty-eight patients (3%) had 31 FN events (NHL, n = 17; breast cancer, n = 11). Twenty-six patients (3%) discontinued pegfilgrastim. Forty-four patients (5%) discontinued G-CSF. The most common reason for pegfilgrastim discontinuation was physician preference for daily G-CSF (n = 14 [2%]), and for discontinuation of all G-CSFs was reduced FN risk (n = 14 [2%]). Patients who continued G-CSF prophylaxis were less likely to experience neutropenic complications (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.26 [0.09-0.80]). Suspected ADRs to pegfilgrastim occurred in 43 patients (5%) and serious ADRs in 5 (1%). CONCLUSIONS: FN rates were consistent with previous reports with pegfilgrastim in clinical practice. No new ADRs were observed. G-CSF discontinuation was uncommon but appeared to increase the likelihood of neutropenic complications.

Real-world Outcomes of Multiple Myeloma: Retrospective Analysis of the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on patient outcomes and treatment patterns in multiple myeloma (MM) are limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present noninterventional, observational, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected Czech patient medical record data from the Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies estimated real-world outcomes in adults with a diagnosis of symptomatic MM made between May 2007 and June 2014. RESULTS: In total, 2446 patients had initiated first-line treatment. The median overall survival since the diagnosis (primary endpoint) was 50.3 months (95% confidence interval, 46.1-54.5 months) and decreased with each successive treatment line. A similar trend was observed for progression-free survival and the depth of response. In line with European guidelines and clinical practice, bortezomib-, thalidomide-, and lenalidomide-based regimens were most commonly used across all treatment lines (42.3%, 28.9%, and 18.4%, respectively). In the first line, bortezomib and thalidomide were used most often, with lenalidomide the most commonly used agent in the relapse setting (second to fourth lines). Exploratory analyses revealed that younger age (≤ 65 years), lower international staging system stage, and previous stem cell transplantation were associated with significant improvements in overall and progression-free survival, especially in the early treatment lines. CONCLUSION: The present study is the first analysis of Czech data from the Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies, and it provides important insights into the real-world management of MM for physicians and healthcare providers.

Carfilzomib in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients with early or late relapse following prior therapy: A subgroup analysis of the randomized phase 3 ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials.

We performed analyses of the randomized phase 3 ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials to investigate the efficacy of carfilzomib among subgroups of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients who had early or late disease relapse following initiation of the immediately prior therapy. In ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR, patients had received 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy. Patients in ASPIRE received carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd), and patients in ENDEAVOR received carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). Patients with relapse ≤1 year after initiating the most recent prior line of therapy were categorized as early relapsers, and patients with relapse after >1 year were categorized as late relapsers. The median progression-free survival (PFS) in ASPIRE for early relapsers was 21.4 months for KRd vs 10.7 months for Rd (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.714; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.508-1.004; P = 0.0257), and for late relapsers was 29.7 months for KRd vs 18.2 months for Rd (HR: 0.675; 95% CI: 0.533-0.854; P = 0.0005). The overall response rate (ORR) for early relapsers was 83.2% for KRd vs 54.8% for Rd, and for late relapsers was 89.0% for KRd vs 69.7% for Rd. The median PFS in ENDEAVOR (Kd vs Vd) for early relapsers was 13.9 months vs 5.7 months (HR: 0.598; 95% CI: 0.423-0.846; P = 0.0017), and for late relapsers was 22.2 months vs 10.2 months (HR: 0.486; 95% CI: 0.382-0.620; P < 0.0001). The ORR (Kd vs Vd) for early relapsers was 63.4% vs 49.1% and for late relapsers was 81.8% vs 66.8%. In conclusion, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who received carfilzomib-containing regimens had improved PFS and ORR compared with control groups, regardless of whether they had an early or late relapse following the most recent prior therapy.

Long-term Outcomes in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Analysis of the Dutch Population-based HAematological Registry for Observational Studies (PHAROS).

Registry data are important for monitoring the impact of new therapies on treatment algorithms and outcomes, and for guiding clinical decision making in multiple myeloma (MM). This observational study analyzed real-world data from patients in the Population-based HAematological Registry for Observational Studies who were treated for symptomatic MM from 2008 to 2013 in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) from initiation of first-line treatment. Secondary endpoints included OS and progression-free survival per treatment line, treatment patterns, and treatment response. Between 2008 and 2013, 917, 583, 283, and 139 patients had initiated first, second, third, and fourth treatment lines, respectively. Thalidomide-based regimens were the most frequently used first-line treatment (66%); bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based regimens were most often used in the second line (41% and 27%, respectively). The median OS (95% confidence interval) ranged from 37.5 months (34.8-41.8 months) in the first line to 9.2 months (6.2-12.3 months) in the fourth line. Univariate analyses showed that survival benefits were most apparent in younger patients (≤65 vs >65 years). These analyses provide important real-world information on treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with MM.

Healthcare resource utilization among patients with relapsed multiple myeloma in the UK, France, and Italy.

AIMS: To assess the real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with different treatment regimens used in the management of patients with relapsed multiple myeloma in the UK, France, and Italy. METHODS: Retrospective medical chart review of characteristics, time to progression, level of response, HRU during treatment, and adverse events (AEs). Data collection started on June 1, 2015 and was completed on July 15, 2015. In the 3 months before record abstraction, eligible patients had either disease progression after receiving one of their country's most commonly prescribed regimens or had received the best supportive care and died. Costs were calculated based on HRU and country-specific diagnosis-related group and/or unit reference costs, amongst other standard resources. RESULTS: Physicians provided data for 1,282 patients (387 in the UK, 502 in France, 393 in Italy) who met the inclusion criteria. Mean [median] total healthcare costs associated with a single line of treatment were €51,717 [35,951] in the UK, €37,009 [32,538] for France, and €34,496 [42,342] for Italy, driven largely by anti-myeloma medications costs (contributing 95.0%, 90.0%, and 94.2% of total cost, respectively). During active treatment, the highest costs were associated with lenalidomide- and pomalidomide-based regimens. Mean cost per month was lowest for patients achieving a very good partial response or better. Unscheduled events (i.e. not considered part of routine management, whether or not related to multiple myeloma, such as unscheduled hospitalization, AEs, fractures) accounted for 1-9% of total costs and were highest for bendamustine. LIMITATIONS: The use of retrospective data means that clinical practice (e.g. use of medical procedures, evaluation of treatment response) is not standardized across participating countries/centers, and some data (e.g. low-grade AEs) may be incomplete or differently adjudicated/reported. The centers involved may not be fully representative of national practice. CONCLUSIONS: Drug costs are the main contributor to total HRU costs associated with multiple myeloma. The duration of active treatment may influence the average total costs, as well as response, associated with a single line of therapy. Improved treatment outcomes, and reductions in unscheduled events and concomitant medication use may, therefore, reduce the overall HRU and related costs of care in multiple myeloma.

G-CSF use in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) as observed in clinical practice in Italy.

Treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) requires chemotherapy regimens with significant risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). For patients at ≥20% FN risk, guidelines recommend primary prophylaxis (PP) with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). This study assessed whether G-CSF use in NHL was in line with recommendations in routine practice. This was a retrospective, observational study of adult NHL patients receiving first-line (R)CHOP-like chemotherapy and G-CSF support between June 2010 and 2012, in Italy. The primary outcome was whether G-CSF was provided as PP, which was defined as G-CSF initiation on days 1-3 after chemotherapy, ≥3 days' use for daily G-CSFs and continued prophylaxis from cycle 1 across all cycles. Secondary prophylaxis was defined as continued prophylaxis from cycle 2 or later, and all other use was defined as Suboptimal. The analysis included 199 patients, 61% of whom had diffuse large B cell lymphoma and 21% follicular lymphoma. (R)CHOP-21 was given to 52% of patients and (R)CHOP-14 to 32%. Overall, 29% of patients received PP, while two-thirds received Suboptimal G-CSF. Of patients receiving daily G-CSF, 3% received PP and 94% received Suboptimal use; with pegfilgrastim, 65% received PP and 26% Suboptimal use. FN occurred in 13 patients (7%) and grade 3/4 neutropenia in 43%. Chemotherapy dose delays occurred in 22% and dose reductions in 18% of patients. Delivery of G-CSF, particularly daily G-CSFs, was not in accordance with guideline or product label recommendations in a large proportion of NHL patients receiving chemotherapy in Italy.

Attitudes of physicians toward assessing risk and using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy associated with an intermediate risk of febrile neutropenia.

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy. This prospective, observational study describes physicians' approaches toward assessing FN risk in patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate (10-20 %) FN risk. In the baseline investigator assessment, physicians selected factors considered important when assessing overall FN risk and deciding on granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP). Physicians then completed patient assessments using the same lists of factors. The final FN risk scores and whether G-CSF PP was planned were reported. The final analysis included 165 physicians and 944 patients. The most frequently considered factor in both assessments was chemotherapy agents in the backbone (88 % of investigator and 93 % of patient assessments). History of FN (83 %), baseline laboratory values (76 %) and age (73 %) were commonly selected at baseline, whereas tumor type (72 %), guidelines (62 %) and tumor stage (43 %) were selected most during patient assessments. Median investigator-reported FN risk threshold for G-CSF PP was 20 % (range 10-85 %). G-CSF PP was planned in 82 % of patients with an FN risk at or above this threshold; therefore, almost one-fifth of qualifying patients would not receive G-CSF PP. Physicians generally follow guidelines, but also consider individual patient characteristics when assessing FN risk and deciding on G-CSF PP. A standardized FN risk assessment may optimize the use of G-CSF PP, which may minimize the incidence of FN in patients undergoing chemotherapy with an intermediate FN risk. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01813721.

Chemotherapy treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Potentially myelosuppressive doublet and triplet chemotherapy combination regimens are considered the most active treatments in gastric cancer. This multicenter prospective observational study was designed to gain insight into the chemotherapy regimens being used in Europe and to evaluate neutropenia management in patients identified as at high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). METHODS: Eligible patients had gastric cancer, were scheduled for ≥ 3 cycles of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and had an investigator-assessed overall FN risk ≥ 20%. Data were collected for up to ten cycles. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (defined as G-CSF initiated on days 1-7 of cycle 1). Secondary endpoints included FN incidence, chemotherapy administration, and G-CSF use. RESULTS: Of 199 patients who met the eligibility criteria and started at least one cycle of chemotherapy, mean age was 63 years, 76% were men, 83% had an ECOG score of 0 or 1, 54% had metastatic disease, and 24% had received prior chemotherapy. A total of 27 different backbone regimens were given; the most common regimen was modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF). Despite all patients having been identified as having a ≥ 20% FN risk, only 70 (35%) received G-CSF primary prophylaxis. FN occurred in 14 patients overall (7%). Most FN events occurred in patients who received DCF/modified DCF (9/14 events, 64%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study reveal a high use of myelotoxic treatment regimens in gastric cancer in Europe and low adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the use of primary and secondary G-CSF prophylaxis for FN.

First-line panitumumab plus irinotecan/5-fluorouracil/leucovorin treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Panitumumab monotherapy is approved for KRAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) progressing after standard chemotherapy. This study evaluated first-line panitumumab plus FOLFIRI in patients with mCRC. METHODS: In this phase II, single-arm study, panitumumab (6 mg/kg) and FOLFIRI [irinotecan (180 mg/m(2)) and leucovorin (400 mg/m(2)) followed by a 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus and a 2,400-3,000 mg/m(2) continuous infusion] were administered every 14 days until progression. Data were analysed descriptively overall and by tumour KRAS status. RESULTS: KRAS data were available for 145/154 (94%) patients: 59% KRAS WT and 41% mutant (MT); mean follow-up was 39.5 versus 35.8 weeks, respectively. Objective responses occurred in 49% of patients: 56% versus 38% in the KRAS WT versus MT groups [(18% difference (95% CI 1-35%); odds ratio 2.1 (95% CI 1.0-4.4)]; median duration of response was 13.0 versus 7.4 months. More patients in the WT group underwent R0 resection (8% vs. 5%); median progression-free survival also favoured this group (8.9 vs. 7.2 months). The most common adverse events (any grade) were integument toxicities (98%), diarrhoea (79%) and stomatitis/oral mucositis (51%). CONCLUSIONS: As expected, consistently favourable efficacy was observed in patients with KRAS WT versus MT tumours receiving first-line panitumumab plus FOLFIRI treatment.