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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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 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.

Hodgkin Lymphoma-related Inflammatory Modification-displayed Castleman Disease-like Histological Features and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Usefulness for the Differential Diagnosis.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD) are markedly different conditions. However, in some cases, histological similarities caused by elevated cytokines, including interleukin-6, can lead to a misdiagnosis of HL as Castleman disease (CD). We herein report a patient with HL who had been diagnosed with CD by an expert panel and for whom an additional biopsy was useful for determining the correct diagnosis. Furthermore, we analyzed the positron emission tomography/computed tomography findings at the diagnosis and found that the maximum standardized uptake value was useful for distinguishing HL from iMCD.

Randomised phase II study to optimise melphalan, prednisolone, and bortezomib in untreated multiple myeloma (JCOG1105).

We conducted a randomised phase II study to determine the optimal dose and schedule of melphalan, prednisone, and bortezomib (MPB) (jRCTs031180097). Transplant-ineligible untreated multiple myeloma patients were randomised to Arm A (twice weekly bortezomib in one six-week cycle followed by eight five-week cycles of four times once weekly bortezomib with melphalan and prednisolone on days 1-4) or Arm B (nine four-week cycles of three times once weekly bortezomib with melphalan and prednisolone on days 1-4). The primary end-point was complete response (CR) rate. Of 91 patients randomised to two arms, 88 were eligible. The median cumulative bortezomib doses were 45·8 and 35·1 mg/m2 , CR rate was 18·6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 8·4-33·4] and 6·7% (95% CI 1·4-18·3), and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2·5 and 1·4 years in Arms A and B [hazard ratio (HR) 1·93 (95% CI 1·09-3·42)], respectively. Frequent grade ≥3 haematologic toxicities in Arms A and B were neutropenia (64·4% vs. 28·3%) and thrombocytopenia (35·6% vs. 10·9%). Grade 2/3 peripheral neuropathy was observed in 24·4/2·2% in Arm A and 8·7/0% in Arm B. In conclusion, Arm A was the more promising regimen, suggesting that the twice weekly schedule of bortezomib in the first cycle and higher cumulative dose of both bortezomib and melphalan influences the efficacy of modified MPB.

Clinical significance of cancer-related fatigue in multiple myeloma patients.

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the adverse events in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated with cytotoxic agents, proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) such as bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide. The aims of our study were to prospectively analyze the clinical significance of CRF, and to evaluate the cumulative incidence of CRF and the survival rates of 16 MM patients who were treated with PIs and IMiDs. Reactivation of salivary human herpes virus (HHV)-6 and HHV-7 was analyzed using real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). CRF was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). Eleven newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and five relapsed or refractory MM patients were enrolled in this study. The cumulative incidence of CRF was 54.9%. The treatment types were not associated with the CRF incidence. The cumulative incidence of reactivation of HHV-6 and HHV-7 was 73.1% and 45.6%, respectively. However, the reactivation of HHV-6 and HHV-7 was not related to CRF. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in NDMM patients with CRF was significantly shorter than in those without CRF. In conclusion, CRF was one of the major symptoms in MM patients, and predicted shorter OS and PFS in NDMM patients.

[Reduced-intensity umbilical cord blood transplantation for adult patients with fulminant aplastic anemia].

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is recommended as a curative treatment option for fulminant aplastic anemia with no neutrophil despite the administration of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor. In the absence of an HLA-matched donor, unrelated cord blood transplantation (UCBT) is a treatment option that can be performed quickly. However, the optimal conditioning regimen of UCBT is yet to be established. We report two cases of fulminant aplastic anemia in adult patients who received UCBT. The first patient was a 52-year-old woman and the second was a 26-year-old man, both of whom received a conditioning regimen of total body irradiation (TBI; 2-4 Gy), fludarabine (Flu; 120 mg/kg), and cyclophosphamide (CY; 100 mg/kg) before UCBT. Short-term methotrexate and tacrolimus were used for prophylaxis of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Engraftments were achieved on days 26 and 19, and they exhibited complete donor chimerism by days 28 and 34. There was no evidence of acute GVHD, and therefore, the immunosuppressant drugs were discontinued. Reduced-intensity UCBT using a low-dose TBI/Flu/CY conditioning regimen could be an effective treatment option for fulminant aplastic anemia in the absence of a suitable donor.

Epstein-Barr Virus-associated Lymphoproliferative Disorder with Encephalitis Following Anti-thymocyte Globulin for Aplastic Anemia Resolved with Rituximab Therapy: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-associated lymphoproliferative disorders (LPDs) sometimes occur following Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) administration for allogenic stem cell transplantation but are rare in aplastic anemia (AA) patients. A 55-year-old woman with AA following ATG developed refractory fever and was diagnosed with EBV-LPD. She was successfully treated with weekly rituximab monotherapy; however, she developed EBV encephalitis. She was admitted to the intensive care unit and finally recovered from unconsciousness. EBV-LPD should be considered after ATG for AA when symptoms appear. Because EBV-LPD following ATG for AA can rapidly progress, weekly monitoring of EBV-DNA and early intervention may be necessary.

Clinical significance of granule-containing myeloma cells in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

The clinical features and prognostic significance of myeloma cells containing granules remain unclear. The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the clinical significance of granule-containing myeloma cells in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). We retrospectively analyzed the records of 122 patients diagnosed with NDMM between January 2007 and December 2013. Granule-containing myeloma cells were defined as myeloma cells that exhibited three or more granules in their cytoplasm by May-Giemsa staining. The patients were classified into two groups, the granule-containing myeloma (GM) and nongranule-containing myeloma (non-GM) groups, depending on the proportion of myeloma cells that contained granules (cut-off value: 10%). There were 25 (20.5%) patients in the GM group. Patients in the GM group displayed significantly higher CD56 and CD49e expression than those in the non-GM group (t-test, P = 0.027 and 0.042). None of the patient characteristics differed significantly between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the chemotherapy profiles of the two groups, and the overall response rates of the two groups were similar. During the median follow-up period of 33.9 months, the overall survival (OS) in the GM group was similar to that in the non-GM group; 4-year OS of the GM and non-GM groups were 78.5% and 51.9%, respectively (P = 0.126). We concluded that cases of NDMM involving granule-containing myeloma cells are not infrequent. Moreover, CD56 and CD49e expression was significantly higher in the presence of myeloma cell populations, and the presence of granules did not affect survival.

Pharmacokinetics for once-daily modified release formulation of tacrolimus hydrate in unrelated hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

A once-daily modified release formulation of oral tacrolimus (Tac QD) has been developed in response to the problem of nonadherence. However, there have been no data available about the efficacy of Tac QD conversion from intravenous Tac (Tac i.v.) in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). We analyzed the pharmacokinetics (PK) of Tac QD in allo-SCT recipients. A total of 10 patients with hematological malignancies who received allo-SCT from unrelated donors were enrolled. Patients received Tac i.v. at 0.03 mg/kg a day before transplantation. Administration of Tac i.v. was converted to Tac QD at a 1:4 ratio when the patients had recovered from regimen-related gastrointestinal toxicity and could tolerate oral medication. After conversion, six out of 10 patients (60 %) showed a sustained decrease in Tac exposure and required dose adjustment. The conversion from Tac i.v. to Tac QD should be performed under close medical supervision. Area under the curve (AUC) and the trough of Tac QD showed a correlation, and the trough should be maintained above 7.5 ng/ml to provide an adequate AUC. Although four patients received bone marrow from an HLA DRB1 1 antigen-mismatched unrelated donor, no patients developed grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). The modification of Tac QD to maintain a whole-blood trough concentration above 7.5 ng/ml may be as effective as Tac BID.

Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen with low-dose ATG-F for unrelated bone marrow transplant is associated with lower non-relapse mortality than a regimen with low-dose TBI: a single-center retrospective analysis of 103 cases.

Although anti-T lymphocyte globulin-Fresenius (ATG-F) is commonly used as prophylaxis for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), the appropriate dosage of ATG-F in the setting of a reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen has not been determined. In the present study, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of 103 patients after unrelated bone marrow transplant (uBMT) with RIC regimens. RIC regimens consisted of purine analogue plus busulfan with low-dose TBI or ATG-F (5-10 mg/kg in total). Median age was 57 years (range 20-68). The incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD and chronic GVHD with ATG-F was significantly lower than that with TBI 2 Gy (15 vs. 61 %, P < 0.05; 33 vs. 57 %, P < 0.05). The incidence of 2-year NRM with ATG-F was significantly lower than that with TBI 2 Gy (6 vs. 28 %, P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the cumulative incidence of 2-year relapse between the ATG-F and TBI 2 Gy groups (37 vs. 20 %, P = 0.13). In conclusion, the addition of low-dose ATG-F to GVHD prophylaxis in patients who received uBMT resulted in decreased incidence of acute and chronic GVHD, which led to a significantly reduced risk of NRM without compromising overall survival. The beneficial effect of low-dose ATG-F should be assessed in a prospective clinical trial.