Etoposide combined with cytarabine and pegfilgrastim for poorly mobilizing patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma: A prospective multicentre study.

A chemotherapy-based mobilization regimen in patients who mobilize poorly, based on etoposide, cytarabine and pegfilgrastim (EAP), has recently been introduced. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the EAP regimen in patients with poorly mobilizing multiple myeloma (MM) or lymphoma. This single-arm clinical trial was performed at eight public hospitals in China and was registered as a clinical trial (NCT05510089). The inclusion criteria were; (1) diagnosis of MM or lymphoma, (2) defined as a 'poor mobilizer' and (3) aged 18-75 years. The EAP regimen consisted of etoposide 75 mg/m2/day on days 1-2, cytarabine 300 mg/m2 every 12 h on days 1-2 and pegfilgrastim 6 mg on day 6. The primary endpoint of the study was the ratio of patients achieving adequate mobilization (≥2.0 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg). From 1 September 2022 to 15 August 2023, a total of 58 patients were enrolled, 53 (91.4%) achieved adequate mobilization, while 41 (70.7%) achieved optimal mobilization with a median number of cumulative collected CD34+ cells was 9.2 (range 2.1-92.7) × 106/kg and the median number of apheresis per patient of 1.2. The median time from administration of the EAP regimen to the first apheresis was 12 days. Approximately 8.6% of patients required plerixa for rescue, which was successful. Twelve (20.7%) of the 58 patients suffered grade 2-3 infections, while 25 (43.1%) required platelet transfusions. The duration of neutrophil and platelet engraftment was 11 days. In conclusion, these results suggest that the EAP mobilization regimen might be a promising option for poorly mobilizing patients with MM or lymphoma.

A randomized, multicenter phase III Study of once-per-cycle administration of efbemalenograstim alfa (F-627), a novel long-acting rhG-CSF, for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: F-627 (efbemalenograstim alfa) is a novel long acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) that contains two human G-CSF fused to a human immunoglobulin G2 (hIgG2) -Fc fragment with a peptide linker. This studyevaluated the efficacy and safety of F-627, also known as efbemalenograstim alfa (Ryzneuta®) in reducing neutropenia compared with filgrastim (GRAN®). METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, active-controlled non-inferiority study. Two hundred thirty nine (239) patients were enrolled in thirteen centers and received the chemotherapy with epirubicin (100 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) on day 1 of each cycle for a maximum of four cycles. Patients were randomized to receive either a single 20 mg subcutaneous (s.c.) injection of F-627 on day 3 of each cycle or daily s.c. injection of filgrastim 5 µg/kg/d starting from day 3 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was the duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in cycle 1. The safety profile was also evaluated. RESULTS: The mean (SD) duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in cycle 1 was 0.68 (1.10) and 0.71 (0.95) days for the F-627 and the filgrastim groups, respectively. The Hodges-Lehmann estimate of the between-group median difference (F-627 vs filgrastim) in the duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in cycle 1 was 0 day and the upper limit of the one-sided 97.5% CI was 0 day, which was within the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1-day. Results for all efficacy endpoints in cycles 2 - 4 were consistent with the results in cycle 1, however a trend towards a lower incidence and a shorter duration of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and grade 4 neutropenia was observed in the F-627 group compared with the filgrastim group. The ANC nadir in the F-627 group was significantly higher than that in the filgrastim group in each cycle. A single fixed dose of F-627 was well tolerated and as safe as standard daily filgrastim. CONCLUSIONS: A single fixed dose of 20 mg of F-627 in each cycle was as safe and effective as a daily dose of filgrastim 5 µg/kg/d in reducing neutropenia and its complications in patients who received four cycles of EC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04174599, on 22/11/2019.

Mecapegfilgrastim for prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in children and adolescents with rhabdomyosarcoma or Ewing sarcoma: a prospective, single-arm, pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The chemotherapy regimens recommended for both rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) and Ewing sarcoma (ES) patients are myelosuppressive and can reduce the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and subsequently increase the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). However, only a few studies have focused on the efficacy and safety of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) drugs in pediatric and adolescent patients with RMS and ES. Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of mecapegfilgrastim, a biosimilar of pegfilgrastim, in prophylaxis of FN for pediatric and adolescent patients with RMS or ES. METHODS: In this single-arm, single-center, prospective study, pediatric and adolescent patients with RMS or ES were enrolled to receive either VAC (vincristine, cyclophosphamide, dactinomycin) regimen or VDC (vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin) regimen in a 3-week cycle, followed by treatment with mecapegfilgrastim (100 µg/kg, maximum 6 mg) given at 24 h after completing chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the incidence rate of FN. Secondary endpoints included the incidence rate of grade 4 neutropenia, duration of ANC ≤ 0.5 × 109/L, incidence rate of chemotherapy delay or reduction, use of antibiotics, and safety profile. RESULTS: In total, 2 of the 30 (6.7%, 95% CI: 0.82-22.07) patients experienced FN after the first cycle of chemotherapy. Eight (26.7%, 95% CI: 12.28-45.89) patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia after receiving prophylactic mecapegfilgrastim. Eight patients experienced ANC ≤ 0.5 × 109/L with a median duration of 4.5 days; among them, 6 patients reached the lowest point of their ANC level on day 7, and 5 of them recovered by day 10. No dose reductions, delays, or discontinuation of chemotherapy was reported. Twenty-one (70.0%) patients received antibiotics during the treatment period. No patient experienced FN in the 0-5 years and the 13-18 years groups, and 2 patients experienced FN in the 6-12 years group. Two patients, 6 patients, and no patient experienced grade 4 neutropenia in the 0-5 years, 6-12 years, and 13-18 years groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Mecapegfilgrastim showed acceptable efficacy and safety profile in pediatric and adolescent patients with RMS or ES. Further randomized studies with large sample size are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered at Chictr.org.cn (No.ChiCTR1900022249). Registered on March 31, 2019.

Comparison of biosimilar filgrastim and originator filgrastim for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Nivestym, a biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to the originator filgrastim (Neupogen), is now being used for the mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). We aim to compare the efficacy of Nivestym and Neupogen for PBSC mobilization in healthy allogeneic donors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center study including 541 adult allo-HSCT donors receiving Nivestym (January 2013-July 2020), or Neupogen (July 2020-June 2023) for donor PBSC mobilization. Bivariate analysis was conducted using SPSS version 28. Statistical significance was determined at a p-value <.05. RESULTS: Our study included 541 allo-HSCT donors who received Neupogen (n = 345, 64%) or Nivestym (n = 196, 36%) for PBSC mobilization. The median age was 47 years (range 17-76). The median donor weight was 86 kg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87-91). Donors receiving Neupogen had similar pre-G-CSF white blood cell count, CD34+ percentages, and circulating CD34+ count compared with donors receiving Nivestym. The Neupogen group had similar median PBSC product total neutrophil count, CD34+ percentage, absolute CD34+ count, and infused CD34+ dose compared with the Nivestym group. For donors aged 35 years or younger, the median CD34+ dose was higher in donors who received Neupogen compared with Nivestym (6.9 vs. 6.3 million cells/kg, p = .044). CONCLUSIONS: Nivestym demonstrated similar efficacy for PBSC mobilization compared with Neupogen among allo-HSCT donors. In donors aged 35 years or younger, a slightly lower PBSC product CD34+ count was noted with Nivestym compared with Neupogen.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar Peg-filgrastim after autologous stem cell transplant in myeloma and lymphoma patients: a comparative study with biosimilar Filgrastim, Lenograstim, and originator Peg-filgrastim.

Data about biosimilar Peg-filgrastim (bioPEG) in autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) are still scarce. The aim of this study has been to assess efficacy and safety of bioPEG among lymphoma and myeloma patients undergoing ASCT, comparing these data with historical controls receiving other G-CSFs. Furthermore, an economic evaluation has been included to estimate the savings by using bioPEG. This is a prospective cohort study comparing lymphoma and myeloma patients undergoing ASCT and receiving bioPEG (n = 73) with three historical consecutive cohorts collected retrospectively who received other G-CSFs (Lenograstim - Leno - n = 101, biosimilar Filgrastim - bioFIL n = 392, and originator Peg-filgrastim - oriPEG n = 60). We observed a significantly shorter time to neutrophils and platelet engraftment (p < 0.001) in patients treated with bioPEG and oriPEG. Moreover, patients who received bioPEG showed a shorter hospitalization time (p < 0.001) and a lower transfusion need (p < 0.001). We did not observe any significant difference in terms of transplant-related mortality, mucositis, and diarrhea among the four groups. No serious adverse events were associated with bioPEG. Similar data were obtained after running a stratified analysis for lymphomas and myeloma separately conducted by using a propensity score matching. The average total cost per patient of bioPEG was € 18218.9 compared to € 23707.8, € 20677.3 and € 19754.9 of Leno, oriPEG, and bioFIL, respectively. In conclusion, bioPEG seems to be as effective as the originator and more effective than short-acting G-CSFs in terms of post-transplant engraftment in myeloma and lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT. Moreover, bioPEG was cost-effective when compared with the other G-CSFs.

Achieving white blood cell equity: are the safety profiles of biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastims comparable?

Biosimilars can provide choices for patients and may provide cost savings; however, their uptake has been slow in the USA, in part due to limited knowledge. To provide additional confidence in US pegfilgrastim biosimilars, this narrative review compared the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims, currently approved or filed for approval in the USA, with the EU- and US-approved reference pegfilgrastims. Headache and bone pain were common to biosimilars and reference products and occurred at a similar incidence. Clinical trial data on the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference products have demonstrated similarity and comparability, with no unexpected safety outcomes. Overall, the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference pegfilgrastims demonstrated a high degree of similarity and comparability.

Pegfilgrastim is a biologic drug (one made in living cells such as bacteria) that is given to some patients being treated for cancer. Pegfilgrastim is prescribed to reduce a patient's risk of infection due to a weakened immune system caused by various chemotherapy treatment plans. A biosimilar is a type of biologic medicine that is highly similar to a US FDA-approved reference biologic, and is often cheaper, making it more widely available to patients. As of March 2023, there are eight pegfilgrastim biosimilars (six approved and two awaiting approval by the FDA). This review compared the side effects for the reference pegfilgrastim with the biosimilar pegfilgrastims. The side effects in general and the side effects from treatment were similar for the reference pegfilgrastim and for the biosimilar pegfilgrastims, with the most common side effects being headache and bone pain. Serious side effects such as allergic reactions or problems with the spleen were very low and were also similar between the reference pegfilgrastim and the biosimilar pegfilgrastims. These results show that the safety of the biosimilar pegfilgrastims was similar to the reference pegfilgrastim, with no unexpected side effects. With comparable safety to their reference product, biosimilars have the potential to improve patient access to more affordable treatment options.

Enhancing patient-centered care: a randomized study on G-CSF administration preferences in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia poses a significant risk to cancer patients, with pegfilgrastim being commonly used for its prevention. While pegfilgrastim can be administered via prefilled syringe or pen device, patient preferences and experiences with these delivery methods remain unclear. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, open-label, randomized, observational trial (NCT05910164) at the Rafael Institute, France, comparing patient preferences for pegfilgrastim administration using a prefilled syringe versus a prefilled pen device. Patients undergoing chemotherapy and requiring pegfilgrastim were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to receive either syringe or pen first, with crossover administration. Questionnaires assessed patient preferences, learning experiences, autonomy, pain levels, emotional responses, satisfaction with nursing care, and empowerment. RESULTS: Among 150 randomized patients (mean age 58 years; 69% female), both groups showed a preference for the pen device, with significantly higher mean scores favoring pen administration (4.94 ± 1.70 vs. 4.27 ± 1.84; p = 0.00106). Patients reported significantly lower perceived pain with pen administration and stronger positive emotions compared to syringe use. Satisfaction with nursing care was higher with syringe use. Empowerment levels were similar across groups but significantly stronger when using the pen in complete autonomy. CONCLUSION: A preference for pegfilgrastim administration via the pen device was observed, though this may have been influenced by the administration sequence and the absence of syringe self-administration. The insights gained can help inform clinical decision-making and improve patient-centered care in managing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05910164 on June 15, 2023.

Clinical effect of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia who receive intensive chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) after completing chemotherapy reduces the duration of neutropenia and infections. However, the efficacy and safety of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients have not yet been evaluated after intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy compared to the daily G-CSF. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of pegfilgrastim for ALL patients who received intensive chemotherapy compared with a short-acting G-CSF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data of 145 patients treated with hyper-CVAD, modified VPDL/VPD, or KALLA 1406/1407 regimen were retrospectively evaluated. Pegfilgrastim or the short-acting G-CSF was selected according to the clinician's discretion. Patients not receiving pegfilgrastim were treated with the short-acting G-CSF. RESULTS: The median age of enrolled patients was 45 years. Sixty newly diagnosed ALL patients were treated with hyper-CVAD regimen, while KALLA and VPDL regimens were administered to 39 and 46 patients, respectively. Among the 60 patients treated with hyper-CVAD, 20 patients received pegfilgrastim. Patients who received pegfilgrastim had a significantly shorter duration of neutropenia and hospitalization and reduced incidence of severe infections compared to patients receiving the short-acting G-CSF. Consistent results were also confirmed in an analysis targeting only patients who achieved remission during hyper-CVAD induction therapy. There was no significant difference in neutrophil recovery ability and hospitalization duration when the daily short-acting G-CSF was used prophylactically after completing hyper-CVAD, KALLA, and VPDL regimens as induction therapy. CONCLUSION: Using pegfilgrastim after hyper-CVAD therapy was more effective than the short-acting G-CSF in terms of infection, neutropenia recovery, and hospitalization in patients with newly diagnosed ALL.

Efficacy of delayed pegfilgrastim administration following consolidation therapy with high-dose cytarabine (HiDAC) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients.

PURPOSE: To study the effects of delaying pegfilgrastim administration following high-dose cytarabine (HiDAC) consolidation in AML patients on time to neutrophil count recovery, infectious complications, and survival. METHODS: Single-center retrospective chart review of 55 patients receiving pegfilgrastim as early administration (within 72 h) or delayed administration (after 72 h) of HiDAC. RESULTS: The difference in neutrophil recovery time was similar between the early and delayed groups (18 days versus 19 days, p < 0.28). Infections were seen in four patients in the early administration group following chemotherapy compared to none in the delayed group (p = 0.04). Febrile neutropenia rates were also decreased in the delayed administration group (23.1% versus 10.3%, p = 0.28) as well as a trend towards longer median survival (16 months versus 19 months, p = 0.69) and overall survival (21 months versus 31 months, p = 0.47). CONCLUSION: A difference in time to neutrophil recovery was not observed between the early and delayed administration groups yet decreased infectious complications may support the delayed administration of pegfilgrastim in these patients.

Filgrastim-induced hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis in a patient with mantle cell lymphoma: A case report.

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a life-threatening disease potentially induced by various causes. Very few reports have described HLH induced by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and those few previous reports have uniformly indicated that continuing G-CSF is unfeasible once HLH has been induced. A 52-year-old Japanese man who had been diagnosed with mantle cell lymphoma with systemic and central nervous system involvements received rituximab, hyper-fractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, Adriamycin and dexamethasone (R-HCVAD)/methotrexate and cytarabine. During the second cycle of R-HCVAD, the patient developed severe back pain, thrombocytopenia, elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase and ferritin levels, and hemophagocytosis in the bone marrow. Complete remission (CR) of mantle cell lymphoma was confirmed on whole-body computed tomography, brain magnetic resonance imaging, and bone marrow biopsy. The patient was diagnosed with HLH induced by filgrastim. HLH recovered with intravenous methylprednisolone at 1 g/day for 3 days, followed by oral prednisolone tapered off over 5 days. The patient continued chemotherapy with a change in the G-CSF formulation from filgrastim to lenograstim and prophylactic administration of corticosteroids. He safely completed scheduled chemotherapy without recurrence of HLH and successfully maintained CR of lymphoma. Although rare, G-CSF potentially induces HLH. Changing the G-CSF formulation and steroid prophylaxis may allow safe continuation of G-CSF.

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.

Pegfilgrastim for the management of neutropenia during neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil in esophageal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) therapy is a new standard for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The optimal timing of pegfilgrastim with the DCF regimen to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN) remains controversial. The effectiveness of concomitant pegfilgrastim administration with continuous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) infusion in the DCF regimen was therefore assessed. METHODS: All patients who received neoadjuvant DCF for esophageal cancer were retrospectively assessed. Patients who had been scheduled to receive pegfilgrastim on days 3-5 (early group) or days 7-9 (regular group) of the DCF regimen were included. Uni- and multivariate analyses were used to assess risk factors for FN. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were included in the analysis. The 26 patients in the early group received pegfilgrastim as scheduled. In the 62 patients of the regular group, 51 received pegfilgrastim at a median of 7 days after starting DCF chemotherapy. However, 11 patients in the regular group could not receive pegfilgrastim. Twenty-two patients of the regular group and 2 patients of the early group developed FN after the first session of DCF. Early administration of pegfilgrastim and grade 4 neutropenia were significantly associated with onset of FN, with multivariate analysis identifying early administration of pegfilgrastim as an independent preventive factor and grade 4 neutropenia as a risk factor, after adjusting for sex and age. CONCLUSION: Early pegfilgrastim administration is a safe approach that reduces the incidence of FN in DCF therapy. Using pegfilgrastim with continuous 5-FU infusion in the DCF regimen represents a reasonable option to prevent FN.

CD34+ cell yield among healthy donors: Large-scale model development and validation.

BACKGROUND: Successful engraftment in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation necessitates the collection of an adequate dose of CD34+ cells. Thus, the precise estimation of CD34+ cells harvested via apheresis is critical. Current CD34+ cell yield prediction models have limited reproducibility. This study aims to develop a more reliable and universally applicable model by utilizing a large dataset, enhancing yield predictions, optimizing the collection process, and improving clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, involving data from over 17 000 healthy donors who underwent filgrastim-mobilized hematopoietic progenitor cell apheresis. Linear regression, gradient boosting regressor, and logistic regression classification models were employed to predict CD34+ cell yield. RESULTS: Key predictors identified include pre-apheresis CD34+ cell count, weight, age, sex, and blood volume processed. The linear regression model achieved a coefficient of determination (R2) value of 0.66 and a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.81. The gradient boosting regressor model demonstrated marginally improved results with an R2 value of 0.67 and an r value of 0.82. The logistic regression classification model achieved a predictive accuracy of 96% at the 200 × 106 CD34+ cell count threshold. At thresholds of 400, 600, 800, and 1000 × 106 CD34+ cell count, the accuracies were 88%, 83%, 83%, and 88%, respectively. The model demonstrated a high area under the receiver operator curve scores ranging from 0.90 to 0.93. CONCLUSION: This study introduces advanced predictive models for estimating CD34+ cell yield, with the logistic regression classification model demonstrating remarkable accuracy and practical utility.

Efficacy and safety of dose-dense gemcitabine plus cisplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dose-dense gemcitabine and cisplatin (ddGC) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced MIBC (cT2aN0M0-cT4N1M0) who received ddGC between December 2017 and December 2023 were included. Regimens of ddGC with pegfilgrastim were administered every 2 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by radical cystectomy. The pathological complete response (CR) (pT0N0) and objective response (OR) (

Effect of Loratadine for Pegfilgrastim-Induced Bone Pain.

AIMS: Breast cancer patients on chemotherapy who receive pegfilgrastim to prevent neutropenia may experience severe bone pain as a side effect. Traditional treatment recommendations include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, opioids, and/or antihistamine use. However, little research was found comparing these interventions. The study aim was to address the gaps in literature and to explore the use of and perceived effectiveness of loratadine versus acetaminophen or NSAIDs in women with breast cancer treated with pegfilgrastim. This study also sought to understand how patients became aware of loratadine or other treatments for management of bone pain. DESIGN/METHODS: This cross-sectional study used survey methods to collect data from 66 adult female breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with pegfilgrastim. RESULTS: The incidence of bone pain was 45% (n = 30) in our sample, but more than half (n = 45; 69%) of the women took either acetaminophen, NSAIDs, or loratadine alone or in combination to prevent bone pain. All medication were rated as effective by patients, with acetaminophen slightly more effective than loratadine, and loratadine more effective than NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and loratadine are easily available and inexpensive. However, unlike acetaminophen and NSAIDs, loratadine is dosed once a day and well tolerated with minimal adverse effects. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Randomized controlled trials are needed to adequately assess the effectiveness of all three medication options. Because little is known about optimal use of any of these medications for pegfilgrastim-induced bone pain, it is also important to identify the optimal time to initiate treatment and ideal treatment duration.

Filgrastim Use in the Treatment of Azathioprine-Induced Myelosuppression Toxicity After Prescription Error in the Feline.

Only one report on the successful use of filgrastim (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) in cats for severe neutropenia following azathioprine toxicity exists. Here, we report on a case in which a cat was prescribed methimazole but the medication was filled incorrectly with azathioprine tablets and the prescription label indicated a methimazole dosing regimen that was administered for three days before recognition of the error. On presentation, the cat's physical examinations were consistent with previous examinations before ingestion of azathioprine. A complete blood cell count revealed neutropenia and leukopenia. The cat later developed hyporexia, dehydration, and vomiting. Treatment included antinausea and appetite stimulant medications, filgrastim, and antibiotics. Filgrastim given as subcutaneous injections over the course of treatment increased neutrophil cell counts after suppression. The cat made a full recovery after responding to the treatment protocol. Based on the perceived response to filgrastim in this single feline case report, its use can be considered for the treatment of azathioprine-induced neutropenia in cats.

[The Utility of Primary Prophylaxis with Pegfilgrastim in Combination with Polatuzumab Vedotin Therapy].

Polatuzumab vedotin(Pola)combination therapy is used for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma(DLBCL)treatment. In clinical trials, more than 90% of the patients have received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor(G-CSF)as primary prophylaxis. However, reports investigating the benefit of prophylactic administration are lacking. In this study, we addressed the incidence of febrile neutropenia(FN)with and without primary prophylaxis with G-CSF combined with Pola therapy. We observed that the incidence of FN with Pola-BR therapy was 0% and 9.5% with and without G-CSF, respectively. The incidence of FN with Pola-R-CHP tended to be higher: 0% and 31.2% with and without G-CSF, respectively. The duration of hospitalization significantly decreased in the Pola-BR group with G-CSF(11 days vs. 18 days in the group without G-CSF), suggesting that prophylaxis might contribute to this reduction. Although not statistically significant, prophylactic G-CSF administration tended to reduce the incidence of Grade 3 or higher leukopenia and neutropenia, suggesting that primary prophylactic G-CSF administration in Pola combination therapy could contribute to reduced hematologic toxicity.

[Approaches and Challenges in the Clinical Application of On-Body Injector(G-Lasta BodyPod)].

The G-Lasta BodyPod(BodyPod), a newly developed on-body injector that automatically injects pegfilgrastim(Peg-G), has been approved for clinical use in Japan. However, its precise operation is yet to be established. Exploring accumulated literature, we reviewed the efficacy and safety of the Peg-G on-body injector used in other countries and determined its eligibility criteria, operating procedures, and troubleshooting guideline. Overseas, the Peg-G on-body injectors were utilized in relatively young patients, approximately 50 years of age. The incidence of on-body injector failure was low(0.1-4.9%)and comprised injection failure, drug leakage, and dropout. We defined eligible patients as those capable of self-management (handling the BodyPod and understanding troubleshooting). For convenience of patients, the BodyPod was applied to them in the outpatient chemotherapy center by nurses with expertise in the application technique. We categorized BodyPod- related issues as(1)allergic symptoms after application and Peg-G injection,( 2)malfunction or failure before initiating the Peg-G injection, or(3)malfunction or failure after initiating the Peg-G injection. In conclusion, a careful understanding of the handling and malfunction of the BodyPod is essential prior to application in clinical settings, along with patient indications and troubleshooting guidelines appropriate for each hospital.

[Investigation of the Changes in Blood Cell Components following the Administration of Pegfilgrastim in Neo-Adjuvant and Adjuvant FEC Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer].

Perioperative fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide(FEC)therapy is a standard treatment for breast cancer. However, more than 20% of patients with breast cancer who undergo FEC therapy experience febrile neutropenia(FN), for which pegfilgrastim is commonly recommended as primary prophylaxis. Although the efficacy and safety of pegfilgrastim were verified at the time of drug approval, there are still no reports on its long-term safety. In this study, we assessed the long-term safety of pegfilgrastim and changes in blood cell components, further assessing the incidence of FN. There were no significant differences in the leukocyte count, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, hemoglobin concentration, or platelet count with or without the use of pegfilgrastim at 1 year. No long-term effects of pegfilgrastim on blood cell components were observed. The incidence of FN was 6.5% with pegfilgrastim administration and 22.8% without pegfilgrastim administration(p=0.020). Primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim can reduce the incidence of FN and can be safely used for 1 year after initial administration in patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy.

[Timing of Administration of Pegfilgrastim and Prophylaxis for Febrile Neutropenia for Patients with Early Breast Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy].

Febrile neutropenia(FN)causes a prolonged treatment schedule and decreased relative dose intensity(RDI)during cancer chemotherapy, which adversely affects prognosis. In recent years, dose-dense(dd)chemotherapy has been used as adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer based on the results of improved disease-free survival according to meta-analysis data. Regarding neoadjuvant chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer, taxanes and trastuzumab with the addition of pertuzumab have shown higher pathological complete response rates and elevated incidences of FN. One hundred seventy-six patients received pegfilgrastim(PEG)prophylaxis between January 2011 and January 2023. Until 2019, the median day of PEG prophylaxis was day 4 from chemotherapy completion(days 2- 3, 14 cases; day 4, 41 cases; and day 5, 8 cases)with antibiotic prophylaxis in 58 patients(92%). FN was observed in 19 cases(30%). The RDIs of TC and FEC were 96.8% and 96.0%, respectively. Meanwhile, the median day of PEG prophylaxis after 2020 was day 2 from chemotherapy completion(days 2-3, 108 cases; day 4, 4 cases; and day 5, 1 case)without antibiotic prophylaxis. FN was not observed in any of the cases. The RDI of all regimens was 99.7%. Although there were some differences in chemotherapy regimens, an earlier timing of PEG prophylaxis(especially 24-48 hours from chemotherapy completion)has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN and increase the RDI.