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.

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.

Association Between Time Since Administration of Pegylated G-CSF (Pegfilgrastim) and Bone Marrow Uptake on FDG PET/CT: Determination of a Minimum Interval.

BACKGROUND. Pegfilgrastim administration after chemotherapy increases bone marrow and spleen FDG uptake. Consensus is lacking regarding the optimal interval between pegfilgrastim administration and FDG PET/CT. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the association between bone marrow and spleen uptake and the interval between pegfilgrastim administration and FDG PET/CT. METHODS. This retrospective study included 70 oncology patients (mean age, 64 ± 12 [SD] years; 48 men, 22 women) receiving chemotherapy who underwent FDG PET/CT (study scan) within 35 days after pegfilgrastim administration and who underwent additional FDG PET/CT at least 4 months before pegfilgrastim initiation or at least 3 months after last pegfilgrastim administration (reference scan). A nuclear medicine physician recorded the SUVmean for normal osseous structures and spleen and assessed bone marrow uptake using a 4-point visual scale (1, no abnormal uptake; 2, clinically insignificant uptake; 3, clinically significant uptake possibly interfering with interpretation; 4, clinically significant uptake expected to interfere with interpretation). RESULTS. Percentage change in SUVmean between reference and study scans significantly increased (p < .05) as the interval increased for five sites (i.e., for patients with interval of 7-13 vs 29-35 days, mean percentage change was 32.3% ± 18.2% vs 11.5% ± 17.3% for cervical vertebra, 42.2% ± 18.3% vs 21.3% ± 14.2% for thoracic vertebra, 47.2% ± 19.8% vs 19.1% ± 13.9% for lumbar vertebra, 51.1% ± 25.8% vs 12.7% ± 11.3% for pelvis, and 53.0% ± 25.6% vs 4.4% ± 14.1% for lower extremity); percentage change was not associated with the interval for upper extremity or spleen (p > .05). Visual uptake scores of 4, 3, 2, and 1 were observed in days 7-21, 12-22, 12-28, and 14-35, respectively. Percentage of patients with a score of 3 or 4 was 94.4% for days 7-13, 58.1% for days 14-21, 6.7% for days 22-28, and 0% for days 29-35. A total of 71.4% of patients had a score of 3 or 4 on day 7-21, whereas 4.8% had a score of 3 and 0% had a score of 4 on days 22-35. CONCLUSION. A visual uptake score of 3 or 4 was consistently observed throughout an approximately 3-week interval following pegfilgrastim administration, without any such case beyond 22 days. CLINICAL IMPACT. We recommend a preferred interval of at least 3 weeks after pegfilgrastim administration before PET/CT.

Prophylactic pegfilgrastim to prevent febrile neutropenia among patients receiving biweekly (Q2W) chemotherapy regimens: a systematic review of efficacy, effectiveness and safety.

BACKGROUND: Pegfilgrastim, a long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), is commonly used to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN), a potentially life-threatening complication, following myelosuppressive chemotherapy. The FDA label for pegfilgrastim specifies that it should not be administered 14 days before or within 24 h of administration of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, precluding the use of pegfilgrastim in biweekly (Q2W) regimens. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines support the use of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients receiving Q2W regimens. The objective of this study was to systematically review evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies that describe the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in preventing FN among patients receiving Q2W regimens. METHODS: An Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library literature search was conducted to evaluate the evidence regarding efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of prophylactic pegfilgrastim versus no prophylactic pegfilgrastim or prophylaxis with other G-CSF in patients who were receiving Q2W chemotherapy regimens with high (> 20%) or intermediate (10-20%) risk of FN for a non-myeloid malignancy. Studies that addressed absolute or relative risk of FN, grade 1-4 neutropenia, all-cause or any hospitalization, dose delays or dose reductions, adverse events, or mortality were included. Studies where the comparator was a Q3W chemotherapy regimen with primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim were also included. RESULTS: The initial literature search identified 2258 publications. Thirteen publications met the eligibility criteria, including eight retrospective, one prospective, one phase 1 dose escalation study, and three RCTs. In nine of the 13 studies reporting incidence of FN, and in seven of the nine studies reporting incidence of neutropenia, administration of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients receiving Q2W regimens resulted in decreased or comparable rates of FN or neutropenia compared with patients receiving filgrastim, no G-CSF, lipefilgrastim or pegfilgrastim in Q3W regimens. In six of the nine studies reporting safety data, lower or comparable safety profiles were observed between pegfilgrastim and comparators. CONCLUSIONS: In a variety of non-myeloid malignancies, administration of prophylactic pegfilgrastim was efficacious in reducing the risk of FN in patients receiving high- or intermediate-risk Q2W regimens, with an acceptable safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no: CRD42019155572 .

Comparing the efficacy and side-effects of PDLASTA® (Pegfilgrastim) with PDGRASTIM® (Filgrastim) in breast cancer patients: a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of a single dose (Pegfilgrastim or PDL) or repeated six daily injections (Filgrastim or PDG) during chemotherapy courses in breast cancer patients in a non-inferiority clinical trial. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, 80 patients were recruited and allocated randomly to two equal arms. In one group, a single subcutaneous dose of PDL was injected the day after receiving the chemotherapy regimen in each cycle. The second arm received a subcutaneous injection of PDG for six consecutive days in each cycle of treatment. The side effects of GCF treatment and its effect on blood parameters were compared in each cycle and during eight cycles of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Hematologic parameters showed no significant differences in any of the treatment courses between the two study groups. The comparison of WBC (p = 0.527), Hgb (p = 0.075), Platelet (p = 0.819), Neutrophil (p = 0.575), Lymphocyte (p = 705) and ANC (p = 0.675) changes during the eight courses of treatment also revealed no statistically significant difference between the two study groups. Side effects including headache, injection site reaction and muscle pain had a lower frequency in patients receiving PDL drugs. CONCLUSION: It seems that PDL is non-inferior in efficacy and also less toxic than PDG. Since PDL can be administered in a single dose and is also less costly, it can be regarded as a cost-effective drug for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT20190504043465N1 , May 2019.

Same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim-cbqv in patients with lymphoma receiving CHOP-like chemotherapy.

Aim: To compare the incidence of febrile neutropenia and related outcomes of prophylactic same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim/pegfilgrastim-cbqv in patients with lymphoma receiving cyclophosphamide, hydroxydaunorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (CHOP)-like chemotherapy. Methods: Retrospective, real-world, single-institution study. Results: 93 patients received 460 cycles of CHOP-like chemotherapy. The incidence of febrile neutropenia and grade 3/4 chemotherapy-induced neutropenia was 5 and 16.5%, respectively. In 401 cycles pegfilgrastim was administered same-day versus 12 cycles next-day. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 17 cycles versus 0 cycles (p = 1.00) and grade 3/4 chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in 65 cycles (16.2%) versus 1 cycle (16.7%; p = 1.00) with same-day versus next-day pegfilgrastim administration, respectively. Conclusion: Pegfilgrastim may be safely administered on the same day as chemotherapy in patients with lymphoma receiving CHOP-like chemotherapy.

Lay abstract Aside from killing cancer cells, chemotherapy can also affect the growth of immune cells that normally prevent infections. Without enough of these immune cells in the blood, the patient's body cannot fight infections. This can lead to a serious condition called febrile neutropenia, and death in the most severe cases. Pegfilgrastim, a growth factor that helps important types of immune cells to grow, can prevent this side effect of chemotherapy. Usually, pegfilgrastim is administered the day after chemotherapy but there is a trend to administer it on the day of chemotherapy, but whether this is effective and safe is currently unclear. This study from the University of Arizona Cancer Center showed that administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy is a safe, effective method of preventing febrile neutropenia in patients who receive standard-of-care chemotherapy to treat lymphoma.

G-CSF and G-CSF-related vasculitis: a systematic review of the literature and intriguing future research perspectives.

Background: There are several case reports suggesting that G-CSFs may, in rare conditions, produce serious side effects, such as vasculitis. Materials & methods: A systematic search was conducted in Medline via PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to describe this unusual side effect to raise awareness among clinicians for early recognition and treatment. Results: Fifty-seven patients were analyzed. The most prevalent cancer type was breast cancer (47%). Long-acting G-CSF was used in 38 patients (67%). Only 47% of patients were treated with steroids. Conclusion: Although the benefit of G-CSF treatment outweighs the potential damage, oncologists should consider the possibility of triggering a vascular toxicity and try to identify patients at increased risk for this side effect.

Lay abstract Background: Several case reports suggest that a type of drug called granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSFs) may, in rare cases, produce serious side effects, such as vasculitis. Materials & methods: A systematic search was conducted to describe this unusual side effect. Results: Fifty-seven patients were analyzed. The most prevalent cancer type in which this side effect was observed was breast cancer (47%). Only 47% of patients were treated with steroids. The main symptoms, such as fever, chest/epigastric pain and general malaise, are nonspecific and cannot be used to diagnose the side effect; laboratory findings are suggestive of inflammation. Conclusion: Accurate assessment of what causes this adverse event is extremely important. Although the benefit of G-CSF treatment outweighs the potential damage, oncologists should consider the possibility of triggering vascular toxicity and try to identify patients at increased risk.

Cabazitaxel schedules in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a review.

Cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) is the standard second-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel. It is associated with a risk of neutropenic complications, which may be a barrier to its use in daily clinical practice, particularly in frail elderly patients. Here the authors reviewed key studies conducted with cabazitaxel (TROPIC, PROSELICA, AFFINITY, CARD and the European compassionate use program) and pilot studies with adapted schedules. Based on this review, the use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor from cycle 1 appears crucial to maximize the benefit-risk ratio of cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Preliminary data with alternative schedules look promising, especially for frail patients. Results of the ongoing Phase III CABASTY trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02961257) are awaited.

Filgrastim alone versus cyclophosphamide and filgrastim for mobilization in multiple myeloma patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard treatment approach in most multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Before ASCT, chemomobilization or only granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilization can be preferred in stem cell mobilization. The primary aim of the study is to compare the effect of the two mobilization regimens on hematopoietic engraftment times, CD34+cell counts and number of apheresis required to harvest stem cells. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of MM patients who applied to our hospital between 2010 and 2020 were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups (Group A: Cyclophosphamide plus filgrastim, Group B: Filgrastim alone) according to the mobilization regimen. RESULTS: A total of 223 MM patients were included in this study (Group A:153, Group B:70 patients). When the patients in Group A and Group B were compared, the number of collected CD34+ cells were higher in Group A (p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of median times to neutrophil and platelet engraftment, and number of apheresis required to harvest stem cells (p > 0.05). The rate of infection development during mobilization in the patients in group A and the duration of hospitalization of these patients were higher than the patients in group B (p < 0.001). Patients receiving >6 cycles of chemotherapy and immunomodulatory treatment had lower collected CD34+ cells than other patients (p = 0.012 and p = 0.054). CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, filgrastim alone seems to provide a sufficient amount of stem cells in MM patients.

Lenograstim versus filgrastim in mobilization before autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma and lymphoma - Single center experience.

OBJECTIVE: Peripheral blood stem cell transplantation is frequently used in the treatment of various hematological malignancies after intensive chemotherapy. The primary aim of our study is to compare the amount of collected CD34+ cells and engraftment times in patients mobilized with filgrastim or lenograstim. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Demographic and clinical data of multiple myeloma (MM) and lymphoma patients who underwent autologous transplantation and mobilized with G-CSF (filgrastim or lenograstim) without chemotherapy were collected retrospectively. RESULTS: One hundred eleven MM and 58 lymphoma patients were included in the study. When mobilization with filgrastim and lenograstim was compared in MM patients, there was no significant difference in neutrophil and thrombocyte engraftment times of lenograstim and filgrastim groups (p = 0.931 p = 0.135, respectively). Similarly, the median number of CD34+ cells collected in patients receiving filgrastim and lenograstim was very similar (4.2 × 106/kg vs 4.3 × 106/kg, p = 0.977). When compared with patients who received lenalidomide before transplantation and patients who did not receive lenalidomide, the CD34+ counts of the two groups were similar. However, neutrophil and platelet engraftment times in the group not receiving lenalidomide tended to be shorter (p = 0.095 and p = 0.12, respectively). When lymphoma patients mobilized with filgrastim and lenograstim were compared, neutrophil engraftment time (p = 0.498), thrombocyte engraftment time (p = 0.184), collected CD34+ cell counts (p = 0.179) and mobilization success (p = 0.161) of the groups mobilized with filgrastim and lenograstim were similar. CONCLUSION: The superiority of the two agents to each other could not be demonstrated. Multi-center prospective studies with larger numbers of patients are needed.

Evaluation of efficacy and safety of pegfilgrastim when given less than two weeks from dose-dense chemotherapy regimens.

INTRODUCTION: In clinical practice, waiting 14 days between the administration of pegfilgrastim and subsequent chemotherapy cycle (as recommended by the prescribing information) is sometimes not feasible with multi-cycle dose-dense regimens. This study evaluated the practice related to the use of pegfilgrastim in oncology patients at a multi-hospital health system. METHODS: Patients who received pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis following dose-dense chemotherapy scheduled every 14 days were included. The primary endpoint was the impact of <14 elapsed days between pegfilgrastim administration and next chemotherapy cycle on the change in mean absolute neutrophil counts (ANC). A generalized linear mixed-effects model with fixed effects for pegfilgrastim delivery method, elapsed days between pegfilgrastim and chemotherapy (fixed categorical effect for 12, 13, 14 days), and ANC at subsequent cycle was fitted to the change in ANC between chemotherapy cycles. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty four patients with breast cancer who received pegfilgrastim support for dose dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (ddAC) qualified for the model. The mean age was 52 ± 12 years. Eighty-eight percent received pegfilgrastim on-body injector while 13% received pegfilgrastim injection. The mean number of elapsed days between pegfilgrastim and subsequent chemotherapy was 13 ± 0.5 days. The method of pegfilgrastim delivery and elapsed days between pegfilgrastim and chemotherapy administration had no significant effect on the change in ANC (p = 0.8663 and p = 0.8434 respectively); however, patient's age (p = 0.0125) had a significant effect on the change in ANC. CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest safety and efficacy when chemotherapy is administered 12-14 days from pegfilgrastim.

Optimizing the timing of 3.6 mg Pegfilgrastim Administration for Dose-Dense Chemotherapy in Japanese Patients with Breast Cancer.

Perioperative dose-dense chemotherapy (DDCT) with pegfilgrastim (Peg) prophylaxis is a standard treatment for high-risk breast cancer. We explored the optimal timing of administration of 3.6 mg Peg, the dose approved in Japan. In the phase II feasibility study of DDCT (adriamycin+cyclophosphamide or epirubicin+cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel) for breast cancer, we investigated the feasibility, safety, neutrophil transition, and optimal timing of Peg treatment by administering Peg at days 2, 3, and 4 post-chemotherapy (P2, P3, and P4 groups, respectively). Among the 52 women enrolled, 13 were aged > 60 years. The anthracycline sequence was administered to P2 (n=33), P3 (n=5), and P4 (n=14) patients, and the taxane sequence to P2 (n=38) and P3 (n=6) patients. Both sequences showed no interaction between Peg administration timing and treatment discontinuation, treatment delay, or dose reduction. However, the relative dose intensity (RDI) was significantly different among the groups. The neutrophil count transition differed significantly among the groups receiving the anthracycline sequence. However, the neutrophil count remained in the appropriate range for both sequences in the P2 group. The timing of Peg administration did not substantially affect the feasibility or safety of DDCT. Postoperative day 2 might be the optimal timing for DDCT.

A comparative effectiveness study of lipegfilgrastim in multiple myeloma patients after high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant.

G-CSF administration after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been shown to expedite neutrophil recovery. Several studies comparing filgrastim and pegfilgrastim in the post-ASCT setting concluded that the two are at least equally effective. Lipegfilgrastim (LIP) is a new long-acting, once-per-cycle G-CSF. This multicentric, prospective study aimed to describe the use of LIP in multiple myeloma patients receiving high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and compare LIP with historic controls of patients who received short-acting agent (filgrastim [FIL]). Overall, 125 patients with a median age of 60 years received G-CSF after ASCT (80 patients LIP on day 1 post-ASCT and 45 patients FIL on day 5 post-ASCT). The median duration of grade 4 neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 0.5 × 10 [9]/L) was 5 days in both LIP and FIL groups, whereas the median number of days to reach ANC ≥ 0.5 × 10 [9]/L was 10% lower in the LIP than in the FIL group (10 vs 11 days), respectively. Male sex was significantly associated with a faster ANC ≥ 0.5 × 10 [9] L response (p = 0.015). The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the LIP than in the FIL group (29% vs 49%, respectively, p = 0.024). The days to discharge after ASCT infusion were greater in patients with FN (p < 0.001). The study indicates that LIP had a shorter time to ANC recovery and is more effective than FIL for the prevention of FN in the ASCT setting.

Quantification of Radiation Injury on Neutropenia and the Link between Absolute Neutrophil Count Time Course and Overall Survival in Nonhuman Primates Treated with G-CSF.

PURPOSE: To model absolute neutrophil count (ANC) suppression in response to acute radiation (AR) exposure and evaluate ANC time course as a predictor of overall survival (OS) in response to AR exposure with or without treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in nonhuman primates. METHODS: Source data were obtained from two pivotal studies conducted in rhesus macaques exposed to 750 cGy of whole body irradiation on day 0 that received either placebo, daily filgrastim, or pegfilgrastim (days 1 and 8 after irradiation). Animals were observed for 60 days with ANC measured every 1 to 2 days. The population model of ANC response to AR and the link between observed ANC time course and OS consisted of three submodels characterizing injury due to radiation, granulopoiesis, and a time-to-event model of OS. RESULTS: The ANC response model accurately described the effects of AR exposure on the duration of neutropenia. ANC was a valid surrogate for survival because it explained 76% (95% CI, 41%-97%) and 73.2% (95% CI, 38.7%-99.9%) of the treatment effect for filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, respectively. CONCLUSION: The current model linking radiation injury to neutropenia and ANC time course to OS can be used as a basis for translating these effects to humans.

Biosimilar Uptake in Medicare Part B Varied Across Hospital Outpatient Departments and Physician Practices: The Case of Filgrastim.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the uptake of filgrastim-sndz (Zarxio), the first biosimilar to launch in the United States, in the Medicare Part B fee-for-service program from its launch in September 2015 to December 2017 and compare characteristics of patients and facilities that used filgrastim-sndz or originator filgrastim (Neupogen). METHODS: The 20% sample of Medicare Part B fee-for-service administrative claims data was used to extract information on claims for any filgrastim product between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017. RESULTS: The utilization of filgrastim-sndz in Medicare Part B increased sharply between January and August 2016, surpassing filgrastim by November 2017, contributing to a 30% decrease in overall spending on this drug since 2015. Uptake was faster and larger in physician practices compared with hospital outpatient departments. About 77% of patients receiving filgrastim-sndz were new users. Utilization patterns indicated that product selection occurred at the facility level, rather than being at the discretion of the prescribing physician or driven by patient characteristics. CONCLUSION: Uptake of biosimilar filgrastim in the Medicare Part B program occurred despite multiple challenges to the adoption of biosimilars in the US market, suggesting that substantial potential savings could be generated by improving biosimilar uptake. Our findings indicated that physician practices and hospital outpatient departments have distinctive biosimilar uptake patterns. Thus policy makers aiming to contain Medicare Part B spending might consider focusing on incentivizing biosimilar uptake among hospital outpatient departments.

Understanding utilization patterns of biologics and biosimilars in the United States to support postmarketing studies of safety and effectiveness.

PURPOSE: To describe utilization of filgrastim and infliximab, the first two products with biosimilars approved in the United States. METHODS: We identified use of filgrastim (reference, tbo-filgrastim, and filgrastim-sndz) and infliximab (reference, infliximab-dyyb, and infliximab-abda) in the Sentinel Distributed Database using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes and National Drug Codes (NDCs) from January 2015 to August 2018. We calculated the proportion of use by code type and assessed uptake over time. We compared baseline patient characteristics and treatment indications. Among patients with >1 exposure episode, we characterized gaps between episodes. RESULTS: Use was identified primarily via HCPCS codes (filgrastim: 86.4%-97.7%; infliximab: 87.8%-100%) although some was identified via NDCs (filgrastim: 2.2%-13.5%; infliximab: <0.1%-6.5%). Filgrastim reference product use declined from 89.4% in January 2015 to 30.3% in June 2018, with corresponding increases in filgrastim-sndz (0% to 49.3%) and tbo-filgrastim (10.6% to 20.4%). Infliximab biosimilar uptake was low (9.7% in June 2018). We identified 94 846 filgrastim reference product, 27 143 tbo-filgrastim, and 38 264 filgrastim-sndz users. For infliximab, we identified 125 412 reference product, 1034 infliximab-dyyb, 49 infliximab-abda, and 4855 undetermined biosimilar users. Patients receiving filgrastim products were largely similar, but differences in age, sex, and indication were observed across infliximab product users. The median exposure episode gap ranged from 1 to 3 days for filgrastim and 48 to 50 days for infliximab. CONCLUSION: Use of biosimilar filgrastim has increased in the United States, but infliximab biosimilar use remains low. Data on identification of biosimilars in claims data and observed gaps between exposure episodes can be used to support drug safety studies of biosimilars.

Administration of docetaxel plus ramucirumab with primary prophylactic pegylated-granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for pretreated non-small cell lung cancer: a phase II study.

PURPOSE: Although docetaxel plus ramucirumab has shown superior treatment efficacy over docetaxel monotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the high rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) presents a clinical problem. This study aimed to validate the primary prophylactic use of pegfilgrastim with docetaxel and ramucirumab treatment in Japanese patients with NSCLC. METHODS: Patients with NSCLC with progression after at least one round of chemotherapy were enrolled and administered docetaxel (60 mg/m2) plus ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) intravenously on day 1, followed by pegylated-granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (3.6 mg) on day 2 of a 21-day treatment cycle. The primary study endpoint was the percentage of patients who developed FN. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, progression-free survival, overall response rate, and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 20 patients (15 men and 5 women) were enrolled, of whom one developed FN, resulting in an overall FN rate of 5%. The response and disease control rates were 40% and 85%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 6.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-NR) months. The median overall survival was 18.4 (95% CI, 2.2-11.0) months. Six patients aged over 75 years were included in this study, and although most adverse events were durable, ramucirumab-associated adverse events occurred more frequently in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a 5% FN rate using primary prophylactic pegylated-granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with docetaxel plus ramucirumab in Japanese patients with NSCLC. While most adverse events were durable, elderly patients should be closely monitored.

Pegfilgrastim (PEG-G-CSF) Induces Anti-polyethylene Glycol (PEG) IgM via a T Cell-Dependent Mechanism.

Protein-based therapeutics are beginning to be widely used in various clinical settings. Conjugation of polyethylene glycol (PEGylation) to protein therapeutics improves their circulation half-lives in the body. However, we and other groups observed that the initial dose of some PEGylated protein-based therapeutics may induce anti-PEG antibodies (primarily immunoglobulin M (IgM)), resulting in the accelerated clearance of a second dose. The mechanism behind the induction of anti-PEG IgM by PEGylated protein-based therapeutics is still unclear. In this study, we found that Pegfilgrastim (PEG-G-CSF, the PEGylated form of the recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) induced anti-PEG IgM in mice when administered via either intravenous or subcutaneous administration. However, the anti-PEG IgM induction is diminished both in athymic nude mice lacking T cells and in splenectomized mice. In addition, anti-PEG IgM production was significantly diminished in the cyclophosphamide-treated mice depleted of B-cells. These results indicate that anti-PEG IgM production by Pegfilgrastim occurs in spleen in a T cell-dependent manner, which differs from anti-PEG IgM induced by PEGylated liposomes. However, B cells, both marginal zone and follicular, are essential for anti-PEG IgM production in both PEGylated preparations.

A prospective comparison of pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim combined with chemotherapy in the mobilization of CD34+ cells in NHL patients.

BACKGROUND: Autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) is a treatment approach in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients. The options for mobilization of CD34+ cells to support high-dose therapy are granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) alone or after chemotherapy. Limited data exist on the efficacy of lipegfilgrastim (LIPEG) in the mobilization field. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present prospective nonrandomized study compared LIPEG 6 mg (n = 40) with pegfilgrastim (PEG) 6 mg (n = 37) in the mobilization of blood CD34+ cells after chemotherapy in NHL patients with comparable mobilizing chemotherapy and disease status before auto-SCT. RESULTS: Significantly higher blood CD34+ cell (B-CD34+ ) counts were observed in the LIPEG group at the start of the first apheresis (44 vs 23 × 106 /L, P = .009), in line with a higher collection yield of the first apheresis (3.3 vs 2.1 × 106 /kg, P = .086) and total yield of CD34+ cells (4.7 vs 2.9 × 106 /kg, P = .004). LIPEG proved to be a more effective G-CSF, resulting in a higher B-CD34+ cell peak (60 vs 32 × 106 /L, P = .030) and higher proportion of excellent mobilizers (33% vs 8%, P = .008). The superiority of LIPEG was confirmed in the multivarite analysis concerning the CD34+ cell yield of the first apheresis day (P = .010) and the total yield (P = .001). CONCLUSION: The mobilization of blood grafts with LIPEG added to chemotherapy was associated with higher CD34+ cell apheresis yields than with PEG. A randomized study is warranted to verify these findings.

Revisiting same day administration of pegfilgrastim in the age of biosimilars: A review of literature.

PURPOSE: Since 2018, several pegfilgrastim biosimilars were approved, which may affect insurance reimbursement. Guidelines recommend pegfilgrastim be administered the days following chemotherapy to prevent hematopoietic toxicity. To date, only the reference pegfilgrastim product has an available autoinjector-device. This has contributed to logistical issues in administering biosimilar agents per guideline recommendations. Administration on the same day as chemotherapy may be a potential alternative when logistical issues are present. This review will assess current evidence on this practice to inform clinical decisions.Data sources: A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline for studies examining the administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy.Data summary: Several studies were identified, including a systematic review, retrospective reviews, and insurance claim data. Studies had significant limitations, and chemotherapy regimens and cancer types varied among studies. Studies showed inconsistent results in terms of incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia. In studies with patients with head and neck, urothelial, gynecologic, gastrointestinal, and prostate cancer, no difference in outcomes was detected or outcomes supported the feasibility of same-day administration. In patients with breast cancer, outcomes were worse with same-day administration. Outcomes were mixed in studies with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and various solid tumors. CONCLUSION: Administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy may be safe and an acceptable alternative, if logistics prohibit a patient from receiving administration the days after chemotherapy. Clinicians should consider patient risk factors and prescribed chemotherapy regimens, along with available evidence when contemplating administration of same-day pegfilgrastim.