Outpatient fractionated ICE protocol in relapsed/refractory lymphomas: Efficacy and safety.

METHODS: In this retrospective trial, we analyzed data of patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoma who received outpatient fractionated ICE between 2011-2017 at a tertiary care center. The three weekly ICE protocol consisted of: ifosfamide 1500 mg/m2 infused over 2 h on days 1-3, carboplatin (5 AUC) on day 1, and etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1-3. Rituximab 375 mg/m2 was given to patients with CD20 positive B cell Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. RESULTS: Total of 89 patients were included in this research project. Majority of patients had Hodgkin lymphoma (64%). Mean number of ICE cycles received was 2.5. Complete remission and partial remission rates for primary refractory (62.9%) and non-primary refractory (36.4%) disease were 10.5% and 26.3% versus 41.9% and 29.0% respectively. Event free survival rate was 14.5 months (95% CI 7.7-28.0) and overall survival rate 88.7 months (95% CI 48.1-NR). Grade 3 hematological toxicities were documented in 19.1% of patients with 10.1% experiencing neutropenia and 9% thrombocytopenia. 5.6% had febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: Our study included, to our knowledge, the largest number of patients treated with outpatient fractionated ICE. Results demonstrated that this regimen might be a reasonable replacement for classic ICE regimen in many patients with lymphoma. It has a favorable safety profile. However, patients with primary refractory lymphomas need more effective regimens.

Impact of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on docetaxel-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a life-threatening complication of Docetaxel-based chemotherapy regimens (DBRs). Prophylactic granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) can reduce the risk of FN. This study investigated the effect of G-CSF on FN in patients receiving DBRs for breast cancer. METHODS: Patients treated between 2015 and 2017 were identified from the hospital's pharmacy database and their medical records were examined retrospectively. Data from patients' first four cycles of DBR were collected. FN rate, FN associated length of hospital stay (FN-LOS), and chemotherapy dose modification/delay due to FN were compared between patients who did (G-CSF group) or did not (non-GCSF group) receive prophylactic G-CSF. RESULTS: Of the 276 included patients, 83.3% received a DBR as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy, and 50% received docetaxel as combination therapy. Prophylactic G-CSF was administered with the first cycle of a DBR in 69.9% of patients who were significantly less likely to experience FN compared to the non-G-CSF group (6.2% vs. 15.7%; odds ratio: 0.36 [95% CI: 0.16-0.82]; p = 0.020). Collectively and after the 4 DBR treatment cycles, FN rate (4.8 vs. 8.5; odds ratio: 0.54 [95% CI: 0.30-0.97]; p = 0.043) and the mean FN-LOS (3.55 vs. 5.28 days; t = -2.22; p = 0.037) were reduced in the G-CSF group. There was no difference in DBR dose delay/reduction between both groups in cycles 2-4. CONCLUSION: In patients receiving DBRs for breast cancer, prophylactic G-CSF significantly reduced both the rate of FN and duration of hospitalization for FN.

Dose-adjusted bendamustine as a replacement for carmustine in autologous stem cell transplant conditioning for patients with relapsed lymphoma: A retrospective single-center study.

BEAM conditioning regimen (carmustine [BCNU], etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan) has been widely used for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with relapsed or refractory lymphoma. However, BCNU-associated toxicities have prompted research to explore other options. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of bendamustine as an alternative to BCNU. We compared 71 patients who received either bendamustine (Benda-EAM group) or BCNU (BEAM group) conditioning. Considering previous reports of increased cardiotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, and mucositis, we adopted a lower bendamustine dose of 160 mg/m2/day administered for 2 days. There was no increase in nephrotoxicity and cardiotoxicity. Further, positive results were also obtained for neutrophil and platelet engraftment, appearing earlier in patients treated with Benda-EAM (10 vs. 14 days and 16 vs. 27 days, respectively). However, caution is warranted because an increased frequency of Grade 3 mucositis was observed in the Benda-EAM group (82.4% vs. 48%). This was accompanied by an increased need for parenteral nutrition. Despite the lower dose of bendamustine, the overall and progression-free survival rates were comparable between the Benda-EAM and BEAM groups. In conclusion, a lower dose of bendamustine may be an attractive alternative to BCNU as a tolerable treatment modality for patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoma.