RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda , Humanos , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Inducción de Remisión , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Quimioterapia de Inducción , Japón , Neutropenia/inducido químicamente , Neutropenia/prevención & controlRESUMEN
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).
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Humanos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Cisplatino/efectos adversos , Cisplatino/uso terapéutico , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Doxorrubicina/administración & dosificación , Doxorrubicina/efectos adversos , Doxorrubicina/uso terapéutico , Neutropenia Febril/prevención & control , Neutropenia Febril/inducido químicamente , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/administración & dosificación , Metotrexato/uso terapéutico , Metotrexato/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Urológicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Vinblastina/administración & dosificación , Vinblastina/uso terapéutico , Vinblastina/efectos adversosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Neoplasias , Humanos , Esquema de Medicación , Filgrastim/uso terapéutico , Filgrastim/administración & dosificación , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Polietilenglicoles , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Proteínas Recombinantes , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Docetaxel/administración & dosificación , Docetaxel/uso terapéutico , Pueblos del Este de Asia , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/administración & dosificación , Japón , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Taxoides/administración & dosificación , Taxoides/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células Pequeñas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Pulmón de Células no Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Docetaxel/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológico , Ramucirumab , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is an essential supportive agent for chemotherapy-induced severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for non-round cell soft tissue sarcoma (NRC-STS)?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve NRC-STS treatment outcomes?" for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: A literature search was performed on the primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for NRC-STSs. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival, incidence of febrile neutropenia, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 154 articles were extracted from the literature search for CQs #1 and #2, respectively. After the first and second screening, one and two articles were included in the final evaluation, respectively. Only some studies have addressed these two clinical questions through a literature review. CONCLUSION: The clinical questions were converted to future research questions because of insufficient available data. The statements were proposed: "The benefit of primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STS" and "The benefit of intensified chemotherapy with primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STSs." G-CSF is often administered as primary prophylaxis when chemotherapy with severe myelosuppression is administered. However, its effectiveness and safety are yet to be scientifically proven.
Asunto(s)
Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Sarcoma , Humanos , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Sarcoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Japón , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Oncología Médica , Calidad de Vida , Prevención Primaria/métodosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer can cause neutropenia, increasing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) and serious infections. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) as primary prophylaxis has been explored to mitigate these risks. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted according to the "Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development" using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing using G-CSF as primary prophylaxis in invasive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and FN incidence. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis, and five RCTs were meta-analyzed for FN incidence. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in FN incidence with primary G-CSF prophylaxis (risk difference [RD] = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01-0.43, p = 0.04). Evidence for improvement in OS with G-CSF was inconclusive. Four RCTs suggested a tendency for increased pain with G-CSF, but statistical significance was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prophylactic use of G-CSF is strongly recommended for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, as it has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN. While the impact on OS is unclear, the benefits of reducing FN are considered to outweigh the potential harm of increased pain.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Femenino , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Neutropenia Febril/prevención & control , Neutropenia Febril/inducido químicamente , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma can lead to severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve Ewing sarcoma treatment outcomes?". METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi web databases, including English and Japanese articles published from 1990 to 2019. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival (OS), febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life (QOL), and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-five English and five Japanese articles were identified for CQ #1. After screening, a cohort study of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide chemotherapy with 851 patients was selected. Incidence of FN was 60.8% with G-CSF and 65.8% without; statistical tests were not conducted. Data on OS, infection-related mortality, QOL, or pain was unavailable. Consequently, CQ #1 was redefined as a future research question. As for CQ #2, we found two English and five Japanese papers, of which one high-quality randomized controlled trial on G-CSF use in intensified chemotherapy was included. This trial showed trends toward lower mortality and a significant increase in event-free survival for 2-week interval regimen with the G-CSF primary prophylactic use compared with 3-week interval. CONCLUSION: This review indicated that G-CSF's efficacy as primary prophylaxis in Ewing sarcoma, except in children, is uncertain despite its common use. This review tentatively endorses intensified chemotherapy with G-CSF primary prophylaxis for Ewing sarcoma.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Sarcoma de Ewing , Humanos , Sarcoma de Ewing/tratamiento farmacológico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Japón , Neoplasias Óseas/tratamiento farmacológico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Doxorrubicina/uso terapéutico , Doxorrubicina/efectos adversos , Doxorrubicina/administración & dosificación , Calidad de Vida , Etopósido/uso terapéutico , Etopósido/administración & dosificación , Ifosfamida/uso terapéutico , Ifosfamida/efectos adversos , Ifosfamida/administración & dosificación , Oncología Médica/métodos , Vincristina/uso terapéutico , Vincristina/efectos adversosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda , Humanos , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/administración & dosificación , Inducción de Remisión , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Japón , Terapia RecuperativaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Polietilenglicoles , Humanos , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/administración & dosificación , Polietilenglicoles/administración & dosificación , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Neutropenia Febril/prevención & control , Neutropenia Febril/inducido químicamente , Proteínas RecombinantesRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Neutropenia Febril , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Humanos , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Neutropenia Febril/tratamiento farmacológico , Neutropenia Febril/inducido químicamente , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Japón , Neutropenia Febril Inducida por Quimioterapia/tratamiento farmacológico , Oncología Médica , Guías de Práctica Clínica como AsuntoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Sistema Digestivo , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos , Humanos , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Sistema Digestivo/tratamiento farmacológico , Japón , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Oncología Médica , Neutropenia Febril Inducida por Quimioterapia/prevención & control , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Patients with advanced ovarian clear cell carcinoma (CCC) have a poor prognosis in the absence of an effective standard treatment. Combination therapy with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and bevacizumab (GPBev) is promising for ovarian CCC. Thus, we conducted a multi-institutional, phase II trial in Japan to examine the efficacy and safety of GPBev for CCC. This is the first study on the use of GPBev for CCC. Eighteen patients (median age, 56.5 years) with pathologically confirmed first recurrent or refractory CCC and having evaluable regions, as assessed using RECIST, were recruited between January 2017 and May 2019. Gemcitabine (1000 mg/m 2 ), cisplatin (40 mg/m 2 ), and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) were administered intravenously on days 1 and 15, every 28 days, for 6-10 cycles, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). The secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR) and adverse events (AEs). Fifteen patients (83.3%) completed 6-10 cycles of treatment; three patients (two with AEs and one with progressive disease) did not. The ORR was 61.1% [complete response (CR) 3 and partial response (PR) 8] and DCR was 88.9% (CR 3, PR 8, and stable disease 5). Grade 3 and 4 hematological AEs were observed in 16.7 and 5.6% of the patients, respectively. Nonhematological AEs of grades 3 and 4 were observed in 27.8 and 5.6% of the patients, respectively. GPBev is a promising therapy for CCC owing to the high ORR and acceptable toxicity for the first recurrence and refractory CCC.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma , Neoplasias Ováricas , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Bevacizumab , Carcinoma Epitelial de Ovario/tratamiento farmacológico , Cisplatino , Desoxicitidina , Gemcitabina , Neoplasias Ováricas/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a classification system introducing neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) of the female reproductive tract, excluding the ovaries. This study aimed to evaluate whether retrospective adaption of the gastroenteropancreatic (GEP)-NEN classification is feasible for ovarian NENs (O-NENs) and correlates with prognosis. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients diagnosed with carcinoid, small cell carcinoma (pulmonary type), paraganglioma, non-small/large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), mixed NEC, or undifferentiated carcinomas at 20 institutions in Japan were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. We identified O-NENs through central pathological review using a common slide set, followed by reclassification according to WHO 2010 guidelines for GEP-NENs. A proportional hazards model was used to assess the association of prognostic factors (age, stage, performance status, histology, and residual disease) with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Of the 68 enrolled patients, 48 were eligible for analysis. All carcinoids (n = 32) were reclassified as NET G1/G2, whereas 14 of 16 carcinomas were reclassified as NEC/mixed adeno-NEC (MANEC) (Fisher's exact test; p < 0.01). The OS/PFS was 49.0/42.5 months and 6.5/3.9 months for NET G1/G2 and NEC/MANEC, respectively. Histology revealed that NEC/MANEC was associated with increased risk of death (HR = 48.0; 95% CI, 3.93-586; p < 0.01) and disease progression (HR = 51.6; 95% CI, 5.54-480; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Retrospective adaption of GEP-NEN classification to O-NENs is feasible and correlates well with the prognosis of O-NENs. This classification could be introduced for ovarian tumors.
Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor/sangre , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/clasificación , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/clasificación , Neoplasias Ováricas/sangre , Neoplasias Ováricas/clasificación , Neoplasias Ováricas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/clasificación , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Anciano , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Japón , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Ováricas/mortalidad , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) is a rare gynecologic malignancy for which the currently available treatments do not consistently provide long-term disease control. This study aimed to reveal the current clinical status of uLMS to support future clinical trials. METHODS: This study enrolled patients with uLMS treated at 53 Japanese institutions from 2000 to 2012. Central pathological review (CPR) was performed. All cases were confirmed by CPR, and epidemiological features, treatment, and prognosis were analyzed statistically. RESULTS: A total of 307 patients were enrolled. A diagnosis of uLMS was confirmed in 266 patients (86.6%) of patients after CPR, of whom data for 259 were analyzed. Of these, 186 (71.8%) patients underwent complete gross resection as primary therapy. Ninety-eight patients received no additional adjuvant therapy, while docetaxel and gemcitabine was the most frequent regimen among 155 patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy. In all cases, the median overall survival (OS) was 44.2 months. Multivariate analyses of prognostic factors in all cases identified stage III and IV disease, high serum lactate dehydrogenase level, and menopausal status as poor prognostic factors. However, in stage I cases, high serum lactate dehydrogenase level and no adjuvant treatment were identified as poor prognostic factors. The 5-year OS of patients with stage I uLMS treated with adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly better than that of those without adjuvant treatment (67.8% vs 46.7%, P = 0.0461). CONCLUSIONS: Despite complete removal of the primary lesion, the clinical course of patients with uLMS was poor due to recurrence of distant metastasis. The application of a suitable biomarker and effective adjuvant chemotherapy are required to improve the prognosis of patients with uLMS.
Asunto(s)
Leiomiosarcoma/patología , Neoplasias Uterinas/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Estudios de Cohortes , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Docetaxel/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Japón/epidemiología , L-Lactato Deshidrogenasa/sangre , Leiomiosarcoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Leiomiosarcoma/epidemiología , Leiomiosarcoma/cirugía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Pronóstico , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Uterinas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Uterinas/epidemiología , Neoplasias Uterinas/cirugía , Adulto Joven , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
AIM: A multi-institutional phase II trial was conducted to determine the efficacy and toxicity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with irinotecan and nedaplatin followed by radical hysterectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced, bulky stage IB2-IIB cervical cancer. METHODS: Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IB2-II, bulky type (>4 cm in diameter) squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix were enrolled. Irinotecan (60 mg/m2 ) was administered intravenously on days 1 and 8 and nedaplatin (80 mg/m2 ) was also administered on day 1 of every 21-day cycle. After two cycles of chemotherapy, a radical hysterectomy was performed. Until 6 weeks after the surgery, three to five cycles of the regimen were added as adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the 2-year relapse-free survival rate. The response rates and toxicities were evaluated as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients from seven institutions were enrolled in this study. The median age was 48 years (range 25-75 years). The average follow-up period was 37.8 months (15-71 months). Twenty-three patients completed the regimen as planned. The objective response rate (complete response + partial response) for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen was 81.2%. The 2-year and 5-year relapse-free-survival rates were 87.5% and 78.8%, respectively. The incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia was 6.3% and 34.4% during neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment, respectively. All other toxicities were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Our treatment showed efficacy and tolerability for patients with locally advanced, bulky stage IB2-IIB cervical cancer. This suggests that treatment has the potential to improve the prognosis compared to concurrent chemo-radiotherapy.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/terapia , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Irinotecán/uso terapéutico , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Compuestos Organoplatinos/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Topoisomerasa I/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/terapia , Adulto , Anciano , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/cirugía , Femenino , Humanos , Histerectomía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Pronóstico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/cirugíaRESUMEN
Chylous ascites is infrequently observed following lymph node dissection in surgeries for gynecological malignancies. If symptoms develop, they can severely debilitate patients and increase the risk of infection, particularly those with a low performance status following the primary operation. Treatment of chylous ascites is often challenging and protracted, with no treatment currently guaranteeing a complete cure. This study explores the efficacy of standby therapy for refractory chylous ascites in a 46-year-old woman with gynecological malignancies who did not respond to multiple lymphangiographic interventions. Due to a suspicion of left ovarian cancer, she underwent surgery including lymph node dissection. On the following day, significant amounts of ascites were confirmed in the abdominal cavity. Despite performing lymphangiography twice, the chylous ascites persisted. During follow-up in the outpatient ward, on the 142nd post-surgery day, the ascites had spontaneously resolved. In cases like this, where symptoms are relatively mild and surgical intervention is not preferred due to complications or patient preference following lymphangiography, it may be beneficial to use standby therapy in combination with dietary management during outpatient follow-up. Such an approach could yield medium- to long-term improvements and should be considered. However, if further treatment is planned following the initial surgery, the patient's long-term prognosis should be considered, and treatment should be administered promptly. Various methods exist for treating refractory chylous ascites, including expectant therapy, dietary management, percutaneous drainage, lymphangiography and embolization, and surgical lymphatic ligation. Tailoring individualized treatment plans for each patient and pursuing a multidisciplinary approach is advisable. Although initiating adjuvant chemotherapy may not be feasible, long-term standby therapy is beneficial, even if lymphangiography proves ineffective in the short term.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the leading cause of female mortality in gynecologic malignancies, with a rising incidence in Japan. This study aimed to validate the treatment patterns and safety of niraparib as maintenance therapy for EOC following initial chemotherapy in clinical practice in Japan. METHODS: Leveraging claims data between April 2008 and December 2022, this descriptive study comprised EOC-diagnosed patients receiving initial platinum-based chemotherapy, debulking surgery, and niraparib as maintenance therapy. Patient characteristics, prescription status, transfusion details, and laboratory data were assessed and reported as summary statistics and frequencies. RESULTS: Among 291 patients, the median age was 64.0 years and 94.5% received a 200-mg daily dose of niraparib. At week 12, 78.7% (229/291) continued niraparib treatment, 21.3% (62/291) discontinued, and 52.2% (152/291) required treatment interruptions. Of the 62 patients who discontinued treatment, 27 patients initiated subsequent EOC treatment within 12 weeks following niraparib discontinuation. Blood transfusions were needed in 10.3% (30/291), and of 55 patients with available laboratory data, 61.8% (34/55) had decreased platelet count <100,000/µL, 25.5% (14/55) had decreased hemoglobin level <8 g/dL, and 22.7% (5/22) had decreased neutrophil count <1,000/µL, meeting the criteria for treatment interruption. Among those with thrombocytopenia, 88.2% (30/34) were able to either resume or continue treatment. CONCLUSION: Niraparib demonstrated favorable tolerability in Japanese patients with advanced EOC, with effective management of thrombocytopenia through dose adjustments and supportive care, supporting its viability as post-chemotherapy maintenance therapy.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: This observation study aimed to differentiate between lobular endocervical glandular hyperplasia (LEGH) and gastric-type mucinous carcinoma (GAS) while evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery in the preoperative diagnosis of cervical cystic lesions. METHOD AND MATERIAL: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic process and laparoscopic surgical management of cervical cystic lesions suspected to be LEGH or GAS. Preoperatively and postoperatively, MRI, cytology, histology, tumor marker analysis, and surgical outcomes (blood loss during surgery, operative time) were assessed. Six individuals were selected based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results indicating a preoperative suspicion of LEGH or GAS. These patients underwent laparoscopic surgical treatment without indications of malignancy based on preoperative histology or cytology. RESULTS: Initially, all individuals were suspected to have LEGH based on MRI findings. Postoperatively, two patients were diagnosed with LEGH, two with adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and minimal deviation adenocarcinoma (MDA), and two showed no notable findings on pathology (one diagnosed endometrioid carcinoma in endometrial tissue). Patients with malignancies exhibited longer surgical times and higher intraoperative blood loss. Preoperatively, no significant variation was observed in maximal lesion diameter between adenocarcinoma and LEGH. However, lesion diameter increased significantly over time in patients with GAS. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery demonstrated feasibility and provided crucial diagnostic and therapeutic outcomes, with no postoperative recurrence observed in cases of malignancy, despite the challenges associated with preoperative differentiation. These findings underscore the potential of laparoscopic surgery in enhancing both diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy for cervical cystic lesions, offering promise for improved patient outcomes and management strategies in clinical practice.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Although CXC chemokine receptor type 4 (CXCR4) is known to be expressed in various solid tumors and plays an integral role in cancer invasion and metastasis, expression of CXCR4 in human vulvar cancer has not yet been investigated. We examined distribution and expression of this chemokine receptor in specimens of invasive and noninvasive human vulvar neoplasms to elucidate its clinical significance. METHODS: Study patients were 38 consecutive patients (31 with primary vulvar cancers and 7 with intraepithelial neoplasms) treated at one of our hospitals. Sections of all specimens were evaluated for CXCR4 expression by means of immunohistochemistry. Relations between CXCR4 expression and clinicopathologic features including prognosis were investigated. RESULTS: None of the 7 vulvar intraepithelial lesions expressed CXCR4. Of the 31 invasive vulvar tumor samples examined, 19 (61%) stained positively for CXCR4; 15 (68%) of 22 squamous cell carcinomas and 2 (29%) of 7 Paget tumors were CXCR4 positive. The difference in expression between invasive cancers and intraepithelial neoplasms was significant (P = 0.003). FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage III-IV cancers, in comparison to FIGO stage I-II cancers, were more likely to be positive for CXCR4 (82% vs 50%, P = 0.08). In terms of disease-free survival, prognosis of cancers that expressed CXCR4 was poorer than that of CXCR4-negative cancers (P = 0.013), but in terms of disease-specific survival, prognosis did not differ significantly between CXCR4-positive and -negative cancers (P = 0.111). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of invasive squamous cell vulvar cancers can be expected to express CXCR4, and CXCR4 expression correlates with poor disease prognosis.