Two decades of pegfilgrastim: what have we learned? Where do we go from here?

Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) is a medical emergency that may occur in patients with malignancies receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. FN requires early therapeutic intervention since it is associated with increased hospitalizations and high mortality risk of 5%-20%. FN-related hospitalizations are higher in patients with myeloid malignancies than in those with solid tumors due to the myelotoxicity of chemotherapy regimens and the compromised bone marrow function. FN increases the burden of cancer by causing chemotherapy dose reductions and delays. The administration of the first granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) filgrastim reduced the incidence and duration of FN in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Filgrastim later evolved into pegfilgrastim, which has a longer half-life than filgrastim and is associated with a lower rate of severe neutropenia, chemotherapy dose reduction, and treatment delay. Nine million patients have received pegfilgrastim since its approval in early 2002. The pegfilgrastim on-body injector (OBI) is an innovative device facilitating the time-released auto-injection of pegfilgrastim approximately 27 h after chemotherapy, as clinically recommended for the prevention of FN, thus eliminating the need for a next-day hospital visit. Since its introduction in 2015, one million patients with cancer have received pegfilgrastim using the OBI. Subsequently, the device was approved in the United States (US), European Union, Latin America, and Japan, with studies and a postmarketing commitment demonstrating device reliability. A recent prospective observational study conducted in the US demonstrated that the OBI substantially improved the adherence to and compliance with clinically recommended pegfilgrastim therapy; patients receiving pegfilgrastim via the OBI experienced a lower incidence of FN than those receiving alternatives for FN prophylaxis. This review discusses the evolution of G-CSFs leading to the development of the OBI, current recommendations for G-CSF prophylaxis in the clinic, continued evidence supporting next-day pegfilgrastim administration, and improvements in patient care made possible with the OBI.

For over 20 years, treatment with pegfilgrastim (a therapy that supports the growth of immune cells) has been used in patients with cancer to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN) ­ an unwanted effect of cancer treatment or chemotherapy. FN is defined as the loss of healthy immune cells and development of fever possibly due to an infection. Patients with FN may be very ill or may die, depending on the seriousness of the condition. However, treatment with pegfilgrastim reduces the occurrence of FN and improves survival.Treatment guidelines recommend that pegfilgrastim should be given 24 h after chemotherapy, requiring patients to travel to the hospital on the next day of chemotherapy. Some patients may choose the less helpful option of receiving pegfilgrastim on the same day of chemotherapy to avoid travel. This need led to the development of an on-body injector (OBI) device that is applied on the skin on the last day of chemotherapy and administers pegfilgrastim approximately 27 h after chemotherapy. The highly reliable OBI ensures timely delivery of therapy with a success rate of 99.9%, reduces the travel burden, and helps in following the recommended guidelines for pegfilgrastim administration. For two decades, pegfilgrastim has played a significant role in the treatment and prevention of FN, and the new OBI device provides the required treatment support for improving patient care.

Clinical factors predicting return emergency department visits in chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia patients.

BACKGROUND: Although chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) is the most common and life-threatening oncologic emergency, the characteristics and outcomes associated with return visits to the emergency department (ED) in these patients are uncertain. Hence, we aimed to investigate the predictive factors and clinical outcomes of chemotherapy-induced FN patients returning to the ED. METHOD: This single-center, retrospective observational study spanning 14 years included chemotherapy-induced FN patients who visited the ED and were discharged. The primary outcome was a return visit to the ED within five days. We conducted logistic regression analyses to evaluate the factors influencing ED return visit. RESULTS: This study included 1318 FN patients, 154 (12.1%) of whom revisited the ED within five days. Patients (53.3%) revisited the ED owing to persistent fever (56.5%), with no intensive care unit admission and only one mortality case who was discharged hopelessly. Multivariable analysis revealed that shock index >0.9 (odds ratio [OR]: 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-2.10), thrombocytopenia (<100 × 103/uL) (OR: 1.64, 95% CI, 1.11-2.42), and lactic acid level > 2 mmol/L (OR: 1.51, 95% CI, 0.99-2.25) were associated with an increased risk of a return visit to the ED, whereas being transferred into the ED from other hospitals (OR: 0.08; 95% CI, 0.005-0.38) was associated with a decreased risk of a return visit to the ED. CONCLUSION: High shock index, lactic acid, thrombocytopenia, and ED arrival type can predict return visits to the ED in chemotherapy-induced FN patients.

Efficacy of same-day versus next-day administration of pegfilgrastim for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients receiving dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide: A retrospective multi-site analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Administering pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy can improve patient satisfaction through convenience and may increase the utilization of cost-effective biosimilars compared to next-day administration, but the effect on clinical outcomes with commonly used breast cancer regimens is unclear. METHODS: This multi-site, retrospective cohort study included breast cancer patients age 18 years or older who received dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (ddAC) and pegfilgrastim between 1 June 2016 and 31 May 2020. Pegfilgrastim was given on the same day as chemotherapy at one site and the day after chemotherapy at the other two sites. The primary endpoint compared the incidence of febrile neutropenia associated with pegfilgrastim administration timing. RESULTS: A total of 360 patients were reviewed (146 same-day administration and 214 next-day administration). In the same-day group 36 patients (24.6%) developed FN compared to 25 patients (11.7%) in the next-day group (p = 0.002). Same-day administration also significantly increased the incidences of additional acute care visits (11.6% vs 2.8%, p = 0.0016), grade ≥ 3 neutropenia (38.4% vs 13.6%, p < 0.0001), chemotherapy dose reductions (21.2% vs 6.1%, p < 0.0001), and antibiotic use (26.7% vs 12.6%, p = 0.001). Same-day administration did not significantly increase the rate of hospitalization (15% vs 11.2%, p = 0.36) and delay of next chemotherapy cycle by ≥1 day (8.2% vs 6.1%, p = 0.57) due to neutropenic complications. CONCLUSIONS: Administering pegfilgrastim on the same day as ddAC led to a significant increase in neutropenic complications. This study confirms the need to administer pegfilgrastim the day after chemotherapy in breast cancer patients receiving ddAC.

Predictive Factors of Febrile Neutropenia After Primary Prophylactic Pegfilgrastim With DCF Chemotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We investigated the predictive factors of febrile neutropenia (FN) after the administration of pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis in patients with esophageal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) to support the appropriate management of FN. We evaluated changes in neutrophil counts and relative dose intensity (RDI) after the incidence of FN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study involved 122 patients with esophageal cancer who were treated with DCF and pegfilgrastim at Showa University Hospital, Japan, between April 2016 and August 2021. The primary outcome was FN incidence after cycle 1 of DCF chemotherapy. The significant independent factors associated with FN incidence were selected using the multivariate analysis. Changes in neutrophil counts and RDI were compared between the FN and non-FN groups. RESULTS: One-hundred patients were included in the analysis. The incidence of FN in cycle 1 was 21%. In the multivariate analysis, geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) <92 [odds ratio (OR)=13.162, p<0.001] and combination of platelet and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (COP-NLR) score of 0 (OR=4.619, p=0.012) were independent predictors of FN. The neutrophil count on day 7-10 and RDI in the FN group were lower than those in the non-FN group (all p<0.05). CONCLUSION: GNRI <92 and COP-NLR score of 0 are important indicators to predict patients at high risk of DCF chemotherapy-induced FN. Furthermore, FN incidence after pegfilgrastim administration had a strong effect on delayed neutrophil recovery and reduced RDI.

Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia and Febrile Neutropenia in the US: A Beast of Burden That Needs to Be Tamed?

Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) are common complications of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This review provides an up-to-date assessment of the patient and cost burden of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia/FN in the US, and summarizes recommendations for FN prophylaxis, including the interim guidance that was recommended during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This review indicates that neutropenia/FN place a significant burden on patients in terms of hospitalizations and mortality. Most patients with neutropenia/FN presenting to the emergency department will be hospitalized, with an average length of stay of 6, 8, and 10 days for elderly, pediatric, and adult patients, respectively. Reported in-hospital mortality rates for neutropenia/FN range from 0.4% to 3.0% for pediatric patients with cancer, 2.6% to 7.0% for adults with solid tumors, and 7.4% for adults with hematologic malignancies. Neutropenia/FN also place a significant cost burden on US healthcare systems, with average costs per neutropenia/FN hospitalization estimated to be up to $40 000 for adult patients and $65 000 for pediatric patients. Evidence-based guidelines recommend prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), which have been shown to reduce FN incidence while improving chemotherapy dose delivery. Availability of biosimilars may improve costs of care. Efforts to decrease hospitalizations by optimizing outpatient care could reduce the burden of neutropenia/FN; this was particularly pertinent during the COVID-19 pandemic since avoidance of hospitalization was needed to reduce exposure to the virus, and resulted in the adaptation of recommendations to prevent FN, which expanded the indications for G-CSF and/or lowered the threshold of use to >10% risk of FN.

Retrospective evaluation of safety and effectiveness of same-day pegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer.

Aim: To determine the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) and related outcomes after same-day pegfilgrastim in lung cancer. Materials & methods: This single-center, retrospective study evaluated electronic health records of patients with lung cancer treated between 2013-2018. The main end points were incidence of FN and grade 3/4 neutropenia after the first and across all chemotherapy cycles. Results: A total of 114 patients received same-day pegfilgrastim in 384 cycles. The incidence of FN and grade 3/4 neutropenia was 2.3 and 25% after the first chemotherapy cycle and 1.6 and 10.4% across all cycles, respectively. Conclusion: Same-day prophylactic pegfilgrastim in patients with lung cancer may be a suitable option, owing to its low incidence of FN and related outcomes.

Chemotherapy is intended to kill fast-growing cancer cells but can also kill immune cells that are needed to prevent infections. When too many immune cells are killed by chemotherapy, patients with cancer may experience febrile neutropenia, a serious condition that can lead to death in the most severe cases. To prevent this side effect of chemotherapy, a protein that helps certain immune cells to grow (pegfilgrastim) is administered on the day after chemotherapy. To avoid a second clinic visit the day after receiving chemotherapy, it has become common to administer pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy. Whether this approach is as effective and safe as next-day administration is currently unclear. This study from the University of Arizona Cancer Center showed that in patients with lung cancer who receive chemotherapy, administration of pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy is a safe, effective method to prevent febrile neutropenia.

A Risk-Prediction Nomogram for Neutropenia or Febrile Neutropenia after Etoposide-Based Chemotherapy in Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: This study was conducted to develop and validate a nomogram for predicting the risk of neutropenia or febrile neutropenia (FN) in tumor patients in the first cycle of etoposide-based chemotherapy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used an information system to monitor patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or solid tumors receiving an etoposide regimen in the first chemotherapy cycle in our hospital from 2009 to 2020. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors of patients with neutropenia or FN. Those factors were then used to develop a nomogram. RESULTS: A total of 1,554 patients were divided into the development group (n = 1,072) and validation group (n = 482). Variables used to predict neutropenia or FN were Karnofsky performance status (odds ratio [OR] = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.81-0.89, p < 0.01), metastatic sites ≥3 (OR = 6.33, 95% CI = 2.66-15.11, p < 0.01), comorbidity of heart disease (OR = 4.88, 95% CI = 1.74-13.67, p < 0.01), recent surgery (OR = 7.96, 95% CI = 1.96-32.36, p < 0.01), administration of alkylating agents (OR = 4.50, 95% CI = 1.10-18.48, p < 0.01), total bilirubin ≥25 µmol/L (OR = 11.42, 95% CI = 4.00-32.61, p < 0.01), and lymphocyte count <0.7 × 109/L (OR = 4.22, 95% CI = 2.00-9.75, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: This model can aid the early identification and screening of the potential risk of neutropenia or FN in the first cycle of treatment for patients using etoposide-based chemotherapy.

Improved risk prediction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia-model development and validation with real-world data.

BACKGROUND: The existing risk prediction models for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) do not necessarily apply to real-life patients in different healthcare systems and the external validation of these models are often lacking. Our study evaluates whether a machine learning-based risk prediction model could outperform the previously introduced models, especially when validated against real-world patient data from another institution not used for model training. METHODS: Using Turku University Hospital electronic medical records, we identified all patients who received chemotherapy for non-hematological cancer between the years 2010 and 2017 (N = 5879). An experimental surrogate endpoint was first-cycle neutropenic infection (NI), defined as grade IV neutropenia with serum C-reactive protein >10 mg/l. For predicting the risk of NI, a penalized regression model (Lasso) was developed. The model was externally validated in an independent dataset (N = 4594) from Tampere University Hospital. RESULTS: Lasso model accurately predicted NI risk with good accuracy (AUROC 0.84). In the validation cohort, the Lasso model outperformed two previously introduced, widely approved models, with AUROC 0.75. The variables selected by Lasso included granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) use, cancer type, pre-treatment neutrophil and thrombocyte count, intravenous treatment regimen, and the planned dose intensity. The same model predicted also FN, with AUROC 0.77, supporting the validity of NI as an endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that real-world NI risk prediction can be improved with machine learning and that every difference in patient or treatment characteristics can have a significant impact on model performance. Here we outline a novel, externally validated approach which may hold potential to facilitate more targeted use of G-CSFs in the future.

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.

Optimization of dosing regimens of vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid and daptomycin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in neutropenic patients with cancer by Monte Carlo simulations.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of various dosing regimens of vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid and daptomycin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in neutropenic patients with cancer. Monte Carlo simulations were conducted using pharmacokinetic parameters and pharmacodynamic data to determine cumulative fraction of response (CFRs) in terms of area under the concentration-time curve/minimum inhibition concentration target. Currently clinical standard dosing regimens of vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid and daptomycin were insufficient to provide expected CFRs against MRSA for neutropenic patients with cancer. The high dosing regimens of vancomycin (3500 mg/d), teicoplanin (800 mg/d) and daptomycin (8 mg/kg/d) could provide CFRs of ≥ 80%, showing a higher treatment success. However, the majority of CFRs with linezolid simulated dosing regimens reached < 80% against MRSA. Therefore, a strategy of high dosages of vancomycin, teicoplanin and daptomycin may be needed to attain optimal therapeutic efficacy against MRSA in neutropenic patients with cancer.

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 .

Prospective Multicenter Phase II Study of Biweekly TAS-102 and Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of biweekly trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride (TAS-102) with bevacizumab combination therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 19 patients with mCRC who received TAS-102 and bevacizumab combination therapy biweekly as third-line chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 73 years and most (73.4%) were men. The median progression-free and overall survival were 5.6 and 11.5 months, respectively. Five (26.3%) patients achieved a response and the disease control rate was 12/19 (63.1%). One patient (5.2%) experienced neutropenia grade 3 or more. The median time from baseline performance status 0/1 to worsening to 2 or more was 10.3 months. CONCLUSION: Biweekly TAS-102 plus bevacizumab facilitates tumor shrinkage by reducing the incidence of grade 3 or more neutropenia, improving survival, and maintaining performance status. This combination may represent a treatment option for patients with late-stage mCRC receiving third- or later-line therapy.

Pegteograstim prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia: a prospective, observational, postmarketing surveillance study in Korea.

PURPOSE: This observational study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of pegteograstim prophylaxis in patients with lymphoma and solid malignancies. METHODS: This study was conducted at 18 sites in Korea between November 2015 and August 2018. RESULTS: In total, 611 patients (female, 61.2%) with a median age of 58 (range, 18-88) years were included. Most patients had lymphomas (n = 371, 60.7%) and breast cancer (n = 230, 37.6%) and were administered R-CHOP21 (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone per 21 days) (n = 284, 46.5%) and AC (doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide) (n = 177, 29.0%). The total pegteograstim dose in the 611 patients was 14,970 mg (2495 doses), with each patient receiving an average daily dose of 6.0 mg. Neutropenia grade 4 occurred in 97 patients (15.9%), and febrile neutropenia (FN) occurred in 31 patients (5.1%). Among the 611 patients, 267 patients (43.7%) developed 882 adverse events (AEs), and 11 patients (1.8%) experienced 18 adverse drug reactions (ADRs). There were 62 patients (10.2%) who experienced 81 cases of serious adverse events (SAEs), with FN and pneumonia being the most frequent at 14 and 13 episodes, respectively, in 13 patients (2.1%). Meanwhile, 1 patient (0.2%) developed 2 episodes of serious ADRs (grade 1 and grade 2 hypotension). No safety concerns in the elderly and patients with liver and/or renal disease were identified. CONCLUSION: The prophylactic use of pegteograstim might have good overall safety and efficacy in patients with lymphomas and solid malignancies in routine clinical practice, even in those who are elderly and have liver and renal diseases.

Appendectomy Versus Observation for Appendicitis in Neutropenic Children With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of neutropenic appendicitis (NA) in children undergoing cancer therapy remains undefined. Management strategies include upfront appendectomy or initial nonoperative management. We aimed to characterize the effect of management strategy on complications and length of stay (LOS) and describe implications for chemotherapy delay or alteration. METHODS: Sites from the Pediatric Surgery Oncology Research Collaborative performed a retrospective review of children with NA over a 6-year period. RESULTS: Sixty-six children, with a median age of 11 years (range 1-17), were identified with NA while undergoing cancer treatment. The most common cancer diagnoses were leukemia (62%) and brain tumor (12%). Upfront appendectomy was performed in 41% of patients; the remainder had initial nonoperative management. Rates of abscess or perforation at diagnosis were equivalent in the groups (30% vs 24%; P = .23). Of patients who had initial nonoperative management, 46% (17 of 37) underwent delayed appendectomy during the same hospitalization. Delayed appendectomy was due to failure of initial nonoperative management in 65% (n = 11) and count recovery in 35% (n = 6). Cancer therapy was delayed in 35% (n = 23). Initial nonoperative management was associated with a delay in cancer treatment (46% vs. 22%, P = .05) and longer LOS (29 vs 12 days; P = .01). Patients who had initial nonoperative management and delayed appendectomy had a higher rate of postoperative complications (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In pediatric patients with NA from oncologic treatment, upfront appendectomy resulted in lower complication rates, reduced LOS, and fewer alterations in chemotherapy regimens compared to initial nonoperative management.

Effect of lipegfilgrastim administration as prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia on dose modification and incidence of neutropenic events: real-world evidence from a non-interventional study in Belgium and Luxembourg.

Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of lipegfilgrastim, a glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, used as primary (PP) or secondary prophylaxis (SP) on chemotherapy (CT) treatment modifications, as well as the incidence of CT-induced neutropenic events in adult patients receiving cytotoxic CT with or without biological therapy (BT) for solid and hematological tumors, in routine clinical practice. Other objectives were to characterize the population of lipegfilgrastim-treated cancer patients and safety assessment. Methods: This phase 4, prospective, observational study was conducted at 15 centers from Belgium and Luxembourg, between 2015 and 2017. Results: Of 139 patients, 82.7% had breast cancer and 54.7% were treated with dose-dense regimens. Most received lipegfilgrastim as PP (82.0%) and were at high-risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) (68.3%). FN and grade III/IV neutropenia were reported for 7.9% and 22.3% patients. Among 123 evaluated patients, CT/BT dose modifications were recorded for 33.3% (PP) and 52.4% (SP) of patients receiving lipegfilgrastim; dose reductions, followed by dose delays, were more frequent than omissions. Among 45 patients with dose modifications, FN was reported for 8.8% and 9.1% patients and grade IV neutropenia for 17.6% and 18.2% of patients when lipegfilgrastim was applied for PP and SP, respectively. Adverse events related to lipegfilgrastim occurred for 55 (39.6%) patients; bone pain and back pain were more frequent. Lipegfilgrastim-related serious adverse events were reported for 9 (6.5%) patients. Conclusion: Use of lipegfilgrastim in real-world settings resulted in limited CT dose modifications and low incidences of neutropenic events, with no new safety concerns arising.

Outcomes of Isolated Neutropenia Referred to Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Children with isolated neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] <1500/µL) are frequently referred to pediatric hematology and oncology clinics for further diagnostic evaluation. Scant literature exists on interventions and outcomes for isolated neutropenia. We hypothesized that children will have resolution of their neutropenia without the need for intervention(s) by a pediatric hematologist and oncologist. METHODS: We performed a 5.5-year institutional review board-approved retrospective chart review of children referred to our pediatric hematology and oncology clinics for isolated neutropenia. Neutropenia was categorized as mild (ANC of 1001-1500/µL), moderate (ANC of 500-1000 µL), severe (ANC of 201-500/µL), or very severe (ANC of ≤200/µL). RESULTS: Among 155 children referred with isolated neutropenia, 45 (29%) had mild neutropenia, 65 (42%) had moderate neutropenia, 30 (19%) had severe neutropenia, and 15 (10%) had very severe neutropenia. Only 29 (19%) children changed to an ANC category lower than their initial referral category. At a median follow-up of 12 months, 101 children had resolution of neutropenia, 40 children had mild neutropenia, 10 children had moderate neutropenia, 3 children had severe neutropenia, and 1 patient had very severe neutropenia. A specific diagnosis was not identified in most (54%) children. The most common etiologies were viral suppression (16%), autoimmune neutropenia (14%), and drug-induced neutropenia (8%). Black children had a 3.5 higher odds of having persistent mild neutropenia. Six (4%) children received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Most children referred for isolated neutropenia do not progress in severity and do not require subspecialty interventions or hospitalizations.

A retrospective analysis of nadir-neutropenia directed pegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia rates in (neo)adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy regimens.

BACKGROUND: Pegfilgrastim, a pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating-factor (GCSF), reduces chemotherapy morbidity and mortality in early stage breast cancer. The optimal approach to individual patient selection for GCSF is unknown, in particular whether secondary GCSF should be given after asymptomatic neutropenia, or only after febrile neutropenia (FN). AIMS: To determine if preplanned nadir blood counts and subsequent nadir-neutropenia directed GCSF was effective to reduce rates of FN associated with (neo)adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. We also aimed to describe (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and GCSF prescribing practices at our institution. METHODS: This was a retrospective electronic medical record review. The rate of FN with secondary GCSF after cycle 1 nadir-neutropenia <1.0 × 109 cells/L was compared with the rate of FN in patients who did not have cycle 1 nadir blood counts or secondary GCSF, and analyzed according to patient and treatment data. RESULTS: Between 11/4/2011 and 22/4/2018, 584 patients received (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Over all rates of FN were 17%, compared with 9% in patients who received primary GCSF. Rates of FN were highest in docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab (TCH, 27%) and docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC, 27%). There were 268 patients (46%) who received primary GCSF and 238 patients (41%) who received secondary GCSF. Rates of FN did not differ between patients who received nadir-neutropenia directed secondary GCSF (6/125, 5%, 95% CI 1.1-8.6), and those who did not have nadir blood counts or secondary GCSF (0/49, 0%, 95% CI not calculable) (P = .1186). GCSF use was associated with lower rates of non-FN hospital admissions. Patients ≥65 years were more likely to have FN and non-FN admissions. Two of three treatment related deaths occurred due to FN. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, nadir-neutropenia directed secondary GCSF was not associated with reduced rates of FN. Observed rates of FN >20% in TC and TCH in routine clinical practice should guide primary GCSF use in accordance with international guidelines.

Febrile Neutropenia in Patients with Solid Tumors Undergoing Intravenous Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially life-threatening complication of systemic chemotherapy (CT) that often requires hospital admission. Delay in diagnosis and treatment are associated with higher morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the factors that influence FN episodes outcomes in the emergency room (ER). METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all FN episodes (with a collected blood culture [BC]) that occurred between 2012 and 2016 at our institution. FN was defined as a temperature ≥38°C and an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) <1,000/µL, expected to decrease to <500/µL in the following week. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2016, there were 173 FN episodes in 153/1,947 patients treated with intravenous CT. Most of these episodes (n = 121, 70%) were diagnosed in the ER, 29 in the outpatient clinic, and 23 as inpatients. In the ER, the median time was 36 min from hospital nurse triage to medical observation, and 52 min from medical observation to complete blood count specimen collection. There was a positive BC in 33 FN episodes, 72% with Gram-negative bacteria. A total of 160 FN episodes led to hospital admission and 13 were treated as outpatients. Mortality associated with the FN episode was 15% and an ANC <100/µL was predictive of increased mortality. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that FN is a serious and common complication of IV CT which must be diagnosed and treated promptly. Profound neutropenia was the only predictive factor of mortality.

The development of outcome key performance indicators for systemic anti-cancer therapy using a modified Delphi method.

OBJECTIVE: Performance measurement of health services informs safe, quality care. Key performance indicators (KPIs) offer one such measurement. Limited research exists on outcome KPIs in systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT). The objective of this study was to develop outcome KPIs for SACT services. METHODS: A Delphi panel of patient advocates and health professionals (n = 35) rated KPIs over four rounds. Participants rated KPIs on validity, reliability, acceptability and feasibility and addressed barriers and facilitators to implementation. Qualitative and quantitative data analyses included Kendall's coefficient of concordance, Wilcoxon signed-rank test on stability of responses and Kruskal-Wallis test for differences in stakeholder groups' responses. RESULTS: Twenty-six KPIs reached agreement, of which nine were prioritised. These were a mixture of outcome and process measures: death within 30 days of SACT, neutropenic sepsis, assessment of palliative care needs, medication errors, multidisciplinary team discussion, patient information and timeframe from surgery to SACT. There was weak agreement on the prioritised list (Kendall's coefficient, p = .012). There was good stability of responses between rounds and no difference between responses of stakeholder sub-groups (p ≥ .05). CONCLUSION: The study provides a comprehensive identification of outcome measures for SACT which will be useful in developing a framework for the performance measurement of SACT services.

A multicentre, randomised trial comparing schedules of G-CSF (filgrastim) administration for primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in early stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of filgrastim as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in early breast cancer patients is unknown, with 5, 7 or 10 days being commonly prescribed. This trial evaluates whether 5 days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomised, open-label trial, early breast cancer patients who were to receive filgrastim as primary FN prophylaxis were randomly allocated to 5 versus 7 versus 10 days of filgrastim for all chemotherapy cycles. A protocol amendment in November 2017 allowed subsequent patients (N = 324) to be randomised to either 5 or 7/10 days. The primary outcome was a composite of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisations. Secondary outcomes included chemotherapy dose reductions, delays and discontinuations. Analyses were carried out by per protocol (primary) and intention-to-treat, and the non-inferiority margin was set at 3% for the risk of having FN and/or hospitalisation per cycle of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Patients (N = 466) were randomised to receive 5 (184, 39.5%), or 7/10 (282, 60.5%) days of filgrastim. In our primary analysis, the difference in risk of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation per cycle was -1.52% [95% confidence interval (CI): -3.22% to 0.19%] suggesting non-inferiority of a 5-day filgrastim schedule compared with 7/10-days. The difference in events per cycle for FN was 0.11% (95% CI: -1.05 to 1.27) while for treatment-related hospitalisations it was -1.68% (95% CI: -2.73% to -0.63%). The overall proportions of patients having at least one occurrence of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation were 11.8% and 14.96% for the 5- and 7/10-day groups, respectively (risk difference: -3.17%, 95% CI: -9.51% to 3.18%). CONCLUSION: Five days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. Given the cost and toxicity of this agent, 5 days should be considered standard of care. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT02428114 and NCT02816164.