Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Ann Hematol ; 97(3): 387-400, 2018 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29282494

RESUMO

Although immunomodulatory drugs, alkylating agents, corticosteroids, protease inhibitors, and therapeutic monoclonal antibodies improve multiple myeloma outcomes, treatment burden is still an issue. Neutropenia is a known complication of cytotoxic cancer therapy and is often associated with infections; it is an important consideration in myeloma given the fact that patients often have a weakened immune system. The risk of febrile neutropenia increases with severe and persisting neutropenia. Recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are commonly used to reduce the incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia. Here, we review the risk and management of neutropenia associated with new and commonly used anti-myeloma agents. Few papers report the use of G-CSF in patients with multiple myeloma receiving anti-cancer treatments, and fewer describe whether G-CSF was beneficial. None of the identified studies reported G-CSF primary prophylaxis. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the need for G-CSF prophylaxis in multiple myeloma. Prophylaxis may be particularly useful in patients at high risk of prolonged severe neutropenia.


Assuntos
Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/uso terapêutico , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/epidemiologia , Neutropenia/epidemiologia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Incidência , Neutropenia/induzido quimicamente
2.
Support Care Cancer ; 26(1): 7-20, 2018 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28939926

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Filgrastim (NEUPOGEN®) is the originator recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor widely used for preventing neutropenia-related infections and mobilizing hematopoietic stem cells. This report presents findings of a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of originator filgrastim to update previous reports. METHODS: A literature search of electronic databases, congress abstracts, and bibliographies of recent reviews was conducted to identify English-language reports of clinical trials and observational studies evaluating filgrastim in its US-approved indications up to February 2015. Two independent reviewers assessed titles/abstracts and full texts of publications, and extracted data from studies that compared originator filgrastim vs placebo or no treatment. For outcomes with sufficient homogeneous data reported across studies, meta-analysis was performed and relative risk (RR) determined. Data were summarized descriptively for all other evaluated outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1194 unique articles evaluating originator filgrastim were identified, with 25 meeting eligibility criteria for data extraction: 18 randomized controlled trials, 2 nonrandomized clinical trials, and 5 observational studies. In chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN), filgrastim vs placebo or no treatment significantly reduced febrile neutropenia incidence (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53-0.75) and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia incidence (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37-0.68). The most commonly reported adverse event (AE) with filgrastim was bone pain (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.29-5.27 in CIN). Additional efficacy and safety outcomes are described within indications. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic literature review and meta-analysis confirms and updates previous reports on the efficacy and safety of originator filgrastim. Bone pain was the commonly reported AE associated with filgrastim use.


Assuntos
Filgrastim/uso terapêutico , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/uso terapêutico , Fármacos Hematológicos/uso terapêutico , Filgrastim/administração & dosagem , Filgrastim/farmacologia , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/administração & dosagem , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/farmacologia , Fármacos Hematológicos/administração & dosagem , Fármacos Hematológicos/farmacologia , Humanos
3.
Support Care Cancer ; 25(8): 2619-2629, 2017 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28484882

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) are commonly used in clinical practice to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN). US and EU prescribing information and treatment guidelines from the NCCN, ASCO, and EORTC specify that pegfilgrastim, a long-acting (LA) G-CSF, should be administered at least 24 h after myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Nevertheless, many patients receive LA G-CSFs on the same day as chemotherapy. This systematic literature review evaluated the relative merits of same-day versus next-day dosing of LA G-CSFs. METHODS: A broad Ovid MEDLINE® and Embase® literature search was conducted that examined all publications indexed before May 9, 2016 that compared same-day versus next-day LA G-CSF administration. A congress abstract literature search included congresses from January 1, 2011 to April 6, 2016. The parameters for this review were prospectively delineated in a research protocol and adhered to the PRISMA Guidelines. RESULTS: The first part of the systematic literature search identified 1736 publications. After elimination of duplicates, title/abstract screening was conducted on 1440 records, and full text review was conducted on 449 publications. Eleven publications met all criteria and are included in this systematic review; of these, four included data from randomized or single arm prospective studies, and seven were retrospective studies. In most studies included in this review and across a variety of tumor types, administration of pegfilgrastim at least 24 h after myelosuppressive chemotherapy resulted in improved patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Data from multiple publications support administration of pegfilgrastim at least 1 day after chemotherapy.


Assuntos
Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia de Indução/métodos , Neutropenia/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neutropenia/induzido quimicamente , Estudos Prospectivos
4.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 82(6): 1412-1443, 2016 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27478094

RESUMO

AIMS: Two anti-proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies, alirocumab and evolocumab, have been approved for the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia in certain patients. We reviewed data from Phase 3 studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of these antibodies. METHODS: We systematically reviewed Phase 3 English-language studies in patients with hypercholesterolaemia, published between 1 January 2005 and 20 October 2015. Congress proceedings from 16 November 2012 to 16 November 2015 were also reviewed. RESULTS: We identified 12 studies of alirocumab and nine of evolocumab, including over 10 000 patients overall. Most studies enrolled patients with hypercholesterolaemia and used anti-PCSK9 antibodies with statins. The ODYSSEY FH I, FH II and HIGH FH alirocumab studies and the RUTHERFORD-2 evolocumab study exclusively recruited patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia. Two evolocumab studies focused mainly on homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HoFH): TESLA Part B and TAUSSIG (a TESLA sub-study); only those data for HoFH are reported here. All comparator studies demonstrated a reduction in LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) with the anti-PCSK9 antibodies. No head-to-head studies were conducted between alirocumab and evolocumab. Up to 87% of patients receiving alirocumab and up to 98% receiving evolocumab reached LDL-C goals. Both antibodies were effective and well tolerated across a broad population of patients and in specific subgroups, such as those with type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Using anti-PCSK9 antibodies as add-on therapy to other lipid-lowering treatments or as monotherapy for patients unable to tolerate statins may help patients with high cardiovascular risk to achieve their LDL-C goals.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Hiperlipoproteinemia Tipo II/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores de PCSK9 , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , LDL-Colesterol/sangue , Humanos , Hiperlipoproteinemia Tipo II/metabolismo , Pró-Proteína Convertase 9/imunologia
5.
Support Care Cancer ; 23(2): 525-45, 2015 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25284721

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Pegfilgrastim was introduced over a decade ago. Other long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) have recently been developed. We systematically reviewed the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of neutropenia prophylaxis with long-acting G-CSFs in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases, and abstracts from key congresses. Studies of long-acting G-CSFs for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and febrile neutropenia (FN) were identified by two independent reviewers. Abstracts and full texts were assessed for final inclusion; risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane's tool. Effectiveness and safety results were extracted according to study type and G-CSF used. RESULTS: Of the 839 articles identified, 41 articles representing different studies met the eligibility criteria. In five randomised controlled trials, 11 clinical trials and 17 observational studies across several tumour types and chemotherapy regimens, pegfilgrastim was used alone or compared with daily G-CSF, no G-CSF, no upfront pegfilgrastim or placebo. Studies generally reported lower incidence of CIN (4/7 studies), FN (11/14 studies), hospitalisations (9/13 studies), antibiotic use (6/7 studies) and adverse events (2/5 studies) with pegfilgrastim than filgrastim, no upfront pegfilgrastim or no G-CSF. Eight studies evaluated other long-acting G-CSFs; most (5/8) were compared to pegfilgrastim and involved patients with breast cancer receiving docetaxel-based therapy. Efficacy and safety profiles of balugrastim and lipegfilgrastim were comparable to pegfilgrastim in phase 3 studies. Efficacy and safety of other long-acting G-CSFs were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Pegfilgrastim reduced the incidence of FN and CIN compared with no prophylaxis. Most studies showed better efficacy and effectiveness for pegfilgrastim than filgrastim. Efficacy and safety profiles of lipegfilgrastim and balugrastim were similar to pegfilgrastim.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/tratamento farmacológico , Neutropenia Febril Induzida por Quimioterapia/prevenção & controle , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusão/uso terapêutico , Albumina Sérica/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Docetaxel , Feminino , Filgrastim , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Polietilenoglicóis , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusão/efeitos adversos , Proteínas Recombinantes/efeitos adversos , Proteínas Recombinantes/uso terapêutico , Albumina Sérica/efeitos adversos , Albumina Sérica Humana , Taxoides/efeitos adversos , Taxoides/uso terapêutico
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa