Rates of febrile neutropenia with pegfilgrastim on same day versus next day of CHOP with or without rituximab.

Febrile neutropenia is a complication of myleotoxic chemotherapy that can markedly decrease quality of life and increase healthcare costs. A granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is used to increase neutrophil production to reduce the risk of developing febrile neutropenia. However, G-CSF administered on the same day as chemotherapy can worsen and prolong neutropenia. To study and compare the effects of pegfilgrastim on the incidence of febrile neutropenia and grade 4 neutropenia in patients receiving pegfilgrastim on the same day (day 1) versus the next day (day 2 or beyond) of chemotherapy, a retrospective, single-center, nonrandomized, cohort study was carried out of adult non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients who received pegfilgrastim 6 mg subcutaneously on day 1 or beyond of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) with or without rituximab every 3 weeks. Six hundred and fifty-five chemotherapy cycles (320 cycles for the same day and 335 cycles for the next day) were evaluable in 141 patients. Among all cycles, the incidence of febrile neutropenia was 9.4 versus 5.1% in the same-day versus the next-day group (P=0.03). The incidence of febrile neutropenia was the highest after the first cycle in the same-day group, which was 19.4, versus 11.1% for the next-day group (P=0.27). There were three deaths among patients who developed febrile neutropenia, including two in the next-day group versus one in the same-day group. In conclusion, our findings support the need for a randomized phase III study to fully evaluate whether a G-CSF is safer when administered on the next day versus the same day of chemotherapy.

Reduction of Inappropriate Prophylactic Pegylated Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Use for Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Who Receive Chemotherapy: An ASCO Quality Training Program Project of the Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute.

PURPOSE: Routine prophylactic pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (pGCSF) administration for patients receiving chemotherapy regimens associated with low risk (< 10%) for neutropenic fever (LRNF) is not recommended. Inappropriate use of pGCSF increases patient morbidity and health care costs. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team reviewed the charts of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at the Taussig Cancer Institute in whom a new chemotherapy regimen was initiated from April through November 2013. pGCSF use was identified and deemed appropriate if prescribed for chemotherapy associated with high risk of neutropenic fever (> 20%) or intermediate risk (10% to 20%) if other risk factors for neutropenic fever were present. Use with LRNF chemotherapy was recorded as inappropriate. RESULTS: One hundred eighty patients with NSCLC received a new chemotherapy regimen during the specified time period. Thirty-four of 119 patients (28%) treated with LRNF chemotherapy received pGCSF. Each patient received an average of 2.6 doses of pGCSF (total, 89 doses). We implemented three plan-do-study-act cycles: education of providers, development of Taussig Cancer Institute consensus guidelines for pGCSF in NSCLC, and removal of standing pGCSF orders from LRNF chemotherapy in the electronic medical record. Analysis during the change period revealed 4% of patients with NSCLC treated with LRNF chemotherapy received pGCSF. Cost analysis showed an 84% decrease in billed charges per month. No increase in neutropenic fever admissions was found. CONCLUSION: pGCSF was excessively prescribed for patients with NSCLC. Factors contributing to inappropriate use included provider lack of familiarity with guidelines and knowledge with regard to the risk of neutropenic fever for individual chemotherapy regimens, and electronic medical record chemotherapy templates that contain standing GCSF orders. Interventions to address these gaps quickly produced improved compliance with guidelines and led to significant cost savings.

Use of atropine-diphenoxylate compared with hyoscyamine to decrease rates of irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Cholinergic syndrome is a well established acute adverse reaction associated with irinotecan. Cholinergic side effects can be ameliorated or prevented with anticholinergic agents. To date, no formal studies have compared atropine-diphenoxylate and hyoscyamine as premedications for prophylaxis of the cholinergic syndrome with irinotecan infusion. OBJECTIVES: To compare the incidence of cholinergic syndrome with irinotecan using atropine-diphenoxylate or hyoscyamine as premedication. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center, nonrandomized, cohort study of adult patients treated with atropine-diphenoxylate or hyoscyamine as premedication before receiving irinotecan. For all irinotecan infusions, intravenous atropine was administered for patients experiencing any cholinergic reaction. RESULTS: A total of 532 irinotecan cycles (354 cycles for atropine-diphenoxylate group; 178 cycles for hyoscyamine group) were analyzed in 80 patients. Overall incidence of cholinergic syndrome did not differ between atropine-diphenoxylate (8.2%) and hyoscyamine (9.0%) groups (P = .76). The incidence of cholinergic syndrome after the £rst cycle of irinotecan was similar between the 2 arms, atropine-diphenoxylate (14.6%) and hyoscyamine (10.7%), with P = .74. The most common cholinergic symptoms documented were abdominal pain or cramping, and diarrhea. LIMITATIONS: This study was subjected to vulnerabilities to bias and random error because of its observational retrospective design and small number of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of difference in the incidence of cholinergic syndrome observed in irinotecan-treated patients suggests atropinediphenoxylate and hyoscyamine may both be effective prophylactic options. The findings support the need for a larger, randomized study to assess and compare these agents with other potential premedications such as scopolamine and atropine in prevention of irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome.

Reducing Time to Antibiotic Administration for Febrile Neutropenia in the Emergency Department.

PURPOSE: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is an oncologic emergency, and prolonged time to antibiotic administration (TTA) is associated with increased hospital length of stay (LOS) and worse outcomes. We hypothesized that a febrile neutropenia pathway (FNP) quality initiative project would reduce TTA delays for febrile patients with cancer presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This prospective study compared ED FNP patients (> 18 years old), between June 2012 and June 2013 with both historical and direct admissions (DA) cohorts at a multispecialty academic center. Interventions included providing patients with FN-Alert cards, standardizing the definition of FN and recognizing it as a distinct chief complaint, revising ED triage level for FN, creating electronic FN order sets, administering empiric antibiotics before neutrophil count result, and relocating FN antibiotics to the ED. The primary outcome was TTA, with a target goal of 90 minutes after ED presentation. RESULTS: In total, 276 FN episodes in 223 FNP patients occurred over the 12-month study period and were compared with 107 episodes in 87 patients and 114 episodes in 101 patients in the historical and DA cohorts, respectively. Use of the FNP reduced TTA from 235 and 169 minutes in historical and DA cohorts, respectively, to 81 minutes, and from 96 to 68 minutes when the order set was not used versus used in the FNP group (P < .001 for all comparisons). Decrease in hospital LOS was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The ED FNP is a significant quality initiative with sustainable interventions, and was able to demonstrate value by decreasing TTA compared to both historical and DA controls in cancer patients presenting to the ED.