Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Support Care Cancer. 2015 Nov;23(11):3131-40. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2686-9. Epub 2015 Mar 29.

The impact of primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors on febrile neutropenia during chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Author information

1
STATinMED Research, Inc., 1400 Preston Rd, Suite 400, Plano, TX, USA. lwang@statinmed.com.
2
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
3
STATinMED Research, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
4
Amgen Europe, Zug, Switzerland.
5
Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

The study aims to assess the relative efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) products administered as primary prophylaxis (PP) to patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

METHODS:

A systematic literature review identified publications (January 1990 to September 2013) of randomized controlled trials evaluating PP with filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, lenograstim, or lipegfilgrastim in adults receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy for solid tumors or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Direct, indirect, and mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) were used to estimate the odds ratio and 95 % credible interval of febrile neutropenia (FN) during cycle 1 and all cycles of chemotherapy combined without adjusting for differences in relative dose intensity (RDI) between study treatment arms.

RESULTS:

Twenty-seven publications representing 30 randomized controlled trials were included. Using MTC over all chemotherapy cycles, PP with filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, lenograstim, and lipegfilgrastim versus no G-CSF PP or placebo were associated with statistically significantly reduced FN risk. FN risk was also significantly reduced with pegfilgrastim PP versus filgrastim PP. Over all chemotherapy cycles, there was a numerical but statistically nonsignificant increase in the FN risk for lipegfilgrastim PP versus pegfilgrastim PP. Using MTC in cycle 1, PP with filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, and lipegfilgrastim versus no G-CSF PP or placebo were associated with statistically significantly reduced FN risk.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this meta-analysis, using MTC without adjustment for RDI, PP with all G-CSFs evaluated reduced the FN risk in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Future studies are needed to assess the influence of RDI on FN outcomes and to eliminate potential bias between G-CSF arms receiving more intensive chemotherapy than control arms.

KEYWORDS:

Febrile neutropenia; Filgrastim; G-CSF; Lipegfilgrastim; Meta-analysis; Pegfilgrastim

PMID:
25821144
PMCID:
PMC4584106
DOI:
10.1007/s00520-015-2686-9
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center