Johanna Mäenpää1, Ioannis Varthalitis2, Frans Erdkamp3, Andreas Trojan4, Krzysztof Krzemieniecki5, Henrik Lindman6, Kate Bendall7, Florian D Vogl8, Shailendra Verma9. 1. University of Tampere, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. 2. Chania General Hospital, Chania, Greece. 3. Orbis Medisch Centrum, Sittard, Netherlands. 4. Brust-Zentrum Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland. 5. Oncology Clinic, Jagiellonian University, Poland. 6. Akademiska Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden. 7. Amgen Ltd, Uxbridge, UK. 8. Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 9. Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa, Canada. Electronic address: sverma@Ottawahospital.on.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use and impact of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) on chemotherapy delivery and neutropenia management in breast cancer in a clinical practice setting. METHODS: IMPACT Solid was an international, prospective observational study in patients with a physician-assessed febrile neutropenia (FN) risk of ≥20%. This analysis focused on stages I-III breast cancer patients who received a standard chemotherapy regimen for which the FN risk was published. Chemotherapy delivery and neutropenia-related outcomes were reported according to the FN risk of the regimen and intent of G-CSF use. RESULTS: 690 patients received a standard chemotherapy regimen; 483 received the textbook dose/schedule with a majority of these regimens (84%) having a FN risk ≥10%. Patients receiving a regimen with a FN risk ≥10% were younger with better performance status than those receiving a regimen with a FN risk <10%. Patients who received higher-risk regimens were more likely to receive G-CSF primary prophylaxis (48% vs 22%), complete their planned chemotherapy (97% vs 88%) and achieve relative dose intensity ≥85% (93% vs 86%) than those receiving lower-risk regimens. Most first FN events (56%) occurred in cycles not supported with G-CSF primary prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Physicians generally recommend standard adjuvant chemotherapy regimens and were more likely to follow G-CSF guidelines for younger, good performance status patients in the curative setting, and often modify standard regimens in more compromised patients. However, G-CSF support is not optimal, indicated by G-CSF primary prophylaxis use in <50% of high-risk patients and observation of FN without G-CSF support.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use and impact of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) on chemotherapy delivery and neutropenia management in breast cancer in a clinical practice setting. METHODS: IMPACT Solid was an international, prospective observational study in patients with a physician-assessed febrile neutropenia (FN) risk of ≥20%. This analysis focused on stages I-III breast cancerpatients who received a standard chemotherapy regimen for which the FN risk was published. Chemotherapy delivery and neutropenia-related outcomes were reported according to the FN risk of the regimen and intent of G-CSF use. RESULTS: 690 patients received a standard chemotherapy regimen; 483 received the textbook dose/schedule with a majority of these regimens (84%) having a FN risk ≥10%. Patients receiving a regimen with a FN risk ≥10% were younger with better performance status than those receiving a regimen with a FN risk <10%. Patients who received higher-risk regimens were more likely to receive G-CSF primary prophylaxis (48% vs 22%), complete their planned chemotherapy (97% vs 88%) and achieve relative dose intensity ≥85% (93% vs 86%) than those receiving lower-risk regimens. Most first FN events (56%) occurred in cycles not supported with G-CSF primary prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Physicians generally recommend standard adjuvant chemotherapy regimens and were more likely to follow G-CSF guidelines for younger, good performance status patients in the curative setting, and often modify standard regimens in more compromised patients. However, G-CSF support is not optimal, indicated by G-CSF primary prophylaxis use in <50% of high-risk patients and observation of FN without G-CSF support.
Authors: Ida Netterberg; Mats O Karlsson; Elisabet I Nielsen; Angelica L Quartino; Henrik Lindman; Lena E Friberg Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-01-18 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Jean Paul Salmon; Martin Smakal; Charisios Karanikiotis; Marek Z Wojtukiewicz; Yohann Omnes; Lucy DeCosta; Sally Wetten; James O'Kelly Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 3.603