Literature DB >> 9402845

Randomized open label phase III trial of CEOP/IMVP-Dexa alternating chemotherapy and filgrastim versus CEOP/IMVP-Dexa alternating chemotherapy for aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). A multicenter trial by the Austrian Working Group for Medical Tumor Therapy.

M A Fridrik1, R Greil, H Hausmaninger, O Krieger, P Oppitz, M Stöger, J Klocker, M Neubauer, W Helm, J Pont, B Fazeny, M Hudec, I Simonitsch, T Radaszkiewicz.   

Abstract

Primary end point of this trial was to reduce neutropenic infections during the treatment of aggressive NHL with CEOP/IMVP-Dexa (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, vincristine, prednisolone ifosfamide, methotrexate, VP-16, and dexamethasone). Further, we studied the influence of filgrastim on dose intensity of CEOP/IMVP-Dexa, on the rate of complete remissions, on the time to relapse, and on survival. Eighty-five patients with untreated large-cell NHL were randomized to one of two treatment arms; 74 patients were eligible. Thirty-eight patients in arm 1 were treated with CEOP/IMVP-Dexa chemotherapy and filgrastim, 36 in arm 2 with CEOP/IMVP-Dexa chemotherapy alone. In arm 1 filgrastim was self-injected by the patients at 5 micrograms/kg body wt. s.c. daily, except on the days when cytotoxic drugs were given. During treatment we did weekly complete blood counts. Median leukocyte counts were 10.91 x 10(9)/l and 5.46 x 10(9)/l in arm 1 and 2, respectively (p = 10(-6)). Median neutrophil counts were 7.7 x 10(9)/l in arm 1 and 2.72 x 10(9)/l in arm 2 (p < 10(-6)). Median neutrophil nadirs were 0.199 x 10(9)/l and 0.213 x 10(9)/l in arm 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.09). Mean platelet nadirs were 95 and 152 x 10(9)/l (p = 0.000004) and mean hemoglobin nadirs 83.95 g/l and 92.78 g/l (p = 0.00558) in arm 1 and 2, respectively. Dose intensity of CEOP/IMVP-Dexa was 82.3% and 76.2% in arm 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.041). Forty-two percent and 58% of patients experienced a febrile neutropenia in arm 1 and 2, respectively (not significant, NS). Median time to first neutropenic infection was in treatment week 11 and 6 in arm 1 and 2, respectively (NS). There was no significant difference in rate, duration, and kind of infection, duration of hospitalization, or antibiotic treatment. Seven toxic deaths occurred, all due to neutropenic infection, 6 and 1 in arm 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.0732). Four of the six patients, who died of infection in arm 1 were older than 60 years. Complete remission rate was 83% and 66.7% in arm 1 and 2, respectively (NS). After a median observation time of 3 years there was no difference in time to relapse or survival. Filgrastim increases leukocyte and neutrophil counts and dose intensity, if used with CEOP/IMVP-Dexa chemotherapy in high-grade lymphomas. There was no significant effect on febrile neutropenia or infections. The more frequent fatal neutropenic infection rate in the filgrastim arm was not statistically significant. It is most appropriate to explain it by the patient's age in combination with the high dose intensity. The small increase in dose intensity had no effect on survival but probably decreased hemoglobin levels and platelet counts in arm 1. We were unable to show a benefit for filgrastim in combination with CEOP/IMVP-Dexa.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9402845     DOI: 10.1007/s002770050330

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Hematol        ISSN: 0939-5555            Impact factor:   3.673


  8 in total

1.  Re: personalized medicine and cancer supportive care: appropriate use of colony-stimulating factor support of chemotherapy.

Authors:  Arnold L Potosky; Jennifer L Malin; Benjamin Kim; Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Epidemiology of treatment-associated mucosal injury after treatment with newer regimens for lymphoma, breast, lung, or colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Jones; Elenir B C Avritscher; Catherine D Cooksley; Marisol Michelet; B Nebiyou Bekele; Linda S Elting
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-04-07       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 3.  Implications of the European Organisation for Research And Treatment Of Cancer (EORTC) guidelines on the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for lymphoma care.

Authors:  Ruth Pettengell; Matti Aapro; Ercole Brusamolino; Dolores Caballero; Bertrand Coiffier; Michael Pfreundschuh; Marek Trneny; Jan Walewski
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.859

Review 4.  Granulopoiesis-stimulating factors to prevent adverse effects in the treatment of malignant lymphoma.

Authors:  Julia Bohlius; Christine Herbst; Marcel Reiser; Guido Schwarzer; Andreas Engert
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2008-10-08

Review 5.  Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.

Authors:  Nicole Skoetz; Julia Bohlius; Andreas Engert; Ina Monsef; Oliver Blank; Jörg-Janne Vehreschild
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-12-21

6.  Macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF) prevents infectious death induced by chemotherapy in mice, while granulocyte-CSF does not.

Authors:  Takao Hidaka; Masaki Fujimura; Akitoshi Nakashima; Subaru Higuma; Naoko Yamagishi; Hiroshi Tsuda; Masatoshi Sakai; Shigeru Saito
Journal:  Jpn J Cancer Res       Date:  2002-04

7.  Macrophage colony-stimulating factor prevents febrile neutropenia induced by chemotherapy.

Authors:  T Hidaka; M Fujimura; M Sakai; S Saito
Journal:  Jpn J Cancer Res       Date:  2001-11

8.  Are prophylactic haematopoietic growth factors of value in the management of patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma?

Authors:  A Hackshaw; J Sweetenham; A Knight
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-04-05       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.