Lipegfilgrastim for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in Dutch patients

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Chemotherapy (CT)-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) can lead to changes in the treatment plan, potentially worsening the cancer outcome. This study evaluated the effect of the glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor lipegfilgrastim, used as primary (PP) or secondary prophylaxis (SP), on treatment modifications in adult patients receiving cytotoxic CT with or without biological/targeted therapy (BT) for solid and haematological tumours. METHODS: This phase 4, prospective, observational study was conducted in eight centres in the Netherlands, in 2015-2017. Other study objectives were to characterise the population of cancer patients receiving lipegfilgrastim, to evaluate the incidence of CT-induced neutropenic events, and to assess safety. RESULTS: Of 142 patients, 73.94% had breast cancer and 55.63% received CT in the adjuvant setting. Most patients received lipegfilgrastim as PP (74.65%) and were at low (34.51%) or high risk (39.44%) of FN. CT dose delays were recorded for 22.64% and 36.11% of patients receiving lipegfilgrastim for PP and SP, respectively. CT dose reductions were recorded for 2.11% of patients; no CT dose omissions and one BT dose omission occurred. FN and grade III/IV neutropenia were reported for 5.63% and 9.86% of patients, respectively; associated hospitalisations were rare. The most frequently lipegfilgrastimrelated adverse events (AE) were myalgia, bone pain, and back pain. Serious AEs (55) were reported for 30 (21.13%) patients. There were two deaths, unrelated to lipegfilgrastim administration. CONCLUSION: Administration of lipegfilgrastim in routine clinical practice in the Netherlands results in limited CT/BT dose modifications and low incidence of neutropenic events, with no new safety concerns

Lipegfilgrastim for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in Dutch patients

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy (CT)-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) can lead to changes in the treatment plan, potentially worsening the cancer outcome. This study evaluated the effect of the glycopegylated granulocyte-colony stimulating factor lipegfilgrastim, used as primary (PP) or secondary prophylaxis (SP), on treatment modifications in adult patients receiving cytotoxic CT with or without biological/targeted therapy (BT) for solid and haematological tumours. METHODS: This phase 4, prospective, observational study was conducted in eight centres in the Netherlands, in 2015-2017. Other study objectives were to characterise the population of cancer patients receiving lipegfilgrastim, to evaluate the incidence of CT-induced neutropenic events, and to assess safety. RESULTS: Of 142 patients, 73.94% had breast cancer and 55.63% received CT in the adjuvant setting. Most patients received lipegfilgrastim as PP (74.65%) and were at low (34.51%) or high risk (39.44%) of FN. CT dose delays were recorded for 22.64% and 36.11% of patients receiving lipegfilgrastim for PP and SP, respectively. CT dose reductions were recorded for 2.11% of patients; no CT dose omissions and one BT dose omission occurred. FN and grade III/IV neutropenia were reported for 5.63% and 9.86% of patients, respectively; associated hospitalisations were rare. The most frequently lipegfilgrastimrelated adverse events (AE) were myalgia, bone pain, and back pain. Serious AEs (55) were reported for 30 (21.13%) patients. There were two deaths, unrelated to lipegfilgrastim administration. CONCLUSION: Administration of lipegfilgrastim in routine clinical practice in the Netherlands results in limited CT/BT dose modifications and low incidence of neutropenic events, with no new safety concerns

Long-term results of a randomised phase III trial of weekly versus three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum induction therapy followed by standard or extended three-weekly paclitaxel/platinum in European patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Weekly paclitaxel/carboplatin might improve survival in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We compared efficacy of first-line weekly to three-weekly paclitaxel/cis- or carboplatin (PCw and PC3w) induction therapy, followed by either three or six PC3w cycles. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised phase III trial with 2x2 design, patients with FIGO stage IIb-IV EOC were randomised to six cycles PCw (paclitaxel 90mg/m(2), cisplatin 70mg/m(2) or carboplatin AUC 4) or three cycles PC3w (paclitaxel 175mg/m(2), cisplatin 75mg/m(2) or carboplatin AUC 6), followed by either three or six cycles PC3w. Primary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were response rate (RR) and toxicity. RESULTS: Of 267 eligible patients, 133 received PCw and 134 PC3w. The first 105 patients received cisplatin, after protocol amendment the subsequent 162 patients received carboplatin. Weekly cisplatin was less well tolerated than weekly carboplatin. All PC3w cycles were well tolerated. At the end of all treatments, RR was 90.8% with no differences between the treatment arms. After a follow-up of median 10.3years (range 7.1-14.8), median PFS was 18.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.9-21.0) months for PCw and 16.4 (95% CI 13.5-19.2) months for PC3w (p=0.78). Median OS was 44.8 (95% CI 33.1-56.5) months for PCw and 41.1 (95% CI 34.4-47.7) months for PC3w (p=0.98). CONCLUSIONS: There was no benefit in terms of OS, PFS or RR for a weekly regimen nor for extended chemotherapy as first-line treatment for EOC in European patients