Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for febrile neutropenia prophylaxis following chemotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:182
|
作者
Cooper, Katy L. [1 ]
Madan, Jason [2 ]
Whyte, Sophie [1 ]
Stevenson, Matt D. [1 ]
Akehurst, Ron L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Sch Hlth & Related Res ScHARR, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Bristol, Acad Unit Primary Hlth Care, Bristol, Avon, England
关键词
SINGLE-ADMINISTRATION PEGFILGRASTIM; PATIENTS RECEIVING CHEMOTHERAPY; ADVANCED BREAST-CANCER; NON-HODGKINS-LYMPHOMA; ELDERLY-PATIENTS; DAILY FILGRASTIM; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; DOUBLE-BLIND; OPEN-LABEL; PHASE-III;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2407-11-404
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Febrile neutropenia (FN) occurs following myelosuppressive chemotherapy and is associated with morbidity, mortality, costs, and chemotherapy reductions and delays. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) stimulate neutrophil production and may reduce FN incidence when given prophylactically following chemotherapy. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of G-CSFs (pegfilgrastim, filgrastim or lenograstim) in reducing FN incidence in adults undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumours or lymphoma. G-CSFs were compared with no primary G-CSF prophylaxis and with one another. Nine databases were searched in December 2009. Meta-analysis used a random effects model due to heterogeneity. Results: Twenty studies compared primary G-CSF prophylaxis with no primary G-CSF prophylaxis: five studies of pegfilgrastim; ten of filgrastim; and five of lenograstim. All three G-CSFs significantly reduced FN incidence, with relative risks of 0.30 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.65) for pegfilgrastim, 0.57 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.69) for filgrastim, and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.88) for lenograstim. Overall, the relative risk of FN for any primary G-CSF prophylaxis versus no primary G-CSF prophylaxis was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.41 to 0.62). In terms of comparisons between different G-CSFs, five studies compared pegfilgrastim with filgrastim. FN incidence was significantly lower for pegfilgrastim than filgrastim, with a relative risk of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.98). Conclusions: Primary prophylaxis with G-CSFs significantly reduces FN incidence in adults undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumours or lymphoma. Pegfilgrastim reduces FN incidence to a significantly greater extent than filgrastim.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Efficacy and tolerability of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in cancer patients after chemotherapy: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis
    Yong Wang
    Lin Chen
    Fen Liu
    Ning Zhao
    Liyao Xu
    Biqi Fu
    Yong Li
    Scientific Reports, 9
  • [32] A Comparison of Brand and Biosimilar Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factors for Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia
    Douglas, Andrea G.
    Schwab, Phil
    Lane, Daniel
    Kennedy, Kenneth
    Slabaugh, S. Lane
    Bowe, Andy
    JOURNAL OF MANAGED CARE & SPECIALTY PHARMACY, 2017, 23 (12): : 1221 - 1226
  • [33] Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: evidence based review
    Bhana, Nila
    CURRENT OPINION IN ONCOLOGY, 2007, 19 (04) : 328 - 335
  • [34] Study Inclusion Criteria and Presentation of Results in a Meta-Analysis of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor for Prevention of Febrile Neutropenia Reply
    Kuderer, Nicole M.
    Dale, David C.
    Crawford, Jeffrey
    Lyman, Gary H.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2010, 28 (36) : E764 - E764
  • [35] Efficacy, effectiveness and safety of long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with cancer: a systematic review
    Alena M. Pfeil
    Kim Allcott
    Ruth Pettengell
    Gunter von Minckwitz
    Matthias Schwenkglenks
    Zsolt Szabo
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2015, 23 : 525 - 545
  • [36] Efficacy, effectiveness and safety of long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with cancer: a systematic review
    Pfeil, Alena M.
    Allcott, Kim
    Pettengell, Ruth
    von Minckwitz, Gunter
    Schwenkglenks, Matthias
    Szabo, Zsolt
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2015, 23 (02) : 525 - 545
  • [37] Is febrile neutropenia prophylaxis with granulocyte-colony stimulating factors economically justified for adjuvant TC chemotherapy in breast cancer?
    Chris Skedgel
    Daniel Rayson
    Tallal Younis
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016, 24 : 387 - 394
  • [38] Is febrile neutropenia prophylaxis with granulocyte-colony stimulating factors economically justified for adjuvant TC chemotherapy in breast cancer?
    Skedgel, Chris
    Rayson, Daniel
    Younis, Tallal
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2016, 24 (01) : 387 - 394
  • [39] Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in established febrile neutropenia
    Mitchell, PLR
    Pinkerton, CR
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1999, 17 (09) : 3002 - 3002
  • [40] Efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for infertility undergoing IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lu-lu Fu
    Ying Xu
    Jing Yan
    Xue-ying Zhang
    Dan-dan Li
    Lian-wen Zheng
    Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, 21