Factors for the optimal selection of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor preparations and predictors for R-CHOP dose reductions/delays among patients with non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma (STOP FN in NHL 2 subanalysis).
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ pharmacology
Cyclophosphamide
/ pharmacology
Doxorubicin
/ pharmacology
Febrile Neutropenia
/ chemically induced
Female
Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
/ pharmacology
Humans
Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin
/ drug therapy
Male
Middle Aged
Prednisone
/ pharmacology
Retrospective Studies
Rituximab
/ pharmacology
Vincristine
/ pharmacology
Elderly
Febrile neutropenia
G-CSF
Non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma
R-CHOP
Risk factor
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Apr 2021
06 Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
29
08
2020
accepted:
18
03
2021
entrez:
7
4
2021
pubmed:
8
4
2021
medline:
13
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A classification tree was used to analyze background factors for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) preparation selection for febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in Japanese patients with non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma receiving the first R-CHOP cycle. This was a subanalysis of the retrospective observational study STOP FN in NHL 2 (UMIN000029534). Patient characteristics, changes in neutrophil count, incidence and severity of neutropenia, and risk factors for dose reduction/delay of R-CHOP were assessed by G-CSF formulation. Among 234 patients in cycle 1, 25.6% received no G-CSF preparation, 52.1% received daily G-CSF, and 22.2% received pegfilgrastim. Pegfilgrastim use was most frequent among patients aged ≥ 80 years, while that of daily G-CSF was most frequent in patients with lymphocyte count (LC) < 1000 cells/μL. Changes in neutrophil count were more marked with pegfilgrastim compared with daily G-CSF and no G-CSF. Relevant factors for G-CSF preparation selection in the first R-CHOP cycle were age ≥ 80 years and LC < 1000 cells/μL; for chemotherapy dose reduction were FN onset in cycle 1 and female sex; and for dose delay was hemoglobin (< 12 g/dL). After cycle 2 and onward, pegfilgrastim use increased markedly (72.6%) compared with cycle 1 (22.2%), with significantly greater proportions continuing pegfilgrastim use and switching from daily G-CSF. Relevant factors for G-CSF preparation selection were age ≥ 80 years and LC < 1000 cells/μL. The use of pegfilgrastim increased markedly after cycle 2. These results may be useful for selecting appropriate G-CSF preparations in the first R-CHOP cycle. UMIN000029534; registered on 13 October 2017, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000033733 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
A classification tree was used to analyze background factors for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) preparation selection for febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in Japanese patients with non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma receiving the first R-CHOP cycle.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a subanalysis of the retrospective observational study STOP FN in NHL 2 (UMIN000029534). Patient characteristics, changes in neutrophil count, incidence and severity of neutropenia, and risk factors for dose reduction/delay of R-CHOP were assessed by G-CSF formulation.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among 234 patients in cycle 1, 25.6% received no G-CSF preparation, 52.1% received daily G-CSF, and 22.2% received pegfilgrastim. Pegfilgrastim use was most frequent among patients aged ≥ 80 years, while that of daily G-CSF was most frequent in patients with lymphocyte count (LC) < 1000 cells/μL. Changes in neutrophil count were more marked with pegfilgrastim compared with daily G-CSF and no G-CSF. Relevant factors for G-CSF preparation selection in the first R-CHOP cycle were age ≥ 80 years and LC < 1000 cells/μL; for chemotherapy dose reduction were FN onset in cycle 1 and female sex; and for dose delay was hemoglobin (< 12 g/dL). After cycle 2 and onward, pegfilgrastim use increased markedly (72.6%) compared with cycle 1 (22.2%), with significantly greater proportions continuing pegfilgrastim use and switching from daily G-CSF.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Relevant factors for G-CSF preparation selection were age ≥ 80 years and LC < 1000 cells/μL. The use of pegfilgrastim increased markedly after cycle 2. These results may be useful for selecting appropriate G-CSF preparations in the first R-CHOP cycle.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
UMIN000029534; registered on 13 October 2017, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000033733 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 33823836
doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08068-0
pii: 10.1186/s12885-021-08068-0
pmc: PMC8025521
doi:
Substances chimiques
R-CHOP protocol
0
Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
143011-72-7
Rituximab
4F4X42SYQ6
Vincristine
5J49Q6B70F
Doxorubicin
80168379AG
Cyclophosphamide
8N3DW7272P
Prednisone
VB0R961HZT
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
358Références
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20;25(21):3158-67
pubmed: 17634496
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2017 Dec;120:163-179
pubmed: 29198330
Leuk Lymphoma. 2016 Feb;57(2):283-290
pubmed: 25926064
Eur J Cancer. 2011 Jan;47(1):8-32
pubmed: 21095116
Support Care Cancer. 2012 Jul;20(7):1525-32
pubmed: 21818641
Clin Ther. 2014 Sep 1;36(9):1287-94
pubmed: 25130388
Med Oncol. 2016 Dec;33(12):139
pubmed: 27822615
Support Care Cancer. 2018 Jul;26(7):2323-2331
pubmed: 29411131
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Sep;171(2):477-488
pubmed: 29869776
Support Care Cancer. 2020 Feb;28(2):571-579
pubmed: 31093770
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Nov;25(11):3313-3320
pubmed: 28551843
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2005 Jul;3(4):557-71
pubmed: 16038646
Ann Oncol. 2016 Sep;27(suppl 5):v111-v118
pubmed: 27664247
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2008 Feb;6(2):109-18
pubmed: 18319047
Am J Hematol. 2003 Aug;73(4):263-6
pubmed: 12879430
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Jun 20;23(18):4198-214
pubmed: 15961767
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2014 Jun;41(6):687-90
pubmed: 25129080
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2016 Apr;128(7-8):238-47
pubmed: 26745973
Nutr Cancer. 2014;66(2):225-33
pubmed: 24405259
BMC Cancer. 2011 Sep 23;11:404
pubmed: 21943360
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011 Mar;77(3):221-40
pubmed: 20227889
Cancer. 2006 May 15;106(10):2258-66
pubmed: 16575919
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Oct 1;33(28):3199-212
pubmed: 26169616
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2012 Oct;12(5):297-305
pubmed: 23040435
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Aug 19;28:116
pubmed: 19689822
Support Care Cancer. 2014 Dec;22(12):3219-26
pubmed: 24996830