Attitudes of physicians toward assessing risk and using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy associated with an intermediate risk of febrile neutropenia

被引:0
作者
Gilles Freyer
Ewa Kalinka-Warzocha
Konstantinos Syrigos
Mihai Marinca
Giuseppe Tonini
Say Liang Ng
Zee Wan Wong
Antonio Salar
Guenther Steger
Mahmoud Abdelsalam
Lucy DeCosta
Zsolt Szabo
机构
[1] Lyon University,Department of Medical Oncology, Hospices Civils de Lyon Cancer Institute
[2] Provincial Specialist Hospital,Chemotherapy Department
[3] University of Athens Medical School,Sotiria General Hospital
[4] University of Medicine and Pharmacy ‘Grigore T Popa’,Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine
[5] Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome,Department of Oncology
[6] Bendigo Health Care Group,Oncology Unit
[7] University of Melbourne,Oncology Unit, Goulburn Valley Health, Shepparton
[8] Hospital del Mar,Department of Clinical Haematology
[9] Medical University of Vienna,Department of Internal Medicine I/Oncology
[10] The Moncton Hospital,Medical Oncology
[11] Amgen Ltd,undefined
[12] Amgen (Europe) GmbH,undefined
来源
Medical Oncology | 2015年 / 32卷
关键词
Febrile neutropenia; Chemotherapy; Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; G-CSF; Prophylaxis; Risk factors;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy. This prospective, observational study describes physicians’ approaches toward assessing FN risk in patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate (10–20 %) FN risk. In the baseline investigator assessment, physicians selected factors considered important when assessing overall FN risk and deciding on granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP). Physicians then completed patient assessments using the same lists of factors. The final FN risk scores and whether G-CSF PP was planned were reported. The final analysis included 165 physicians and 944 patients. The most frequently considered factor in both assessments was chemotherapy agents in the backbone (88 % of investigator and 93 % of patient assessments). History of FN (83 %), baseline laboratory values (76 %) and age (73 %) were commonly selected at baseline, whereas tumor type (72 %), guidelines (62 %) and tumor stage (43 %) were selected most during patient assessments. Median investigator-reported FN risk threshold for G-CSF PP was 20 % (range 10–85 %). G-CSF PP was planned in 82 % of patients with an FN risk at or above this threshold; therefore, almost one-fifth of qualifying patients would not receive G-CSF PP. Physicians generally follow guidelines, but also consider individual patient characteristics when assessing FN risk and deciding on G-CSF PP. A standardized FN risk assessment may optimize the use of G-CSF PP, which may minimize the incidence of FN in patients undergoing chemotherapy with an intermediate FN risk. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01813721.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 145 条
[1]  
Viscoli C(2005)Infections in patients with febrile neutropenia: epidemiology, microbiology, and risk stratification Clin Infect Dis 40 S240-S245
[2]  
Varnier O(2010)Management of febrile neutropenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines Ann Oncol 21 v252-v256
[3]  
Machetti M(2011)A prospective study of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in the South West London Cancer Network. Interpretation of study results in light of NCAG/NCEPOD findings Br J Cancer 104 407-412
[4]  
de Naurois J(2012)Epidemiology, management and economic impact of febrile neutropenia in oncology patients receiving routine care at a regional UK cancer centre Ann Oncol 23 1889-1893
[5]  
Novitzky-Basso I(2006)Mortality, morbidity, and cost associated with febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients Cancer 106 2258-2266
[6]  
Gill MJ(2008)Impact of neutropenia on delivering planned chemotherapy for solid tumours Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 17 19-25
[7]  
Marti FM(1992)Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to prevent dose-limiting neutropenia in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a randomized controlled trial Blood 80 1430-1436
[8]  
Cullen MH(2008)Neutropenia occurrence and predictors of reduced chemotherapy delivery: results from the INC-EU prospective observational European neutropenia study Support Care Cancer 16 1299-1309
[9]  
Roila F(1998)Dose and dose intensity as determinants of outcome in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. The Cancer and Leukemia Group B J Natl Cancer Inst 90 1205-1211
[10]  
Okera M(2001)Benefit of a high-dose epirubicin regimen in adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients with poor prognostic factors: 5-year follow-up results of French Adjuvant Study Group 05 randomized trial J Clin Oncol 19 602-611