Pegfilgrastim for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in multiple myeloma

被引:0
作者
Claudio Cerchione
Davide Nappi
Giovanni Martinelli
机构
[1] IRCCS,Hematology Unit, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori “Dino Amadori” (IRST)
[2] Ospedale di Bolzano,Department of Hematology and Cell Bone Marrow Transplantation (CBMT)
来源
Supportive Care in Cancer | 2021年 / 29卷
关键词
Pegfilgrastim; Multiple myeloma; G-CSF; Supportive care; Febrile neutropenia;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Multiple myeloma (MM) survival rates have been substantially increased thanks to novel agents that have improved survival outcomes and shown better tolerability than treatments of earlier years. These new agents include immunomodulating imide drugs (IMiD) thalidomide and lenalidomide, the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib (PI), recently followed by new generation IMID pomalidomide, monoclonal antibodies daratumumab and elotuzumab, and next generation PI carfilzomib and ixazomib. However, even in this more promising scenario, febrile neutropenia remains a severe side effect of antineoplastic therapies and can lead to a delay and/or dose reduction in subsequent cycles. Supportive care has thus become key in helping patients to obtain the maximum benefit from novel agents. Filgrastim is a human recombinant subcutaneous preparation of G-CSF, largely adopted in hematological supportive care as “on demand” (or secondary) prophylaxis to recovery from neutropenia and its infectious consequences during anti-myeloma treatment. On the contrary, pegfilgrastim is a pegylated long-acting recombinant form of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) that, given its extended half-life, can be particularly useful when adopted as “primary prophylaxis,” therefore before the onset of neutropenia, along chemotherapy treatment in multiple myeloma patients. There is no direct comparison between the two G-CSF delivery modalities. In this review, we compare data on the two administrations’ modality, highlighting the efficacy of the secondary prophylaxis over multiple myeloma treatment. Advantage of pegfilgrastim could be as follows: the fixed administration rather than multiple injections, reduction in neutropenia and febrile neutropenia rates, and, finally, a cost-effectiveness advantage.
引用
收藏
页码:6973 / 6980
页数:7
相关论文
共 181 条
  • [1] Palumbo A(2011)Multiple myeloma N Engl J Med 364 1046-1060
  • [2] Anderson K(2016)Cancer Statistics. 2016 CA Cancer J Clin 66 7-30
  • [3] Seigel RL(2017)Trends in overall survival and costs of multiple myeloma, 2000–2014 Leukemia 31 1915-1921
  • [4] Miller KD(2008)Multiple myeloma Blood 111 2962-2972
  • [5] Jemal A(2009)Autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma N Engl J Med 360 2645-2654
  • [6] Fonseca R(2018)Prevention and management of adverse events of novel agents in multiple myeloma: a consensus of the European Myeloma Network Leukemia 32 1542-1560
  • [7] Abouzaid S(2009)Infections in patients with multiple myeloma in the era of high-dose therapy and novel agents Clin Infect Dis 49 1211-1225
  • [8] Bonafede M(2011)2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours Eur J Cancer 47 8-32
  • [9] Kyle RA(2012)Oral antibiotic prophylaxis of early infection in multiple myeloma: a URCC/ECOG randomized phase III study Leukemia 26 2517-2520
  • [10] Rajkumar SV(2011)Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America Clin Infect Dis 52 427-431