» Articles » PMID: 30298233

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Short- Versus Long-Acting Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors for Reduction of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia

Overview
Journal Adv Ther
Date 2018 Oct 10
PMID 30298233
Citations 21
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Short- and long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are approved for the reduction of febrile neutropenia. A systematic literature review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs reporting the use of G-CSFs following chemotherapy treatment.

Methods: Medline/Medline in-process, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2003 and June 2016. A hand-search of relevant conference proceedings was conducted for meetings held between 2012 and 2016. Eligible studies were restricted to those reporting a direct, head-to-head comparison of short- versus long-acting G-CSFs for reduction of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia. Risk-of-bias assessments were performed for full publications only.

Results: The search strategy yielded 4044 articles for electronic screening. Thirty-six publications were evaluated for the meta-analysis: 11 of 12 RCTs and 2 of 24 non-RCTs administered doses of the short-acting G-CSF filgrastim for ≥ 7 days. In RCT studies, there was no statistically significant difference in outcomes of interest between short- and long-acting G-CSFs. In non-RCTs, the overall risk was lower with long-acting G-CSF than with short-acting G-CSF for incidence of febrile neutropenia [overall relative risk (RR) = 0.67, P  = 0.023], hospitalizations (overall RR = 0.68, P  < 0.05), and chemotherapy dose delays (overall RR = 0.68, P  = 0.020).

Conclusions: Overall, the weight of evidence from RCTs indicates little difference in efficacy between the short- and long-acting G-CSFs if dosed according to recommended guidelines. There is some evidence for greater efficacy for long-acting G-CSFs in non-RCTs, which may be a result of under-dosing of short-acting G-CSFs in general practice in real-world usage.

Funding: Hospira Inc, which was acquired by Pfizer Inc in September 2015, and Pfizer Inc.

Citing Articles

What role for real-world evidence in market access of biosimilars?.

Simoens S, Lockhart C, Courmier D Front Pharmacol. 2025; 16:1538866.

PMID: 40066332 PMC: 11891046. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1538866.


Effects of long-acting versus short-acting granulocyte colony stimulating factor after radiotherapy in gynecologic malignancies: a prospective observational cohort study.

Chen X, Wu M, Ma S, Tan X, Zhong S, Li L BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):1512.

PMID: 39696092 PMC: 11658528. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-13296-1.


Cost-effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for the prevention of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with cancer.

Aapro M, Chaplin S, Cornes P, Howe S, Link H, Koptelova N Support Care Cancer. 2023; 31(10):581.

PMID: 37728795 PMC: 10511548. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08043-4.


Efficacy and safety of PEG-rhG-CSF versus rhG-CSF in preventing chemotherapy-induced-neutropenia in early-stage breast cancer patients.

Jiang Y, Zhang J, Zhong J, Liao H, Zhang J, Liu Y BMC Cancer. 2023; 23(1):702.

PMID: 37495949 PMC: 10373237. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11198-2.


Prescription patterns of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in patients with breast cancer: A real-world study.

Hsu S, Chiang S, Hsu J, Ko Y PLoS One. 2023; 18(7):e0288642.

PMID: 37459309 PMC: 10351717. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288642.


References
1.
Green M, Koelbl H, Baselga J, Galid A, Guillem V, Gascon P . A randomized double-blind multicenter phase III study of fixed-dose single-administration pegfilgrastim versus daily filgrastim in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. 2002; 14(1):29-35. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdg019. View

2.
Vose J, Crump M, Lazarus H, Emmanouilides C, Schenkein D, Moore J . Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of pegfilgrastim compared with daily filgrastim after chemotherapy for lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(3):514-9. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.03.040. View

3.
Kubista E, Glaspy J, Holmes F, Green M, Hackett J, Neumann T . Bone pain associated with once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim is similar to daily filgrastim in patients with breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer. 2003; 3(6):391-8. DOI: 10.3816/cbc.2003.n.003. View

4.
Grigg A, Solal-Celigny P, Hoskin P, Taylor K, McMillan A, Forstpointner R . Open-label, randomized study of pegfilgrastim vs. daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in elderly patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2003; 44(9):1503-8. DOI: 10.1080/1042819031000103953. View

5.
Crawford J, Dale D, Lyman G . Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: risks, consequences, and new directions for its management. Cancer. 2004; 100(2):228-37. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.11882. View