» Articles » PMID: 32944800

Efficacy and Safety of Lipegfilgrastim Versus Pegfilgrastim in Elderly Patients with Aggressive B Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (B-NHL): Results of the Randomized, Open-label, Non-inferiority AVOID Neutropenia Study

Overview
Specialties Critical Care
Oncology
Date 2020 Sep 18
PMID 32944800
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Lipegfilgrastim has been shown to be non-inferior to pegfilgrastim for reduction of the duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) in breast cancer patients. This open-label, non-inferiority study assessed the efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim in elderly patients with aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) at high risk for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.

Patient And Methods: One hundred and one patients (median age, 75 years) were randomized to lipegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim (6 mg/cycle) during six cycles of R-CHOP21.

Results: Lipegfilgrastim was non-inferior to pegfilgrastim for the primary efficacy endpoint, reduction of DSN in cycle 1. In the per-protocol population, mean (standard deviation) DSN was 0.8 (0.92) and 0.9 (1.11) days in the two groups, respectively; the adjusted mean difference between groups was - 0.3 days (95% confidence interval, - 0.70 to 0.19). Non-inferiority was also demonstrated in the intent-to-treat population. The incidence of severe neutropenia in cycle 1 was 51% (21/41) in the lipegfilgrastim group and 52% (23/44) in the pegfilgrastim group. Very severe neutropenia (ANC < 0.1 × 10/L) in cycle 1 was reported by 5 (12%) patients in the lipegfilgrastim group and 8 (18%) patients in the pegfilgrastim group. However, over all cycles, febrile neutropenia (strict definition) was reported by only 1 (2%) patient in each treatment group (during cycle 1 in the lipegfilgrastim group and cycle 6 in the pegfilgrastim group). The mean time to absolute neutrophil count recovery (defined as ≥ 2.0 × 10/L) was 8.3 and 9.4 days in the two groups, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 46% of patients in each group; none were considered treatment-related. Eight patients died during the study (2 in the lipegfilgrastim group, 5 in the pegfilgrastim group, and 1 who died before starting study treatment). No deaths occurred during the treatment period, and all were considered to be related to the underlying disease.

Conclusions: This study shows lipegfilgrastim to be non-inferior to pegfilgrastim for the reduction of DSN in elderly patients with aggressive B cell NHL receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, with a comparable safety profile.

Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02044276; EudraCT number 2013-001284-23.

Citing Articles

New insight into strategies used to develop long-acting G-CSF biologics for neutropenia therapy.

Theyab A, Alsharif K, Alzahrani K, Oyouni A, Hawsawi Y, Algahtani M Front Oncol. 2023; 12:1026377.

PMID: 36686781 PMC: 9850083. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1026377.


A comparative assessment of neutropenia events, healthcare resource use, and costs among cancer patients treated with lipegfilgrastim compared with pegfilgrastim in Germany.

Link H, Thompson S, Tian M, Haas J, Meise D, Maas C Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30(11):9317-9327.

PMID: 36076105 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07353-3.


A multinational, drug utilization study of lipegfilgrastim use in real-world setting in Europe.

Kaplan S, Bogojevic D, Rainville C, Gross N Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30(11):9191-9201.

PMID: 36044089 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07341-7.


Current state and future opportunities in granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF).

Link H Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30(9):7067-7077.

PMID: 35739328 PMC: 9225876. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07103-5.

References
1.
Gao L, Li S . Cost-effectiveness analysis of lipegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis in women with breast cancer in Australia: a modelled economic evaluation. Breast Cancer. 2018; 25(6):671-680. DOI: 10.1007/s12282-018-0872-6. View

2.
Delarue R, Tilly H, Mounier N, Petrella T, Salles G, Thieblemont C . Dose-dense rituximab-CHOP compared with standard rituximab-CHOP in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (the LNH03-6B study): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013; 14(6):525-33. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70122-0. View

3.
Klastersky J, de Naurois J, Rolston K, Rapoport B, Maschmeyer G, Aapro M . Management of febrile neutropaenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol. 2016; 27(suppl 5):v111-v118. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw325. View

4.
Cunningham D, Hawkes E, Jack A, Qian W, Smith P, Mouncey P . Rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a phase 3 comparison of dose intensification with 14-day versus 21-day cycles. Lancet. 2013; 381(9880):1817-26. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60313-X. View

5.
Mitchell S, Li X, Woods M, Garcia J, Hebard-Massey K, Barron R . Comparative effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors to prevent febrile neutropenia and related complications in cancer patients in clinical practice: A systematic review. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2016; 22(5):702-16. DOI: 10.1177/1078155215625459. View