Myeloid Growth Factors, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Crawford, Jeffrey; Becker, Pamela S.; Armitage, Jamés O.; Blayney, Douglas W.; Chávez, Julio C.; Curtin, Peter T.; Dinner, Shira; Fynan, T. M.; Gojo, Ivana; Griffiths, Elizabeth A.; Hough, Shannon; Kloth, Dwight D.; Kuter, David J.; Lyman, Gary H.; Mably, Mary; Mukherjee, Sudipto; Patel, Shiven B.; Perez, Lia; Poust, Adam; Rampal, Raajit K.; Roy, Vivek; Rugo, Hope S.; Saad, Ayman; Schwartzberg, Lee S.; Shayani, Sepideh; Talbott, Mahsa; Vadhan‐Raj, Saroj; Vasu, Sumithira; Wadleigh, Martha; Westervelt, Peter; Burns, Jennifer L.; Pluchino, Lenora A.

doi:10.6004/jnccn.2017.0175

Cited by 114 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

133

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Exclusion criteria were the following: inadequate liver (aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase > 3 times the upper limit of institutional laboratory normal) and kidney functions (blood urea nitrogen and creatinine > 3 times the upper limit of normal). Risk for FN was assessed, 6,23 and eligible patients had to receive a chemotherapy protocol expected to exert at least a moderate risk for neutropenia. Risk groups were classified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) growth factor guidelines 6 and further defined as intermediate (I), high (H), and very high (VH) if any patient-related factors upgrading the risk were present (ie, previous neutropenia with the same protocol and doses, extensive prior chemotherapy, marrow radiation prior to treatment, pathological evidence for bone marrow involvement by disease, age >65 years).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Risk for FN was assessed, 6,23 and eligible patients had to receive a chemotherapy protocol expected to exert at least a moderate risk for neutropenia. Risk groups were classified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) growth factor guidelines 6 and further defined as intermediate (I), high (H), and very high (VH) if any patient-related factors upgrading the risk were present (ie, previous neutropenia with the same protocol and doses, extensive prior chemotherapy, marrow radiation prior to treatment, pathological evidence for bone marrow involvement by disease, age >65 years). Growth factors (GCSF) were administered according to the NCCN guidelines 6,23 as well as standard prophylactic antibiotic treatment as assigned by the treating physician (in certain protocols, acyclovir for herpes viruses and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia prevention).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 Prophylactic measures such as granulocyte colony stimulating factor (GCSF) are routinely required. 5,6 However, the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for patients at risk for FN is controversial. Although mortality reduction has been reported with administration of necessarily broad-spectrum prophylactic antibiotics, this benefit is countered by deleterious effects of drug toxicity, 7 emergence of antibioticresistant bacteria, and fungal overgrowth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Randomized Controlled Study to Determine the Efficacy of Garlic Compounds in Patients With Hematological Malignancies at Risk for Chemotherapy-Related Febrile Neutropenia

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Patients receiving chemotherapy for hematological malignancies are at high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). Garlic extracts (GEs) are natural food substances showing antimicrobial effects in vivo. Objectives. We explored whether adding GE may be efficacious in reducing the risk or severity of infections. Design. This was a placebo-controlled doubleblind randomized study. Results. Of 95 patients randomized to receive GE or placebo following chemotherapy, a febrile episode was documented in 50% of patients receiving GE and 63.3% receiving placebo (P = .89). There was a higher risk of developing a third and fourth febrile episode in the GE group (P = .01). However, among those at a lower risk for FN, those receiving GE developed fewer FN episodes (P = .075), especially those with severe neutropenia (P = .05). Major adverse events were distributed equally, but nonadherence was more common in the GE than in the placebo group: 19.5% versus 4%, respectively (P = .05). Conclusions. GE was safe and did not reduce FN risk in the entire cohort, but yet appeared to exert a protective effect in the lower-risk subgroup. We do not recommend the use of GE for FN prevention in higherrisk patients. A larger-scale clinical trial for the lower-risk subgroup of patients is advocated. (This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00247039.)

show abstract

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Randomized Controlled Study to Determine the Efficacy of Garlic Compounds in Patients With Hematological Malignancies at Risk for Chemotherapy-Related Febrile Neutropenia

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following international guidelines on the prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia [15,16], patients receiving these regimens have an intermediate risk for febrile neutropenia (10-20%). Therefore, prophylactic treatment with G-CSF was only applied in patients with at least 1 clinical risk factor (i.e., prior chemotherapy or radiation therapy, persistent neutropenia, bone marrow involvement, recent surgery and/or open wounds, liver dysfunction (bilirubin > 2.0 mg/dl), renal dysfunction (creatinine clearance < 50 ml/min), age > 65 years and receiving chemotherapy with full dose intensity).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pretherapeutic Inflammation Predicts Febrile Neutropenia and Reduced Progression-Free Survival after First-Line Chemotherapy in SCLC

Kauffmann-Guerrero¹,

Kahnert²,

Syunyaeva³

et al. 2018

Oncol Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Despite initial response to chemotherapy, the prognosis of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients is limited. Following first-line therapy, the strongest predictor of durable progression-free survival (PFS) is remission quality. Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a frequent complication after chemotherapy, and its prevention could improve treatment density and degree of remission. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 39 SCLC patients treated at a German tertiary care lung cancer center between 2013 and 2016. We extracted data sets from electronic records and analyzed anthropometric data, pretherapeutic blood values, and prognostic scores. Discriminant analysis was performed to predict FN. Results: PFS after first-line chemotherapy was significantly shorter in patients with FN (p = 0.003). Pretherapeutic albumin (p = 0.019), C-reactive protein (CRP; p < 0.001), lactate dehydrogenase (p = 0.041), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p = 0.009), prognostic nutritional index (p = 0.018), and Glasgow prognostic score (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with FN. CRP in combination with absolute neutrophil count is a strong predictor of FN (positive predictive value 79.8%). Conclusion: SCLC patients with FN after chemotherapy showed significantly reduced PFS. Prevention of FN may improve treatment results. We identified pretherapeutic markers which can predict FN risk. This simple and cost-effective method could serve to identify the need for preventive measures against FN (e.g., prophylactic antibiotic treatment or granulocyte colony stimulating factor administration).

show abstract

“…The effects of BEV‐PEM/CIS are generalized, i.e., any cell capable of uptaking the drugs are susceptible to their effects, especially rapidly dividing cells such as myeloid cells . Accordingly, BEV‐PEM/CIS has a narrow therapeutic window and generalized side effects .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal Scheduling of Bevacizumab and Pemetrexed/Cisplatin Dosing in Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer

Schneider

Boyer

Ciccolini

et al. 2019

CPT Pharmacom & Syst Pharma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bevacizumab‐pemetrexed/cisplatin ( BEV ‐ PEM / CIS ) is a first‐line therapeutic for advanced nonsquamous non‐small cell lung cancer. Bevacizumab potentiates PEM / CIS cytotoxicity by inducing transient tumor vasculature normalization. BEV ‐ PEM / CIS has a narrow therapeutic window. Therefore, it is an attractive target for administration schedule optimization. The present study leverages our previous work on BEV ‐ PEM / CIS pharmacodynamic modeling in non‐small cell lung cancer–bearing mice to estimate the optimal gap in the scheduling of sequential BEV ‐ PEM / CIS . We predicted the optimal gap in BEV ‐ PEM / CIS dosing to be 2.0 days in mice and 1.2 days in humans. Our simulations suggest that the efficacy loss in scheduling BEV ‐ PEM / CIS at too great of a gap is much less than the efficacy loss in scheduling BEV ‐ PEM / CIS at too short of a gap.

show abstract

Myeloid Growth Factors, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Cited by 114 publications

References 44 publications

A Randomized Controlled Study to Determine the Efficacy of Garlic Compounds in Patients With Hematological Malignancies at Risk for Chemotherapy-Related Febrile Neutropenia

A Randomized Controlled Study to Determine the Efficacy of Garlic Compounds in Patients With Hematological Malignancies at Risk for Chemotherapy-Related Febrile Neutropenia

Pretherapeutic Inflammation Predicts Febrile Neutropenia and Reduced Progression-Free Survival after First-Line Chemotherapy in SCLC

Optimal Scheduling of Bevacizumab and Pemetrexed/Cisplatin Dosing in Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About