Granulocyte colony stimulating factor

粒细胞集落刺激因子
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:发热性中性粒细胞减少症(FN)是与癌症化疗相关的常见且严重的疾病。人重组粒细胞集落刺激因子(G-CSF)预防和减弱FN的严重程度和持续时间。我们评估了波多黎各FN风险较高的乳腺癌女性中G-CSF依从性的使用和预测因素。
    方法:这项回顾性队列研究使用了波多黎各中央癌症登记处-健康保险联系数据库。纳入2009-2015年期间诊断为浸润性乳腺癌的女性,接受选定的化疗方案(n=816)。根据国家综合癌症网络指南和文献,根据化疗方案将FN的风险分为高风险和低风险。坚持被定义为在第一个化疗周期开始时使用或不使用G-CSF的女性乳腺癌基于发生FN的风险。我们使用多变量逻辑模型来确定与FN高危女性使用G-CSF相关的因素。
    结果:在FN风险较高的女性中,对G-CSF临床实践指南的依从性较低(38.2%)。与有私人健康保险的女性相比,有FN高风险的女性接受G-CSF的可能性较低(aOR:0.14;CI95%:0.08,0.24)和Medicare/Medicaid(aOR:0.33;CI95%:0.15,0.73)。区域分期(aOR:1.82;CI95%:1.15,2.88)的女性比局部癌症的女性更有可能接受G-CSF。
    结论:FN风险较高的女性对临床实践指南的依从性较差。此外,在医疗保险方面坚持使用G-CSF的差异,卫生区域,和癌症分期给予了实施策略的机会,以遵循推荐的指南使用G-CSF作为癌症治疗的一部分.
    BACKGROUND: Febrile Neutropenia (FN) is a common and serious condition related to cancer chemotherapy. Human recombinant Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) prevents and attenuates the severity and duration of FN. We evaluated the use and predictors of G-CSF adherence among women with breast cancer with a high risk of FN in Puerto Rico.
    METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the Puerto Rico Central Cancer Registry-Health Insurance Linkage Database. Women with invasive breast cancer diagnosed during 2009-2015 who received selected chemotherapy regimens (n = 816) were included. The risk of FN was categorized as high and low risk based on the chemotherapy regimens according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and literature. Adherence was defined as the use or no use of G-CSF at the start of the first chemotherapy cycle among women with breast cancer based on the risk of developing FN. We used a multivariate logistic model to identify factors associated with G-CSF use in women classified at high risk for FN.
    RESULTS: Adherence to G-CSF clinical practice guidelines was low (38.2%) among women with a high risk of FN. Women at high risk of FN with Medicaid (aOR: 0.14; CI 95%: 0.08, 0.24) and Medicare/Medicaid (aOR: 0.33; CI 95%: 0.15, 0.73) were less likely to receive G-CSF than women with private health insurance. Women with regional stage (aOR: 1.82; CI 95%: 1.15, 2.88) were more likely to receive G-CSF than women with localized cancers.
    CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to clinical practice guidelines was poor among women with a high risk of FN. Furthermore, disparities in the adherence to G-CSF use in terms of health insurance, health region, and cancer stage granted the opportunity to implement strategies to follow the recommended guidelines for using G-CSF as part of cancer treatment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在MONITOR-GCSF研究化疗诱导的(发热性)中性粒细胞减少与生物仿制药非格司亭,56.6%的患者根据修订的EORTC指南进行了预防,但17.4%的患者被预防低于指南建议,26.0%高于指南建议。
    MONITOR-GCSF是一种潜在的,观察性研究纳入了来自12个欧洲国家140个癌症中心的1447名可评估患者,这些患者接受了多达6个周期的骨髓抑制化疗,并接受了GCSF预防.患者被归类为-,正确-,或相对于基于化疗风险的指南建议过度预防GCSF,个别危险因素,和GCSF预防类型(原发性与继发性)。
    under-(17.4%)之间的差异,正确-(56.6%),或过度预防组(26.0%)在患者危险因素方面(年龄,性能状态,FN的历史,合并症)以及预防模式(预防类型,GCSF起始日,和GCSF持续时间)。化疗诱导的中性粒细胞减少症(CIN)的发生率(所有等级),FN,与预防不足和正确的患者相比,过度预防患者与CIN相关的住院率始终较低.除了与CIN/FN相关的化疗障碍外,未预防和正确预防的患者之间没有观察到差异。组间没有发现GCSF安全性差异(头痛除外)。
    MONITOR-GCSF研究提供的真实世界证据表明,提供GCSF支持可能会产生更好的CIN,FN,和CIN/FN相关的住院结局,如果患者的预防水平高于指南建议。预防不足的患者化疗方案受到干扰的风险较高。我们的发现支持在每个化疗周期开始时评估CIN/FN风险的指南建议。
    In the MONITOR-GCSF study of chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia with biosimilar filgrastim, 56.6% of patients were prophylacted according to amended EORTC guidelines, but 17.4% were prophylacted below and 26.0% above guideline recommendations.
    MONITOR-GCSF is a prospective, observational study of 1447 evaluable patients from 140 cancers centers in 12 European countries treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy for up to 6 cycles receiving biosimilar GCSF prophylaxis. Patients were classified as under-, correctly-, or over-prophylacted with GCSF relative to guideline recommendations based on their chemotherapy risk, individual risk factors, and type of GCSF prophylaxis (primary versus secondary).
    Differences between under- (17.4%), correctly- (56.6%), or over-prophylacted (26.0%) groups were found in terms of patient risk factors (age, performance status, history of FN, comorbid conditions) as well as prophylaxis patterns (type of prophylaxis, day of GCSF initiation, and GCSF duration). Rates of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) (all grades), FN, and CIN-related hospitalizations were consistently lower in over-prophylacted patients relative to under- and correctly-prophylacted patients. No differences were observed between under- and correctly-prophylacted patients except for CIN/FN-related chemotherapy disturbances. No GCSF safety differences were found between groups (except for headaches).
    The real-world evidence provided by the MONITOR-GCSF study indicates that providing GCSF support may yield better CIN, FN, and CIN/FN-related hospitalization outcomes if patients are prophylacted at levels above guideline recommendations. Patients who are under-prophylacted are at higher risk for disturbances to their chemotherapy regimens. Our findings support the guideline recommendation that CIN/FN risk be assessed at the beginning of each chemotherapy cycle.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • DOI:
    文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factors (GCSF) is high-cost agents commonly recommended for primary and secondary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. GCSFs have been shown to be beneficial in some patient subgroups, although they are probably overused in clinical settings. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines summarize current data on the appropriate use of CSFs. The aim of this study was to assess and audit the use of GCSF in a tertiary care center according to the recommendation of ASCO guideline.
    METHODS: A prospective observational study from November 2014 to June 2015 was performed on all patients prescribed with filgrastim in the large teaching hospital (Isfahan, Iran). Data was collected on demographics, indication, dosing regimen and duration of treatment, the Absolute Neutrophil Count (ANC) and patient outcome.
    RESULTS: 91 patients were recorded over the period of the study. 63.7% of prescription complied with the ASCO guideline. Febrile neutropenia post chemotherapy/radiotherapy was the most common appropriate indication (29.3%) followed by primary prophylaxis (25.8%). Fourteen (32%) patients showed ANC recovery in 1-3 days and 16 (37%) within 4-7 days. Ten patients (23%) showed no recovery. The overall mortality was 8 (8.8%) patients.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that at least one-third of prescribed GCSF was not in accordance with ASCO guideline. Considering the high cost of GCSF in our country and limitation of our resources, we proposed cost-effectiveness studies on GCSF treatment and also the development of a national guideline for optimizing GCSF use.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号