PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · South Asian J Cancer 2023; 12(03): 238-244
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1757599
Original Article
Breast Cancer

Phase 1/2 Study of the Timing and Efficacy of 3 mg Peg-GCSF in Neo/Adjuvant Dose Dense Breast Cancer Treatment Protocols

Amol Patel 
1   Indian Naval Hospital Ship, Asvini, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Abhishek Pathak
2   Command Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
,
Arti Sarin
3   Western Naval Command, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Divya Shelly
1   Indian Naval Hospital Ship, Asvini, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Richa Ranjan
2   Command Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
,
Arashdeep Singh 
1   Indian Naval Hospital Ship, Asvini, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Tripti Kala
4   Day Care Chemotherapy Centre, INHS, Asvini, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Babitha PV
4   Day Care Chemotherapy Centre, INHS, Asvini, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Zoom Image
Amol Patel

Background Peg-GCSF has similar efficacy at a dose of 60 µg/kg and 100 µg/kg. The conventional 6 mg SC dose was based on the maximum tolerable dose. In Japan, 3.6 mg dose was approved on the basis of dose finding studies. Peg-GCSF is an integral part of dose-dense chemotherapy protocols. Dose finding and scheduling study of peg-GCSF have not been conducted in Indian patients.

Materials and Methods We conducted two-center phase 1/2 clinical study addressing the timing and efficacy of peg-GCSF in Indian breast cancer patients (CTRI no: 2021/07/034751). Three groups of timing administration were studied, namely 1, 6, and 24 hours post chemotherapy. The phase 2 part was the expansion of the best timing group. The primary objective was dose density, which was defined as receiving chemotherapy on < 3 days of scheduled date. Adriamycin/epirubicin cyclophosphamide (AC/EC) was administered q2 weeks. The total leucocyte (TLC) and absolute neutrophil (ANC) kinetics were studied. Other outcomes were incidence of grade 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia (FN), and requirement of additional doses of G-CSF. Bone pain, fever, and myalgia were studied for adverse effects.

Results From November 20 to December 21, 36 patients were enrolled. Patient characteristics are depicted in Table 1. Initially, three patients received the peg-GCSF in each timing group. One patient in each 1-hour and 6 hours needed G-CSF support for maintaining the dose density. The 24-hour group was carried to phase 2 part. Dose density was maintained in 97% of patients. None of the patient in 24-hour group had FN. Also, 4/30 patients had grade 4 neutropenia and required an additional dose of GCSF. Grade 3 or 4 bone pain was not noticed by any of the patients. During the first cycle, the mean ANC (cells/μL) was 5284, 20704, 3010, 6954 on D0, D + 3, D + 7, and D + 13, respectively (Fig. 1A-TLC and 1B-ANC). The mean ANC (cells/μL) rise on D + 3 in cycles 1, 2, 3, 4 was 23810, 29209, 32428,22455, respectively.

Conclusion Dose density of AC/EC breast cancer protocol is maintained with peg-GCSF 3 mg. Post chemotherapy 24-hour timing of peg-GCSF administration remains as the standard. A phase 3 trial of 6 mg versus 3 mg is warranted.

Keywords

3 mg - dose dense protocol - Indian patients - pegylated GCSF - phase 2 study


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
11. August 2023

© 2023. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Freifeld AG, Bow EJ, Sepkowitz KA. et al; Infectious Diseases Society of America. 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 2011; 52 (04) e56-e93
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Citron ML, Berry DA, Cirrincione C. et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: first report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21 (08) 1431-1439
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Citron ML. Dose-dense chemotherapy: principles, clinical results and future perspectives. Breast Care (Basel) 2008; 3 (04) 251-255
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Gray R, Bradley R, Braybrooke J. et al; Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Increasing the dose intensity of chemotherapy by more frequent administration or sequential scheduling: a patient-level meta-analysis of 37 298 women with early breast cancer in 26 randomised trials. Lancet 2019; 393 (10179): 1440-1452
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Molineux G, Kinstler O, Briddell B. et al. A new form of Filgrastim with sustained duration in vivo and enhanced ability to mobilize PBPC in both mice and humans. Exp Hematol 1999; 27 (12) 1724-1734
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kuendgen A, Fenk R, Bruns I. et al. Splenic rupture following administration of pegfilgrastim in a patient with multiple myeloma undergoing autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2006; 38 (01) 69-70
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Lyman GH, Yau L, Nakov R, Krendyukov A. Overall survival and risk of second malignancies with cancer chemotherapy and G-CSF support. Ann Oncol 2018; 29 (09) 1903-1910
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Karlin L, Darmon M, Thiéry G. et al. Respiratory status deterioration during G-CSF-induced neutropenia recovery. Bone Marrow Transplant 2005; 36 (03) 245-250
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Lasagna A, Zuccaro V, Ferraris E, Rizzo G, Tancredi RJ, Pedrazzoli P. How to use prophylactic G-CSF in the time of COVID-19. JCO Oncol Pract 2020; 16 (11) 771-772
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Morita S, Kikumori T, Tsunoda N. et al. Feasibility of dose-dense epirubicin and cyclophosphamide with subcutaneous pegfilgrastim 3.6 mg support: a single-center prospective study in Japan. Int J Clin Oncol 2018; 23 (01) 195-200
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Gerberich AJ, Attilio MR, Svoboda A. Revisiting same day administration of pegfilgrastim in the age of biosimilars: a review of literature. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2020; 26 (08) 1970-1976
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) | Protocol Development | CTEP [Internet]. . [cited 2020 Dec 3]. Accessed September 13, 2022, at: https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm#ctc_50
  • 13 Sparano JA, Wang M, Martino S. et al. Weekly paclitaxel in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2008; 358 (16) 1663-1671
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Burstein HJ, Parker LM, Keshaviah A. et al. Efficacy of pegfilgrastim and darbepoetin alfa as hematopoietic support for dose-dense every-2-week adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (33) 8340-8347
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Ji X, Xu L, Pan P, Xu Z, Wang A, Li Y. Efficacy and safety of 3 mg pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as support to chemotherapy for lung cancer. Thorac Cancer 2022; 13 (01) 117-125
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Osumi H, Shinozaki E, Wakatsuki T. et al. Is the PEG-G-CSF useful as the prevention for the severe neutropenia in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab?. Ann Oncol 2018; 29: v62
    CrossrefSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Masuda N, Tokuda Y, Nakamura S, Shimazaki R, Ito Y, Tamura K. Dose response of pegfilgrastim in Japanese breast cancer patients receiving six cycles of docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide therapy: a randomized controlled trial. Support Care Cancer 2015; 23 (10) 2891-2898
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Zhang Z, Li H, Zhang J. et al. Effect of 3 mg versus 6 mg pegfilgrastim on the prevention of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel and cyclophosphamide: a retrospective study. Ann Palliat Med 2021; 10 (05) 5310-5315
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Average height of men and women worldwide [Internet]. Worlddata.info. [cited 2021 Nov 23]. Accessed September 09, 2022, at: https://www.worlddata.info/average-bodyheight.php
  • 20 Li X. Is PEGylated G-CSF superior to G-CSF in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 2020 Nov;28(11):5085–5097. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05603-w. Epub 2020 Jul 3. PMID: 32621264