Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2018

01-04-2018 | Clinical trial

A multi-center pragmatic, randomized, feasibility trial comparing standard of care schedules of filgrastim administration for primary febrile neutropenia prophylaxis in early-stage breast cancer

Authors: Mohammed F. K. Ibrahim, John Hilton, Sasha Mazzarello, Dean Fergusson, Brian Hutton, Andrew Robinson, Nadia Califaretti, Tina Hsu, Stan Gertler, Mihaela Mates, Carol Stober, Lisa Vandermeer, Ranjeeta Mallick, Mark Clemons

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 2/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

The most effective duration of filgrastim as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in early breast cancer (EBC) patients is unknown. Despite significant differences in cost and toxicity, no prospective trial has been performed to optimize practice. We assessed the feasibility of using a novel pragmatic trial model to compare the most commonly used schedules of filgrastim.

Methods

Early breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy were randomized to 5, 7, or 10 days of filgrastim as primary FN prophylaxis. The trial methodology integrated broad eligibility criteria, simply defined endpoints, an integrated consent model incorporating oral consent, and web-based randomization in the clinic. Feasibility was reflected through a combination of primary endpoints including patient and physician engagement (if > 50% of appropriate patients approached agree to participate, and if > 50% of physicians approached patients for the study). Secondary endpoints included the first occurrence rates of FN, treatment-related hospital admission, or chemotherapy dose reductions/delays/discontinuation.

Results

From May 2015 to August 2016, 142/149 (95.3%) patients approached agreed to participate and were randomized. Seventeen of 24 (70.8%) medical oncologists approached and randomized patients. The 142 patients received a total of 495 cycles of chemotherapy. Aggregate incidences of a first event by patient were FN (8/142, 5.6%), treatment-related hospitalization (6/142, 4.2%), chemotherapy discontinuation (7/142, 4.9%), chemotherapy delays (5/142, 3.5%), and chemotherapy dose reduction (18/142, 12.7%). Overall, 31.7% (45/142) of patients and 9.0% (45/495) of chemotherapy cycles were associated with one of these first events.

Conclusion

This study met its feasibility endpoints. This novel pragmatic trial approach offers a means of comparing standard of care treatments in a practical and cost-effective manner. The trial will now be expanded to compare rates of FN between the three filgrastim schedules.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02428114.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Renner P, Milazzo S, Liu JP et al (2012) Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:7913 Renner P, Milazzo S, Liu JP et al (2012) Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:7913
2.
go back to reference Inc AC (2016) Product Monograph (filgrastim). Version Oct 2016 Inc AC (2016) Product Monograph (filgrastim). Version Oct 2016
3.
go back to reference Inc AC (2016) Neulasta (pegfilgrastim) injection, for subcutaneous use Inc AC (2016) Neulasta (pegfilgrastim) injection, for subcutaneous use
4.
go back to reference Cancer Care Ontario GCSF Recommendations 2016 (2016) Cancer Care Ontario GCSF Recommendations 2016 (2016)
5.
go back to reference NCCN (2010) NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Myeloid Growth Factors NCCN (2010) NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Myeloid Growth Factors
6.
go back to reference Aapro MS, Bohlius J, Cameron DA et al (2011) 2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours. Eur J Cancer 47:8–32CrossRefPubMed Aapro MS, Bohlius J, Cameron DA et al (2011) 2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours. Eur J Cancer 47:8–32CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Smith TJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH et al (2015) Recommendations for the use of WBC growth factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol 33:3199–3212CrossRefPubMed Smith TJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH et al (2015) Recommendations for the use of WBC growth factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol 33:3199–3212CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Fraser J, Steele N, Al Zaman A, Yule A (2011) Are patients in clinical trials representative of the general population? Dose intensity and toxicities associated with FE100C-D chemotherapy in a non-trial population of node positive breast cancer patients compared with PACS-01 trial group. Eur J Cancer 47:215–220CrossRefPubMed Fraser J, Steele N, Al Zaman A, Yule A (2011) Are patients in clinical trials representative of the general population? Dose intensity and toxicities associated with FE100C-D chemotherapy in a non-trial population of node positive breast cancer patients compared with PACS-01 trial group. Eur J Cancer 47:215–220CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Hilton J, Mazzarello S, Fergusson D et al (2016) Novel methodology for comparing standard-of-care interventions in patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract 12:e1016CrossRefPubMed Hilton J, Mazzarello S, Fergusson D et al (2016) Novel methodology for comparing standard-of-care interventions in patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract 12:e1016CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference ClinicalTrials.gov (2015) A multi centre study to determine the feasibility of using an integrated consent model to compare standard of care administration schedules of G-CSF (Filgrastim) for primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in early stage breast cancer (React-G Study) NCT02428114 ClinicalTrials.gov (2015) A multi centre study to determine the feasibility of using an integrated consent model to compare standard of care administration schedules of G-CSF (Filgrastim) for primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in early stage breast cancer (React-G Study) NCT02428114
11.
go back to reference Kim SY, Miller FG (2014) Informed consent for pragmatic trials–the integrated consent model. N Engl J Med 370:769–772CrossRefPubMed Kim SY, Miller FG (2014) Informed consent for pragmatic trials–the integrated consent model. N Engl J Med 370:769–772CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Sugarman J, Califf RM (2014) Ethics and regulatory complexities for pragmatic clinical trials. JAMA 311:2381–2382CrossRefPubMed Sugarman J, Califf RM (2014) Ethics and regulatory complexities for pragmatic clinical trials. JAMA 311:2381–2382CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference de Naurois J, Novitzky-Basso I, Gill MJ et al (2010) Management of febrile neutropenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 5):v252–v256CrossRefPubMed de Naurois J, Novitzky-Basso I, Gill MJ et al (2010) Management of febrile neutropenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 5):v252–v256CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Madarnas Y, Dent SF, Husain SF et al (2011) Real-world experience with adjuvant fec-d chemotherapy in four Ontario regional cancer centres. Curr Oncol 18:119–125PubMedPubMedCentral Madarnas Y, Dent SF, Husain SF et al (2011) Real-world experience with adjuvant fec-d chemotherapy in four Ontario regional cancer centres. Curr Oncol 18:119–125PubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Younis T, Rayson D, Thompson K (2012) Primary G-CSF prophylaxis for adjuvant TC or FEC-D chemotherapy outside of clinical trial settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 20:2523–2530CrossRefPubMed Younis T, Rayson D, Thompson K (2012) Primary G-CSF prophylaxis for adjuvant TC or FEC-D chemotherapy outside of clinical trial settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 20:2523–2530CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Vandenberg T, Younus J, Al-Khayyat S (2010) Febrile neutropenia rates with adjuvant docetaxel and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in early breast cancer: discrepancy between published reports and community practice-a retrospective analysis. Curr Oncol 17:2–3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vandenberg T, Younus J, Al-Khayyat S (2010) Febrile neutropenia rates with adjuvant docetaxel and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy in early breast cancer: discrepancy between published reports and community practice-a retrospective analysis. Curr Oncol 17:2–3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Soong D, Haj R, Leung MG et al (2009) High rate of febrile neutropenia in patients with operable breast cancer receiving docetaxel and cyclophosphamide. J Clin Oncol 27:e101–e102CrossRefPubMed Soong D, Haj R, Leung MG et al (2009) High rate of febrile neutropenia in patients with operable breast cancer receiving docetaxel and cyclophosphamide. J Clin Oncol 27:e101–e102CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Weycker D, Barron R, Edelsberg J et al (2014) Risk and consequences of chemotherapy-induced neutropenic complications in patients receiving daily filgrastim: the importance of duration of prophylaxis. BMC Health Serv Res 14:189CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Weycker D, Barron R, Edelsberg J et al (2014) Risk and consequences of chemotherapy-induced neutropenic complications in patients receiving daily filgrastim: the importance of duration of prophylaxis. BMC Health Serv Res 14:189CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
21.
go back to reference von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, du Bois A et al (2008) Pegfilgrastim ± ciprofloxacin for primary prophylaxis with TAC (docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy for breast cancer. Results from the GEPARTRIO study. Ann Oncol 19:292–298CrossRef von Minckwitz G, Kummel S, du Bois A et al (2008) Pegfilgrastim ± ciprofloxacin for primary prophylaxis with TAC (docetaxel/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy for breast cancer. Results from the GEPARTRIO study. Ann Oncol 19:292–298CrossRef
22.
go back to reference ClinicalTrials.gov (2017) A study to compare administration schedules of G-CSF (Filgrastim) for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (REaCT-G2) ClinicalTrials.gov (2017) A study to compare administration schedules of G-CSF (Filgrastim) for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (REaCT-G2)
23.
go back to reference Crawford J, Armitage J, Balducci L et al (2013) Myeloid growth factors. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 11:1266–1290CrossRefPubMed Crawford J, Armitage J, Balducci L et al (2013) Myeloid growth factors. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 11:1266–1290CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Crawford J, Caserta C, Roila F, Group EGW (2010) Hematopoietic growth factors: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the applications. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 5):v248–v251CrossRefPubMed Crawford J, Caserta C, Roila F, Group EGW (2010) Hematopoietic growth factors: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the applications. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 5):v248–v251CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
A multi-center pragmatic, randomized, feasibility trial comparing standard of care schedules of filgrastim administration for primary febrile neutropenia prophylaxis in early-stage breast cancer
Authors
Mohammed F. K. Ibrahim
John Hilton
Sasha Mazzarello
Dean Fergusson
Brian Hutton
Andrew Robinson
Nadia Califaretti
Tina Hsu
Stan Gertler
Mihaela Mates
Carol Stober
Lisa Vandermeer
Ranjeeta Mallick
Mark Clemons
Publication date
01-04-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4604-y

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2018 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine