Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2011

01-06-2011 | Epidemiology

Chemotherapy characteristics are important predictors of primary prophylactic CSF administration in older patients with breast cancer

Authors: Suja S. Rajan, Gary H. Lyman, William R. Carpenter, Sally C. Stearns

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 2/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Chemotherapy is vital for breast cancer management, but early onset toxicities like neutropenia hinder its administration. Primary prophylactic (PP) use of colony- stimulating factors (CSF) helps prevent neutropenia and ensures successful chemotherapy completion. Nevertheless, lack of specific guidelines for CSF administration in older patients has lead to unexplained geographic and racial, and counter-intuitive clinical variations in CSF administration. This study examined the reasons for these variations and for the first time looked at variations in PP-CSF administration and duration of administration in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. This retrospective observational study of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy used SEER-Medicare data from 1994–2003. Regression analyses were used to explore the factors associated with PP-CSF administration and duration of administration. Clinical and therapeutic characteristics previously unexplored by other studies were included. Univariate analyses demonstrated geographic, racial and clinical disparities similar to previous studies. However, clinical correlations resolved to statistical insignificance after inclusion of chemotherapy characteristics. The analysis showed that significant geographic and racial disparities existed. History of recent antibiotic use was associated with shorter PP-CSF administration. Physicians’ decision to administer PP-CSF is predominantly driven by neutropenia risk associated with pre-planned chemotherapy regimen. Older, sicker women at a higher risk of neutropenia receive less intense/toxic chemotherapy and thus do not require PP-CSF. Geographic variations are driven by proportion of physicians administering PP-CSF with no evidence for overuse among specific physicians. Association of recent antibiotic use with shorter PP-CSF administration suggests intended substitution of the expensive PP-CSF with prophylactic antibiotics.
Literature
1.
American Cancer Society (2009) Breast cancer facts and figures 2009–2010. ACS, Atlanta
2.
Earle CC, Nattinger AB, Potosky AL et al (2002) Identifying cancer relapse using SEER-Medicare Data. Med Care 40(8 Suppl):IV-75–81
3.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomized trials. Lancet 365:1687–1717CrossRef
4.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (1998) Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 352:930–942CrossRef
5.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (1992) Effects of adjuvant tamoxifen and of cytotoxic therapy on mortality in early breast cancer: an overview of 61 randomised trials among 28,896 women. N Engl J Med 319:1681–1692
6.
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (1988) Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy: 133 randomised trials involving 31,000 recurrences and 24,000 deaths among 75,000 women. Lancet 339(1–15):71–85
7.
Fisher B (1999) Highlights from recent national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project studies in the treatment and prevention of breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 49:159–177PubMedCrossRef
8.
Fisher B, Redmond C, Legault PS et al (1990) Postoperative chemotherapy and tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen alone in the treatment of positive-node breast cancer patients aged 50 years and older with tumors responsive to tamoxifen: results from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-16. J Clin Oncol 8(6):1005–1018PubMed
9.
10.
Webster J, Lyman G (1996) Use of G-CSF to sustain dose intensity in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: a pilot study. Cancer Control 3(6):519–523PubMed
11.
Perry MC, Yarbro JW (1984) Toxicity of chemotherapy. Gruene & Stratton, Orlando
12.
Shayne M, Crawford J, Dale DC et al (2006) Predictors of reduced dose intensity in patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 100:255–262PubMedCrossRef
13.
Ziegler J, Citron M (2006) Dose-dense adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Cancer Nurs 29(4):266–272PubMedCrossRef
14.
Chrischilles EA, Link KB, Scott SD et al (2003) Factors associated with early termination of CHOP therapy and the impact on survival among patients with chemosensitive intermediate grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Cancer Control 10(5):396–403PubMed
15.
Eldar-Lissai A, Cosler LE, Culakova E et al (2007) Economic analysis of prophylactic pegfilgrastim in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Value Health 11(2):172–179CrossRef
16.
Kuderer N, Dale D, Crawford J, Lyman GH (2006) The morbidity, mortality and cost of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients. Cancer 106:2258–2266PubMedCrossRef
17.
Lyman GH, Lyman CG, Sanderson RA, Balducci L (1993) Decision analysis of hematopoietic growth factor use in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 85(6):488–493
18.
Lyman GH, Kuderer NM, Greene J (1998) The economics of febrile neutropenia: implications for the use of colony-stimulating factors. Eur J Cancer 34(12):1857–1864PubMedCrossRef
19.
Weycker D, Malin J, Glass A, Oster G (2007) Economic burden of chemotherapy-related febrile neutropenia. J Supp Oncol 5(4):Suppl 2:44–45
20.
Lyman GH, Kuderer N, Agboola O et al (2003) Evidence-based use of colony-stimulating factors in elderly cancer patients. Cancer Control 10(6):487–499PubMed
21.
Kuderer NN, Dale DC, Crawford J et al (2007) Impact of primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia and mortality in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol 25(21):3158–3167PubMedCrossRef
22.
Lyman GH, Dale DC, Crawford J (2003) Incidence and predictors of low dose-intensity in adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy: a nationwide study of community practices. J Clin Oncol 21:4524–4531PubMedCrossRef
23.
Lenhart C (2005) Relative dose intensity: improving cancer treatment and outcomes. Oncol Nurs Forum 32:757–764PubMedCrossRef
24.
Chrischilles EA, Rubenstein LM, Voelker MD, Wright et al (2003) Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use during first course chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: National SEER-Medicare Study. Session Type: Poster Session 929-I
25.
Du XL, Lairson DR, Begley E et al (2005) Temporal and geographic variation in the use of hematopoietic growth factors in older women receiving breast cancer chemotherapy: findings from a large population-based cohort. J Clin Oncol 23(34):8620–8628PubMedCrossRef
26.
Chen-Hardee S, Chrischilles EA, Voelker MD (2006) Population-based assessment of hospitalizations for neutropenia from chemotherapy in older adults with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (United States). Cancer Causes Control 17(5):647–654PubMedCrossRef
27.
Chrischilles EA, Delgado DJ, Stolshek BS (2002) Impact of age and colony-stimulating factor use on hospital length of stay for febrile neutropenia in CHOP-treated non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Cancer Control 9(3):203–211PubMed
28.
Armitage JO, Potter JF (1984) Aggressive chemotherapy for diffuse histiocytic lymphoma in the elderly: increased complications with advancing age. J Am Geriatr Soc 32:269–273PubMed
29.
Gomez H, Hidalgo M, Casanova L et al (1998) Risk factors for treatment-related death in elderly patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: results of a multivariate analysis. J Clin Oncol 16:2065–2069PubMed
30.
Shayne M, Culakova E, Poniewierski MS et al (2007) Dose intensity and hematologic toxicity in older cancer patients receiving systemic chemotherapy. Cancer 110(7):1611–1620PubMedCrossRef
31.
Timmer-Bonte JN, Adang EM, Smit HJ (2006) Cost-effectiveness of adding granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to primary prophylaxis with antibiotics in patients with small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 24:2991–2997PubMedCrossRef
32.
Gridelli C, Matti A, Sandro B, Giordano B et al (2007) Role of colony stimulating factors (CSFs) in solid tumors: results of an expert panel. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 63(1):53–64PubMedCrossRef
33.
Berghmans T, Paesmans M, Lafitte JJ et al (2002) Therapeutic use of granulocyte and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factors in febrile neutropenic cancer patients. A systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 10:181–188PubMedCrossRef
34.
Clark O, Lyman GH, Castro AA et al (2005) Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Oncol 23:4198–4214PubMedCrossRef
35.
Hartmann LC, Tschetter LK, Habermann TM et al (1997) Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in severe chemotherapy-induced afebrile neutropenia. N Engl J Med 336(25):1776–1780PubMedCrossRef
36.
García-Carbonero R, Mayordomo JI, Tornamira MV et al (2001) Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in the treatment of high-risk febrile neutropenia: a multicenter randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 91(1):31–38
37.
Lyman GH, Kuderer NM (2004) The economics of the colony-stimulating factors in the prevention and treatment of febrile neutropenia. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 50:129–146PubMedCrossRef
38.
39.
Weycker D, Hackett J, Edelsberg JS et al (2006) Are shorter courses of filgrastim prophylaxis associated with increased risk of hospitalization? Ann Pharmacother 40:402–407PubMedCrossRef
40.
Weycker D, Hackett J, Edelsberg JS et al (2004) Duration of G-CSF therapy and risk of hospitalization for neutropenia or infection. J Clin Oncol 2004 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition) 22(14S) (July 15 Supplement): 6731
41.
Scott SD, Chrischilles EA, Link BK et al (2003) Days of prophylactic filgrastim use to reduce febrile neutropenia in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma treated with chemotherapy. J Manag Care Pharm 9(Suppl 2):15–21PubMed
42.
Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Schrag Deborah et al (2002) Overview of the SEER-Medicare Data: content, research applications, and generalizability to the United States Elderly Population. Med Care 40(8): IV-3–IV-18
43.
Shapiro CL, Recht A (2001) Side effects of adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 344(26):1997–2008PubMedCrossRef
44.
Crawford J, Kreisman H, Garewal H et al (1997) The impact of filgrastim schedule variation on hematopoietic recovery post-chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 8:1117–1124PubMedCrossRef
45.
Lyman GH (2003) Risk assessment in oncology clinical practice: from risk factors to risk models. Oncology 17(Suppl 11):8–13PubMed
46.
Lyman GH, Kuderer NM (2004) Economics of hematopoietic growth factors. In: Morstyn G, Foote M, Lieschke GJ (eds) Hematopoietic growth factors in oncology: basic science and clinical therapeutics. Humana Press Inc., Totowa, pp 409–443
47.
Levinson DR (2009) Medicare part B chemotherapy administration: payment and policy. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington
48.
Olsen M (2006) Medicare reimbursement issues in supportive care. Cancer Ther Supportive Care 4(1):5–8
49.
Amgen (2001) Guide to coverage and reimbursement for Neupogen vial and Neupogen singleject prefilled syringe: reimbursement information for Neupogen. Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks
50.
Smith TJ, Khatcheressian J, Lyman GH et al (2006) Update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 24(19):3187–3205PubMedCrossRef
51.
Rolston KV (2004) The Infectious Diseases Society of America 2002 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in patients with cancer and neutropenia: salient features and comments. Clin Infect Dis 39(Suppl 1):S44–S48
Metadata
Title
Chemotherapy characteristics are important predictors of primary prophylactic CSF administration in older patients with breast cancer
Authors
Suja S. Rajan
Gary H. Lyman
William R. Carpenter
Sally C. Stearns
Publication date
01-06-2011
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 2/2011
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-1216-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2011

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2011 Go to the issue

Preclinical study

Three-dimensional collagen represses cyclin E1 via β1 integrin in invasive breast cancer cells

Invited commentary

Can strategies targeting cleaved MUC1 overcome resistance to trastuzumab?

Epidemiology

Out of pocket cost comparison between Caucasian and minority breast cancer survivors in the Breast Cancer Education Intervention (BCEI)

Preclinical study

Gene expression profile predicts outcome after anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer

Invited Commentary

Estrogen receptor: is it predictive for response to cytotoxic as well as hormonal therapy?

Preclinical study

Estrogen receptor beta decreases survival of p53-defective cancer cells after DNA damage by impairing G2/M checkpoint signaling
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

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
Image Credits