Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 1/2018

01-01-2018 | Original Article

Administration options for pegfilgrastim prophylaxis: patient and physician preferences from a cross-sectional survey

Authors: A. Brett Hauber, Brennan Mange, Mark A. Price, Daniel Wolin, Mark Bensink, James A. Kaye, David Chandler

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

Although clinical guidelines recommend administration of pegfilgrastim 1–4 days after a myelosuppressive chemotherapy cycle to decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), some physicians administer pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy administration. A novel on-body injector (OBI) that automatically delivers pegfilgrastim the day after chemotherapy is also available. Our objective was to estimate patient and physician preferences among the pegfilgrastim administration options.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of patients receiving pegfilgrastim and physicians prescribing pegfilgrastim. Respondents’ preferences for pegfilgrastim administration options were elicited using direct elicitation; the relative importance of features associated with the options was estimated in a point-allocation exercise. Physicians considered two hypothetical patient profiles when completing the exercises.

Results

The samples included 200 patients and 200 physicians. Patients generally preferred the administration option with which they had experience. Among patients, 48.5% with previous in-clinic injections 24 hours after chemotherapy preferred this option; 56.8% with previous OBI administration preferred this option. For a clinically compromised patient, 37.5% of physicians preferred an in-clinic injection option; 49.5% preferred the OBI. For a less compromised patient, 55.5% preferred an in-clinic injection option; 28.0% preferred the OBI. Avoiding the need to return to the clinic was chosen most often as the most important treatment feature for patients and physicians.

Conclusions

Patients and physicians identified that returning clinic visits for pegfilgrastim administration may be burdensome. A potential solution to mitigate this burden is the OBI, which allows adherence to the labeled use of pegfilgrastim without return visits to the clinic.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Crawford J, Dale DC, Kuderer NM et al (2008) Risk and timing of neutropenic events in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: the results of a prospective nationwide study of oncology practice. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 6:109–118CrossRef Crawford J, Dale DC, Kuderer NM et al (2008) Risk and timing of neutropenic events in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: the results of a prospective nationwide study of oncology practice. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 6:109–118CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Vogel CL, Wojtukiewicz MZ, Carroll RR et al (2005) First and subsequent cycle use of pegfilgrastim prevents febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study. J Clin Oncol 23:1178–1184CrossRef Vogel CL, Wojtukiewicz MZ, Carroll RR et al (2005) First and subsequent cycle use of pegfilgrastim prevents febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study. J Clin Oncol 23:1178–1184CrossRef
5.
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 33:3199–3212CrossRef 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 33:3199–3212CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Weycker D, Li X, Figueredo J et al (2016) Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in cancer patients receiving pegfilgrastim prophylaxis: does timing of administration matter? Support Care Cancer 24:2309–2316CrossRef Weycker D, Li X, Figueredo J et al (2016) Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in cancer patients receiving pegfilgrastim prophylaxis: does timing of administration matter? Support Care Cancer 24:2309–2316CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Marion S, Tzivelekis S, Darden C et al (2016) “same-day” administration of pegfilgrastim following myelosuppressive chemotherapy: clinical practice and provider rationale. Support Care Cancer 24:3889–3896CrossRef Marion S, Tzivelekis S, Darden C et al (2016) “same-day” administration of pegfilgrastim following myelosuppressive chemotherapy: clinical practice and provider rationale. Support Care Cancer 24:3889–3896CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Berg MJ, Gross RA, Tomaszewski KJ et al (2008) Generic substitution in the treatment of epilepsy – case evidence of breakthrough seizures. Neurology 71:525–530CrossRef Berg MJ, Gross RA, Tomaszewski KJ et al (2008) Generic substitution in the treatment of epilepsy – case evidence of breakthrough seizures. Neurology 71:525–530CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Devine S, Babrowicz J, Hahn R et al (2015) Intra-operative communication regarding neuromuscular blockade: a survey of anaesthesiologists and surgeons. J Anesth Clin Res 6:524–530 Devine S, Babrowicz J, Hahn R et al (2015) Intra-operative communication regarding neuromuscular blockade: a survey of anaesthesiologists and surgeons. J Anesth Clin Res 6:524–530
11.
go back to reference Hovinga CA, Asato MR, Manjunath R et al (2015) Association of non-adherence to antiepileptic drugs and seizures, quality of life, and productivity: survey of patients with epilepsy and physicians. Epilepsy Behav 13:316–322CrossRef Hovinga CA, Asato MR, Manjunath R et al (2015) Association of non-adherence to antiepileptic drugs and seizures, quality of life, and productivity: survey of patients with epilepsy and physicians. Epilepsy Behav 13:316–322CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Landy SH, Runken MC, Bell CF et al (2011) Assessing the impact of migraine onset on work productivity. J Occup Environ Med 53:74–81CrossRef Landy SH, Runken MC, Bell CF et al (2011) Assessing the impact of migraine onset on work productivity. J Occup Environ Med 53:74–81CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tomaszewski K, Deniz B, Tomanovich P et al (2012) Comparison of current US risk strategy to screen for hepatitis C virus with a hypothetical targeted birth cohort strategy. Am J Public Health 102:e101–e106CrossRef Tomaszewski K, Deniz B, Tomanovich P et al (2012) Comparison of current US risk strategy to screen for hepatitis C virus with a hypothetical targeted birth cohort strategy. Am J Public Health 102:e101–e106CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Joshi RS, Egbuna OI, Cairns AS et al (2016) Performance of the pegfilgrastim on-body injector as studied with placebo buffer in healthy volunteers. Curr Med Res Opin 5:1–21 Joshi RS, Egbuna OI, Cairns AS et al (2016) Performance of the pegfilgrastim on-body injector as studied with placebo buffer in healthy volunteers. Curr Med Res Opin 5:1–21
15.
go back to reference Yang BB, Morrow PK, Wu X et al (2015) Comparison of pharmacokinetics and safety of pegfilgrastim administered by two delivery methods: on-body injector and manual injection with a prefilled syringe. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 75:1199–1206CrossRef Yang BB, Morrow PK, Wu X et al (2015) Comparison of pharmacokinetics and safety of pegfilgrastim administered by two delivery methods: on-body injector and manual injection with a prefilled syringe. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 75:1199–1206CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Administration options for pegfilgrastim prophylaxis: patient and physician preferences from a cross-sectional survey
Authors
A. Brett Hauber
Brennan Mange
Mark A. Price
Daniel Wolin
Mark Bensink
James A. Kaye
David Chandler
Publication date
01-01-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3841-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Supportive Care in Cancer 1/2018 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