Febrile neutropenia prophylaxis with prolonged G-CSF in elderly cancer patients: Analysis from the EMPREREAL study.
Abstract
e13773 Background: Guidelines consider age ≥ 65 years a key factor in recommending primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate risk (10-20%) of febrile neutropenia (FN). There is limited evidence on neutropenia outcomes in elderly patients receiving prolonged G-CSF. We report a prespecified analysis of elderly patients from the EMPEREAL study assessing chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) of any grade, FN, and dose-limiting neutropenia (DLN). Methods: EMPEREAL is an observational prospective cohort study of 2384 cancer patients receiving chemotherapy (CT) and primary FN prophylaxis with prolonged G-CSF empegfilgrtastim. Patients were followed up for up to five cycles of CT. Number and proportion of patients with FN, CIN of grade 4, grade 3-4, grade 1-4 and DLN in the elderly cohort are presented. Results: The EMPEREAL study included 634 patients (26.6%) aged ≥65 years. Their mean age was 69 years, 65/634 (10.3%) were aged ≥75 years, 2/634 (0.3%) were aged ≥85 years. 468/634 (73.8%) were females. Primary sites for the malignancies included breast cancer (51.4%), digestive cancer (24.0%), lung cancer (8.5%). Most patients (93.8%) had ECOG 0–1. One-third of the patients (31.2%) had received previous systemic therapy. About half (52.5%) pts had a regimens with 10–20% FN risk and 38,5% pts had a regimens with ≥20% risk, Included dose-dense regimens in 12,4 %. 598/634 (94.3%) had at least one risk factors for FN additional to age (median number of additional risk factors was 2): advanced stage (22.9%), female gender (73.8%), Hb < 12 g/dL (26.0%), previous radiation therapy (8.2%), renal or liver failure or heart disease (48.6%), malnutrition (4.4%), history of febrile neutropenia (3.0%). There were no data on neutropenia available for 57/634 (9.0%) patients. FN, CIN of any grade and DLN were registered in 0/577 (0%), 61/577 (15.1%) and 6/577 (1.6%), respectively (Table 1). Conclusions: These results support the effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with empegfilgrastim in routine practice for elderly patients. Clinical outcomes at the patient level. FN 0 (0.0%) CIN grade 4 6 (1.6%) CIN grade 3-4 7 (1.8%) CIN grade 1 through 4 61 (15.1%) DLN 6 (1.6%)
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (3)
Alexey Tryakin
N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russian Federation
Olga Mironenko
The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Moscow, Russian Federation
Oksana Prosianikova
North-Western State Medical University Named After I.I. Mechnikov, Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation