-
Drug Safety Jun 2016Prochlorperazine is recommended for adults with breakthrough or refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The objective of this review was to describe... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Prochlorperazine is recommended for adults with breakthrough or refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The objective of this review was to describe its safety in children when given for any indication to help define its role for CINV control in children.
METHODS
Electronic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were performed as of 9 March 2015. All studies in English reporting adverse effects (AEs) associated with prochlorperazine in children (≤18 years) were included. AEs were synthesized for prospective studies.
RESULTS
Forty-nine (15 prospective) studies evaluating the use of prochlorperazine in 758 children were included. The most commonly reported AEs in prospective studies of prochlorperazine in children were sedation (multiple-dose studies: 10 %, 95 % CI 5-21) and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) (single-dose studies: 9 %, 95 % CI 3-29; multiple-dose studies: 4 %, 95 % CI 1-11). Serious AEs (seizure, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, autonomic collapse, tardive dyskinesia) were rarely associated with prochlorperazine use in children. Five fatalities were reported in children receiving prochlorperazine.
LIMITATIONS
The limitations of this systematic review and meta-analysis were that the AEs reported in the included studies were heterogeneous, the prospective use of systematic clinical tools to identify AEs was rare, and the risk of bias in most prospective studies was moderate.
CONCLUSIONS
The most common AEs reported with the pediatric use of prochlorperazine are EPS and sedation. Fatalities, life-threatening, and persistent AEs have also been reported.
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia; Child; Child Health Services; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Humans; Male; Nausea; Prochlorperazine; Risk Assessment; Vomiting
PubMed: 26884326
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-016-0398-9 -
Clinical Endocrinology Mar 2021Neutropenia, a low absolute neutrophil count (ANC), may be a sign of new-onset hyperthyroidism. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Neutropenia, a low absolute neutrophil count (ANC), may be a sign of new-onset hyperthyroidism. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide the most reliable estimates of prevalence, degree and response to treatments of neutropenia in the pure hyperthyroidism setting.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed and Scopus databases for retrieving articles in English and non-English languages reporting ANC values/neutropenic cases at presentation and after therapy in patients with hyperthyroidism. A proportion meta-analysis was performed with DerSimonian and Laird method (random-effects model). Pooled data were presented with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and displayed in a forest plot. I statistic index was used to quantify the heterogeneity among the studies. Sensitivity analyses for the prevalence of neutropenia and the mean of ANC in hyperthyroid patients were performed by excluding the studies without full details. Trim and fill analysis and Egger's linear regression test were carried out to evaluate the publication bias. A two-sided P-value of <.05 was regarded as significant for all analyses. The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Quality Assessment Tool was used to evaluate the quality of studies included.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 1880 studies of which 13 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. Results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that the prevalence of neutropenia in newly diagnosed and untreated patients with Graves' hyperthyroidism was 10% (CI 5%-19%, I 88.6%) and summary mean ANC value in neutropenic was 1.4 ± 0.3 × 10 /L. In all neutropenic patients under ATD therapy neutropenia resolved, thus without the worsening of the baseline ANC values or the development of agranulocytosis. The sensitivity analyses showed similar results as those of the main analyses. For all outcomes, the publication bias was not statistically significant or not calculable.
CONCLUSIONS
Graves' disease per se is associated with neutropenia in about 10% of cases. Neutropenia usually appears as a mild to moderate laboratory abnormality with no detectable consequences. Subnormal/mild neutropenia should not be regarded as a contraindication to use ATDs, and clinicians should know that treating hyperthyroidism they have a significant chance to normalize ANC too.
Topics: Graves Disease; Humans; Hyperthyroidism; Neutropenia; Neutrophils; Prevalence
PubMed: 32799342
DOI: 10.1111/cen.14313 -
The Journal of Infection Sep 2023The optimisation of the use of β-lactam antibiotics (BLA) via prolonged infusions in life-threatening complications such as febrile neutropenia (FN) is still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimisation of the use of β-lactam antibiotics (BLA) via prolonged infusions in life-threatening complications such as febrile neutropenia (FN) is still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the efficacy of this strategy in onco-haematological patients with FN.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, EMBASE, World Health Organization, and ClinicalTrials.gov, from database inception until December 2022. The search included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared prolonged vs short-term infusions of the same BLA. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were defervescence, requirement of vasoactive drugs, length of hospital stay and adverse events. Pooled risk ratios were calculated using random effects models.
RESULTS
Five studies were included, comprising 691 episodes of FN, mainly in haematological patients. Prolonged infusion was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (pRR 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.48). Nor differences were found in secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The limited data available did not show significant differences in terms of all-cause mortality or significant secondary outcomes in patients with FN receiving BLA in prolonged vs. short-term infusion. High-quality RCTs are needed to determine whether there are subgroups of FN patients who would benefit from prolonged BLA infusion.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Monobactams; Febrile Neutropenia
PubMed: 37423503
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2023.06.023 -
Genes Aug 2023PSTPIP1 (proline-serine-threonine phosphatase-interactive protein 1)-associated myeloid-related proteinemia inflammatory (PAMI) syndrome, previously known as... (Review)
Review
PSTPIP1 (proline-serine-threonine phosphatase-interactive protein 1)-associated myeloid-related proteinemia inflammatory (PAMI) syndrome, previously known as Hyperzincemia/Hypercalprotectinemia (Hz/Hc) syndrome, is a recently described, rare auto-inflammatory disorder caused by specific deleterious variants in the gene (p.E250K and p.E257K). The disease is characterized by chronic systemic inflammation, cutaneous and osteoarticular manifestations, hepatosplenomegaly, anemia, and neutropenia. Increased blood levels of MRP 8/14 and zinc distinguish this condition from other PSTPIP1-associated inflammatory diseases (PAID). The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the disease phenotype, course, treatment, and outcome based on reported cases. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines (2020) for reporting. A literature search was performed in Embase, Medline, and Web of Science on 13 October 2022. The quality of the case reports and case series was assessed using the JBI checklists. Out of the 43 included patients with PAMI syndrome, there were 24 females and 19 males. The median age at onset was 3.9 years. The main clinical manifestations included anemia (100%), neutropenia (98%), cutaneous manifestations (74%), osteoarticular manifestations (72%), splenomegaly (70%), growth failure (57%), fever (51%), hepatomegaly (56%), and lymphadenopathy (39%). Systemic inflammation was described in all patients. Marked elevation of zinc and MRP 8/14 blood levels were observed in all tested patients. Response to treatment varied and no consistently effective therapy was identified. The most common therapeutic options were corticosteroids (N = 30), anakinra (N = 13), cyclosporine A (N = 11), canakinumab (N = 6), and anti-TNF (N = 14). Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has been recently reported to be successful in five patients. Our review highlights the key characteristics of PAMI syndrome and the importance of considering this disease in the differential diagnosis of patients presenting with early-onset systemic inflammation and cytopenia.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Neutropenia; Diagnosis, Differential; Cytoskeletal Proteins; Adaptor Proteins, Signal Transducing
PubMed: 37628706
DOI: 10.3390/genes14081655 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2022Duvelisib is the first FDA-approved oral dual inhibitor of phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase PI3K-delta (PI3K-δ) and PI3K-gamma (PI3K-γ). Although many clinical studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Safety and efficacy of dual PI3K-δ, γ inhibitor, duvelisib in patients with relapsed or refractory lymphoid neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Duvelisib is the first FDA-approved oral dual inhibitor of phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase PI3K-delta (PI3K-δ) and PI3K-gamma (PI3K-γ). Although many clinical studies support the efficacy of duvelisib, the safety of duvelisib remains with great attention. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duvelisib in treating different relapsed or refractory (RR) lymphoid neoplasm types.
METHODS
We searched prospective clinical trials from PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. For efficacy analysis, Overall response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CR), partial response rate (PR), rate of stable disease (SDR), rate of progressive disease (PDR), median progression-free survival (mPFS), 12-/24-month PFS, and 12-month overall survival (OS) were assessed. For safety analysis, the incidences of any grade and grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and treatment-related discontinuation and death were evaluated. Subgroup analysis based on the disease type was performed.
RESULTS
We included 11 studies and 683 patients, including 305 chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL), 187 B-cell indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL), 39 B-cell aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (aNHL), and 152 T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (T-NHL) patients. The pooled ORR in CLL/SLL, iNHL, aNHL and T-NHL was 70%, 70%, 28% and 47%, respectively. Additionally, the pooled ORR in CLL/SLL patients with or without TP53 mutation/17p-deletion (62% vs. 74%, p=0.45) and in follicular lymphoma (FL) or other iNHL (69% vs. 57%, p=0.38) had no significant differences. Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients had higher pooled ORR than other aNHL (68% vs. 17%, p=0.04). Angioimmunoblastic TCL (AITL) patients had higher pooled ORR than other PTCL patients (67% vs. 42%, p=0.01). The pooled incidence of any grade, grade ≥3, serious AEs, treatment-related discontinuation and death was 99%, 79%, 63%, 33% and 3%, respectively. The most frequent any-grade AEs were diarrhea (47%), ALT/AST increase (39%), and neutropenia (38%). The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (25%), ALT/AST increased (16%), diarrhea (12%), and anemia (12%).
CONCLUSION
Generally, duvelisib could offer favorable efficacy in patients with RR CLL/SLL, iNHL, MCL, and AITL. Risk and severity in duvelisib treatment may be mitigated through proper identification and management.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases; Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell; Prospective Studies; Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin; Lymphoma, Mantle-Cell; Lymphoma, B-Cell; Neutropenia; Diarrhea
PubMed: 36685572
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1070660 -
Bipolar Disorders May 2015To evaluate the efficacy and safety of clozapine for treatment-resistant bipolar disorder (TRBD). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of clozapine for treatment-resistant bipolar disorder (TRBD).
METHODS
A systematic review of randomized controlled studies, open-label prospective studies, and retrospective studies of patients with TRBD was carried out. Interventions included clozapine monotherapy or clozapine combined with other medications. Outcome measures were efficacy and adverse drug reactions (ADRs).
RESULTS
Fifteen clinical trials with a total sample of 1,044 patients met the inclusion criteria. Clozapine monotherapy or clozapine combined with other treatments for TRBD was associated with improvement in: (i) symptoms of mania, depression, rapid cycling, and psychotic symptoms, with many patients with TRBD achieving a remission or response; (ii) the number and duration of hospitalizations, the number of psychotropic co-medications, and the number of hospital visits for somatic reasons for intentional self-harm/overdose; (iii) suicidal ideation and aggressive behavior; and (iv) social functioning. In addition, patients with TRBD showed greater clinical improvement in long-term follow-up when compared with published schizophrenia data. Sedation (12%), constipation (5.0%), sialorrhea (5.2%), weight gain (4%), and body ache/pain (2%) were the commonly reported ADRs; however, these symptoms but did not usually require drug discontinuation. The percentage of severe ADRs reported, such as leukopenia (2%), agranulocytosis (0.3%), and seizure (0.5%), appeared to be lower than those reported in the published schizophrenia literature.
CONCLUSION
The limited current evidence supports the concept that clozapine may be both an effective and a relatively safe medication for TRBD.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Clozapine; Humans
PubMed: 25346322
DOI: 10.1111/bdi.12272 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Schizophrenia and related disorders such as schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorder are serious mental illnesses characterised by profound disruptions in thinking... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Schizophrenia and related disorders such as schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorder are serious mental illnesses characterised by profound disruptions in thinking and speech, emotional processes, behaviour and sense of self. Clozapine is useful in the treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders, particularly when other antipsychotic medications have failed. It improves positive symptoms (such as delusions and hallucinations) and negative symptoms (such as withdrawal and poverty of speech). However, it is unclear what dose of clozapine is most effective with the least side effects.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and tolerability of clozapine at different doses and to identify the optimal dose of clozapine in the treatment of schizophrenia, schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorders.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (August 2011 and 8 December 2016).
SELECTION CRITERIA
All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of blinding status or language, that compared the effects of clozapine at different doses in people with schizophrenia and related disorders, diagnosed by any criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently inspected citations from the searches, identified relevant abstracts, obtained full articles of relevant abstracts, and classified trials as included or excluded. We included trials that met our inclusion criteria and reported useable data. For dichotomous data, we calculated the relative risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five studies that could be included. Each compared the effects of clozapine at very low dose (up to 149 mg/day), low dose (150 mg/day to 300 mg/day) and standard dose (301 mg/day to 600 mg/day). Four of the five included studies were based on a small number of participants. We rated all the evidence reported for the main outcomes of interest as low or very low quality. No data were available for the main outcomes of global state, service use or quality of life. Very low dose compared to low doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low and very low doses of clozapine in terms of average Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Anchored (BPRS-A) endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 3.55, 95% CI -4.50 to 11.60, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in body mass index (BMI) in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.95 to 0.75, low-quality evidence). Very low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between very low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of average BPRS-A endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 6.67, 95% CI -2.09 to 15.43, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 58, MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.76 to 0.96, low-quality evidence) Low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of both clinician-assessed clinical improvement (2 RCTs, n = 141, RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.61, medium-quality evidence) and clinically important response as more than 30% change in BPRS score (1 RCT, n = 176, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.10, medium-quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 57, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.24, low-quality evidence).We found some evidence of effect for other adverse effect outcomes; however, the data were again limited. Very low dose compared to low doseThere was limited evidence that serum triglycerides were lower at low-dose clozapine compared to very low dose in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.49). Low dose compared to standard doseWeight gain was lower at very low dose compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 27, MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.38 to -0.02). Glucose level one hour after meal was also lower at very lose dose (1 RCT, n = 58, MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.90 to -0.30). Total cholesterol levels were higher at very low compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 58, n = 58, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.80). Low dose compared to standard doseThere was evidence of fewer adverse effects, measured as lower TESS scores, in the low-dose group in the short term (2 RCTs, n = 266, MD -3.99, 95% CI -5.75 to -2.24); and in one study there was evidence that the incidence of lethargy (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97), hypersalivation (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.84), dizziness (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.81) and tachycardia (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.71) was less at low dose compared to standard dose.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence of effect on mental state between standard, low and very low dose regimes, but we did not identify any trials on high or very high doses of clozapine. BMI measurements were similar between groups in the short term, although weight gain was less at very low dose compared to standard dose in one study. There was limited evidence that the incidence of some adverse effects was greater at standard dose compared to lower dose regimes. We found very little useful data and the evidence available is generally of low or very low quality. More studies are needed to validate our findings and report on outcomes such as relapse, remission, social functioning, service utilisation, cost-effectiveness, satisfaction with care, and quality of life. There is a particular lack of medium- or long-term outcome data, and on dose regimes above the standard rate.
Topics: Agranulocytosis; Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 28613395
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009555.pub2 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024Bispecific antibody (BsAbs) therapy represents a promising immunotherapeutic approach with manageable toxicity and noteworthy preliminary efficacy in treating patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Bispecific antibody (BsAbs) therapy represents a promising immunotherapeutic approach with manageable toxicity and noteworthy preliminary efficacy in treating patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted BsAbs and non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs in the treatment of RRMM patients.
METHODS
PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and meeting libraries were searched from inception to August 16th, 2023. The efficacy evaluation included the complete objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, stringent CR (sCR) rate, partial response (PR) rate, and very good PR (VGPR) rate. The efficacy evaluation included any grade adverse events (AEs) and grade ≥ 3 AEs.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies with a total of 1473 RRMM patients were included. The pooled ORR of the entire cohort was 61%. The non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs group displayed a higher ORR than the BCMA-targeted BsAbs group (74% . 54%, < 0.01). In terms of hematological AEs, BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy exhibited higher risks of neutropenia (any grade: 48% . 18%, < 0.01; grade ≥ 3: 43% . 15%, < 0.01) and lymphopenia (any grade: 37% . 8%, < 0.01; grade ≥ 3: 31% . 8%, = 0.07). Regarding non-hematological AEs, there were no significant differences in the risks of cytokine release syndrome (CRS, any grade: 64% . 66%, = 0.84; grade ≥ 3: 1% . 1%, = 0.36) and infections (any grade: 47% . 49%, = 0.86; grade ≥ 3: 24% . 20%, = 0.06) between the two groups. However, non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy was associated with a higher risk of immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS, any grade: 11% . 2%, < 0.01) and lower risks of fatigue (any grade: 14% . 30%, < 0.01) and pyrexia (any grade: 14% . 29%, < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
This analysis suggest that non-BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy may offer a more favorable treatment response and tolerability, while BCMA-targeted BsAbs therapy may be associated with diminished neurotoxic effects.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42018090768.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Antibodies, Bispecific; B-Cell Maturation Antigen; Prospective Studies; Neurotoxicity Syndromes; Neutropenia
PubMed: 38482019
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1348955 -
Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford,... Apr 2023Rechallenge/continuation of clozapine in association with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) following neutropenia/agranulocytosis has been reported, but many questions... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Rechallenge/continuation of clozapine in association with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) following neutropenia/agranulocytosis has been reported, but many questions remain unanswered about efficacy and safety. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of rechallenging/continuing clozapine in patients following neutropenia/agranulocytosis using CSFs.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception date to July 31, 2022. Articles screening and data extraction were realized independently by two reviewers, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 systematic review guidance. Included articles had to report on at least one case where clozapine was rechallenged/continued using CSFs despite previous neutropenia/agranulocytosis.
RESULTS
Eight hundred forty articles were retrieved; 34 articles met the inclusion criteria, totaling 59 individual cases. Clozapine was successfully rechallenged/continued in 76% of patients for an average follow-up period of 1.9 years. There was a trend toward better efficacy reported in case reports/series, compared with consecutive case series (overall success rates of 84% and 60%, respectively, -value = 0.065). Two administration strategies were identified, "as-needed" and prophylactic, both yielding similar success rates (81% and 80%, respectively). Only mild and transient adverse events were documented.
CONCLUSIONS
Although limited by the relatively small number of published cases, factors such as time of onset to first neutropenia and severity of the episode did not seem to impact the outcome of a subsequent clozapine rechallenge using CSFs. While the efficacy of this strategy remains to be further adequately evaluated in more rigorous study designs, its long-term innocuity warrants considering its use more proactively in the management of clozapine hematological adverse events as to maintain this treatment for as many individuals as possible.
Topics: Humans; Clozapine; Antipsychotic Agents; Neutropenia; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
PubMed: 36794520
DOI: 10.1177/02698811231154111 -
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Dec 2021Docetaxel, carboplatin and trastuzumab, with or without pertuzumab (TCH(P)), has become the preferred (neo)adjuvant regimen for HER2-positive breast cancer. However, its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Docetaxel, carboplatin and trastuzumab, with or without pertuzumab (TCH(P)), has become the preferred (neo)adjuvant regimen for HER2-positive breast cancer. However, its associated febrile neutropenia (FN) risk is unclear: pivotal studies reported FN risks < 10%, but in clinical practice, a high FN rate (> 20%) was observed. This systematic review and meta-analysis determine the FN risk associated with TCH(P) and the indication for primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PP G-CSF).
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were searched for full-text English articles reporting the FN incidence in early breast cancer patients receiving (neo)adjuvant TCH(P). The primary endpoint was the pooled crude FN incidence in patients treated without PP G-CSF using the random effects method. Secondary endpoints were the FN risk with PP G-CSF support, age-related differences in FN and differences in risk with TCH versus TCHP.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies were included in the systematic review. The pooled estimates of FN incidences were 27.6% (95% CI 18.6 to 37.1) in patients who did not receive PP G-CSF (primary meta-analysis, 9 studies, n = 889) versus 5.0% (95% CI 2.6 to 8.0) in patients administered PP G-CSF (secondary meta-analysis, 7 studies, n = 445). Two studies reported non-significant age-related differences in FN. The risk comparison between TCH and TCHP was inconclusive.
CONCLUSIONS
The crude FN risk associated with (neo)adjuvant TCH(P) is over 20%, the upper limit above which the international guidelines unanimously advise PP G-CSF administration. G-CSF prophylaxis effectively reduces FN risk and should become the standard of care with (neo)adjuvant TCH(P).
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Breast Neoplasms; Docetaxel; Febrile Neutropenia; Female; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Humans
PubMed: 34533681
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-021-06387-1