Open AccessEfficacy and Safety of Lipegfilgrastim in Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy in a Real-World Setting: Results of an Analysis of Pooled Data from Two Non-Interventional European Studies
Author(s) -
Christian Geßner,
Karin Potthoff,
Nikolaj Frost
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
oncology research and treatment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.553
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 2296-5262
pISSN - 2296-5270
DOI - 10.1159/000512594
Subject(s) - medicine , neutropenia , febrile neutropenia , lung cancer , chemotherapy , population , incidence (geometry) , adverse effect , surgery , gastroenterology , physics , environmental health , optics
Background/Aim: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a common and serious complication in cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This analysis was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prophylaxis with lipegfilgrastim, a glycoPEGylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice. Methods: Data from two European non-interventional studies (NIS NADIR and NIS LEOS) investigating lipegfilgrastim for primary and secondary prophylaxis were pooled. Outcomes included the incidence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN), use of anti-infectives and antimycotics, and adverse events and their relationship to lipegfilgrastim. Results: The safety population included 361 patients with lung cancer (median age, 66 years [range, 36–88]), of whom 322 had received 2 or more consecutive cycles of lipegfilgrastim (efficacy population [primary prophylaxis, 75.5%; secondary prophylaxis, 16.5%]). Almost 40% of the patients were considered to have a high risk (>20%) of FN, and around 60% had an intermediate risk (10–20%). For all cycles, FN was reported in 3 patients (0.9%), neutropenia in 14 (4.3%), and grade 4 neutropenia in 9 (2.8%). Anti-infectives were used in 27 patients (8.4%) and antimycotics in 6 (1.9%). The incidence rates were lower for the patients’ first cycle (FN, 0.4%; neutropenia, 0.8%; grade 4 neutropenia, 0.8%; anti-infectives, 0.6%; antimycotics, 0.6%). Adverse drug reactions considered lipegfilgrastim related were reported in 35 patients (9.7%), and serious adverse drug reactions in 10 (2.8%). None of the fatal events reported in 28 patients (7.8%) were lipegfilgrastim related. Conclusion: Lipegfilgrastim administered to patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy in real-world clinical practice showed similar effectiveness and safety to that reported in published pivotal trials.