Trial reportMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2005
The safety of full-dose chemotherapy with secondary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) following a prior cycle with febrile neutropenia.
Trial report in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biosimilars in the management of neutropenia: focus on filgrastim.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2016Review
- The impact of chemotherapy dose intensity and supportive care on the risk of febrile neutropenia in patients with early stage breast cancer: a prospective cohort study.SpringerPlus · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Secondary prophylactic administration of recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) following an episode of febrile neutropenia is recommended if maintenance of dose-intensity is desired. This policy was adopted in our center in patients treated with an intent for cure or durable complete response. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of this policy. Patients in whom neutropenia was associated with a life-threatening infection and those who developed prolonged myelosuppression were excluded. Fifty-one patients who developed febrile neutropenia that required intravenous antibiotics following moderately myelotoxic chemotherapy were included. These patients received the next cycle of the same chemotherapy regime without dose modification but with the support of filgrastim (300 or 480 mg/d sc for at least 10 consecutive days). Diagnoses included lymphoma (n = 19), breast cancer (n = 15), germ cell tumor (n = 7), small-cell lung cancer (n = 5), and other solid tumors (n = 5). The incidence of febrile neutropenia during the first cycle given with filgrastim support (N1) was 8/51 (16%). Intravenous antibiotics were required for 3-7 d (median, 4.5 d). During the following cycle (N2), febrile neutropenia developed in 4/41 (10%) patients. Intravenous antibiotics were given for 2, 4, 5, and 7 d. Other dose-limiting toxicities developed in 1/51 patients who received N1 and in 1/41 patients who received N2. There was no drug-related death associated with either cycle. In conclusion, a policy of full-dose chemotherapy with secondary G-CSF support in patients who develop febrile neutropenia following moderately myelotoxic chemotherapy is relatively safe and feasible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.