SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chinese Medicine Combined with Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Improving Myelosuppression in Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic literature review of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of filgrastim.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Biochemical Changes in Blood of Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Treated with Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor.BioMed research international · 2019Trial
- A randomized, multicenter, phase II/III study to determine the optimal dose and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pegteograstim (GCPGC) on chemotherapy-induced neutropenia compared to pegfilgrastim in breast cancer patients: KCSG PC10-09.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016Trial
- Comparison of EP2006, a filgrastim biosimilar, to the reference: a phase III, randomized, double-blind clinical study in the prevention of severe neutropenia in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2015Trial
- Article
- Article
- Febrile neutropenia incidence and the variable toxicity profile between brand and generic docetaxel in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with docetaxel and cyclophosphamide regimen.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2023Article
- Prophylaxis of Neutropenia with Lipegfilgrastim in Breast Cancer Patients with Dose-Dense Chemotherapy: Results of a Noninterventional Study on Therapeutic Routine in Germany (NADENS).Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-associated aortitis in a woman with breast cancer: a case report.Surgical case reports · 2022Article
- Improved risk prediction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia-model development and validation with real-world data.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Review
- Febrile neutropenia and role of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in docetaxel and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for breast cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- Patient Characteristics and Utilization Patterns of Short-Acting Recombinant Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) Biosimilars Compared to Their Reference Product.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2021Article
- Successful treatment of G-CSF-related aortitis with prednisolone during preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer: a case report.Surgical case reports · 2021Article
- The impact of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with palliative chemotherapy: a single-institution retrospective review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
- Article
- Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor-associated aortitis in a woman with advanced breast cancer: a case report and review of the literature.BMC cancer · 2019Review
- Strategies to generate functionally normal neutrophils to reduce infection and infection-related mortality in cancer chemotherapy.Pharmacology & therapeutics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-dose or dose-intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy often causes myelosuppression and severe neutropenia among cancer patients. Severe neutropenia accompanied by fever, named febrile neutropenia (FN), is the most serious manifestation of neutropenia usually requiring hospitalization and intravenous antibiotics. FN and neutropenia can lead to chemotherapy treatment delays or dose reductions, which potentially compromises the effectiveness of cancer treatment and prospects for a cure. Granulocyte-macrophage (GM) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are administered during chemotherapy in order to prevent or reduce the incidence or the duration of FN and neutropenia.
objectivesTo assess the effect of prophylactic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) in reducing the incidence and duration of FN, and all-cause and infection-related mortality during chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, HEALTHSTAR, International Health Technology Assessment, SOMED, AMED and BIOSIS up to 8 August 2011. We also searched three Chinese databases (VIP, CNKI, CBM), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and OpenGrey.eu up to August 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CSFs (any dose) with placebo or no treatment in patients with breast cancer at any stage, at risk of developing FN while undergoing any type of chemotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes. At least two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Trial authors were contacted for further details when information was unclear. MAIN
resultsWe included eight RCTs involving 2156 participants with different stages of breast cancer and chemotherapy regimens. The trials were carried out between 1995 and 2008 and judged as being at least at moderate risk of bias. The strength of the evidence was weak for the majority of outcomes, which was mostly because of the small numbers of evaluable patients, varying definitions, as well as unclear measurements of the trials' outcomes and uncertain influences of supportive treatments on them. In most trials, the chemotherapy regimens had a risk of FN that was below the threshold at which current guidelines recommend routine primary prophylaxis with CSFs. Using CSFs significantly reduced the proportion of patients with FN (RR 0.27; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.70; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 12) but there was substantial heterogeneity which can be explained by possible differential effects of G-CSFs and GM-CSFs and different definitions of FN. A significant reduction in early mortality was observed in CSF-treated patients compared to placebo or no treatment (RR 0.32; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.77; NNTB 79). This finding was based on 23 fatal events in 2143 patients; wherein 19 of these 23 events occurred in one study and 17 events were attributed to progression of the disease by the study authors. For infection-related mortality, there were no significant differences between CSF and control groups (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.29). In CSF-treated patients, the risk for hospitalization was significantly reduced (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.30; NNTB 13), as well as the use of intravenous antibiotics (RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.55; NNTB 18). The risks of severe neutropenia, infection or not maintaining the scheduled dose of chemotherapy did not differ between CSF-treated and control groups. CSFs frequently led to bone pain (RR 5.88; 95% CI 2.54 to 13.60; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 3) and injection-site reactions (RR 3.59; 95% CI 2.33 to 5.53; NNTH 3). AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, CSFs have shown evidence of benefit in the prevention of FN. There is evidence, though less reliable, of a decrease of all-cause mortality during chemotherapy and a reduced need for hospital care. No reliable evidence was found for a reduction of infection-related mortality, a higher dose intensity of chemotherapy with CSFs or diminished rates of severe neutropenia and infections. The majority of adverse events reported from CSF use were bone pain and injection-site reactions but no conclusions could be drawn regarding late-term side effects.
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.