Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25820754›Full record

Trial reportMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2015

An open-label, randomized, multicenter dose-finding study of once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim versus daily filgrastim in Chinese breast cancer patients receiving TAC chemotherapy.

Wei Zhang, Zhiwei Jiang, Ling Wang, Chanjuan Li, Jielai Xia

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05573386 (A Single Center, Prospective Study to Compare the Quality and Quantity of the Cellular Content of M-PRP Harvested After Peripheral Mobilization of Progenitor Cells Using Filgrastim Versus Pegfilgrastim), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05573386 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Single Center, Prospective Study to Compare the Quality and Quantity of the Cellular Content of M-PRP Harvested After Peripheral Mobilization of Progenitor Cells Using Filgrastim Versus Pegfilgrastim

TypeobservationalSponsorAndrews Research & Education FoundationRan2021 to 2023Enrolled15ConditionsHealthyArmsFilgrastim, Pegfilgrastim
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Is PEGylated G-CSF superior to G-CSF in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Refining the role of pegfilgrastim (a long-acting G-CSF) for prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: consensus guidance recommendations.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wei ZhangDepartment of Health Statistics, School of Preventive Medicine, Fourth Military Medical University, No. 169 Changle West Road, Xi'an, 710032, Shaanxi, China.
Zhiwei Jiang
Ling Wang
Chanjuan Li
Jielai Xia
Air Force Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A chemotherapy regimen of docetaxel, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (TAC) has been accepted as a standard care because of their superior clinical benefit in early-stage breast cancer patients, but with a higher risk of neutropenia. Pegfilgrastim is a once-per-cycle therapy for prophylactic neutrophil support and neutropenia prevention. There was still a lack of direct evidences for finding an optimal fixed dose of pegfilgrastim in Chinese breast cancer patients receiving TAC regimen. An open-label, randomized, phase II study was designed to compare the effects of pegfilgrastim with filgrastim. Eighteen centers in China enrolled 171 eligible female breast cancer patients with cycles of TAC chemotherapy treatment, randomized into four arms, received a single subcutaneous injection of pegfilgrastim (60, 100 or 120 µg/kg) per chemotherapy cycle or daily subcutaneous injections of filgrastim 5 µg/kg 24 h after chemotherapy. Efficacy and safety were analyzed. In ITT population, the mean duration of grade 3+ neutropenia (neutrophil count <1.0 × 10(9)/l) was 2.09, 1.53 and 1.73 days in patients who received pegfilgrastim 60, 100 and 120 µg/kg/cycle, respectively, and 1.69 days in patients who received 5 µg/kg/day filgrastim (P = 0.043). The incidence of grade 3+ neutropenia was 76, 83 and 74 % for doses of pegfilgrastim and 90 % for filgrastim (P = 0.409). The results for febrile neutropenia, time to neutrophil recovery and neutrophil profile were also not significantly different between arms. The safety profiles of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim were similar. A single dose of 100 µg/kg once-per-cycle administration of pegfilgrastim provided neutrophil support and a safety profile comparable to daily subcutaneous injections of filgrastim in Chinese breast cancer patients receiving TAC chemotherapy.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsAsian PeopleBreast NeoplasmsCyclophosphamideDocetaxelDoxorubicinFemaleFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHumansMiddle AgedPolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant ProteinsTaxoidsCyclophosphamideDocetaxelDoxorubicinFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorpegfilgrastimPolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant ProteinsTaxoids

Identifiers

PMID25820754
OpenAlexW1972469059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.