Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26670915›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016

Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with early discontinuation of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in US clinical practice.

Derek Weycker, Xiaoyan Li, Rich Barron, Yanli Li, Maureen Reiner, Alex Kartashov, Jacqueline Figueredo, Spiros Tzivelekis, Jacob Garcia

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Is it appropriate to select patients for primary prophylactic use of pegfilgrastim based on the risk of febrile neutropenia?Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Observational
  6. Burden of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia Hospitalizations in US Clinical Practice, by Use and Patterns of Prophylaxis with Colony-Stimulating Factor.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Derek WeyckerPolicy Analysis Inc. (PAI), Four Davis Court, Brookline, MA, USA. dweycker@pai2.com.
Xiaoyan LiAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Rich BarronAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Yanli LiAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Maureen ReinerAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Alex KartashovPolicy Analysis Inc. (PAI), Four Davis Court, Brookline, MA, USA.
Jacqueline FigueredoPolicy Analysis Inc. (PAI), Four Davis Court, Brookline, MA, USA.
Spiros TzivelekisAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Jacob GarciaAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Amgen (United States) · USPolicy Analysis (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAccumulating evidence suggests that not all cancer chemotherapy patients who receive first-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis continue to receive it in subsequent cycles and that these patients may be subsequently at higher risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Additional evidence from US clinical practice is warranted.

methodsData from two US private healthcare claims repositories were employed. The source population comprised adults who received "intermediate-risk" or "high-risk" chemotherapy regimens for solid cancers or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and first-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis. From the source population, all patients who did not receive second-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis ("comparison patients") were matched (1:1) to those who received it ("pegfilgrastim patients") based on cancer, regimen, and propensity score. Odds ratios (OR) for FN-broad and narrow definitions-during the second chemotherapy cycle were estimated for comparison patients versus pegfilgrastim patients using generalized estimating equations.

resultsA total of 2245 comparison patients (5.3 % of source population) were matched to pegfilgrastim patients; cohorts were well-balanced on baseline characteristics. Second-cycle FN incidence proportions for comparison and pegfilgrastim patients were 3.8 versus 2.2 % based on broad definition and 2.6 versus 0.8 % based on narrow definition; corresponding OR were 1.7 (95 % CI 1.2-2.5, p = 0.002) and 3.5 (95 % CI 2.0-6.0, p < 0.001). Results were similar within cancer/regimen-subgroups and were robust when using alternative methods for confounding adjustment.

conclusionsIn this retrospective evaluation of cancer chemotherapy patients who received first-cycle pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in US clinical practice, a clinically relevant minority did not receive second-cycle prophylaxis. Second-cycle FN odds among this subset were significantly higher than they were among those who continued prophylaxis.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemotherapy-Induced Febrile NeutropeniaCohort StudiesDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant ProteinsRetrospective StudiesFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorpegfilgrastimPolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant ProteinsFebrile neutropeniaGranulocyte colony-stimulating factorNeulastaPegfilgrastim

Identifiers

PMID26670915
PMCPMC4846701
OpenAlexW2239656908

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.