Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28614980›Full record

SynthesisJournal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners2018

Meta-analysis and indirect treatment comparison of lipegfilgrastim with pegfilgrastim and filgrastim for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia-related events.

T Christopher Bond, Erika Szabo, Susan Gabriel, Jean Klastersky, Omar Tomey, Udo Mueller, Lee Schwartzberg, Boxiong Tang

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A multinational, drug utilization study of lipegfilgrastim use in real-world setting in Europe.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Biosimilar Pegfilgrastim: Improving Access and Optimising Practice to Supportive Care that Enables Cure.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

T Christopher Bond1 Covance Market Access, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
Erika Szabo2 Teva Pharmaceuticals, Frazer, PA, USA.
Susan Gabriel2 Teva Pharmaceuticals, Frazer, PA, USA.
Jean Klastersky3 Centre des Tumeurs de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Omar Tomey4 Teva Pharmaceuticals, Naucalpan De Juárez Area, Mexico.
Udo Mueller5 Teva Pharmaceuticals, Ulm, Germany.
Lee Schwartzberg6 The West Clinic, Memphis, TN, USA.
Boxiong Tang2 Teva Pharmaceuticals, Frazer, PA, USA.
Teva Pharmaceuticals (United States) · USCampbell Clinic · USCovance (United States) · USTeva Pharmaceuticals (Germany) · DEUniversidad de Norteamérica · MXUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are effective at reducing the risk and duration of neutropenia. The current meta-analysis compared the neutropenia-related efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim to those of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim. Methods Embase was searched for trials examining the efficacy/safety of lipegfilgrastim, pegfilgrastim, or filgrastim. Outcomes included febrile neutropenia, severe neutropenia, duration of severe neutropenia, time to recovery of absolute neutrophil count, and incidence of bone pain. Direct comparisons were made using random-effects models. No trials directly compared lipegfilgrastim and filgrastim. Indirect comparisons were made between lipegfilgrastim and filgrastim with pegfilgrastim as the common comparator. Results This meta-analysis included a total of 5769 patients from 24 studies. Over all cycles, lipegfilgrastim showed a lower, nonsignificant risk of febrile neutropenia compared with pegfilgrastim. Lipegfilgrastim has a lower risk of febrile neutropenia versus filgrastim but was also not statistically significant. The risk ratio for severe neutropenia in cycle 1 was 0.80, a 20% reduction in favor of lipegfilgrastim. For cycles 2-4, the risk ratio was 0.53 (0.35, 0.79) for lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim. The risk of severe neutropenia in cycles 2-4 was also significantly lower for lipegfilgrastim (risk ratio 0.45, 0.27, 0.75, respectively). No significant differences were found for febrile neutropenia and severe neutropenia in cycle 1. However, in cycles 2-4, lipegfilgrastim was associated with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in risk of severe neutropenia versus either pegfilgrastim or filgrastim. Conclusions Compared with pegfilgrastim or filgrastim, lipegfilgrastim has a statistically significantly lower absolute neutrophil count recovery time; however, differences in duration of severe neutropenia and bone pain were nonsignificant.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsFilgrastimHumansNeutropeniaOdds RatioPolyethylene GlycolsAntineoplastic AgentsFilgrastimpegfilgrastimPolyethylene Glycolsfilgrastimlipegfilgrastimmeta-analysisNeutropeniapegfilgrastim

Identifiers

PMID28614980
PMCPMC6094503
OpenAlexW2626058665

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.