Pegfilgrastim: evidence in support of its use with cytotoxic chemotherapy

References

• Hughes W, Armstrong D, Bodey G et al. 2002 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer. Clin. Infect. Dis. 34, 730–751 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonadonna G, Valagussa P. Dose–response effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 304, 10–15 (1981).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budman D, Berry D, Cirrincione C et al. Dose and dose intensity as determinants of outcome in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90, 1205–1211 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford J, Ozer H, Stoller R et al. Reduction by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor of fever and neutropenia induced by chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 325, 164–170 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trillet-Lenoir V, Green J, Manegold C et al. Recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor reduces the infectious complications of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Eur. J. Cancer 29A, 319–324 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop M, Tarantolo S, Geller R et al. A randomized, double-blind trial of filgrastim (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus placebo following allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation. Blood 96, 80–85 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nemunaitis J, Rabinowe S, Singer J et al. Recombinant granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor after autologous bone marrow transplantation for lymphoid cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 324, 1773–1778 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citron M, Berry D, Cirrincione C et al. Randomized trial of dose-dense versus conventionally scheduled and sequential versus concurrent combination chemotherapy as postoperative adjuvant treatment of node-positive primary breast cancer: first report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 1431–1439 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin M, Pienkowski T, Mackey J et al. TAC improves disease free survival and overall survival over FAC in node positive early breast cancer patients, BCIRG 001: 55 months follow-up. Presented at the San Antonia Breast Cancer Symposium. (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Bria E, Giannarelli D, Felici A et al. Taxanes with anthracyclines as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast carcinoma. Pooled analysis of 2805 patients. Cancer 103, 672–679 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welte K, Bonilla M, Gillio A et al. Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. Effects on hematopoiesis in normal and cyclophosphamide-treated primates. J. Exp. Med. 165, 941–948 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang BB, Lum PK, Hayashi MM et al. Polyethylene glycol modification of filgrastim results in decreased renal clearance of the protein in rats. J. Pharm. Sci. 93, 1367–1373 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Layton J, Hockman H, Sheridan W et al. Evidence for a novel in vivo control mechanism of granulopoiesis: mature cell-related control of a regulatory growth factor. Blood 74, 1303–1307 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston E, Crawford J, Blackwell S et al. Randomized, dose-escalation study of SD/01 compared with daily filgrastim in patients receiving chemotherapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 2522–2528 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green M, Koelbl H, Baselga J et al. A randomized double-blind multicenter phase III study of fixed-dose single-administration pegfilgrastim versus daily filgrastim in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Ann. Oncol. 14, 29–35 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes F, O’Shaughnessy J, Vukelja S et al. Blinded, randomized, multicenter study to evaluate single administration pegfilgrastim once per cycle versus daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in patients with high-risk Stage II or Stage III/IV breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 20, 727–731 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delgado C, Francis G, Fisher D. The uses and properties of PEG-linked proteins. Crit. Rev. Ther. Drug Carrier Syst. 9, 249–304 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes F, Jones S, O’Shaughnessy J et al. Comparable efficacy and safety profiles of once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim and daily injection filgrastim in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: a multicenter dose-finding study in women with breast cancer. Ann. Oncol. 13, 903–909 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang BB, Lum P, Renwick J et al. Pharmacokinetic rationale for a fixed-dose regimen of a sustained-duration form of filgrastim in cancer patients. Blood 96, 157 (Abstract 4384) (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Siena S, Piccart M, Holmes F et al. A combined analysis of two pivotal randomized trials of a single dose of pegfilgrastim per chemotherapy cycle and daily Filgrastim in patients with Stage II-IV breast cancer. Oncol. Rep. 10, 715–724 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shogan J, Koelbl H, Holmes F et al. Pegfilgrastim shows safety and efficacy similar to filgrastim in elderly patients with breast cancer. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 21, 66a (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Vogel C, Wojtukiewicz M, Carroll R et al. First and subsequent cycle use of pegfilgrastim prevents febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer: multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III study. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 1178–1184 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sledge G, Neuberg D, Bernardo P et al. Phase III trial of doxorubicin, paclitaxel, and the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel as front-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: an Intergroup Trial (E1193). J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 588–592 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubista E, Glaspy J, Holmes F et al. Bone pain associated with once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim is similar to daily filgrastim in patients with breast cancer. Clin. Breast Cancer 3, 391–398 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grigg A, Solal-Celigny P, Hoskin P et al. Open-label, randomized study of pegfilgrastim vs. daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in elderly patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Leuk. Lymphoma 44, 1503–1508 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vose J, Crump M, Lazarus H et al. Randomized, multicenter, open-label study of pegfilgrastim compared with daily filgrastim after chemotherapy for lymphoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 514–519 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heli G, Hoelzer D, Sanz M et al. Long-term survival from a phase 3 study of filgrastim in remission induction and consolidation therapy for adults with de novo acute myeloid leukemia. Proceedings from the 44th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology. (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Bosi A, Szer J, Kassis J et al. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase 2 trial comparing pegfilgrastim with filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia. Proceedings from the 46th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Norton L, Simon R. The Norton-Simon hypothesis revisited. Cancer Treat. Rep. 70, 163–169 (1986).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thatcher N, Girling D, Hopwood P et al. Improving survival without reducing quality of life in small-cell lung cancer patients by increasing the dose-intensity of chemotherapy with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support: results of a British Medical Research Council Multicenter Randomized Trial. Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party. J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 395–404 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfreundschuh M, Trumper L, Kloess M et al. Two-weekly or 3-weekly CHOP chemotherapy with or without etoposide for the treatment of elderly patients with aggressive lymphomas: results of the NHL-B2 trial of the DSHNHL. Blood 104, 634–641 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfreundschuh M, Trumper L, Kloess M et al. 2-weekly or 3-weekly CHOP chemotherapy with or without etoposide for the treatment of young patients with good-prognosis (normal LDH) aggressive lymphomas: results of the NHL-B1 trial of the DSHNHL. Blood 104, 626–633 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Younes A, Fayad L, Romaguera J et al. Single administration of a fixed dose pegfilgrastim (Neulasta) in inducing neutrophil count recovery after 170 consecutive doses of ABVD chemotherapy in patients with Hodgkin Lymphoma: Safety of pegfilgrastim with q14-day chemotherapy regimens. Proceedings from the 44th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Moore T, Patel T, Segal M et al. A single pegfilgrastim dose per cycle supports dose-dense (q14d) CHOP-R in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Proceedings from the 45th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Pirker R, Ulsperger E, Aigner K et al. A phase II study of pegfilgrastim to support ACE 14 chemotherapy for the treatment of subjects with small cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 22, 14S (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Steidl U, Fenk R, Bruns I et al. Successful transplantation of peripheral blood stem cells mobilized by chemotherapy and a single dose of pegylated G-CSF in patients with multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant 35, 33–36 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroschinsky F, Holig K, Platzbecker U et al. Pegfilgrastim is able to mobilize autologous CD34+ peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with lymphoid malignancies and solid tumors. Bone Marrow Transplant 33(Suppl. 1), (Abstract P408) (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Mandanas R, Underwood B, Geist B et al. Pegfilgrastim (Neulasta™) following chemotherapy leads to successful mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells among transplant patients with various diagnoses. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant 10(Suppl. 1), (Abstract 21) (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Ozer H, Armitage J, Bennett C et al. 2000 update of recommendations for the use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors: evidence-based, clinical practice guidelines. American Society of Clinical Oncology Growth Factors Expert Panel. J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 3558–3585 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyman G, Kuderer N, Green J et al. The economics of febrile neutropenia: implications for the use of colony-stimulating factors. Eur. J. Cancer 34, 1857–1864 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heckinger E, Lee J, Calhoun E et al. Cost minimization of filgrastim (G-CSF) versus pegfilgrastim (peg-G-CSF) for Stage II-IV breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: assessments based on third-party and societal perspectives. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 22, 526 (2003).
   Google Scholar