학술논문

Is high‐risk neuroblastoma induction chemotherapy possible without G‐CSF? A pilot study of safety and treatment delays in the absence of primary prophylactic hematopoietic growth factors
Document Type
article
Source
Pediatric Blood & Cancer. 67(10)
Subject
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences
Oncology and Carcinogenesis
Clinical Research
Neuroblastoma
Vaccine Related
Pediatric
Hematology
Cancer
Rare Diseases
Neurosciences
Clinical Trials and Supportive Activities
Pediatric Cancer
Stem Cell Research
Infectious Diseases
Prevention
Evaluation of treatments and therapeutic interventions
6.1 Pharmaceuticals
Infection
Adolescent
Bacterial Infections
Child
Child
Preschool
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization
Humans
Induction Chemotherapy
Infant
Male
Neutropenia
Pilot Projects
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Survival Rate
Time-to-Treatment
cancer stem cell
G-CSF
GM-CSF
high-risk neuroblastoma
induction chemotherapy
neuroblastoma
Clinical Sciences
Paediatrics and Reproductive Medicine
Oncology & Carcinogenesis
Oncology and carcinogenesis
Paediatrics
Language
Abstract
Background/objectivesStandard supportive care during induction therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma (HR-NBL) includes primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) aimed at limiting duration of neutropenia, reducing infection risk, and minimizing treatment delays. Preclinical models suggest that G-CSF promotes maintenance of neuroblastoma cancer stem cells and may reduce the efficacy of chemotherapy. This study's objective was to determine the safety and feasibility of administering induction chemotherapy without routine use of prophylactic G-CSF.Design/methodsChildren with newly diagnosed HR-NBL received six-cycle induction chemotherapy regimen without prophylactic G-CSF in four cycles. G-CSF was administered for stem cell mobilization after cycle 3 and granulocyte-monocyte colony-stimulating factor after cycle 5 prior to surgical resection of primary disease. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of grade 3 or higher infection. We hypothesized that the per patient infection rate would be comparable to our institutional baseline rate of 58% in patients with HR-NBL receiving induction chemotherapy with prophylactic growth factor support. The trial used an A'Hern single-stage design.ResultsTwelve patients with HR-NBL received 58 cycles of chemotherapy on study. Three patients completed the entire six-cycle regimen with no infections. Nine patients experienced grade 3 infections (bacteremia four, urinary tract infection two, skin/soft tissue infection three). No patients experienced grade 4 infections or required intensive care treatment for infection.ConclusionA greater than expected number of serious bacterial infections were observed during administration of induction chemotherapy for HR-NBL without primary prophylactic G-CSF. These results support continued prophylactic administration growth factor during induction chemotherapy.