Primary Prophylaxis of Febrile Neutropenia With Pegfilgrastim in Small-cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Amrubicin as Second-line Therapy
Primary Prophylaxis of Febrile Neutropenia With Pegfilgrastim in Small-cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Amrubicin as Second-line Therapy
复制标题
DOI：
10.21873/anticanres.14923
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-01
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Suzuki, Akio
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sato, Yukina;Iihara, Hirotoshi;Suzuki, Akio
背景/目的：我们评价了培非格司亭（PEG）对接受氨柔比星（AMR）治疗的小细胞肺癌（SCLC）患者发热性中性粒细胞减少（FN）的一级预防疗效。患者和方法：在接受AMR作为二线治疗的SCLC患者中进行了一项回顾性队列研究。结果如下：共33例患者接受AMR治疗（无PEG组），13例患者接受AMR+预防性PEG给药（PEG组）。与无PEG组相比，PEG组中性粒细胞减少症的严重程度显著降低（p=0.02）。无PEG组和PEG组FN的发生率分别为27.3%和7.7%。与无PEG组相比，PEG组的FN形成时间往往更长（p=0.132）。结论：PEG一级预防可能有助于降低接受AMR的SCLC患者发生FN的风险。
Background/Aim: We evaluated the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim (PEG) for febrile neutropenia (FN) in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients receiving amrubicin (AMR). Patients and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients with SCLC receiving AMR as second-line therapy. Results: A total of 33 patients were treated with AMR (no PEG group), while 13 patients were treated with AMR plus prophylactic administration of PEG (PEG group). The severity of neutropenia was significantly reduced in the PEG group compared to the no PEG group (p=0.02). The incidence of FN in the no PEG and PEG groups was 27.3% and 7.7%, respectively. The time to development of FN tended to be longer in the PEG group compared to the no PEG group (p=0.132). Conclusion: Primary prophylaxis with PEG may be beneficial in reducing the risk of FN in patients with SCLC receiving AMR.