• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

依福嘧啶(eflapegrastim)对比培非格司亭(pegfilgrastim)在韩国和亚洲早期乳腺癌化疗所致中性粒细胞减少症患者中的疗效:来自 ADVANCE 和 RECOVER 两项 III 期研究的结果。

Eflapegrastim versus Pegfilgrastim for Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Korean and Asian Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Results from the Two Phase III ADVANCE and RECOVER Studies.

机构信息

Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea.

Department of Surgery, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea.

出版信息

Cancer Res Treat. 2023 Jul;55(3):766-777. doi: 10.4143/crt.2022.987. Epub 2023 Jan 19.

DOI:10.4143/crt.2022.987
PMID:36701846
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10372586/
Abstract

PURPOSE

We investigated the consistent efficacy and safety of eflapegrastim, a novel long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), in Koreans and Asians compared with the pooled population of two global phase 3 trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two phase 3 trials (ADVANCE and RECOVER) evaluated the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose eflapegrastim (13.2 mg/0.6 mL [3.6 mg G-CSF equivalent]) compared to pegfilgrastim (6 mg based on G-CSF) in breast cancer patients who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant docetaxel/cyclophosphamide. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of eflapegrastim compared to pegfilgrastim in mean duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) in cycle 1, in Korean and Asian subpopulations.

RESULTS

Among a total of 643 patients randomized to eflapegrastim (n=314) or pegfilgrastim (n=329), 54 Asians (29 to eflapegrastim and 25 to pegfilgrastim) including 28 Koreans (14 to both eflapegrastim and pegfilgrastim) were enrolled. The primary endpoint, DSN in cycle 1 in the eflapegrastim arm was non-inferior to the pegfilgrastim arm in Koreans and Asians. The DSN difference between the eflapegrastim and pegfilgrastim arms was consistent across populations: -0.120 days (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.227 to -0.016), -0.288 (95% CI, -0.714 to 0.143), and -0.267 (95% CI, -0.697 to 0.110) for pooled population, Koreans and Asians, respectively. There were few treatment-related adverse events that caused discontinuation of eflapegrastim (1.9%) or pegfilgrastim (1.5%) in total and no notable trends or differences across patient populations.

CONCLUSION

This study may suggest that eflapegrastim showed non-inferior efficacy and similar safety compared to pegfilgrastim in Koreans and Asians, consistently with those of pooled population.

摘要

目的

我们研究了新型长效粒细胞集落刺激因子(G-CSF)eflapegrastim 在韩国人和亚洲人中与两项全球 3 期试验汇总人群相比的一致疗效和安全性。

材料和方法

两项 3 期试验(ADVANCE 和 RECOVER)评估了固定剂量 eflapegrastim(13.2mg/0.6mL[3.6mg G-CSF 等效物])与 pegfilgrastim(基于 G-CSF 的 6mg)在接受新辅助或辅助多西他赛/环磷酰胺治疗的乳腺癌患者中的疗效和安全性。主要目的是证明在第 1 周期严重中性粒细胞减少症(DSN)的平均持续时间方面,eflapegrastim 与 pegfilgrastim 相比不劣效,在韩国人和亚洲亚人群中。

结果

在总共 643 名随机分配至 eflapegrastim(n=314)或 pegfilgrastim(n=329)的患者中,54 名亚洲人(eflapegrastim 29 名,pegfilgrastim 25 名),包括 28 名韩国人(eflapegrastim 和 pegfilgrastim 各 14 名)。主要终点,eflapegrastim 组第 1 周期的 DSN 不劣于 pegfilgrastim 组在韩国人和亚洲人中。eflapegrastim 组和 pegfilgrastim 组之间的 DSN 差异在各人群中一致:-0.120 天(95%置信区间[CI],-0.227 至-0.016),-0.288(95%CI,-0.714 至 0.143)和-0.267(95%CI,-0.697 至 0.110)为汇总人群、韩国人和亚洲人。eflapegrastim(1.9%)或 pegfilgrastim(1.5%)总共有少数与治疗相关的不良事件导致停药,并且在患者人群中没有明显的趋势或差异。

结论

这项研究表明,eflapegrastim 在韩国人和亚洲人中与 pegfilgrastim 相比显示出非劣效的疗效和相似的安全性,与汇总人群一致。

相似文献

1
Eflapegrastim versus Pegfilgrastim for Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Korean and Asian Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Results from the Two Phase III ADVANCE and RECOVER Studies.依福嘧啶(eflapegrastim)对比培非格司亭(pegfilgrastim)在韩国和亚洲早期乳腺癌化疗所致中性粒细胞减少症患者中的疗效:来自 ADVANCE 和 RECOVER 两项 III 期研究的结果。
Cancer Res Treat. 2023 Jul;55(3):766-777. doi: 10.4143/crt.2022.987. Epub 2023 Jan 19.
2
Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor for the Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia: Results of a Phase III Trial.依洛珠单抗,一种长效粒细胞集落刺激因子,用于治疗化疗引起的中性粒细胞减少症:III 期临床试验结果。
Oncologist. 2020 Aug;25(8):e1233-e1241. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2020-0105. Epub 2020 Jun 16.
3
A comparison of eflapegrastim to pegfilgrastim in the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy (RECOVER): A Phase 3 study.早期乳腺癌患者接受细胞毒性化疗时,化疗诱导性中性粒细胞减少症的管理中,比较埃拉替非巴肽和培格非格司亭(RECOVER):一项 3 期研究。
Cancer Med. 2020 Sep;9(17):6234-6243. doi: 10.1002/cam4.3227. Epub 2020 Jul 20.
4
Justification for a Fixed Dose of Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting G-CSF, in Patients Receiving Docetaxel-Cyclophosphamide Chemotherapy.在接受多西他赛-环磷酰胺化疗的患者中,长效 G-CSF(非格司亭)固定剂量的合理性。
J Clin Pharmacol. 2021 Feb;61(2):204-210. doi: 10.1002/jcph.1723. Epub 2020 Aug 21.
5
Eflapegrastim's enhancement of efficacy compared with pegfilgrastim in neutropenic rats supports potential for same-day dosing.依氟鸟苷与培非格司亭在中性粒细胞减少症大鼠中的疗效比较支持同日给药的潜力。
Exp Hematol. 2020 Dec;92:51-61. doi: 10.1016/j.exphem.2020.09.199. Epub 2020 Sep 29.
6
A randomized, multicenter, phase II/III study to determine the optimal dose and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pegteograstim (GCPGC) on chemotherapy-induced neutropenia compared to pegfilgrastim in breast cancer patients: KCSG PC10-09.一项随机、多中心、II/III期研究,旨在确定培格托司亭(GCPGC)治疗化疗引起的中性粒细胞减少症的最佳剂量,并评估其与培非格司亭相比在乳腺癌患者中的疗效和安全性:韩国癌症研究组PC10-09研究。
Support Care Cancer. 2016 Apr;24(4):1709-17. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2963-7. Epub 2015 Oct 1.
7
A Comparison of Proposed Biosimilar LA-EP2006 and Reference Pegfilgrastim for the Prevention of Neutropenia in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Receiving Myelosuppressive Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Pegfilgrastim Randomized Oncology (Supportive Care) Trial to Evaluate Comparative Treatment (PROTECT-2), a Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.拟用生物类似药LA-EP2006与参比药培非格司亭预防接受骨髓抑制性辅助或新辅助化疗的早期乳腺癌患者中性粒细胞减少症的比较:培非格司亭随机肿瘤学(支持性护理)评估对比治疗试验(PROTECT-2),一项III期随机双盲试验
Oncologist. 2016 Jul;21(7):789-94. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0011. Epub 2016 Apr 18.
8
Pooled analysis of two randomized, double-blind trials comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in breast cancer.比较拟生物类似药 LA-EP2006 与参照用培非格司亭在乳腺癌中疗效的两项随机、双盲试验的汇总分析。
Ann Oncol. 2017 Sep 1;28(9):2272-2277. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx303.
9
Efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastim versus pegfilgrastim in elderly patients with aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL): results of the randomized, open-label, non-inferiority AVOID neutropenia study.在侵袭性 B 细胞非霍奇金淋巴瘤(B-NHL)老年患者中,利培鲁肽与培非格司亭的疗效和安全性:随机、开放标签、非劣效性 AVOID 中性粒细胞减少研究的结果。
Support Care Cancer. 2021 May;29(5):2519-2527. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05711-7. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
10
An open-label, dose-ranging study of Rolontis, a novel long-acting myeloid growth factor, in breast cancer.一项罗隆蒂斯(一种新型长效髓系生长因子)的开放性、剂量范围研究,用于乳腺癌。
Cancer Med. 2018 May;7(5):1660-1669. doi: 10.1002/cam4.1388. Epub 2018 Mar 23.

引用本文的文献

1
The hidden costs of PEG-rhG-CSF in autologous stem cell transplantation for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.聚乙二醇化重组人粒细胞集落刺激因子在新诊断多发性骨髓瘤自体干细胞移植中的隐性成本
Sci Rep. 2025 Aug 23;15(1):30992. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-15360-7.

本文引用的文献

1
Eflapegrastim's enhancement of efficacy compared with pegfilgrastim in neutropenic rats supports potential for same-day dosing.依氟鸟苷与培非格司亭在中性粒细胞减少症大鼠中的疗效比较支持同日给药的潜力。
Exp Hematol. 2020 Dec;92:51-61. doi: 10.1016/j.exphem.2020.09.199. Epub 2020 Sep 29.
2
Justification for a Fixed Dose of Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting G-CSF, in Patients Receiving Docetaxel-Cyclophosphamide Chemotherapy.在接受多西他赛-环磷酰胺化疗的患者中,长效 G-CSF(非格司亭)固定剂量的合理性。
J Clin Pharmacol. 2021 Feb;61(2):204-210. doi: 10.1002/jcph.1723. Epub 2020 Aug 21.
3
A comparison of eflapegrastim to pegfilgrastim in the management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy (RECOVER): A Phase 3 study.
早期乳腺癌患者接受细胞毒性化疗时,化疗诱导性中性粒细胞减少症的管理中,比较埃拉替非巴肽和培格非格司亭(RECOVER):一项 3 期研究。
Cancer Med. 2020 Sep;9(17):6234-6243. doi: 10.1002/cam4.3227. Epub 2020 Jul 20.
4
Eflapegrastim, a Long-Acting Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor for the Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia: Results of a Phase III Trial.依洛珠单抗,一种长效粒细胞集落刺激因子,用于治疗化疗引起的中性粒细胞减少症:III 期临床试验结果。
Oncologist. 2020 Aug;25(8):e1233-e1241. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2020-0105. Epub 2020 Jun 16.
5
Global Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates and Trends--An Update.全球癌症发病率、死亡率及趋势——最新情况
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016 Jan;25(1):16-27. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0578. Epub 2015 Dec 14.
6
Design Rationale and Development Approach for Pegfilgrastim as a Long-Acting Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor.聚乙二醇化重组人粒细胞刺激因子作为长效粒细胞集落刺激因子的设计原理与开发方法
BioDrugs. 2015 Jun;29(3):185-98. doi: 10.1007/s40259-015-0127-4.
7
2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours.2010 年版 EORTC 指南更新:粒细胞集落刺激因子在降低淋巴增殖性疾病和实体瘤成人患者化疗所致发热性中性粒细胞减少症发生率中的应用
Eur J Cancer. 2011 Jan;47(1):8-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.10.013. Epub 2010 Nov 20.
8
Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes.替格瑞洛与氯吡格雷用于急性冠脉综合征患者的比较
N Engl J Med. 2009 Sep 10;361(11):1045-57. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0904327. Epub 2009 Aug 30.
9
Impact of primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia and mortality in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a systematic review.粒细胞集落刺激因子一级预防对接受化疗的成年癌症患者发热性中性粒细胞减少症及死亡率的影响:一项系统评价
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20;25(21):3158-67. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.8823.
10
Geographic variability in outcomes within an international trial of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Results from PURSUIT.急性冠状动脉综合征患者糖蛋白IIb/IIIa抑制剂国际试验中结局的地域差异。PURSUIT研究结果
Eur Heart J. 2000 Mar;21(5):371-81. doi: 10.1053/euhj.1999.1743.