Mayordomo J I, Rivera F, Díaz-Puente M T, Lianes P, Colomer R, López-Brea M, López E, Paz-Ares L, Hitt R, García-Ribas I
Division of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Jun 7;87(11):803-8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/87.11.803.
Several randomized trials have tested the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in relieving chemotherapy-induced bone marrow suppression. However, the use of CSFs in the treatment of neutropenic fever remains virtually unexplored.
This study evaluated the benefits of adding CSF therapy to the standard antibiotic treatments given to cancer patients for chemotherapy-induced neutropenic fever. The usefulness of CSFs was quantified in terms of reducing the following: (a) the duration of neutropenia, (b) the length of hospitalization, and (c) the overall cost of the treatment.
A randomized trial was conducted to test whether the administration of either G-CSF or GM-CSF improved the outcome of standard antibiotic therapy (ceftazidime plus amikacin) in nonleukemic cancer patients with fever (> 38 degrees C) and grade IV neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 500/mm3) induced by standard-dose chemotherapy. Of 121 patients who entered the trial, 39 received G-CSF (5 micrograms/kg body weight per day), 39 received GM-CSF (5 micrograms/kg body weight per day), and 43 received a placebo beginning just after the first dose of antibiotics. Treatments were continued for at least 5 days (7 days with clinically or microbiologically documented infections) or until 2 days after fever subsided and ANCs rose above 1000/mm3.
The median duration of grade IV neutropenia (ANC of < 500/mm3) was 2 days in both CSF arms and 3 days in the placebo arm (P < .001). The median duration of neutropenia with an ANC of less than 1000/mm3 was also significantly shorter in patients receiving G-CSF or GM-CSF (P < .001). The median duration of fever was similar in the three arms. The median hospital stay was 5 days (range, 5-14 days) in the G-CSF arm, 5 days (range, 5-10 days) in the GM-CSF arm, and 7 days (range, 5-34 days) in the placebo arm (P < .001). The median time on CSF was 4 days in both treatment arms. The mean cost of overall treatment was reduced by $1300-$1400 in the CSF arms compared with the placebo arm (P = .11 for G-CSF versus placebo; P = .06 for GM-CSF versus placebo; P = .7 for G-CSF versus GM-CSF).
Adding G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy to antibiotic treatment shortens the duration of neutropenia and the duration of hospitalization in patients with neutropenic fever. A statistically nonsignificant trend toward lower cost was observed in the CSF arms as compared with the placebo arm.
The benefits of CSFs to cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenic fever merit further evaluation in large randomized trials.
多项随机试验已对使用粒细胞集落刺激因子(G-CSF)和粒细胞巨噬细胞集落刺激因子(GM-CSF)缓解化疗引起的骨髓抑制进行了测试。然而,CSF在治疗中性粒细胞减少性发热方面的应用实际上仍未得到充分探索。
本研究评估了在癌症患者化疗引起的中性粒细胞减少性发热的标准抗生素治疗中添加CSF治疗的益处。从以下方面对CSF的效用进行了量化:(a)中性粒细胞减少的持续时间,(b)住院时间,以及(c)治疗的总体费用。
进行了一项随机试验,以测试在因标准剂量化疗引起发热(>38摄氏度)和IV级中性粒细胞减少(绝对中性粒细胞计数[ANC]<500/mm³)的非白血病癌症患者中,给予G-CSF或GM-CSF是否能改善标准抗生素治疗(头孢他啶加阿米卡星)的疗效。在121名进入试验的患者中,39名接受G-CSF(每天5微克/千克体重),39名接受GM-CSF(每天5微克/千克体重),43名在首次使用抗生素后立即接受安慰剂治疗。治疗持续至少5天(临床或微生物学记录感染时为7天),或直至发热消退且ANC升至1000/mm³以上2天后。
在两个CSF治疗组中,IV级中性粒细胞减少(ANC<500/mm³)的中位持续时间为2天,安慰剂组为3天(P<.001)。接受G-CSF或GM-CSF治疗的患者中,ANC低于1000/mm³的中性粒细胞减少的中位持续时间也显著缩短(P<.001)。三组中发热的中位持续时间相似。G-CSF组的中位住院时间为5天(范围5-14天),GM-CSF组为5天(范围5-10天),安慰剂组为7天(范围5-34天)(P<.001)。两个治疗组使用CSF的中位时间均为4天。与安慰剂组相比,CSF治疗组的总体治疗平均费用降低了1300-1400美元(G-CSF与安慰剂组相比,P=.11;GM-CSF与安慰剂组相比,P=.06;G-CSF与GM-CSF相比,P=.7)。
在抗生素治疗基础上添加G-CSF或GM-CSF治疗可缩短中性粒细胞减少性发热患者的中性粒细胞减少持续时间和住院时间。与安慰剂组相比,CSF治疗组在费用降低方面有统计学上不显著的趋势。
CSF对化疗引起的中性粒细胞减少性发热癌症患者的益处值得在大型随机试验中进一步评估。