Adherence to granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) guidelines to reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy—a representative sample survey in Germany
- 670 Downloads
Febrile neutropenia (FN) after chemotherapy increases complications, morbidity, risk of death, reduction of dose delivery and impairs quality of life. Primary granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis after chemotherapy is recommended in the guideline (GL) if the risk of FN is high (≥20 %) or intermediate (≥10–20 %) with additional risk factors. This study evaluated the implementation of G-CSF GL.
Patients and methods
Sample size of the survey was calculated at 2 % of the incidences of malignant lymphoma, breast cancer, and lung cancer in Germany in 2006. Patients were documented retrospectively over three to nine cycles of chemotherapy and FN risk ≥10 %. Professional physician profiles were analyzed by classification and regression tree analysis (CART).
One hundred ninety-five hematologists-oncologists and pulmonologists and gynecologists specialized in oncology documented data of 666 lung cancer patients, 286 malignant lymphoma patients, and 976 breast cancer patients, with 7805 chemotherapy cycles; 85.1 % of physicians claimed adhering to G-CSF GL. Adherence to GL in all high-FN-risk chemotherapy cycles was 15.4 % in lung cancer, 84.5 % in malignant lymphoma, and 85.6 % in breast cancer, and in all intermediate-FN-risk chemotherapy cycles, lung cancer it was 38.8 %, malignant lymphoma it was 59.4 %, and breast cancer it was 49.3 %. G-CSF was overused without additional patient risk factors in 7.2 % lung cancer cycles, 16.8 % malignant lymphoma cycles, and 17.6 % breast cancer cycles. The CART analysis split pulmonologists and other specialists, with the latter adhering more to GL. Pulmonologists, trained less than 22.5 years, adhered better to GL, as did also gynecologists or hematologists-oncologists with professional experience less than 8.1 years.
Acceptance of and adherence to G-CSF GL differed between lung cancer, lymphoma, and breast cancer. Physicians overestimate their adherence to the GL. Physicians adhering to the GL can be characterized.
KeywordsG-CSF guidelines Febrile neutropenia Adherence Implementation Physicians’ professional profile
The authors thank Dr. Rita A. Klim, Munich, who provided medical writing services.
Conflicts of interest
Prof. Link has received consulting and speaker fees from Amgen, Teva, Chugai, and Hexal. Josef Nietsch, Markus Kerkmann, and Petra Ortner have reported no potential conflicts of interest.
This work was supported by Supportive Care Group (ASORS) Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Berlin, Germany, with an unrestricted grant from Amgen, Munich, Germany.
- 1.Aapro MS, Bohlius J, Cameron DA et al (2011) 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. Eur J Cancer 47:8–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Abdelsattar ZM, Reames BN, Regenbogen SE et al (2015) Critical evaluation of the scientific content in clinical practice guidelines. Cancer. 121(5):783–789Google Scholar
- 7.Breiman L (2001) Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author). Stat Sci 16(3):199–231Google Scholar
- 10.Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) USDOHAHS. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0: National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute, U.S.DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; 2010 [updated v4.03: June 14, 2010; cited 2014 Feb. 8, 2014]. Version 4.03:[Available from: http://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_5x7.pdf.
- 12.Crawford J. NCCN® Practice Guidelines in Oncology - v.2.2014; Myeloid Growth Factors. National Comprehensive Cancer Network [Internet]. 2014 01/04/2015. Available from: http://www.nccn.org/
- 18.Jagsi R, Huang G, Griffith K et al (2014) Attitudes toward and use of cancer management guidelines in a national sample of medical oncologists and surgeons. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 12:204–212Google Scholar
- 21.Krebs in Deutschland 2009/2010: Robert Koch-Institut, Epidemiologie und Gesundheitsberichterstattung; Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V.; 2012 [updated published on edoc: 2012-02-21T12:04:00Z; cited 2012]. Available from: http://edoc.rki.de/docviews/abstract.php?id=1843
- 30.Potosky AL, Malin JL, Kim B et al. (2011) Use of Colony-Stimulating Factors With Chemotherapy: Opportunities for Cost Savings and Improved Outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(12):979–982Google Scholar
- 31.Pujol JL, Daures JP, Riviere A et al (2001) Etoposide plus cisplatin with or without the combination of 4′-epidoxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in treatment of extensive small-cell lung cancer: a French Federation of Cancer Institutes multicenter phase III randomized study. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:300–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 36.Vehreschild JJ, Bohme A, Cornely OA et al (2014) Prophylaxis of infectious complications with colony-stimulating factors in adult cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy-evidence-based guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party AGIHO of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). Ann Oncol 25:1709–1718CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 39.Weycker D, Li X, Edelsberg J et al. (2015) Risk and Consequences of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia in Patients with Metastatic Solid Tumors. J Oncol Pract / Am Soc Clin Oncol 11(1):47–54Google Scholar