Pegfilgrastim in primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia following frontline bendamustine plus rituximab treatment in patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a single center, real-life experience

Abstract

BackgroundIn this prospective study, the impact of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-2 CSF) administered during induction treatment with bendamustine plus rituximab for indolent non- Hodgkin Llymphoma (NHL) was evaluated by comparing patients who received secondary prophylaxis with filgrastim (control group) versus. patients who received pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis (peg-group). The primary endpoint was the incidence rate of febrile neutropenia (FN)- related chemotherapy disruptions (regarding dose-dense and/or dose-intensity of schedule). The Ssecondary endpoint included days of hospitalization due to FN, and G-CSF-related side effects (grade ≥3 WHO toxicity criteria) in each group.MethodsOne hundred twenty-two: 122 consecutive patients, with untreated indolent NHL, were referred to our outpatient unit for remission induction immuno-chemotherapy with bendamustine-rituximab. During the first period, 61 patients received secondary prophylaxis with filgrastim, given “on demand” if ANC was <1000/mm3. During the second period, 61 patients received primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim in a single administration.ResultsPegfilgrastim was significantly associated with fewer incidence rate of FN-related chemotherapy disruptions (11.4% in the control group vs. 1.6% in the peg-group, p = 0.04) and fewer days of hospitalization due to FN (median number 18 days in the control group vs. 6 in the peg-group, p = 0.04). In terms of G-CSF-related extra-hematological grade III side effects, no significant difference has been found in the two groups (9.8% in the control group vs. 11.5% in the peg-group, p = 0.77). Only one patient stopped the treatment in the peg-group due to intolerance.ConclusionsIn patients with indolent NHL, in front-line treatment with bendamustine plus rituximab, primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim seems to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy disruptions due to FN, and the days of hospitalization. Moreover, it is well- tolerated and may increase the opportunity to maintain the planned schedule of treatment. These results make pegfilgrastim an advantageous option in most cases both in terms of cost-effectiveness and quality of life. These preliminary observations need to be validated by controlled clinical trials.