How to cite item

A randomized multicenter phase II trial of mecapegfilgrastim single administration versus granulocyte colony-stimulating growth factor on treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients

  
@article{ATM25503,
	author = {Tao Wang and Biao Wu and Xichun Hu and Jinping Liu and Tao Zhang and Funian Li and Bing Sun and Li Cai and Xinzheng Li and Zhiyue Chen and Qing Yang and Zefei Jiang},
	title = {A randomized multicenter phase II trial of mecapegfilgrastim single administration versus granulocyte colony-stimulating growth factor on treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients},
	journal = {Annals of Translational Medicine},
	volume = {7},
	number = {9},
	year = {2019},
	keywords = {},
	abstract = {Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mecapegfilgrastim (HHPG-19K) with different doses compared to granulocyte colony-stimulating growth factor (G-CSF) in treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients.
Methods: A total of 182 breast cancer patients were enrolled in this multi-center, randomized, phase II trial and developed neutropenia after first cycle chemotherapy. Patients were then assigned as 1:1:1 ratio to receive 100 µg/kg HHPG-19K single injection (HHPG-19K-N group), 150 µg/kg HHPG-19Ksingle injection (HHPG-19K-H group) and 5 µg/kg G-CSF daily injection (G-CSF group) at day 3 of the second cycle (cycle 2) chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia during cycle 2. Study drug-related adverse events during cycle 2 were recorded for safety assessment.
Results: During cycle 2 chemotherapy, both HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups exhibited lower incidence of grade ≥3 neutropenia compared with G-CSF group, while no difference was observed between HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups. Also, better outcomes were observed in HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups compared with G-CSF group regarding to grade 4 neutropenia, duration of grade ≥3 neutropenia, duration of grade 4 neutropenia, incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) and rescue application of G-CSF, time to ANC recovery, while no difference of these outcomes between HHPG-19K-N and HHPG-19K-H groups was observed. For safety analysis, the incidences of hematologic and non-hematologic adverse events were similar among the 3 groups.
Conclusions: HHPG-19K presents with better clinical efficacy as well as equal tolerance compared with G-CSF in treating chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in breast cancer patients.},
	issn = {2305-5847},	url = {https://atm.amegroups.org/article/view/25503}
}