Attitudes of physicians toward assessing risk and using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy associated with an intermediate risk of febrile neutropenia.
Mostra el registre complet Registre parcial de l'ítem
- dc.contributor.author Freyer, Gillesca
- dc.contributor.author Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewaca
- dc.contributor.author Syrigos, Konstantinosca
- dc.contributor.author Marinca, Mihaica
- dc.contributor.author Tonini, Giuseppeca
- dc.contributor.author Ng, Say Liangca
- dc.contributor.author Wong, Zee Wanca
- dc.contributor.author Salar Silvestre, Antonioca
- dc.contributor.author Steger, Guentherca
- dc.contributor.author Abdelsalam, Mahmoudca
- dc.contributor.author DeCosta, Lucyca
- dc.contributor.author Szabo, Zsoltca
- dc.date.accessioned 2015-11-10T11:22:43Z
- dc.date.available 2016-10-31T03:00:04Z
- dc.date.issued 2015
- dc.description.abstract Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy. This prospective, observational study describes physicians' approaches toward assessing FN risk in patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate (10-20 %) FN risk. In the baseline investigator assessment, physicians selected factors considered important when assessing overall FN risk and deciding on granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP). Physicians then completed patient assessments using the same lists of factors. The final FN risk scores and whether G-CSF PP was planned were reported. The final analysis included 165 physicians and 944 patients. The most frequently considered factor in both assessments was chemotherapy agents in the backbone (88 % of investigator and 93 % of patient assessments). History of FN (83 %), baseline laboratory values (76 %) and age (73 %) were commonly selected at baseline, whereas tumor type (72 %), guidelines (62 %) and tumor stage (43 %) were selected most during patient assessments. Median investigator-reported FN risk threshold for G-CSF PP was 20 % (range 10-85 %). G-CSF PP was planned in 82 % of patients with an FN risk at or above this threshold; therefore, almost one-fifth of qualifying patients would not receive G-CSF PP. Physicians generally follow guidelines, but also consider individual patient characteristics when assessing FN risk and deciding on G-CSF PP. A standardized FN risk assessment may optimize the use of G-CSF PP, which may minimize the incidence of FN in patients undergoing chemotherapy with an intermediate FN risk. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01813721.ca
- dc.description.sponsorship Funding for this support was provided by Amgen (Europe) GmbH.
- dc.format.mimetype application/pdfca
- dc.identifier.citation Freyer G, Kalinka-Warzocha E, Syrigos K, Marinca M, Tonini G, Ng SL. et al. Attitudes of physicians toward assessing risk and using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy associated with an intermediate risk of febrile neutropenia. Med Oncol. 2015 Oct;32(10):236. doi: 10.1007/s12032-015-0682-z.ca
- dc.identifier.doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12032-015-0682-z
- dc.identifier.issn 1357-0560
- dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10230/25031
- dc.language.iso catca
- dc.publisher Springerca
- dc.relation.ispartof Medical Oncology. 2015 Oct;32(10):236
- dc.rights c) Springer ( The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com)ca
- dc.rights.accessRights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
- dc.subject.other Quimioteràpiaca
- dc.subject.other Neutropèniaca
- dc.title Attitudes of physicians toward assessing risk and using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as primary prophylaxis in patients receiving chemotherapy associated with an intermediate risk of febrile neutropenia.ca
- dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/articleca
- dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionca