author_facet Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa
Gallego Plazas, Javier
Mineur, Laurent
Salek, Tomas
Hendlisz, Alain
Bendall, Kate
Vogl, Florian D.
Passalacqua, Rodolfo
Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa
Gallego Plazas, Javier
Mineur, Laurent
Salek, Tomas
Hendlisz, Alain
Bendall, Kate
Vogl, Florian D.
Passalacqua, Rodolfo
author Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa
Gallego Plazas, Javier
Mineur, Laurent
Salek, Tomas
Hendlisz, Alain
Bendall, Kate
Vogl, Florian D.
Passalacqua, Rodolfo
spellingShingle Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa
Gallego Plazas, Javier
Mineur, Laurent
Salek, Tomas
Hendlisz, Alain
Bendall, Kate
Vogl, Florian D.
Passalacqua, Rodolfo
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
Cancer Research
Oncology
author_sort kalinka-warzocha, ewa
spelling Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa Gallego Plazas, Javier Mineur, Laurent Salek, Tomas Hendlisz, Alain Bendall, Kate Vogl, Florian D. Passalacqua, Rodolfo 0732-183X 1527-7755 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Cancer Research Oncology http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.128 <jats:p> 128 </jats:p><jats:p> Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP) is recommended for pts undergoing CT who are at overall high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). No single CT regimen is recognized as standard in gastric cancer and few regimens are represented in G-CSF guidelines. We therefore evaluated neutropenia management in pts receiving CT for gastric cancer. Methods: This was a multicentre prospective observational study that enrolled pts sequentially from 11/2009 to 06/2011. Adult gastric cancer pts (any stage) with ≥3 cycles of myelosuppressive CT scheduled and an investigator-assessed overall FN risk ≥20% were eligible. The primary outcome was the proportion of pts who received PP G-CSF (G-CSF in days 1-7 of cycle 1). Secondary outcomes included FN incidence, chemotherapy administration, and G-CSF use. Posthoc analyses investigated the subgroup who received DCF, including modifications from standard DCF (Van Cutsem. JCO. 2006), and the G-CSF support given up to the first FN (G-CSF prophylaxis given per label in each cycle up to that in which FN occurred). Results: Of 209 pts enrolled, 199 were eligible and their data analyzed. The mean (±SD) age was 62 (±12) years, 76% were male, 17% were ECOG 2 and none ECOG 3-4; 47% were treatment naïve. Planned CT was palliative in 74% of pts; overall, 27 different backbone regimens were planned (10 triplet, 12 doublet, 5 single drug regimens). The most common regimen used was DCF (54 pts, 27%), predominantly given as modified DCF (41 pts). Despite being assessed as high risk for FN, G-CSF PP was administered to only 35% of pts overall (n=70; 54 pegfilgrastim, 16 daily G-CSF) and to 69% of pts who received DCF. FN occurred in 14 pts (10%), 9 of whom received DCF. A large majority of FN pts (12/14, 86%) had not received prophylactic G-CSF per label up to the first FN occurrence; furthermore, 86% of FN pts did not receive G-CSF prophylaxis in the cycle following the FN event. Conclusions: The variety of CT used, frequent modifications to standard CT, and presence of pt risk factors makes FN risk estimation difficult in gastric cancer. Improved risk assessment and appropriate targeting of G-CSF PP to high risk pts is needed. </jats:p> Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe. Journal of Clinical Oncology
doi_str_mv 10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.128
facet_avail Online
Free
finc_class_facet Medizin
format ElectronicArticle
fullrecord blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTIwMC9qY28uMjAxMy4zMS40X3N1cHBsLjEyOA
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTIwMC9qY28uMjAxMy4zMS40X3N1cHBsLjEyOA
institution DE-D275
DE-Bn3
DE-Brt1
DE-Zwi2
DE-D161
DE-Gla1
DE-Zi4
DE-15
DE-Pl11
DE-Rs1
DE-105
DE-14
DE-Ch1
DE-L229
imprint American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2013
imprint_str_mv American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2013
issn 0732-183X
1527-7755
issn_str_mv 0732-183X
1527-7755
language English
mega_collection American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) (CrossRef)
match_str kalinkawarzocha2013chemotherapycttreatmentpatternsandneutropeniamanagementingastriccancerpatientsptsreceivingmyelosuppressivechemotherapyineurope
publishDateSort 2013
publisher American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
recordtype ai
record_format ai
series Journal of Clinical Oncology
source_id 49
title Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_unstemmed Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_full Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_fullStr Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_full_unstemmed Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_short Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_sort chemotherapy (ct) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in europe.
topic Cancer Research
Oncology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.128
publishDate 2013
physical 128-128
description <jats:p> 128 </jats:p><jats:p> Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP) is recommended for pts undergoing CT who are at overall high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). No single CT regimen is recognized as standard in gastric cancer and few regimens are represented in G-CSF guidelines. We therefore evaluated neutropenia management in pts receiving CT for gastric cancer. Methods: This was a multicentre prospective observational study that enrolled pts sequentially from 11/2009 to 06/2011. Adult gastric cancer pts (any stage) with ≥3 cycles of myelosuppressive CT scheduled and an investigator-assessed overall FN risk ≥20% were eligible. The primary outcome was the proportion of pts who received PP G-CSF (G-CSF in days 1-7 of cycle 1). Secondary outcomes included FN incidence, chemotherapy administration, and G-CSF use. Posthoc analyses investigated the subgroup who received DCF, including modifications from standard DCF (Van Cutsem. JCO. 2006), and the G-CSF support given up to the first FN (G-CSF prophylaxis given per label in each cycle up to that in which FN occurred). Results: Of 209 pts enrolled, 199 were eligible and their data analyzed. The mean (±SD) age was 62 (±12) years, 76% were male, 17% were ECOG 2 and none ECOG 3-4; 47% were treatment naïve. Planned CT was palliative in 74% of pts; overall, 27 different backbone regimens were planned (10 triplet, 12 doublet, 5 single drug regimens). The most common regimen used was DCF (54 pts, 27%), predominantly given as modified DCF (41 pts). Despite being assessed as high risk for FN, G-CSF PP was administered to only 35% of pts overall (n=70; 54 pegfilgrastim, 16 daily G-CSF) and to 69% of pts who received DCF. FN occurred in 14 pts (10%), 9 of whom received DCF. A large majority of FN pts (12/14, 86%) had not received prophylactic G-CSF per label up to the first FN occurrence; furthermore, 86% of FN pts did not receive G-CSF prophylaxis in the cycle following the FN event. Conclusions: The variety of CT used, frequent modifications to standard CT, and presence of pt risk factors makes FN risk estimation difficult in gastric cancer. Improved risk assessment and appropriate targeting of G-CSF PP to high risk pts is needed. </jats:p>
container_issue 4_suppl
container_start_page 128
container_title Journal of Clinical Oncology
container_volume 31
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
_version_ 1792328191764856849
geogr_code not assigned
last_indexed 2024-03-01T12:49:21.737Z
geogr_code_person not assigned
openURL url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=Chemotherapy+%28CT%29+treatment+patterns+and+neutropenia+management+in+gastric+cancer+patients+%28pts%29+receiving+myelosuppressive+chemotherapy+in+Europe.&rft.date=2013-02-01&genre=article&issn=1527-7755&volume=31&issue=4_suppl&spage=128&epage=128&pages=128-128&jtitle=Journal+of+Clinical+Oncology&atitle=Chemotherapy+%28CT%29+treatment+patterns+and+neutropenia+management+in+gastric+cancer+patients+%28pts%29+receiving+myelosuppressive+chemotherapy+in+Europe.&aulast=Passalacqua&aufirst=Rodolfo&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1200%2Fjco.2013.31.4_suppl.128&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng
SOLR
_version_ 1792328191764856849
author Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa, Gallego Plazas, Javier, Mineur, Laurent, Salek, Tomas, Hendlisz, Alain, Bendall, Kate, Vogl, Florian D., Passalacqua, Rodolfo
author_facet Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa, Gallego Plazas, Javier, Mineur, Laurent, Salek, Tomas, Hendlisz, Alain, Bendall, Kate, Vogl, Florian D., Passalacqua, Rodolfo, Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa, Gallego Plazas, Javier, Mineur, Laurent, Salek, Tomas, Hendlisz, Alain, Bendall, Kate, Vogl, Florian D., Passalacqua, Rodolfo
author_sort kalinka-warzocha, ewa
container_issue 4_suppl
container_start_page 128
container_title Journal of Clinical Oncology
container_volume 31
description <jats:p> 128 </jats:p><jats:p> Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP) is recommended for pts undergoing CT who are at overall high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). No single CT regimen is recognized as standard in gastric cancer and few regimens are represented in G-CSF guidelines. We therefore evaluated neutropenia management in pts receiving CT for gastric cancer. Methods: This was a multicentre prospective observational study that enrolled pts sequentially from 11/2009 to 06/2011. Adult gastric cancer pts (any stage) with ≥3 cycles of myelosuppressive CT scheduled and an investigator-assessed overall FN risk ≥20% were eligible. The primary outcome was the proportion of pts who received PP G-CSF (G-CSF in days 1-7 of cycle 1). Secondary outcomes included FN incidence, chemotherapy administration, and G-CSF use. Posthoc analyses investigated the subgroup who received DCF, including modifications from standard DCF (Van Cutsem. JCO. 2006), and the G-CSF support given up to the first FN (G-CSF prophylaxis given per label in each cycle up to that in which FN occurred). Results: Of 209 pts enrolled, 199 were eligible and their data analyzed. The mean (±SD) age was 62 (±12) years, 76% were male, 17% were ECOG 2 and none ECOG 3-4; 47% were treatment naïve. Planned CT was palliative in 74% of pts; overall, 27 different backbone regimens were planned (10 triplet, 12 doublet, 5 single drug regimens). The most common regimen used was DCF (54 pts, 27%), predominantly given as modified DCF (41 pts). Despite being assessed as high risk for FN, G-CSF PP was administered to only 35% of pts overall (n=70; 54 pegfilgrastim, 16 daily G-CSF) and to 69% of pts who received DCF. FN occurred in 14 pts (10%), 9 of whom received DCF. A large majority of FN pts (12/14, 86%) had not received prophylactic G-CSF per label up to the first FN occurrence; furthermore, 86% of FN pts did not receive G-CSF prophylaxis in the cycle following the FN event. Conclusions: The variety of CT used, frequent modifications to standard CT, and presence of pt risk factors makes FN risk estimation difficult in gastric cancer. Improved risk assessment and appropriate targeting of G-CSF PP to high risk pts is needed. </jats:p>
doi_str_mv 10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.128
facet_avail Online, Free
finc_class_facet Medizin
format ElectronicArticle
format_de105 Article, E-Article
format_de14 Article, E-Article
format_de15 Article, E-Article
format_de520 Article, E-Article
format_de540 Article, E-Article
format_dech1 Article, E-Article
format_ded117 Article, E-Article
format_degla1 E-Article
format_del152 Buch
format_del189 Article, E-Article
format_dezi4 Article
format_dezwi2 Article, E-Article
format_finc Article, E-Article
format_nrw Article, E-Article
geogr_code not assigned
geogr_code_person not assigned
id ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTIwMC9qY28uMjAxMy4zMS40X3N1cHBsLjEyOA
imprint American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2013
imprint_str_mv American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), 2013
institution DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-Zwi2, DE-D161, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229
issn 0732-183X, 1527-7755
issn_str_mv 0732-183X, 1527-7755
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-01T12:49:21.737Z
match_str kalinkawarzocha2013chemotherapycttreatmentpatternsandneutropeniamanagementingastriccancerpatientsptsreceivingmyelosuppressivechemotherapyineurope
mega_collection American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) (CrossRef)
physical 128-128
publishDate 2013
publishDateSort 2013
publisher American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
record_format ai
recordtype ai
series Journal of Clinical Oncology
source_id 49
spelling Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa Gallego Plazas, Javier Mineur, Laurent Salek, Tomas Hendlisz, Alain Bendall, Kate Vogl, Florian D. Passalacqua, Rodolfo 0732-183X 1527-7755 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Cancer Research Oncology http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.128 <jats:p> 128 </jats:p><jats:p> Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (PP) is recommended for pts undergoing CT who are at overall high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). No single CT regimen is recognized as standard in gastric cancer and few regimens are represented in G-CSF guidelines. We therefore evaluated neutropenia management in pts receiving CT for gastric cancer. Methods: This was a multicentre prospective observational study that enrolled pts sequentially from 11/2009 to 06/2011. Adult gastric cancer pts (any stage) with ≥3 cycles of myelosuppressive CT scheduled and an investigator-assessed overall FN risk ≥20% were eligible. The primary outcome was the proportion of pts who received PP G-CSF (G-CSF in days 1-7 of cycle 1). Secondary outcomes included FN incidence, chemotherapy administration, and G-CSF use. Posthoc analyses investigated the subgroup who received DCF, including modifications from standard DCF (Van Cutsem. JCO. 2006), and the G-CSF support given up to the first FN (G-CSF prophylaxis given per label in each cycle up to that in which FN occurred). Results: Of 209 pts enrolled, 199 were eligible and their data analyzed. The mean (±SD) age was 62 (±12) years, 76% were male, 17% were ECOG 2 and none ECOG 3-4; 47% were treatment naïve. Planned CT was palliative in 74% of pts; overall, 27 different backbone regimens were planned (10 triplet, 12 doublet, 5 single drug regimens). The most common regimen used was DCF (54 pts, 27%), predominantly given as modified DCF (41 pts). Despite being assessed as high risk for FN, G-CSF PP was administered to only 35% of pts overall (n=70; 54 pegfilgrastim, 16 daily G-CSF) and to 69% of pts who received DCF. FN occurred in 14 pts (10%), 9 of whom received DCF. A large majority of FN pts (12/14, 86%) had not received prophylactic G-CSF per label up to the first FN occurrence; furthermore, 86% of FN pts did not receive G-CSF prophylaxis in the cycle following the FN event. Conclusions: The variety of CT used, frequent modifications to standard CT, and presence of pt risk factors makes FN risk estimation difficult in gastric cancer. Improved risk assessment and appropriate targeting of G-CSF PP to high risk pts is needed. </jats:p> Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe. Journal of Clinical Oncology
spellingShingle Kalinka-Warzocha, Ewa, Gallego Plazas, Javier, Mineur, Laurent, Salek, Tomas, Hendlisz, Alain, Bendall, Kate, Vogl, Florian D., Passalacqua, Rodolfo, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe., Cancer Research, Oncology
title Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_full Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_fullStr Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_full_unstemmed Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_short Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
title_sort chemotherapy (ct) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in europe.
title_unstemmed Chemotherapy (CT) treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer patients (pts) receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy in Europe.
topic Cancer Research, Oncology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.128