First, we examined the impact of excluding filgrastim cycles which has a shorter duration of filgrastim prophylaxis. 2nd, as the ex clusion of individuals find more info with proof of in excess of 1 pri mary cancer could inappropriately exclude patients with only one key cancer, that criterion was removed. Results Patient traits The first population from the claims database con tained 151,118 sufferers getting chemotherapy. Following applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the eli gible population included 3,535 individuals with breast cancer, lung cancer, NHL, ovarian cancer, or colorectal cancer receiving G CSF prophylaxis. These patients represented twelve,056 cycles all through which G CSF was delivered prophylactically, which includes 373 filgrastim cycles and eleven,683 pegfilgrastim cycles.
Base line demographics indicated that almost all individuals have been female using a indicate age of 55, with half in the pati ents from the Southern region of your United states of america. About half from the sufferers had breast cancer, using the following most regular cancers currently being lung cancer and NHL. Between all patient cycles within the sample, about 32% were connected that has a historical past of anemia within the 120 days just before the start off of every cycle. Filgrastim was employed to get a indicate of 4. eight injec tions per cycle compared to 1. 0 injections per cycle with pegfilgrastim, which was constant with pegfilgrastims as soon as per cycle indication. Threat of hospitalization Hospitalization data for a narrow definition of neutro penia, a broad definition of neutropenia, and all causes have been calculated and are described herein.
The incidence of neutropenia related hospitalization per cycle was 1. 3% with prophylactic filgrastim and 0. 6% with prophylactic pegfilgrastim . neutropenia associated hospitalization per cycle also occurred at a greater incidence with prophylactic filgras tim than with prophylactic pegfilgrastim . a greater incidence with prophylactic filgrastim than with prophylactic pegfilgrastim in all bring about hospitalizations per cycle was observed also. When in contrast with cycles during which filgrastim was prophylactically utilised, cycles by which prophylactic peg filgrastim was applied had been related by using a reduction from the threat of all result in hospitalizations and neutropenia associated hospitalization, just after controlling for patient, condition, and treatment method characteristics in GEE designs.
Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the possible effects of length of filgrastim prophylaxis plus the presence of over 1 main cancer. Hospitalization chance for cycles during which filgrastim was used for 4 or extra days was examined. The OR for the comparison concerning filgrastim and pegfilgrastim did not alter appreciably from individuals observed during the key analysis. Comparable findings were observed when sufferers with more than 1 key cancer were included during the analyses.