Cargando…

Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model

OBJECTIVES: Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) is widely used to treat neutropenia during cytotoxic chemotherapy. The optimal scheduling of rhG-CSF is unknown and can hardly be tested in clinical studies due to numerous therapy parameters affecting outcome (chemotherap...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Scholz, Markus, Ackermann, Manuela, Emmrich, Frank, Loeffler, Markus, Kamprad, Manja
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2726061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19707393
_version_ 1782170560360349696
author Scholz, Markus
Ackermann, Manuela
Emmrich, Frank
Loeffler, Markus
Kamprad, Manja
author_facet Scholz, Markus
Ackermann, Manuela
Emmrich, Frank
Loeffler, Markus
Kamprad, Manja
author_sort Scholz, Markus
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) is widely used to treat neutropenia during cytotoxic chemotherapy. The optimal scheduling of rhG-CSF is unknown and can hardly be tested in clinical studies due to numerous therapy parameters affecting outcome (chemotherapeutic regimen, rhG-CSF schedules, individual covariables). Motivated by biomathematical model simulations, we aim to investigate different rhG-CSF schedules in a preclinical chemotherapy mouse model. METHODS: The time course of hematotoxicity was studied in CD-1 mice after cyclophosphamide (CP) administration. Filgrastim was applied concomitantly in a 2 × 3-factorial design of two dosing options (2 × 20 μg and 4 × 10 μg) and three timing options (directly, one, and two days after CP). Alternatively, a single dose of 40 μg pegfilgrastim was applied at the three timing options. The resulting cytopenia was compared among the schedules. RESULTS: Dosing and timing had a significant influence on the effectiveness of filgrastim schedules whereas for pegfilgrastim the timing effect was irrelevant. The best filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules exhibited equivalent toxicity. Monocytes dynamics performed analogously to granulocytes. All schedules showed roughly the same lymphotoxicity. CONCLUSION: We conclude that effectiveness of filgrastim application depends heavily on its scheduling during chemotherapy. There is an optimum of timing. Dose splitting is better than concentrated applications. Effectiveness of pegfilgrastim is less dependent on timing.
format Text
id pubmed-2726061
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27260612009-08-25 Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model Scholz, Markus Ackermann, Manuela Emmrich, Frank Loeffler, Markus Kamprad, Manja Biologics Original Research OBJECTIVES: Recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF) is widely used to treat neutropenia during cytotoxic chemotherapy. The optimal scheduling of rhG-CSF is unknown and can hardly be tested in clinical studies due to numerous therapy parameters affecting outcome (chemotherapeutic regimen, rhG-CSF schedules, individual covariables). Motivated by biomathematical model simulations, we aim to investigate different rhG-CSF schedules in a preclinical chemotherapy mouse model. METHODS: The time course of hematotoxicity was studied in CD-1 mice after cyclophosphamide (CP) administration. Filgrastim was applied concomitantly in a 2 × 3-factorial design of two dosing options (2 × 20 μg and 4 × 10 μg) and three timing options (directly, one, and two days after CP). Alternatively, a single dose of 40 μg pegfilgrastim was applied at the three timing options. The resulting cytopenia was compared among the schedules. RESULTS: Dosing and timing had a significant influence on the effectiveness of filgrastim schedules whereas for pegfilgrastim the timing effect was irrelevant. The best filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules exhibited equivalent toxicity. Monocytes dynamics performed analogously to granulocytes. All schedules showed roughly the same lymphotoxicity. CONCLUSION: We conclude that effectiveness of filgrastim application depends heavily on its scheduling during chemotherapy. There is an optimum of timing. Dose splitting is better than concentrated applications. Effectiveness of pegfilgrastim is less dependent on timing. Dove Medical Press 2009 2009-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC2726061/ /pubmed/19707393 Text en © 2009 Scholz et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Scholz, Markus
Ackermann, Manuela
Emmrich, Frank
Loeffler, Markus
Kamprad, Manja
Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
title Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
title_full Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
title_fullStr Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
title_short Effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
title_sort effectiveness of cytopenia prophylaxis for different filgrastim and pegfilgrastim schedules in a chemotherapy mouse model
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2726061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19707393
work_keys_str_mv AT scholzmarkus effectivenessofcytopeniaprophylaxisfordifferentfilgrastimandpegfilgrastimschedulesinachemotherapymousemodel
AT ackermannmanuela effectivenessofcytopeniaprophylaxisfordifferentfilgrastimandpegfilgrastimschedulesinachemotherapymousemodel
AT emmrichfrank effectivenessofcytopeniaprophylaxisfordifferentfilgrastimandpegfilgrastimschedulesinachemotherapymousemodel
AT loefflermarkus effectivenessofcytopeniaprophylaxisfordifferentfilgrastimandpegfilgrastimschedulesinachemotherapymousemodel
AT kampradmanja effectivenessofcytopeniaprophylaxisfordifferentfilgrastimandpegfilgrastimschedulesinachemotherapymousemodel