Cargando…

Lenograstim and filgrastim in the febrile neutropenia prophylaxis of hospitalized patients: efficacy and cost of the prophylaxis in a retrospective survey

PURPOSE: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and related costs of using two different molecules of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (lenograstim – LENO or filgrastim – FIL) as primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in a hematological inpatient se...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Innocenti, Rolando, Rigacci, Luigi, Restelli, Umberto, Scappini, Barbara, Gianfaldoni, Giacomo, Fanci, Rosa, Mannelli, Francesco, Scolari, Francesca, Croce, Davide, Bonizzoni, Erminio, Perrone, Tania, Bosi, Alberto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6312059/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30643475
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JBM.S186786
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and related costs of using two different molecules of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (lenograstim – LENO or filgrastim – FIL) as primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in a hematological inpatient setting. METHODS: The primary endpoints of the analysis were the efficacy of the two G-CSFs in terms of the level of white blood cells, hemoglobin and platelets at the end of the treatment and the per capita direct medical costs related to G-CSF prophylaxis. RESULTS: Two hundred twelve patients (96 LENO, 116 FIL) have been evaluated. The following statistically significant differences have been observed between FIL and LENO: the use of a higher number of vials (11 vs 7; P<0.03) to fully recover bone marrow, a higher grade 3–4 neutropenia at the time of G-CSF discontinuation (29.3% vs 16.7%; P=0.031) and an increased number of days of hospitalization (8 vs 5; P<0.005). A longer hospital stay before discharge was necessary (12 vs 10), which reflects the higher final costs per patient (median treatment cost per cycle 10.706 € for LENO, compared to 12.623 € for FIL). CONCLUSION: The use of LENO has been associated with a lower number of days of hospitalization, number of vials and less incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia at the time of G-CSF discontinuation. LENO seems to be cost-saving when compared with FIL (–15.2%).