Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in the treatment of high-risk febrile neutropenia: a multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) have been shown to help prevent febrile neutropenia in certain subgroups of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, but their role in treating febrile neutropenia is controversial. The purpose of our study was to evaluate-in a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial-the efficacy of adding G-CSF to broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment of patients with solid tumors and high-risk febrile neutropenia. METHODS A total of 210 patients with solid tumors treated with conventional-dose chemotherapy who presented with fever and grade IV neutropenia were considered to be eligible for the trial. They met at least one of the following high-risk criteria: profound neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count <100/mm(3)), short latency from previous chemotherapy cycle (<10 days), sepsis or clinically documented infection at presentation, severe comorbidity, performance status of 3-4 (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale), or prior inpatient status. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive the antibiotics ceftazidime and amikacin, with or without G-CSF (5 microg/kg per day). The primary study end point was the duration of hospitalization. All P values were two-sided. RESULTS Patients randomly assigned to receive G-CSF had a significantly shorter duration of grade IV neutropenia (median, 2 days versus 3 days; P = 0.0004), antibiotic therapy (median, 5 days versus 6 days; P = 0.013), and hospital stay (median, 5 days versus 7 days; P = 0.015) than patients in the control arm. The incidence of serious medical complications not present at the initial clinical evaluation was 10% in the G-CSF group and 17% in the control group (P = 0.12), including five deaths in each study arm. The median cost of hospital stay and the median overall cost per patient admission were reduced by 17% (P = 0.01) and by 11% (P = 0.07), respectively, in the G-CSF arm compared with the control arm. CONCLUSIONS Adding G-CSF to antibiotic therapy shortens the duration of neutropenia, reduces the duration of antibiotic therapy and hospitalization, and decreases hospital costs in patients with high-risk febrile neutropenia.

Randomized phase 3 trial of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide alone or followed by Paclitaxel for early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND Taxanes are among the most active drugs for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, and, as a consequence, they have also been studied in the adjuvant setting. METHODS After breast cancer surgery, women with lymph node-positive disease were randomly assigned to treatment with fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or with FEC followed by weekly paclitaxel (FEC-P). The primary endpoint of study-5-year disease-free survival (DFS)-was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and analysis of the prognostic and predictive value of clinical and molecular (hormone receptors by immunohistochemistry and HER2 by fluorescence in situ hybridization) markers. Associations and interactions were assessed with a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model for DFS for the following covariates: age, menopausal status, tumor size, lymph node status, type of chemotherapy, tumor size, positive lymph nodes, HER2 status, and hormone receptor status. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS Among the 1246 eligible patients, estimated rates of DFS at 5 years were 78.5% in the FEC-P arm and 72.1% in the FEC arm (difference = 6.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.6% to 11.2%; P = .006). FEC-P treatment was associated with a 23% reduction in the risk of relapse compared with FEC treatment (146 relapses in the 614 patients in the FEC-P arm vs 193 relapses in the 632 patients in the FEC arm, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.95; P = .022) and a 22% reduction in the risk of death (73 and 95 deaths, respectively, HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.06; P = .110). Among the 928 patients for whom tumor samples were centrally analyzed, type of chemotherapy (FEC vs FEC-P) (P = .017), number of involved axillary lymph nodes (P < .001), tumor size (P = .020), hormone receptor status (P = .004), and HER2 status (P = .006) were all associated with DFS. We found no statistically significant interaction between HER2 status and paclitaxel treatment or between hormone receptor status and paclitaxel treatment. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with operable breast cancer, FEC-P treatment statistically significantly reduced the risk of relapse compared with FEC as adjuvant therapy.

A Nested Case-Control Study of Metabolically Defined Body Size Phenotypes and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).

BACKGROUND Obesity is positively associated with colorectal cancer. Recently, body size subtypes categorised by the prevalence of hyperinsulinaemia have been defined, and metabolically healthy overweight/obese individuals (without hyperinsulinaemia) have been suggested to be at lower risk of cardiovascular disease than their metabolically unhealthy (hyperinsulinaemic) overweight/obese counterparts. Whether similarly variable relationships exist for metabolically defined body size phenotypes and colorectal cancer risk is unknown. METHODS AND FINDINGS The association of metabolically defined body size phenotypes with colorectal cancer was investigated in a case-control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Metabolic health/body size phenotypes were defined according to hyperinsulinaemia status using serum concentrations of C-peptide, a marker of insulin secretion. A total of 737 incident colorectal cancer cases and 737 matched controls were divided into tertiles based on the distribution of C-peptide concentration amongst the control population, and participants were classified as metabolically healthy if below the first tertile of C-peptide and metabolically unhealthy if above the first tertile. These metabolic health definitions were then combined with body mass index (BMI) measurements to create four metabolic health/body size phenotype categories: (1) metabolically healthy/normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m2), (2) metabolically healthy/overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2), (3) metabolically unhealthy/normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m2), and (4) metabolically unhealthy/overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2). Additionally, in separate models, waist circumference measurements (using the International Diabetes Federation cut-points [≥80 cm for women and ≥94 cm for men]) were used (instead of BMI) to create the four metabolic health/body size phenotype categories. Statistical tests used in the analysis were all two-sided, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. In multivariable-adjusted conditional logistic regression models with BMI used to define adiposity, compared with metabolically healthy/normal weight individuals, we observed a higher colorectal cancer risk among metabolically unhealthy/normal weight (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59, 95% CI 1.10-2.28) and metabolically unhealthy/overweight (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.01-1.94) participants, but not among metabolically healthy/overweight individuals (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.65-1.42). Among the overweight individuals, lower colorectal cancer risk was observed for metabolically healthy/overweight individuals compared with metabolically unhealthy/overweight individuals (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.96). These associations were generally consistent when waist circumference was used as the measure of adiposity. To our knowledge, there is no universally accepted clinical definition for using C-peptide level as an indication of hyperinsulinaemia. Therefore, a possible limitation of our analysis was that the classification of individuals as being hyperinsulinaemic-based on their C-peptide level-was arbitrary. However, when we used quartiles or the median of C-peptide, instead of tertiles, as the cut-point of hyperinsulinaemia, a similar pattern of associations was observed. CONCLUSIONS These results support the idea that individuals with the metabolically healthy/overweight phenotype (with normal insulin levels) are at lower colorectal cancer risk than those with hyperinsulinaemia. The combination of anthropometric measures with metabolic parameters, such as C-peptide, may be useful for defining strata of the population at greater risk of colorectal cancer.