Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective study shows prophylactic G-CSF improves survival in aggressive B-cell lymphoma patients treated with R-CHOP, suggesting clinical benefit.
e19061 Background: R-CHOP is the standard first-line regimen for aggressive CD20-positive B-cell lymphomas, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Outcomes depend on maintaining chemotherapy dose intensity, but myelosuppression and febrile neutropenia (FN) frequently lead to treatment delays or dose reductions. Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) reduce FN risk and preserve dose intensity and are guideline-recommended for patients at moderate-to-high FN risk; however, evidence for improved long-term survival in real-world R-CHOP–treated populations remain limited. We evaluated the association between prophylactic G-CSF use and survival and safety outcomes using a multi-institutional electronic health record network. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using the TriNetX research network from 2012-2024. Adults with aggressive B-cell lymphomas who received R-CHOP were grouped based on whether or not they received prophylactic G-CSF within 3-days of cycle 1. Propensity score matching was used to balance cohorts before comparing survival using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Secondary outcomes included early neutropenia and septic shock or vasopressor use. Results: After propensity score matching, 4,007 patients receiving R-CHOP with G-CSF were well balanced with 4,007 patients receiving R-CHOP without G-CSF across baseline characteristics. At 6 months, mortality was 6.20% with G-CSF versus 7.33% without (risk difference −1.13%, 95% CI −2.23% to −0.02%; HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71–0.99; p = 0.045). At 12 months, mortality was 10.20% vs 11.42% (risk difference −1.22%, 95% CI −2.58% to 0.15%; HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77–1.00; p = 0.08), and at 24 months remained lower with G-CSF (13.48% vs 15.10%; risk difference −1.63%, 95% CI −3.16% to −0.09%; HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78–0.98; p = 0.038). Survival probabilities favored G-CSF at 6 months (93.7% vs 92.5%), 12 months (89.4% vs 88.1%), and 24 months (85.6% vs 83.7%). Neutropenia was more frequently documented with G-CSF (28.7% vs 26.7%; HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04–1.23; p < 0.001) but not after excluding patients with prior neutropenia (22.45% vs 23.03%; HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93–1.13; p = 0.56). Rates of septic shock (1.20% vs 1.22%; HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66–1.46; p = 0.91) and septic shock or vasopressor use were low and similar between groups, including in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: In this large real-world, propensity-matched cohort of patients with B-cell lymphomas treated with R-CHOP, prophylactic G-CSF use was associated with improved early and long-term survival without a difference in septic shock or severe infectious complications. Apparent increases in neutropenia were not observed after accounting for baseline history, suggesting no excess risk of new-onset neutropenia. These findings support the routine use of G-CSF with R-CHOP and suggest a potential survival benefit beyond neutropenia prevention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: