Background: This study was a prospective, non-interventional, multicentre study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Nivestim ® (biosimilar of filgrastim) in chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in real-life setting.Methods: Adult patients undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumor or hematological malignancy treated with prophylactic or curative Nivestim were included.Patients were followed for 1-6 chemotherapy cycles following study inclusion.The primary objective was the assessment of the safety of Nivestim.Results: 2102 patients (mean age, 63.5 years) were analyzed (1579 with solid tumor and 532 with hematological malignancy); 2065 (98.2%) received Nivestim as prophylaxis administered with a median time of two days after onset of chemotherapy.Chemotherapy regimens were associated with a high risk of febrile neutropenia for 19.4%, intermediate risk for 55.6% and low risk for 25.0%.Adverse events were reported for 20.4% (414/2034) of patients: the most common adverse event was muscle and/or bone pain (12.1%).In prophylactic patients, febrile neutropenia was reported in 98 patients (4.9%; 95% CI, 4.06-5.98),occurring at a median time of 14.0 days after the first chemotherapy cycle.Infection occurred in 61 patients (3.1%; 95% CI, 2.39-3.93)after a median time of 23.5 days following onset of chemotherapy.A total of 98 prophylactic patients (4.9%) who presented with febrile neutropenia and/or infection were hospitalized.Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of Nivestim in cancer patients in real-world clinical practice were consistent with the registration studies and in line with reference filgrastim in both the prophylactic and curative settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maloisel et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one related paper. Consider it for comparative context: