[Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in the treatment of febrile neutropenia]. / Factor estimulante de colonias de granulocitos en el tratamiento de neutropenia febril.

PURPOSE: To determine whether granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) used in addition to antibiotic therapy, in patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia shortens the period of fever, neutropenia and hospitalization. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was prospective. Patients with lymphoblastic acute leukemia (LAL) were included. They received intensive chemotherapy of induction, intensification, or consolidation. At random, a group received amikacin-ceftriaxone; if no had response after 3 days, we added vancomicin and, after 7 days, amphotericin. The other group received in addition these antibiotics, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. RESULTS: The groups were comparable in the magnitude of the initial neutropenia (< 0.5 x 10(9)/L), site of the infection, chemotherapy received germs isolated, age, and sex. The patients of the group that received FEC-G were cured in the course of 3.1 days; in the group without FEC-G, this occurred in 7.2 days (p = 0.0001). At the end of the infectious episode, the number of neutrophils, in the group with FEC-G, was of 1.9 x 10(9)/L versus 0.7 x 10(9)/L (p = 0.0009). The mortality was of one and two cases (p = 0.46). The global mortality was 7.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of FEC-G to the treatment with antibiotics, in febrile neutropenia, decreases duration of days with fever, hospitalization and neutropenia. However, the frequency of cure is not augmented.

Neutrophil recovery time and adverse side effects in acute leukemia patients treated with intensive chemotherapy and concomitant G or GM-CSF.

OBJECTIVE: Compare the speed of neutrophil recovery and the unwanted secondary effects in two groups of acute leukemia patients treated with intensive chemotherapy and G or GM-CSF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous G-CSF at a daily dose of 300 micrograms for adults and 150 micrograms for children or GM-CSF at 400 and 200 micrograms respectively, starting With chemotherapy and stopping when the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) reached 500/microL. Secondary effects were attributed to growth factors only when not coincidental with infection, chemotherapy or hemoderivative transfusion. RESULTS: 34 patients were included in the G-CSF arm and 37 in the GM-CSF arm. Distribution by sex, age, type of acute leukemia, induction or post-induction therapy, as well as initial neutrophil count were comparable among the two groups. Mean time for ANC > 500/microL was 19 days for G-CSF group and 16 days for GM-CSF group (p = 0.08). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary unwanted side effects between the two groups. There were two cases of growth factor-related-fever in the G-CSF group and five in the GM-CSF group (p = 0.25). There was a case of systemic reaction in the G-CSF group. Twenty-nine patients in each group presented febrile neutropenia episodes (p = 0.45). The only factor that showed significance on neutrophil recovery speed was type of leukemia (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: We found no clear advantage of one growth factor over the other for this indication.

[Comparison of 2 regimens of polychemotherapy in refractory acute leukemia or in relapse]. / Comparación de dos regímenes de poliquimioterapia en leucemia aguda refractaria o en recaída.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of two chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of relapsed and refractory acute leukemias. METHODS: We randomly assigned 24 patients in two groups: the LARR1 group received induction with 4 days of etoposide and 4 days of high-dose ara-C; the LARR2 group received induction therapy with 4 days of etoposide plus 3 days of mitoxantrone. Consolidation was given using the same drugs at the same dosage. Maintenance therapy was the same for both groups alternating methotrexate, vincristine, L-asparaginase, carmustine, cyclophosphamide and Ara-C. Every 15 weeks both groups repeated consolidation according to their group. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor was used in both groups. RESULTS: Median survival for both groups was 5 months (range 1-17). Ten months after starting therapy three patients were disease free in the LARR1 group and two in the LARR2 group. There were no statistically significant differences in complete remission rate (p = 0.62), refractoriness (p = 0.58), deaths in induction (0.14) and other parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results were comparable with those of others. The only advantage we found was the possibility of using the LARR1 treatment in patients who have reached or are about to reach cardiotoxic-anthracycline doses.