Peg-filgrastim and cabazitaxel in prostate cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the impact of prophylaxis with granulocyte-colony stimulating growth factor (G-CSF) on the risk of febrile neutropenia in a cohort of patients enrolled at the University Federico II of Naples and treated with cabazitaxel for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We carried out a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients enrolled at our institution in a compassionate-use programme with cabazitaxel, aimed at providing early access to the drug before its commercial availability in mCRPC patients. Besides baseline clinical and demographic characteristics, data on treatment efficacy and toxicity, as well as those on the use of G-CSF per patient per cycle were extracted. Progression-free survival and overall survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Fisher's exact test was used to explore a relationship between a single event of grade 3 or more neutropenia or febrile neutropenia and previous use of G-CSF. Univariate analysis was carried out to evaluate predictors of grade 3 or more neutropenia and/or febrile neutropenia. Of 34 patients enrolled at our institution from December 2010 to December 2011, 32 had received at least one dose of cabazitaxel and were included in the analysis. Patients received a median of 10 cabazitaxel cycles. Grade 3 or more neutropenia was common, occurring in 64.5% of patients. Three patients (9.3%) developed febrile neutropenia. Twenty-seven patients received prophylaxis with G-CSF during at least one cycle using peg-filgrastim. The risk of grade 3 or more neutropenia and/or febrile neutropenia per patient and per cycle was seven times lower when G-CSF was used. Baseline neutrophil count of less than 4570/mm was the strongest predictor of grade 3 or more neutropenia and/or febrile neutropenia. No toxic death was reported. Only one patient discontinued cabazitaxel because of an adverse event. Our analysis suggests that prophylaxis with peg-filgrastim may considerably reduce the incidence of grade 3 or more neutropenia and, possibly, of febrile neutropenia in mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel. Further analyses involving a larger population are warranted to confirm our results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".