Efficacy and Safety of Pegylated Filgrastim as Primary Prophylaxis Following Pediatric Dose-intensive Chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Large trials and meta-analyses in adults suggest a similar efficacy and safety of a single dose of peg-filgrastim compared with daily filgrastim in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. However, there is no large prospective data in the pediatric population. This trial was designed to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of peg-filgrastim in children. METHODS: This was an open-labelled randomized trial. Children with solid tumors receiving chemotherapy in which growth factor support was indicated were screened before chemotherapy and randomized to either the filgrastim arm (5 mcg/kg daily) or peg-filgrastim arm (100 mcg/kg single dose 24 h postchemotherapy). Patients were followed up till absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovery clinically as well as by thrice weekly complete blood counts. The primary outcome was the incidence of FN, and secondary outcomes included the reduction in the depth of ANC nadir, shortening of the duration of grade-4 neutropenia, reduction in ANC recovery time, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 344 chemotherapy cycles were screened. After the exclusion of 29 cycles, 315 chemotherapy cycles in 61 patients were randomized to peg-filgrastim (n=160) and filgrastim arm (n=155). The median age of included patients was 3 years (2; 6.5), and males were predominant. The incidence of FN in peg-filgrastim and filgrastim arms was 8% and 18% ( P =0.01) (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.24-0.84). Duration of ANC recovery, depth of ANC nadir, and adverse events reported were not significantly different in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of FN in the peg-filgrastim arm was significantly lesser. No significant adverse events attributable to the study drug were reported.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".