DOCSLIB.ORG

1 the PREVENTION of ORAL SIDE EFFECTS of CANCER TREATMENT VOLUME I of II a Thesis Submitted to the University of Manchester

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 the PREVENTION of ORAL SIDE EFFECTS of CANCER TREATMENT VOLUME I of II a Thesis Submitted to the University of Manchester THE PREVENTION OF ORAL SIDE EFFECTS OF CANCER TREATMENT VOLUME I of II A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health 2017 PHILIP RILEY SCHOOL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES Division of Dentistry 1 CONTENTS VOLUME I OF II: ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. 6 DECLARATION ......................................................................................................... 7 COPYRIGHT STATEMENT .................................................................................... 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................ 8 THE AUTHOR ............................................................................................................ 8 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 9 1.1 Overview of side effects caused by cancer treatment .............................................9 1.2 Oral mucositis .............................................................................................................9 1.3 Salivary gland dysfunction ......................................................................................19 1.4 Importance of systematic reviews ...........................................................................21 1.5 Importance of clinical guidelines ............................................................................24 1.6 What are the gaps? ..................................................................................................27 2 AIMS .................................................................................................................. 29 3 INTERVENTIONS FOR PREVENTING ORAL MUCOSITIS IN PATIENTS WITH CANCER RECEIVING TREATMENT: ORAL CRYOTHERAPY ...... 30 3.1 Abstract .....................................................................................................................30 3.2 Background ...............................................................................................................33 3.3 Objectives ..................................................................................................................36 3.4 Methods .....................................................................................................................36 3.5 Results .......................................................................................................................44 3.5.1 Description of studies ..................................................................................... 44 3.5.2 Risk of bias in included studies ...................................................................... 53 3.5.3 Effects of interventions .................................................................................. 57 3.6 Summary of findings tables .....................................................................................79 1 Cryotherapy versus control for preventing oral mucositis in adults receiving fluorouracil-based treatment for solid cancers ........................................................ 79 2 Cryotherapy versus control for preventing oral mucositis in adults receiving high- dose melphalan-based treatment prior to haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for haematological cancers ........................................................................................... 81 3.7 Discussion ..................................................................................................................84 3.8 Authors' conclusions ................................................................................................89 4 INTERVENTIONS FOR PREVENTING ORAL MUCOSITIS IN PATIENTS WITH CANCER RECEIVING TREATMENT: CYTOKINES AND GROWTH FACTORS .................................................................................................................. 91 2 4.1 Abstract .....................................................................................................................91 4.2 Background ...............................................................................................................93 4.3 Objectives ..................................................................................................................97 4.4 Methods .....................................................................................................................97 4.5 Results .....................................................................................................................105 4.5.1 Description of studies ................................................................................... 105 Excluded studies.................................................................................................... 118 4.5.2 Risk of bias in included studies .................................................................... 119 4.5.3 Effects of interventions ................................................................................ 123 4.6 Summary of findings tables ...................................................................................157 1 KGF compared to placebo for preventing oral mucositis in adults with cancer receiving treatment ................................................................................................ 157 2 GM-CSF compared to placebo/no treatment for preventing oral mucositis in adults with cancer receiving treatment ............................................................................ 160 3 G-CSF compared to placebo/no treatment for preventing oral mucositis in adults with cancer receiving treatment ............................................................................ 163 4.7 Discussion ................................................................................................................165 4.8 Authors' conclusions ..............................................................................................171 5 PHARMACOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS FOR PREVENTING DRY MOUTH AND SALIVARY GLAND DYSFUNCTION FOLLOWING RADIOTHERAPY .................................................................................................. 173 5.1 Abstract ...................................................................................................................173 5.2 Background .............................................................................................................175 5.3 Objectives ................................................................................................................177 5.4 Methods ...................................................................................................................177 5.5 Results .....................................................................................................................184 5.5.1 Description of studies ................................................................................... 184 5.5.2 Risk of bias in included studies .................................................................... 189 5.5.3 Effects of interventions ................................................................................ 193 5.6 Summary of findings tables ...................................................................................245 1 Pilocarpine compared to no treatment/placebo for preventing salivary gland dysfunction following radiotherapy ...................................................................... 245 2 Amifostine compared to no treatment/placebo for preventing salivary gland dysfunction following radiotherapy ...................................................................... 248 3 Palifermin compared to placebo for preventing salivary gland dysfunction following radiotherapy........................................................................................................... 251 5.7 Discussion ................................................................................................................252 5.8 Authors' conclusions ..............................................................................................256 6 THE QUALITY OF CLINICAL GUIDELINES ON MOUTH CARE FOR CANCER PATIENTS ............................................................................................. 258 6.1 Abstract ...................................................................................................................258 3 6.2 Background .............................................................................................................258 6.3 Objective .................................................................................................................259 6.4 Methods ...................................................................................................................259 6.5 Results .....................................................................................................................265 6.6 Discussion ................................................................................................................276 6.7 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................278 7 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................. 279 8 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Annual Report on Eudravigilance for the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission Reporting Period: 1 January to 31 December 2018
    21 March 2019 EMA/906394/2019 Inspections, Human Medicines Pharmacovigilance and Committees Division 2018 Annual Report on EudraVigilance for the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission Reporting period: 1 January to 31 December 2018 Official address Domenico Scarlattilaan 6 ● 1083 HS Amsterdam ● The Netherlands Address for visits and deliveries Refer to www.ema.europa.eu/how-to-find-us Send us a question Go to www.ema.europa.eu/contact Telephone +31 (0)88 781 6000 An agency of the European Union © European Medicines Agency, 2019. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Table of contents Abbreviations used in the document ...................................................................................... 3 1. Executive summary ............................................................................................................ 4 2. Operation of EudraVigilance including its new functionalities ............................................ 6 3. Data collection and data quality ......................................................................................... 7 Medicinal product information ..................................................................................................... 7 Reporting of ADR reports and patient involvement ........................................................................ 7 Data Quality ............................................................................................................................. 8 4. Data analysis ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe December 2020
    White Paper The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe December 2020 PER TROEIN, Vice President, Strategic Partners, IQVIA MAX NEWTON, Senior Consultant, Global Supplier & Association Relations, IQVIA KIRSTIE SCOTT, Analyst, Global Supplier & Association Relations, IQVIA Table of contents Introduction 1 Key observations 2 Methodology 11 Country and therapy area KPIs 14 Human growth hormone (HGH) 14 Epoetin (EPO) 16 Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (GCSF) 18 Anti-tumour necrosis factor (ANTI-TNF) 20 Fertility (FOLLITROPIN ALFA) 22 Insulins 24 Oncology 26 Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) 28 Appendix 30 EMA list of approved biosimilars 30 List of Biosimilars under review by EMA 32 Introduction ‘The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe’ report describes the effects on price, volume, and market share following the arrival of biosimilar competition in Europe. The report consists of: observations on competitive markets, and a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor the impact of biosimilars in 23 European markets. The report has been a long-standing source of information on the status of the biosimilars market. This iteration has been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe and has provided an opportunity to provide full-year 2019 data, and an additional data point (June 2020 MAT) which incorporates the impact on patients in Europe across major therapeutic areas to 30th June 2020. The direct impact of which is visible in the Low Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH), and Fertility (somatropin) markets. This report has been prepared by IQVIA at the The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has a central request of the European Commission services with role in setting the rules for biosimilar submissions, initial contributions on defining the KPIs from EFPIA, approving applications, establishing approved Medicines for Europe, and EuropaBio.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020, Vol. 16, Number 1, 1–40
    Oncology in Clinical Practice 2020, Vol. 16, Number 1, 1–40 Oncology in Clinical Practice 2020, Vol. 2020, Vol. 16, Number 1 ISSN 2450–1654 Beata Jagielska, Elżbieta Sarnowska, Tomasz Sarnowski, Katarzyna Śmiałek-Kania, Janusz Siedlecki, Andrzej Kawecki Contemporary diagnostic and therapeutic possibilities in patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck Łukasz Kwinta Febrile neutropenia prophylaxis with short- and long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors during treatment of solid tumours Bartłomiej Żerek, Wojciech Straś, Piotr Rózga, Elżbieta Pękala The evolution of biologics in the context of oncological therapy Aleksandra Sobiborowicz, Anna M Czarnecka, Anna Szumera-Ciećkiewicz, Piotr Rutkowski, Tomasz Świtaj Diagnosis and treatment of malignant PEComa tumours Monika Misztal, Magdalena Krakowska, Monika Ryś-Bednarska, Mariusz Śliwa, Piotr Potemski Symptoms of nervous system damage in a patient undergoing anti-PD1 immunotherapy Róża Poźniak-Balicka, Dawid Murawa Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) ONCOLOGY IN CLINICAL PRACTICE Official Journal of the Polish Society of Clinical Oncology https://journals.viamedica.pl/oncology_in_clinical_practice Editor-in-Chief dr hab. med. Maria Litwiniuk prof. dr hab. med. Maciej Krzakowski dr med. Aleksandra Łacko prof. Ruggero De Maria (Rome, Italy) Deputy Editors dr Mario Mandala (Bergamo, Italy) prof. dr hab. med. Andrzej Kawecki dr hab. med. Radosław Mądry prof. dr hab. med. Piotr Potemski dr med. Janusz Meder prof. dr hab. med. Piotr Rutkowski dr hab. med. Sergiusz Nawrocki prof. dr hab. med. Krzysztof Składowski prof. dr hab. med. Włodzimierz Olszewski prof. dr hab. med. Piotr Wysocki prof. dr hab. med. Maria Podolak-Dawidziak dr hab. med. Barbara Radecka Scientific Board prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Autoimmune Pulmonary Alveolar Proteinosis in an Adolescent Successfully Treated with Inhaled Rhgm-CSF
    Respiratory Medicine Case Reports 23 (2018) 167–169 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Respiratory Medicine Case Reports journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rmcr Case report Autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis in an adolescent successfully T treated with inhaled rhGM-CSF (molgramostim) ∗ Marta E. Gajewskaa, , Sajitha S. Sritharana, Eric Santoni-Rugiub, Elisabeth M. Bendstrupa a Department of Respiratory Diseases and Allergology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark b Department of Pathology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (aPAP) is a rare parenchymal lung disease characterized by ac- Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis cumulation of surfactant in the airways with high levels of granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating (GM-CSF) antibodies in blood. Disease leads to hypoxemic respiratory failure. Whole lung lavage (WLL) is factor considered the first line therapy, but procedure can be quite demanding, specifically for children. Recently GM-SCF alternative treatment options with inhaled GM-CSF have been described but no consensus about the standard Molgramostim treatment exists. We here describe a unique case of a 14-year-old patient who was successfully treated with WLL Inhalation therapy and subsequent inhalations with molgramostim – new recombinant human GM-CSF (rhGM-CSF). 1. Introduction eosinophilic on hematoxylin-and eosin staining (HE) and positive with the periodic acid-Schiff stain and diastase-resistant (PAS + D), which is Pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (PAP) is a rare parenchymal lung considered characteristic for PAP (Fig. 2). Blood assays showed ele- disease characterized by accumulation of surfactant in the airways that vated high levels of GM-CSF antibodies. There was no suspicion of leads to hypoxemic respiratory failure [1–3].
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Public Assessment for Lipegfilgrastim (Rbe)
    Australian Public Assessment Report for Lipegfilgrastim (rbe) Proprietary Product Name: Lonquex Sponsor: Teva Pharma Australia Pty Ltd February 2016 Therapeutic Goods Administration About the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) • The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) is part of the Australian Government Department of Health and is responsible for regulating medicines and medical devices. • The TGA administers the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (the Act), applying a risk management approach designed to ensure therapeutic goods supplied in Australia meet acceptable standards of quality, safety and efficacy (performance) when necessary. • The work of the TGA is based on applying scientific and clinical expertise to decision- making, to ensure that the benefits to consumers outweigh any risks associated with the use of medicines and medical devices. • The TGA relies on the public, healthcare professionals and industry to report problems with medicines or medical devices. TGA investigates reports received by it to determine any necessary regulatory action. • To report a problem with a medicine or medical device, please see the information on the TGA website <https://www.tga.gov.au>. About AusPARs • An Australian Public Assessment Report (AusPAR) provides information about the evaluation of a prescription medicine and the considerations that led the TGA to approve or not approve a prescription medicine submission. • AusPARs are prepared and published by the TGA. • An AusPAR is prepared for submissions that relate to new chemical entities, generic medicines, major variations and extensions of indications. • An AusPAR is a static document; it provides information that relates to a submission at a particular point in time. • A new AusPAR will be developed to reflect changes to indications and/or major variations to a prescription medicine subject to evaluation by the TGA.
    [Show full text]
  • Lenograstim and Filgrastim in the Febrile Neutropenia Prophylaxis Open Access to Scientific and Medical Research DOI
    Journal name: Journal of Blood Medicine Article Designation: Original Research Year: 2019 Volume: 10 Journal of Blood Medicine Dovepress Running head verso: Innocenti et al Running head recto: Lenograstim and filgrastim in the febrile neutropenia prophylaxis open access to scientific and medical research DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JBM.S186786 Open Access Full Text Article ORIGINAL RESEARCH Lenograstim and filgrastim in the febrile neutropenia prophylaxis of hospitalized patients: efficacy and cost of the prophylaxis in a retrospective survey Rolando Innocenti,1 Purpose: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and related costs of Luigi Rigacci,1,2 Umberto using two different molecules of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) (lenograstim Restelli,3,4 Barbara – LENO or filgrastim – FIL) as primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in Scappini,1 Giacomo a hematological inpatient setting. Gianfaldoni,1 Rosa Fanci,1 Methods: The primary endpoints of the analysis were the efficacy of the two G-CSFs in terms of the level of white blood cells, hemoglobin and platelets at the end of the treatment and the Francesco Mannelli,1 per capita direct medical costs related to G-CSF prophylaxis. Francesca Scolari,3 For personal use only. Two hundred twelve patients (96 LENO, 116 FIL) have been evaluated. The follow- 3,4 Results: Davide Croce, Erminio ing statistically significant differences have been observed between FIL and LENO: the use of 5 6 Bonizzoni, Tania Perrone, a higher number of vials (11 vs 7; P<0.03) to fully recover bone marrow, a higher grade 3–4 1 Alberto Bosi neutropenia at the time of G-CSF discontinuation (29.3% vs 16.7%; P=0.031) and an increased 1Hematology Department, University number of days of hospitalization (8 vs 5; P<0.005).
    [Show full text]
  • Role of Cytokines As a Double-Edged Sword in Sepsis
    in vivo 27: 669-684 (2013) Review Role of Cytokines as a Double-edged Sword in Sepsis HINA CHAUDHRY1, JUHUA ZHOU2,3, YIN ZHONG2, MIR MUSTAFA ALI1, FRANKLIN MCGUIRE1, PRAKASH S. NAGARKATTI2 and MITZI NAGARKATTI2 1Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, and 2Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, SC, U.S.A.; 3Institute for Tumor Immunology, Ludong University School of Life Sciences, Yantai, Shandong, P.R. China Abstract. Background: Sepsis is a deadly immunological results from imbalances in the inflammatory network (1). disorder and its pathophysiology is still poorly understood. Sepsis is exhibited as a whole-body or a systemic We aimed to determine if specific pro-inflammatory and anti- inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), in the presence of inflammatory cytokines can be used as diagnostic and a known or suspected infection. It becomes severe following therapeutic targets for sepsis. Materials and Methods: organ dysfunction, which results from low blood pressure, or Recent publications in the MEDLINE database were insufficient blood flow to one or more organs due to lactic searched for articles regarding the clinical significance of acidosis, reduced urine production and altered mental status. inflammatory cytokines in sepsis. Results: In response to Severe sepsis is defined as sepsis with organ dysfunction pathogen infection, pro-inflammatory cytokines [interleukin- including hypotension (<90 mmHg or a reduction of 6 (IL-6), IL-8, IL-18 and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)] ≥40 mmHg from baseline), hypoxemia, oliguria, metabolic and anti-inflammatory cytokine (IL-10) increased in patients acidosis, thrombocytopenia and obtundation (2).
    [Show full text]
  • Colony Stimulating Factors
    © Copyright 2012 Oregon State University. All Rights Reserved Drug Use Research & Management Program Oregon State University, 500 Summer Street NE, E35 Salem, Oregon 97301-1079 Phone 503-947-5220 | Fax 503-947-2596 Drug Class Literature Scan: Colony Stimulating Factors Date of Review: June 2021 Date of Last Review: January 2019 Literature Search: 09/01/18 – 03/25/21 Current Status of PDL Class: See Appendix 1. Conclusions: There is limited new evidence available for evaluation of this class. No high-quality systematic reviews met inclusion criteria for review, many of which include biosimilar products not approved for use in the United States. One guideline was included in this review. Evidence supports previous recommendations with no compelling new evidence of efficacy or harms between granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF), including between reference products and biosimilar formulations. Prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN): evidence supports use with no differentiation between filgrastim, filgrastim biosimilars, tbo-filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, or pegfilgrastim biosimilars.1 Treatment of FN: evidence supports use of filgrastim, filgrastim biosimilars, tbo-filgrastim, and sargramostim for FN due to chemotherapy; all reference and biosimilar G-CSF products and sargramostim (a granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor [GM-CSF]) are recommended for hematopoietic acute radiation syndrome (H-ARS).1 (Note: Biosimilar products and tbo-filgrastim do not carry H-ARS as an official Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indication [Appendix 6]). Mobilization of Progenitor Cells: o Autologous Setting: evidence supports filgrastim, filgrastim biosimilars, and tbo-filgrastim; there is a lower rated recommendation for concurrent filgrastim or filgrastim biosimilars in combination with sargramostim. o Allogeneic Donors: evidence supports filgrastim and filgrastim biosimilars as the preferred choice, with tbo-filgrastim as an additional option.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Safety of Filgrastim Versus Sargramostim in Patients Receiving Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy
    Comparative Safety of Filgrastim versus Sargramostim in Patients Receiving Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy Gary Milkovich, B.S., Ronald J. Moleski, Pharm.D., John F. Reitan, Pharm.D., David M. Dunning, M.D., Gene A. Gibson, Pharm.D., Thomas A. Paivanas, M.H.S.A., Susan Wyant, Pharm.D., and R. Jake Jacobs, M.P.A. Study Objective. To compare rates of adverse events with filgrastim versus sargramostim when given prophylactically to patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Design. Retrospective review with center crossover. Setting. Ten United States outpatient chemotherapy centers. Patients. Four hundred ninety patients treated for lung, breast, lymphatic system, or ovarian tumors. Intervention. Prophylactic use of filgrastim or sargramostim, with dosages at investigator discretion. Measurements and Main Results. The frequency and severity of adverse events and the frequency of switching to the alternative CSF were assessed. There was no difference in infectious fever. Fever unexplained by infection was more common with sargramostim (7% vs 1%, p<0.001), as were fatigue, diarrhea, injection site reactions, other dermatologic disorders, and edema (all p<0.05). Skeletal pain was more frequent with filgrastim (p=0.06). Patients treated with sargramostim switched to the alternative agent more often (p<0.001). Conclusion. Adverse events were less frequent with filgrastim than with sargramostim, suggesting that quality of life and treatment costs also may differ. (Pharmacotherapy 2000;20(12):1432–1440) Colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are therapy. Bone pain is the most commonly recommended in certain situations to reduce the reported adverse event with filgrastim,6, 7 but likelihood of febrile neutropenia induced by exacerbation of preexisting inflammatory myelosuppressive chemotherapy.1 Recombinant conditions,8–10 rash,11 allergic reactions,12 Sweet forms of granulocyte (G)-CSF and granulocyte- syndrome,13 and injection site reactions14 have macrophage (GM)-CSF are synthesized using a been reported.
    [Show full text]
  • PDCO Minutes of the 20-23 February 2018 Meeting
    23 February 2018 EMA/PDCO/113780/2018 Inspections, Human Medicines Pharmacovigilance and Committees Division Paediatric Committee (PDCO) Minutes of the meeting on 20-23 February 2018 Chair: Dirk Mentzer – Vice-Chair: Koenraad Norga 20 February 2018, 14:00- 17:00, room 3A 21 February 2018, 08:30- 19:00, room 3A 22 February 2018, 08:30- 19:00, room 3A 23 February 2018, 08:30- 13:00, room 3A Disclaimers Some of the information contained in this set of minutes is considered commercially confidential or sensitive and therefore not disclosed. With regard to intended therapeutic indications or procedure scopes listed against products, it must be noted that these may not reflect the full wording proposed by applicants and may also vary during the course of the review. Additional details on some of these procedures will be published in the PDCO Committee meeting reports (after the PDCO Opinion is adopted), and on the Opinions and decisions on paediatric investigation plans webpage (after the EMA Decision is issued). Of note, this set of minutes is a working document primarily designed for PDCO members and the work the Committee undertakes. Further information with relevant explanatory notes can be found at the end of this document. Note on access to documents Some documents mentioned in the minutes cannot be released at present following a request for access to documents within the framework of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 as they are subject to on-going procedures for which a final decision has not yet been adopted. They will become public when adopted or considered public according to the principles stated in the Agency policy on access to documents (EMA/127362/2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Stem Cells Following Myelosuppressive Chemotherapy: a Randomized Comparison of Filgrastim, Sarg
    Bone Marrow Transplantation (2001) 27, Suppl. 2, S23–S29 2001 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0268–3369/01 $15.00 www.nature.com/bmt Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells following myelosuppressive chemotherapy: a randomized comparison of filgrastim, sargramostim, or sequential sargramostim and filgrastim CH Weaver, KA Schulman and CD Buckner CancerConsultants.com Inc., Ketchum, ID; and Clinical Economics Research Unit, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA Summary: the sequential regimen received higher numbers of CD34 cells and had faster platelet recovery with fewer Myelosuppressive chemotherapy is frequently used for patients requiring platelet transfusions than patients mobilization of autologous CD34+ progenitor cells into receiving peripheral blood stem cells mobilized by GM- the peripheral blood for subsequent collection and sup- CSF. In summary, G-CSF alone is superior to GM-CSF port of high-dose chemotherapy. The administration of alone for the mobilization of CD34+ cells and reduction myelosuppressive chemotherapy is typically followed by of toxicities following myelosuppressive chemotherapy. a myeloid growth factor and is associated with variable An economic analysis evaluating the cost-effectiveness CD34 cell yields and morbidity. The two most com- of these three effective schedules is ongoing at the time monly used myeloid growth factors for facilitation of of this writing. Bone Marrow Transplantation (2001) 27, CD34 cell harvests are granulocyte colony-stimulating Suppl. 2, S23–S29. factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte–macrophage colony- Keywords: filgrastim; sargramostim; stem cell mobiliz- stimulating factor (GM-CSF). We performed a ran- ation domized phase III clinical trial comparing G-CSF, GM- CSF, and sequential administration of GM-CSF and G- CSF following administration of myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe Contents
    May 2017 The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe Contents 01 Introduction 02 Definitions 03 Four Observatons by QuintilesIMS 09 The country and therapy areas KPIs 09 Epoetin (EPO) 11 Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 13 Human growth hormone (HGH) 15 Anti-tumor necrosis factor (Anti-TNF) 18 Fertility (Follitropin alfa) 20 Insulins 23 Reading guide 27 Appendices 27 EMA list of approved Biosimilars 28 Methodology 29 QuintilesIMS source of volume data 30 QuintilesIMS source of price data The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe Page 2 Introduction This document sets out to describe the effects on price, volume and market share following the arrival and presence of biosimilar competition in the European Economic Area (EEA). The report consists of a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) to monitor the impact of biosimilars in European markets, using full year 2016 data. This report has been prepared by QuintilesIMS at the request of the European Commission services with initial contributions from EFPIA, Medicines for Europe, and EuropaBio. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has a central role in setting the rules for biosimilar submissions, approving applications, establishing approved indications and monitoring adverse events, and if necessary issue safety warnings. We have, when appropriate, quoted their information and statements. The Impact of Biosimilar Competition in Europe Page 1 Definitions The report uses some basic terms defined as follows: • Accessible category: products within the same ATC4 code including the following three product categories: • Referenced Medicinal Product: Original product, granted market exclusivity at the start of its life, exclusivity has now expired and the product has been categorised as referenced.
    [Show full text]