Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Toxicité hématologique des chimiothérapies Pr Jean Trédaniel Unité de cancérologie thoracique Hôpital Saint-Louis Chimiothérapie ADN Système réplicatif cellulaire Tissus à renouvellement rapide, dont le système hématopoïétique Cinétique des cellules sanguines périphériques • Granulocytes: 6 heures • Plaquettes: 10 jours • Hématies: 120 jours leucopénie thrombopénie anémie temps Physiopathologie Chemotherapy agents Antimetabolites Alkylating agents more toxic to mature not cell cycle dependent; but still dividing progenitor cells than to more primitive and less mitotically active cells active to primitive stem cells that have minimal mitotic activity earlier and less severe myelosuppression delayed and profound myelosuppression Pharmacogenetics • Pharmacogenetics may influence the development of hematologic toxicity • Metabolic processes for drug inactivation are polymorphic • Ex: polymorphic deficiency of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase results in increased toxicity of 5-FU, including hematologic toxicity A few chemotherapeuty agents result in virtually no myelosuppression • • • • Bleomycin L-asparaginase Vincristine streptozotocine Modifying the drug administration schedule can reduce the bone marrow toxicity (1) 5-FU IV bolus injection: dose-limiting toxicity: bone marrow suppression IV protracted infusion: dose-limiting toxicities: mucositis & hand-and-foot syndrome; myelosuppression occurs rarely Modifying the drug administration schedule can reduce the bone marrow toxicity (2) • The myelosuppressive effects of paclitaxel consist primarily of granulocytopenia, with an increase in the incidence and severity of neutropenia observed with increasing doses, • Identical doses of paclitaxel are markedly less myelosuppressive when delivered by 3-hr than by 24-hr infusion, • Neutropenia is not related to paclitaxel’s peak concentration or to the AUC but rather to the duration that the plasma concentration is aboce a certain threshold (>=0,05 µmol/L). • Neutropénie – Risque infectieux • Anémie – Asthénie, dyspnée • Thrombopénie – Hémorragie PNN Leucocytes Lymphocytes Grade Hb (gr/dl) (103/mm3) (103/mm3) (103/mm3) Plaquettes (103/mm3) 0 >= 4,0 >= 2,0 >= 2,0 N N 1 3,0 - 3,9 1,5 - 1,9 1,5 - 1,9 10,0 - N 75,0 - N 2 2,0 - 2,9 1,0 - 1,4 1,0 - 1,4 8,0 - 9,9 50,0 - 74,9 3 1,0 - 1,9 0,5 - 0,9 0,5 - 0,9 6,5 - 7,9 25,0 - 49,9 4 < 1,0 <0,5 <0,5 < 6,5 < 25,0 Neutropénie • la neutropénie compromet la réponse inflammatoire à l’infection, • en réduisant les signes et symptômes de l’infection (« pas de PNN = pas de pus = pas de foyer ») elle atténue la présentation clinique (« simple fièvre), • malgré le risque de choc septique ! Neutropénie: facteurs de risque dépendants du patient • Hémopathie maligne (atteinte intrinsèque du système hématopoïétique + intensité des chimiothérapies) > tumeur solide • Âge physiologique élevé • Taux de LDH élevé • Fièvre élevée, hypotension à l’admission • Lymphopénie, hypoalbuminémie • Conséquence hématologique de la première cure de chimiothérapie Crawford et al. Cancer 2004;100:228-37. Early lymphopenia after cytotoxic chemotherapy as a risk factor for febrile neutropenia. • Cohorte rétrospective de 112 patients traités consécutivement, avec des régimes divers de chimiothérapie – 2 facteurs de risque identifiés • taux de lymphocytes < = 700/µl à J5 • type de la chimiothérapie (forte dose versus autres) – Modèle avec 0,1 ou 2 facteurs de risque • Validation du modèle – Série du Centre Léon Bérard (Lyon): 3%, 19 %, 67% – Série de l’IGR: 6%, 19%, 75% – Patients traités par ACVBP (= un facteur de risque) au CLB 1988-92: 33%, 72%. Blay et al. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:636-43. Incidence of Life-Threatening Neutropenia, Neutropenic Infection, and Death in Older Individuals With Large-Cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas Treated With CHOP-Like Regimens Febrile neutropenia (%) Treatment related deaths (%) Author n regimen age Neutropenia (%) Zinzani 161 VNCOP-B 60+ 44 32 1,3 Sonneveld 148 CHOP CNOP 60+ 60+ - - 14 13 Gomez 267 CHOP 60+ 70+ - - 12 14 Tirelli 120 VMP CHOP 70+ 70+ 50 48 21 21 7 5 Bastion 444 CVP CTVP 70+ 70+ 9 29 7 13 12 15 O’Reilly 63 POCE 65+ 50 20 8 Bjorkholm 104 CHOP 60 91 47 - Bertini 57 P-VEBEC 65+ 46 18 2 Armitage 20 CHOP 70+ - - 30 Balducci. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:1583-5. Risk-models for predicting chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Lyman et al. Oncologist 2005;10:427-37. Risk factors for chemotherapy induced neutropenia • Disease specific – Tumor type – Advanced disease & uncontrolled cancer • Patient specific – Age – PS – Comorbidities – Laboratory abnormalities • Treatment specific – Chemotherapy regimen – CSF use Lyman et al. Oncologist 2005;10:427-37. Risk of first episode of febrile neutropenia in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma treated with CHOP chemotherapy. Lyman et al. Oncologist 2005;10:427-37. Risk of Febrile Neutropenia Among Patients with Intermediategrade Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Receiving CHOP Chemotherapy. • • • 577 intermediate grade NHL patients who received CHOP chemotherapy 160 patients experienced 224 febrile neutropenia events The risk of febrile neutropenia was significantly associated with: • First febrile neutropenic events occurred by day 14 of cycle 1 in one-half of patients experiencing febrile neutropenia. In multivariate analysis, the risk of febrile neutropenia remained significantly associated with: • – – – – – – age ≥65 years (p=0.001), cardiovascular disease (p=0.020), renal disease (p=0.006), baseline hemoglobin <12 g/dl (p=0.018), >80% planned average relative dose intensity (ARDI; p=0.018), and no prophylactic colony-stimulating factor (CSF) use (p=0.046). – – – – – – age ≥65 years (HR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.18-2.32), renal disease (HR=1.91, 95% CI: 1.10-3.30), cardiovascular disease (HR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.02-2.33), baseline hemoglobin <12 g/dl (HR=1.44, 95% CI: 1.04-2.00), >80% planned CHOP ARDI (HR=2.41, 95% CI: 1.30-4.47), and no CSF prophylaxis (HR=2.13, 95% CI: 1.20-3.76). Lyman et al. Leukemia & Lymphoma 2003;44:2069-76. Risk of Febrile Neutropenia Among Patients with Intermediategrade Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Receiving CHOP Chemotherapy. Cumulative probability of febrile neutropenia, by number of risk factors. Lyman et al. Leukemia & Lymphoma 2003;44:2069-76. 2000 update of recommendations for the use of hematopoietic colonystimulating factors: evidence-based, clinical practice guidelines. • • • • • • Routine use of CSFs for primary prophylaxis of FN for any common disease in previously untreated patients is not justified, The available data indicate that, with a sufficiently high incidence of FN ( 40%), there is strong evidence for the primary administration of CSFs to reduce hospitalization for antibiotic administration. Secondary prophylaxis: physicians should consider chemotherapy dose reduction after neutropenic fever or severe or prolonged neutropenia after the previous cycle of treatment, CSFs should not be routinely used for patients with neutropenia who are afebrile, CSFs should not be routinely used as adjunct therapy for the treatment of uncomplicated fever and neutropenia. Uncomplicated fever and neutropenia are defined as follows: fever of 10 days in duration; no evidence of pneumonia, cellulitis, abscess, sinusitis, hypotension, multiorgan dysfunction, or invasive fungal infection; and no uncontrolled malignancies, Certain patients with fever and neutropenia are at higher risk for infection-associated complications and have prognostic factors that are predictive of poor clinical outcome. The use of a CSF for such high-risk patients may be considered, but the benefits of a CSF in these circumstances have not been proven. These factors include profound (ANC < 100/µL) neutropenia, uncontrolled primary disease, pneumonia, hypotension, multiorgan dysfunction (sepsis syndrome), and invasive fungal infection. Age greater than 65 years and posttreatment lymphopenia may also be high-risk factors but have not been consistently confirmed by multicenter trials. Ozer et al. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3558-85. NCCN - National Comprehensive Cancer Network Myeloid Growth Factors in Cancer Treatment version 1.2005 • The NCCN panel members recommend the routine use of CSFs for high-risk (>20%) patients to prevent the development of FN in patients receiving treatment with curative intent, adjuvant therapy, or treatment expected to prolong survival or to improve QOL. (www.NCCN.org) NCCN - Myeloid growth factors guidelines Risk of FN High > 20 % Intermediate 10 - 20 % Low < 10 % CSF Consider CSF no CSF NCCN - Myeloid growth factors guidelines Evaluation of prior chemotherapy cycle Febrile neutropenia or dose-limiting neutropenic event Prior use of CSF No prior use of CSF Consider dose reduction or change in treatment regimen Consider CSF No febrile neutropenia or dose-limiting neutropenic event Repeat intervention for the subsequent cycle Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapyinduced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Overall mortality Clark et al. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4198-214. Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapyinduced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Infection-related mortality Clark et al. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4198-214. Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapyinduced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Lenght of hospitalisation Clark et al. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4198-214. Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapyinduced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Time to neutrophil recovery Clark et al. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4198-214. Antibacterial prophylaxis after chemotherapy for solid tumors and lymphomas. Patients who were receiving cyclic chemotherapy for solid tumors or lymphoma and who were at risk for temporary, severe neutropenia (fewer than 500 neutrophils per cubic millimeter). Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 500 mg of levofloxacin once daily or matching placebo for seven days during the expected neutropenic period. levofloxacin placebo p n 781 784 1st cycle-FN (%) 3,5 7,9 <0,001 at least 1 FN (%) 10,8 15,2 0,01 probable infection (%) 34,2 41,5 0,004 hospitalisation (%) 15,7 21,6 0,004 severe infection (%) 1,0 2,0 0,15 N infection related deaths 4 4 Cullen et al. NEJM 2005;353:988-98. Risk model for severe anemia requiring red blood cell transfusion after cytotoxic conventional chemotherapy regimens. • • • • • One hundred seven of the 1,051 patients of the CLB-1996 cohort (10%) experienced SARRT. In univariate analysis: – female sex, – performance status greater than 1, – hemoglobin level less than 12 g/dL before chemotherapy on day 1 (d1), – d1 lymphocyte count <= 700/µL significantly correlated with the risk of SARRT. Using logistic regression: – d1 hemoglobin level less than 12 g/dL (OR = 14.0; 95% CI, 7 to 30), – performance status greater than 1 (OR = 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.5), – d1 lymphocyte count <= 700/µL (OR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.6) were identified as independent risk factors for SARRT. These three factors were given arbitrary risk coefficients of 3, 1, and 1 respectively, and a risk score for each individual patient was obtained by adding the coefficients. The calculated probability of RBC transfusions was 30% for patients with a score 4, and 11%, 4%, and 1% in patients with a score of 2 or 3, 1, and 0 respectively. Ray-Coquard et al. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:2840 A risk model for thrombocytopenia requiring platelet transfusion after cytotoxic chemotherapy. • • • • Cohort of the 1,051 patients (CLB 1996) treated with chemotherapy In univariate analysis: – performance status (PS) greater than 1, – platelet count less than 150,000/µL at day 1 (d1) before the initiation of chemotherapy, – d1 lymphocyte count <= 700/µL, – d1 polymorphonuclear leukocyte count less than 1,500/µL, – and the type of chemotherapy (high risk v others) were significantly associated (P < .01) with an increased risk of severe thrombocytopenia requiring platelet transfusions. Using logistic regression: – d1 platelet count less than 150,000/µL (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.9 to 9.6), – d1 lymphocyte counts <= 700/µL (OR, 3.37; 95% CI, 1.77 to 6.4), – the type of chemotherapy (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 1.77 to 6.4), – and PS greater than 1 (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.22 to 4.1) were identified as independent risk factors for platelet transfusions. The observed incidences of platelet transfusions were 45%, 13%, 7%, and 1.5% for patients with 3, 2, 1, or 0 risk factors, respectively. This model was then tested in 3 groups of patients treated with chemotherapy used as validation samples: Blay et al. Blood 1998;92:405-10. Chronic bone marrow damage • Decreased bone marrow reserve, • Myelodysplastic syndromes and secondary leukemias.