Sk. Parsons et al., Growth factor practice patterns among pediatric oncologists: Results of a 1998 Pediatric Oncology Group survey, J PED H ONC, 22(3), 2000, pp. 227-241
The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines on growth facto
r (GF) use recommend applying adult-derived guidelines in pediatric oncolog
y. An ASCO survey of adult oncology GF use determined the preference for fi
rst degree prophylaxis (use of GF when febrile neutropenia [FN] is expected
to be high in untreated patients), second-degree prophylaxis (administrati
on of GF after a documented episode of FN on a previous cycle of chemothera
py), and intervention in the treatment of FN. Similar preferences have not
been evaluated in pediatrics. The purpose of this study was to (1) characte
rize GF use in pediatric oncology; (2) correlate use patterns with demograp
hic factors; and (3) compare the Pediatric Oncology Group (POG) and ASCO su
rveys. The ASCO survey was revised for use within pediatric oncology and wa
s mailed to the physician membership of FOG; 341 were returned (85% complet
ion rate). Comparisons were made with the ASCO survey. Most (76%) physician
s said GF use was determined by protocol requirements and most (70%) patien
ts were entered on FOG protocols. GF use as first-degree prophylaxis was se
lected 40% of the time, which was significantly greater than in adults; thi
s was most influenced by anticipated duration of neutropenia (greater than
or equal to 7 days). The severity of the initial clinical course (eg, neutr
openia, infection) influenced use in second-degree prophylaxis; dose reduct
ion alone was never selected. For FN, GF use was 45%, with lower preference
s in uncomplicated FN (16%-38%) compared with complicated FN (66%). FOG res
pondents endorse greater use of GF for first and second-degree prophylaxis
but less use in uncomplicated FN than do ASCO respondents. These patterns m
ay reflect different strategies, including the role of chemotherapy, value
of dose intensity, and perceived toxicity of regimens. Given these differen
ces, adult-based guidelines may not be appropriate for pediatrics.