Skip to content

Use of Biosimilar Nivestim® to Prevent Chemo-induced Neutropenia. Real Life Study

PROPHYLACTIC TREATMENT FOR CHEMO-INDUCED NEUTROPENIA. USE OF G-CSF BIOSIMILAR (NIVESTIM(REGISTERED)) ACCORDING TO THE CHEMOTHERAPY CONTEXT: ADJUVANT VERSUS METASTATIC.

Status
Terminated
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02454530
Acronym
VISTA
Enrollment
1160
Registered
2015-05-27
Start date
2014-09-30
Completion date
2017-01-31
Last updated
2019-06-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia

Brief summary

The aim of this study is to describe in real-life conditions the determinants of use of GCSF (Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor) Nivestim® in primary or secondary prophylaxis and in patients receiving chemotherapy for solid tumour according to the chemotherapy context: adjuvant or metastatic setting.

Detailed description

This is a longitudinal, observational, prospective, multicentre, cohort study, conducted in France among a representative sample of public and/or private hospital-based oncologists. Data will be collected by the investigator during three visits using data available in the patient medical record and obtained from patient questioning and clinical examination performed during the consultations: * Baseline visit: prescription of Nivestim®. * Follow-up visit: during the first cycle of chemotherapy after the first course of Nivestim®. * Final visit: after the last cycle of chemotherapy or 16-18 weeks after inclusion.

Interventions

BIOLOGICALNivestim®

Sponsors

Hospira, now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Pfizer
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients aged at least 18 years, seen by the oncologist for chemotherapy for solid tumour. * Patients for whom the oncologist has decided the initiation of G-CSF biosimilar treatment (Nivestim®) in primary or secondary prophylaxis. * Patients informed about the computer processing of their medical data and their right of access and correction.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with contraindication of use of Nivestim®. * Patients with haematological malignancy including Myelodysplasia and Chronic myeloid leukemia treated or untreated. * Patients participating or having participated in the previous month in a clinical trial. * Patients refusing to participate in this study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimInclusion visit (Week 1)The factors which determined the use of Nivestim among participants included participant's sex, young participant, elderly participant, past history of infection, comorbidities, life expectancy, past history of febrile neutropenia and severe neutropenia, occupational activity, family activity and other important criteria. Percentage of participants were categorized based upon the level of importance under different categories which included very important, important, relatively important, not important and not applicable.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Who Continued ChemotherapyFollow-up visit (Week 3); End of study visit ( up to Week 19)Chemotherapy is a type of cancer treatment that uses one or more anti-cancer drugs as a part of a standardize treatment regimen. Chemotherapy may be given with curative intent, or it may aim to prolong life or to reduce symptoms.
Number of Participants Who Discontinued ChemotherapyFollow-up visit (Week 3); End of study visit ( up to Week 19)
Number of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at Follow Up VisitFollow-up visit (Week 3)
Number of Participants With Dose Reduction in Chemotherapy Due to NeutropeniaFollow-up visit (Week 3)Neutropenia is an abnormally low level of neutrophils (count of less than 1,500 neutrophils per microliter (microL) in blood) and was classified as Grade 1 (mild) with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1000-1500 cells per microL, Grade 2 (moderate) with an ANC of 500-1000 cells per microL, or Grade 3 (severe) with an ANC lower than 500 cells per microL.
Number of Participants With Delayed Administration of Chemotherapy Cycle Due to NeutropeniaFollow-up visit (Week 3)Neutropenia is an abnormally low level of neutrophils (count of less than 1,500 neutrophils per microliter (microL) in blood) and was classified as Grade 1 (mild) with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1000-1500 cells per microL, Grade 2 (moderate) with an ANC of 500-1000 cells per microL, or Grade 3 (severe) with an ANC lower than 500 cells per microL.
Number of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at the End of Study VisitEnd of study visit (up to Week 19)The reasons for unplanned discontinuation of chemotherapy included neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, other toxicity, development of resistance to treatment and other. Also, one participant could have more than one reason for unplanned discontinuation.
Number of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitEnd of study visit (up to Week 19)Number of participants with change in chemotherapy protocol due to each conditions (neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia/febrile neutropenia, other toxicity, neutropenia/other toxicity) has been reported in this outcome measure.
Change From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyInclusion visit (Week 1), End of study visit (up to Week 19)Change in the disease status of the participant was measured by the change in the count of neutrophils (NPs), platelets and leukocytes as reported in this outcome measure.
Change From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Participants Performance Status at End of StudyInclusion visit (Week 1); End of study visit (up to Week 19)The Karnofsky performance scale was used for rating participant activities of daily living. The KPS scores range from 0 to 100. A higher score means the participant is better able to carry out daily activities. The lower the Karnofsky score, the worse the survival for most serious illnesses. The score ranges included as 100 (Normal; no complaints), 90 (Able to carry on normal activity), 80 (Normal activity with effort), 70 (Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity), 60 (Requires occasional assistance, but is able to care), 50 (Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care), 40 (Disabled; requires special care), 30 (Severely disabled), 20 (Very sick; hospital admission necessary), 10 (Moribund; fatal processes progressing rapidly) and 0 (Dead).
Change From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Haemoglobin Level at End of Study VisitInclusion visit (Week 1), End of study visit (up to Week 19)Change in the disease status of the participant was measured by the change in the hemoglobin level as reported in this outcome measure.
Pain Experienced by Participant During Injection of Nivestim as Assessed by Pain at the Injection SiteEnd of study visit (up to Week 19)Pain experienced by participant at the injection site was measured on a scale 0 to 10 (0 = no pain to 10 = maximum pain), where higher score indicates maximum pain.
Number of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentEnd of study visit (up to Week 19)Participant's satisfaction after the chemotherapy treatment was assessed by the doctor and was categorized under the 4 categories as very satisfied, satisfied, not very satisfied and dissatisfied.
Number of Participants Who Wished to Again Have Nivestim Treatment If NecessaryEnd of study visit (up to Week 19)
Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)Inclusion visit (Week 1) up to end of study visit (up to Week 19)An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in participants who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) was adverse event that started or worsened in severity after Inclusion visit up to end of study visit (up to Week 19). AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse event. If a participant who reported an SAE also reported an AE that was not serious, that would count as 1 participant in the total number of participants reporting AEs.
Number of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFollow-up visit (Week 3); End of study visit (up to Week 19)Neutropenia is an abnormally low level of neutrophils (count of less than 1,500 neutrophils per microL in blood) and was classified as Grade 1 (mild) with an ANC of 1000-1500 cells per microL, Grade 2 (moderate) with an ANC of 500-1000 cells per microL, or Grade 3 (severe) with an ANC lower than 500 cells per microL. The incidence of neutropenia (between follow up and final visit) were described from the questionnaire completed by the investigator during the final visit. Febrile neutropenia was defined as tympanic or axillary body temperature greater than (\>) 38.5 degree celsius for \>1 hour and ANC less than (\<) 1.0 \*10\^9 neutrophils per liter. The incidence of febrile neutropenia were described from the questionnaire completed by the investigator during the follow-up and final visits. Only those categories which had atleast 1 abnormality have been reported in this outcome measure.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants in Different Profiles Receiving Treatment With NivestimEnd of study visit (up to Week 19)Classification of participants into three different profiles were established by level of importance of the determining factors for the use of Nivestim and was categorized as profile 1= not applicable, profile 2= relatively unimportant and profile 3 = not important. A multiple correspondence analysis was conducted on the whole analysis population in order to identify possible different patient profiles. None of these profiles could have been associated to a type of chemotherapy (adjuvant or metastatic).

Countries

France

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Between September 2014 and September 2016, 102 public and/or private hospital-based oncologists included 1160 patients with solid tumor treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy and for whom a prophylactic treatment with G-CSF (Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor) biosimilar (Nivestim®) was initiated. The study was conducted in France.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Adjuvant Chemotherapy
Participants who were receiving chemotherapy for solid tumor in the adjuvant setting and for whom a prophylactic treatment with G-CSF (Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor) biosimilar (Nivestim®) was initiated (maximum duration was 15 days) were observed for a maximum of 2.25 years in this study.
551
Metastatic Chemotherapy
Participants who were receiving chemotherapy for solid tumor in the metastatic setting and for whom a prophylactic treatment with G-CSF biosimilar (Nivestim®) was initiated (maximum duration was 10 days) were observed for a maximum of 2.25 years in this study.
603
Total1,154

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyDeath241
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up44
Overall StudyMissing information5669
Overall StudyOther813

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicAdjuvant ChemotherapyMetastatic ChemotherapyTotal
Age, Continuous60.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.1
65.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11
62.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.8
Sex/Gender, Customized
Female
399 Participants324 Participants723 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Male
149 Participants277 Participants426 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Missing
3 Participants2 Participants5 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
2 / 55241 / 608
other
Total, other adverse events
78 / 55267 / 608
serious
Total, serious adverse events
3 / 5522 / 608

Outcome results

Primary

Percentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of Nivestim

The factors which determined the use of Nivestim among participants included participant's sex, young participant, elderly participant, past history of infection, comorbidities, life expectancy, past history of febrile neutropenia and severe neutropenia, occupational activity, family activity and other important criteria. Percentage of participants were categorized based upon the level of importance under different categories which included very important, important, relatively important, not important and not applicable.

Time frame: Inclusion visit (Week 1)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here 'Number analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for specified categories.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly Participant: RU12.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Important11.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Relatively unimportant (RU)24.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Not important (NI)52.3 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Not applicable (NA)9.3 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: VI4.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: Important17.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: RU26.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: NI24.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: NA27.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: VI22.3 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: Important30.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Very important (VI)2.7 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: NI12.7 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: NA21.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: VI16.7 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: Important22.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: RU11.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: NI17.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: NA32.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: VI19.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: Important27.8 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: RU15.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: NI15.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: NA21.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: VI23.1 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: Important26.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: RU18.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: NA17.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history febrile neutropenia (FN): VI29.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: Important7.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: RU7.1 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: NI13.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: NA41.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of severe neutropenia (SN): VI26.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: Important16.1 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: RU8.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: NI11.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: NA36.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: VI2.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: Important8.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: RU28.0 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity:NI26.6 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: VI2.9 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: Important15.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: RU22.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: NI26.4 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: NA33.0 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOther VI/ Important criteria17.2 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: NI14.5 Percentage of participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: NA34.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: RU7.0 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Very important (VI)1.7 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: Important31.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Important7.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: VI1.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Relatively unimportant (RU)22.5 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: RU24.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Not important (NI)58.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: NI15.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimParticipant sex: Not applicable (NA)10.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: RU18.5 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: VI2.7 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: NA13.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: Important9.3 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: Important7.9 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: RU26.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history febrile neutropenia (FN): VI29.7 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: NI27.1 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOther VI/ Important criteria21.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimYoung participant: NA34.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: Important12.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: VI20.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: RU22.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: Important33.9 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: NI28.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly Participant: RU13.3 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: NI13.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity:NI29.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: NA17.6 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history FN: NA37.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: VI15.6 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimOccupational activity: NA38.5 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: Important25.7 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of severe neutropenia (SN): VI29.3 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: RU13.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimElderly participant: NI14.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: NI17.6 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: Important19.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of infection: NA27.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: VI1.0 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: VI20.4 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: RU8.9 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: Important32.8 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: NA38.6 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: RU15.0 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: NI10.9 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: NI15.7 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimFamily activity: Important13.0 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimComorbidities: NA16.2 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimPast history of SN: NA31.6 Percentage of participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyPercentage of Participants by Level of Importance of Factors Determining the Use of NivestimLife expectancy: VI15.5 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Change From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Haemoglobin Level at End of Study Visit

Change in the disease status of the participant was measured by the change in the hemoglobin level as reported in this outcome measure.

Time frame: Inclusion visit (Week 1), End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Haemoglobin Level at End of Study Visit-1.2 grams per deciliter (g/dl)Standard Deviation 1.6
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Haemoglobin Level at End of Study Visit-0.9 grams per deciliter (g/dl)Standard Deviation 1.7
Secondary

Change From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of Study

Change in the disease status of the participant was measured by the change in the count of neutrophils (NPs), platelets and leukocytes as reported in this outcome measure.

Time frame: Inclusion visit (Week 1), End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here 'Number analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for specified categories.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyNP count at Inclusion Visit4.6 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 15.4
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyChange in NP count-0.2 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 10.9
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyPlatelet count at Inclusion Visit279.7 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 103.6
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyChange in platelet count-31.9 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 117
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyLeukocyte count at Inclusion Visit7.6 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 26.4
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyChange in leukocyte count-0.1 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 13.3
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyLeukocyte count at Inclusion Visit6.7 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 9.4
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyNP count at Inclusion Visit5.3 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 16.9
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyChange in platelet count-43.4 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 127.2
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyChange in NP count1.8 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 33.2
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyChange in leukocyte count1.5 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 17.7
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Number of Neutrophil Cells (Neutrophils), Platelet Count and Leukocyte Count at End of StudyPlatelet count at Inclusion Visit261.4 gram per liter (g/L)Standard Deviation 122.9
Secondary

Change From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Participants Performance Status at End of Study

The Karnofsky performance scale was used for rating participant activities of daily living. The KPS scores range from 0 to 100. A higher score means the participant is better able to carry out daily activities. The lower the Karnofsky score, the worse the survival for most serious illnesses. The score ranges included as 100 (Normal; no complaints), 90 (Able to carry on normal activity), 80 (Normal activity with effort), 70 (Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity), 60 (Requires occasional assistance, but is able to care), 50 (Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care), 40 (Disabled; requires special care), 30 (Severely disabled), 20 (Very sick; hospital admission necessary), 10 (Moribund; fatal processes progressing rapidly) and 0 (Dead).

Time frame: Inclusion visit (Week 1); End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Adjuvant ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Participants Performance Status at End of Study-2.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11
Metastatic ChemotherapyChange From Inclusion Visit in Disease Status as Measured by Participants Performance Status at End of Study-9.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.7
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Continued Chemotherapy

Chemotherapy is a type of cancer treatment that uses one or more anti-cancer drugs as a part of a standardize treatment regimen. Chemotherapy may be given with curative intent, or it may aim to prolong life or to reduce symptoms.

Time frame: Follow-up visit (Week 3); End of study visit ( up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Number analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for specified categories.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Continued ChemotherapyFollow up visit514 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Continued ChemotherapyEnd of study visit111 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Continued ChemotherapyFollow up visit524 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Continued ChemotherapyEnd of study visit202 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Discontinued Chemotherapy

Time frame: Follow-up visit (Week 3); End of study visit ( up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here 'Number analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for specified categories.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Discontinued ChemotherapyFollow up visit22 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Discontinued ChemotherapyEnd of study visit482 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Discontinued ChemotherapyFollow up visit42 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Discontinued ChemotherapyEnd of study visit502 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Wished to Again Have Nivestim Treatment If Necessary

Time frame: End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not have a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Wished to Again Have Nivestim Treatment If Necessary424 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants Who Wished to Again Have Nivestim Treatment If Necessary428 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study Visit

Number of participants with change in chemotherapy protocol due to each conditions (neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia/febrile neutropenia, other toxicity, neutropenia/other toxicity) has been reported in this outcome measure.

Time frame: End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitNeutropenia21 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitOther toxicity57 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitNeutropenia/Febrile neutropenia2 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitNeutropenia/Other toxicity2 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitFebrile neutropenia/Other toxicity2 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitFebrile neutropenia2 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitFebrile neutropenia/Other toxicity0 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitNeutropenia21 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitNeutropenia/Other toxicity6 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitOther toxicity89 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitFebrile neutropenia2 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Change in Chemotherapy Protocol at End of Study VisitNeutropenia/Febrile neutropenia0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy Treatment

Participant's satisfaction after the chemotherapy treatment was assessed by the doctor and was categorized under the 4 categories as very satisfied, satisfied, not very satisfied and dissatisfied.

Time frame: End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentVery satisfied158 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentSatisfied276 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentNot very satisfied25 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentDissatisfied13 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentDissatisfied5 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentVery satisfied113 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentNot very satisfied30 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Chemotherapy Satisfaction as Per Doctor Assessment After Chemotherapy TreatmentSatisfied330 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Delayed Administration of Chemotherapy Cycle Due to Neutropenia

Neutropenia is an abnormally low level of neutrophils (count of less than 1,500 neutrophils per microliter (microL) in blood) and was classified as Grade 1 (mild) with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1000-1500 cells per microL, Grade 2 (moderate) with an ANC of 500-1000 cells per microL, or Grade 3 (severe) with an ANC lower than 500 cells per microL.

Time frame: Follow-up visit (Week 3)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Delayed Administration of Chemotherapy Cycle Due to Neutropenia1 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Delayed Administration of Chemotherapy Cycle Due to Neutropenia0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Dose Reduction in Chemotherapy Due to Neutropenia

Neutropenia is an abnormally low level of neutrophils (count of less than 1,500 neutrophils per microliter (microL) in blood) and was classified as Grade 1 (mild) with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1000-1500 cells per microL, Grade 2 (moderate) with an ANC of 500-1000 cells per microL, or Grade 3 (severe) with an ANC lower than 500 cells per microL.

Time frame: Follow-up visit (Week 3)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Dose Reduction in Chemotherapy Due to Neutropenia0 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Dose Reduction in Chemotherapy Due to Neutropenia1 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile Neutropenia

Neutropenia is an abnormally low level of neutrophils (count of less than 1,500 neutrophils per microL in blood) and was classified as Grade 1 (mild) with an ANC of 1000-1500 cells per microL, Grade 2 (moderate) with an ANC of 500-1000 cells per microL, or Grade 3 (severe) with an ANC lower than 500 cells per microL. The incidence of neutropenia (between follow up and final visit) were described from the questionnaire completed by the investigator during the final visit. Febrile neutropenia was defined as tympanic or axillary body temperature greater than (\>) 38.5 degree celsius for \>1 hour and ANC less than (\<) 1.0 \*10\^9 neutrophils per liter. The incidence of febrile neutropenia were described from the questionnaire completed by the investigator during the follow-up and final visits. Only those categories which had atleast 1 abnormality have been reported in this outcome measure.

Time frame: Follow-up visit (Week 3); End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here 'Number analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for specified categories.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFinal visit: Febrile Neutropenia9 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFollow up visit: Neutropenia21 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFinal visit: Neutropenia63 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFollow up visit: Febrile Neutropenia21 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFollow up visit: Neutropenia21 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFollow up visit: Febrile Neutropenia19 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFinal visit: Neutropenia75 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Neutropenia and Febrile NeutropeniaFinal visit: Febrile Neutropenia16 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

An adverse event (AE) was any untoward medical occurrence in participants who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) was adverse event that started or worsened in severity after Inclusion visit up to end of study visit (up to Week 19). AEs included both serious and non-serious adverse event. If a participant who reported an SAE also reported an AE that was not serious, that would count as 1 participant in the total number of participants reporting AEs.

Time frame: Inclusion visit (Week 1) up to end of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim during the study.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)SAEs3 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)AEs80 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)SAEs2 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)AEs68 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at Follow Up Visit

Time frame: Follow-up visit (Week 3)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at Follow Up Visit10 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at Follow Up Visit36 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at the End of Study Visit

The reasons for unplanned discontinuation of chemotherapy included neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, other toxicity, development of resistance to treatment and other. Also, one participant could have more than one reason for unplanned discontinuation.

Time frame: End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at the End of Study Visit39 Participants
Metastatic ChemotherapyNumber of Participants With Unplanned Discontinuation of Chemotherapy at the End of Study Visit136 Participants
Secondary

Pain Experienced by Participant During Injection of Nivestim as Assessed by Pain at the Injection Site

Pain experienced by participant at the injection site was measured on a scale 0 to 10 (0 = no pain to 10 = maximum pain), where higher score indicates maximum pain.

Time frame: End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol. Here, 'Overall number of participants analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Adjuvant ChemotherapyPain Experienced by Participant During Injection of Nivestim as Assessed by Pain at the Injection Site2.0 unit on a scaleStandard Deviation 2
Metastatic ChemotherapyPain Experienced by Participant During Injection of Nivestim as Assessed by Pain at the Injection Site2.0 unit on a scaleStandard Deviation 2
Other Pre-specified

Number of Participants in Different Profiles Receiving Treatment With Nivestim

Classification of participants into three different profiles were established by level of importance of the determining factors for the use of Nivestim and was categorized as profile 1= not applicable, profile 2= relatively unimportant and profile 3 = not important. A multiple correspondence analysis was conducted on the whole analysis population in order to identify possible different patient profiles. None of these profiles could have been associated to a type of chemotherapy (adjuvant or metastatic).

Time frame: End of study visit (up to Week 19)

Population: Analysis population included all participants who received at least one dose of Nivestim and did not had a major deviation from the protocol and who did not had any missing importance level for the determining factors for the use of Nivestim. Here, Overall Number of Participants Analyzed=number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants in Different Profiles Receiving Treatment With NivestimProfile 1475 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants in Different Profiles Receiving Treatment With NivestimProfile 2439 Participants
Adjuvant ChemotherapyNumber of Participants in Different Profiles Receiving Treatment With NivestimProfile 3207 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026