Afebrile chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: an international survey spots oncologists' routine clinical practice versus the standard of care and the impact of COVID-19

Introduction Afebrile chemotherapy-induced neutropenia represents a frequent clinical situation where chemotherapy protocol, patient's comorbidities, and disease status determine the risk of infection hence the management plan. Internationally distributed, this questionnaire aims to evaluate the routine practice and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on afebrile chemotherapy-induced neutropenia management. Material and methods Coordinators from Egypt, Morocco, Azerbaijan, and Russia developed a 12-item questionnaire using Google forms to explore how oncologists deal with afebrile chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. The link to the survey was available internationally through social media and to their local societies over the period from July to September 2021. Results We received 151 responses from 4 world regions: 58.9, 9.9, 11.3, and 15.2% from the Mena area, Russia, Europe, and Asia. The responses deviated from the guideline-driven practice as G-CSF was the most chosen option for intermediate risk that was statistically different based on the academic background of the treating physician. Half of the responders ignored patients and disease risk factors in the intermediate-risk cases that trend was statistically different based on the geographical distribution. The steroid was a valid option for intermediate and low-risk as per oncologists practicing in Russia. COVID-19 pandemic positively affected the rate of prescription of G-CSF as expected. Conclusion The disparities in the routine practice of oncologists based on their geographical and academic backgrounds highlight the need to analyze the underlying obstacles that hinder guideline-based practice like workload or lack of the proper knowledge.

Automated summary

This study investigated the management of afebrile chemotherapy-induced neutropenia by oncologists and found that geographical and academic backgrounds influence their routine practices, highlighting the need to analyze and address related obstacles.