Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a naturally occurring glycoprotein that stimulates the proliferation and maturation of precursor cells in the bone marrow into fully differentiated neutrophils. Several reports of G-CSF-producing malignant tumors have been published, but scarcely any in the hepatobiliary system, such as in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Here, we encountered a 69-yr-old man with a hepatic tumor who had received right hepatic resection. He showed leukocytosis of 25,450/microL along with elevated serum G-CSF. Histological examination of surgical samples demonstrated immunohistochemical staining for G-CSF, but not for G-CSF receptor. The patient survived without recurrence for four years, but ultimately passed away with multiple bone metastases. In light of the above, clinicians may consider G-CSF-producing HCC when encountering patients with leukocytosis and a hepatic tumor. More cases are needed to clarify the clinical picture of G-CSF-producing HCC.
Aged ; Bone Neoplasms/secondary ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/*metabolism/pathology ; Fatal Outcome ; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor/*metabolism ; Humans ; Liver Neoplasms/*metabolism/pathology ; Male ; Receptors, Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor/metabolism

Good Post-Marketing Study Practice (GPSP) changed in April 2018, allows pharmaceutical companies to use a real-world data for pharmacovigilance activity. On the other hand, it is known that there are 3 major dimensions of pharmacovigilance： “Monitoring, vigilance, and science：building the best evidence” ,“Regulation, industry, and legal system：ensuring public health” and “Medicine, medicines, and uncertainty : doing good to patients” . Therefore, in this article, we consider how the change of GPSP reflects on the 3 features of pharmacovigilance.In general, it is thought that the change of GPSP contributes pharmacovigilance, considering the 3 features of pharmacovigilance. On the other hand, there are some points to improve pharmacovigilance system：1) how a safety question for pharmacovigilance should be addressed, 2) how information of routine pharmacovigilance should contribute to a safety question to be addressed, 3) how a feasibility assessment (assessment of data source before conducting a formal comparative activity) should be conducted, and 4) a necessity of a variety of methodology and data sources such as descriptive studies and disease registry. These improvements will contribute to global standardization and give us global competence.Overall, it is very difficult to consider the best safety question, data source and methodology from many options. However, it is thought that keep considering them in order to accumulate experiences is important for our ultimate goal, which is to help our patients. We expect more discussions among all the stakeholders together.