Survival and erythropoietin receptor protein in tumours from patients randomly treated with rhEPO for palliative care

Erythropoietin or darbepoetin for patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Anaemia associated with cancer and cancer therapy is an important clinical factor in the treatment of malignant diseases. Therapeutic alternatives are recombinant human erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) and red blood cell transfusions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of ESAs to either prevent or treat anaemia in cancer patients.

SEARCH METHODS

This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004. We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE and other databases. Searches were done for the periods 01/1985 to 12/2001 for the first review, 1/2002 to 04/2005 for the first update and to November 2011 for the current update. We also contacted experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on managing anaemia in cancer patients receiving or not receiving anti-cancer therapy that compared the use of ESAs (plus transfusion if needed).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. One review author assessed quality assessment and extracted data, a second review author checked for correctness.

MAIN RESULTS

This update of the systematic review includes a total of 91 trials with 20,102 participants. Use of ESAs significantly reduced the relative risk of red blood cell transfusions (risk ratio (RR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.68, 70 trials, N = 16,093). On average, participants in the ESAs group received one unit of blood less than the control group (mean difference (MD) -0.98; 95% CI -1.17 to -0.78, 19 trials, N = 4,715). Haematological response was observed more often in participants receiving ESAs (RR 3.93; 95% CI 3.10 to 3.71, 31 trials, N = 6,413). There was suggestive evidence that ESAs may improve Quality of Life (QoL). There was strong evidence that ESAs increase mortality during active study period (hazard ratio (HR) 1.17; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.29, 70 trials, N = 15,935) and some evidence that ESAs decrease overall survival (HR 1.05; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.11, 78 trials, N = 19,003). The risk ratio for thromboembolic complications was increased in patients receiving ESAs compared to controls (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.74; 57 trials, N = 15,498). ESAs may also increase the risk for hypertension (fixed-effect model: RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.56; random-effects model: RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.33, 31 trials, N = 7,228) and thrombocytopenia/haemorrhage (RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.42; 21 trials, N = 4,507). There was insufficient evidence to support an effect of ESA on tumour response (fixed-effect RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.06, 15 trials, N = 5,012).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ESAs reduce the need for red blood cell transfusions but increase the risk for thromboembolic events and deaths. There is suggestive evidence that ESAs may improve QoL. Whether and how ESAs affects tumour control remains uncertain. The increased risk of death and thromboembolic events should be balanced against the potential benefits of ESA treatment taking into account each patient's clinical circumstances and preferences. More data are needed for the effect of these drugs on quality of life and tumour progression. Further research is needed to clarify cellular and molecular mechanisms and pathways of the effects of ESAs on thrombogenesis and their potential effects on tumour growth.

The effect of erythropoietin on normal and neoplastic cells

Erythropoietin (Epo) is an essential hormone that binds and activates the Epo receptor (EpoR) resident on the surface of erythroid progenitor cells, thereby promoting erythropoiesis. Recombinant human erythropoietin has been used successfully for over 20 years to treat anemia in millions of patients. In addition to erythropoiesis, Epo has also been reported to have other effects, such as tissue protection and promotion of tumor cell growth or survival. This became of significant concern in 2003, when some clinical trials in cancer patients reported increased tumor progression and worse survival outcomes in patients treated with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). One of the potential mechanisms proffered to explain the observed safety issues was that functional EpoR was expressed in tumors and/or endothelial cells, and that ESAs directly stimulated tumor growth and/or antagonized tumor ablative therapies. Since then, numerous groups have performed further research evaluating this potential mechanism with conflicting data and conclusions. Here, we review the biology of endogenous Epo and EpoR expression and function in erythropoiesis, and evaluate the evidence pertaining to the expression of EpoR on normal nonhematopoietic and tumor cells.

[Oncology blood transfusion and quality of life: review]

Blood transfusion's repercussions on quality of life are less well studied in cancer research, and rarer in palliative situation. It is necessary to look for studies dealing with anaemia to estimate its effects. In curative palliative situation, the situation is similar to that of curative stage patients. It is necessary landing quickly for anaemia to assure the patient's quality of life. Blood transfusion and more recently erythropoïesis-stimulating agents are effective treatments. In advanced palliative stage, transfusion improves symptoms (weakness and dyspnoea bound anaemia) and the patients' well being. The treatment choice must be individual and has to follow an ethical behaviour in respect with the legislation.

Association between pharmaceutical support and basic science research on erythropoiesis-stimulating agents

BACKGROUND

To our knowledge, no prior research has evaluated the association between pharmaceutical industry funding and basic science research results. When erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were licensed to treat chemotherapy-associated anemia, basic science concerns related to potential cancer stimulation were raised. We evaluated associations between pharmaceutical industry support and reported findings evaluating ESA effects on cancer cells.

METHODS

Articles identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (1988-2008) investigating basic science findings related to ESA administration in the solid tumor setting were reviewed. Outcomes included information on erythropoietin receptors (EpoRs), Epo-induced signaling events, cellular function, and qualitative conclusions. Information on study funding (academic investigators with no reported funding from ESA manufacturers [64 studies], academic investigators with grant funding from ESA manufacturers [7 studies], and investigators employed by the ESA manufacturers [3 studies]) was evaluated. Some studies did not include information on each outcome.

RESULTS

Investigators without funding from ESA manufacturers were more likely than academic investigators with such funding or investigators employed by ESA manufacturers to identify EpoRs on solid tumor cells (100%, 60%, and 67%, respectively; P = .009), Epo-induced signaling events (94%, 0%, and 0%, respectively; P = .001), or changes in cellular function (57%, 0%, and 0%, respectively; P = .007) and to conclude that ESAs had potentially harmful effects on cancer cells (57%, 0%, and 0%, respectively; P = .008).

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers who do not have pharmaceutical industry support are more likely than those with pharmaceutical support to identify detrimental in vitro effects of ESAs. The potential for conflicts of interest to affect basic science research should be considered.

Erythropoietin or Darbepoetin for patients with cancer--meta-analysis based on individual patient data

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) reduce anemia in cancer patients and may improve quality of life, but there are concerns that ESAs might increase mortality.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to examine the effect of ESAs and identify factors that modify the effects of ESAs on overall survival, progression free survival, thromboembolic and cardiovascular events as well as need for transfusions and other important safety and efficacy outcomes in cancer patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and conference proceedings for eligible trials. Manufacturers of ESAs were contacted to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin or darbepoetin plus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) versus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) alone, to prevent or treat anemia in adult or pediatric cancer patients with or without concurrent antineoplastic therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin alpha, epoetin beta or darbepoetin alpha plus red blood cell transfusions versus transfusion alone, for prophylaxis or therapy of anemia while or after receiving anti-cancer treatment. Patient-level data were obtained and analyzed by independent statisticians at two academic departments, using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis. Analyses were according to the intention-to-treat principle. Primary endpoints were on study mortality and overall survival during the longest available follow-up, regardless of anticancer treatment, and in patients receiving chemotherapy. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effects of ESAs on mortality across pre-specified subgroups. The present review reports only the results for the primary endpoint.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 13933 cancer patients from 53 trials were analyzed, 1530 patients died on-study and 4993 overall. ESAs increased on study mortality (combined hazard ratio [cHR] 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.30) and worsened overall survival (cHR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00-1.12), with little heterogeneity between trials (I(2) 0%, p=0.87 and I(2) 7.1%, p=0.33, respectively). Thirty-eight trials enrolled 10441 patients receiving chemotherapy. The cHR for on study mortality was 1.10 (95% CI 0.98-1.24) and 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.11) for overall survival. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of patients receiving different cancer treatments (P for interaction=0.42).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ESA treatment in cancer patients increased on study mortality and worsened overall survival. For patients undergoing chemotherapy the increase was less pronounced, but an adverse effect could not be excluded.

Assessment of iron status and the role for iron-replacement therapy in anaemic cancer patients under the care of a specialist palliative care unit

Anaemia is common in advanced cancer, may develop for several reasons, and is not always symptomatic. Our observations of the seemingly indiscriminate prescription of iron-replacement therapy (IRT) for anaemic palliative care patients, and our practice of discontinuing IRT in patients with normal red-cell indices, prompted a study to determine (1) the prevalence of anaemia in our patients, (2) what proportion had iron deficiency, (3) the prevalence and benefits of IRT and (4) the prevalence of side effects attributable to IRT. The prevalence of anaemia was 65%. We found a 9% prevalence of iron deficiency, and suggestive but inconclusive evidence of iron deficiency in a further 41%, but only three (27%) of these patients had typical iron deficiency red-cell indices. Only two patients within the study population were taking IRT. Haemoglobin increased significantly in one, but fell in the other, and both experienced side effects attributable to iron. IRT should neither be indiscriminately prescribed nor withheld for anaemic palliative care patients, and the decision should not be based on red-cell indices alone. When symptomatic anaemia is found in patients whose general condition indicates that IRT would be acceptable, iron status should be fully assessed. A therapeutic trial of IRT may be justified where ferritin is elevated, but other parameters suggest iron deficiency.