Randomised, phase III trial of epoetin-β to treat chemotherapy-induced anaemia according to the EU regulation

Myelopreservation with Trilaciclib in recurrent advanced ovarian cancer: a case report

Ovarian cancer is a prevalent malignant tumor of the female reproductive system, often remaining concealed until it reaches an advanced stage. The standard treatment protocol includes cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer plus postoperative consolidation chemotherapy and maintenance therapy, although it carries a high recurrence rate. During the treatment period, chemotherapy can lead to bone marrow suppression, a condition known as Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression (CIM). This suppression may necessitate dose reduction or chemotherapy treatment cycle delay. In severe cases, CIM can result in infection, fever, and potential harm to the patient's life. Here, we report a case of a female patient with ovarian malignant tumor of biochemical recurrence who treated with chemotherapy combined with Trilaciclib, following previous perioperative chemotherapy with occurrence of severe CIM. It involves an intravenous injection of Trilaciclib before chemotherapy, which significantly abates the side effects of chemotherapy, reduces the occurrence of severe CIM, improves the patients' quality of life, and decreases the economic burden of hospitalization. We hope that this retrospective analysis of the case may serve as a reference in preventing and treating severe CIM during chemotherapy in some patients with malignant tumors, ultimately benefiting more patients with tumors.

Intravenous iron versus oral iron versus no iron with or without erythropoiesis- stimulating agents (ESA) for cancer patients with anaemia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anaemia is common among cancer patients and they may require red blood cell transfusions. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and iron might help in reducing the need for red blood cell transfusions. However, it remains unclear whether the combination of both drugs is preferable compared to using one drug.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the effect of intravenous iron, oral iron or no iron in combination with or without ESAs to prevent or alleviate anaemia in cancer patients and to generate treatment rankings using network meta-analyses (NMAs).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by searching bibliographic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase; until June 2021). We also searched various registries, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing intravenous, oral or no iron, with or without ESAs for the prevention or alleviation of anaemia resulting from chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combination therapy or the underlying malignancy in cancer patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes were on-study mortality, number of patients receiving red blood cell transfusions, number of red blood cell units, haematological response, overall mortality and adverse events. We conducted NMAs and generated treatment rankings. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-six trials (25,157 participants) fulfilled our inclusion criteria; 62 trials (24,603 participants) could be considered in the NMA (12 different treatment options). Here we present the comparisons of ESA with or without iron and iron alone versus no treatment. Further results and subgroup analyses are described in the full text. On-study mortality We estimated that 92 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia died up to 30 days after the active study period. Evidence from NMA (55 trials; 15,074 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (12 of 1000; risk ratio (RR) 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.29; low certainty) or oral iron (34 of 1000; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.01 to 27.38; low certainty) may decrease or increase and ESA alone (103 of 1000; RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.35; moderate certainty) probably slightly increases on-study mortality. Additionally, treatment with intravenous iron alone (271 of 1000; RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.71 to 12.34; low certainty) may increase and oral iron alone (24 of 1000; RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.00 to 19.73; low certainty) may increase or decrease on-study mortality. Haematological response We estimated that 90 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia had a haematological response. Evidence from NMA (31 trials; 6985 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (604 of 1000; RR 6.71, 95% CI 4.93 to 9.14; moderate certainty), ESA and oral iron (527 of 1000; RR 5.85, 95% CI 4.06 to 8.42; moderate certainty), and ESA alone (467 of 1000; RR 5.19, 95% CI 4.02 to 6.71; moderate certainty) probably increases haematological response. Additionally, treatment with oral iron alone may increase haematological response (153 of 1000; RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.69 to 4.20; low certainty). Red blood cell transfusions We estimated that 360 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia needed at least one transfusion. Evidence from NMA (69 trials; 18,684 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (158 of 1000; RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.63; moderate certainty), ESA and oral iron (144 of 1000; RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.66; moderate certainty) and ESA alone (212 of 1000; RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.69; moderate certainty) probably decreases the need for transfusions. Additionally, treatment with intravenous iron alone (268 of 1000; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.28; low certainty) and with oral iron alone (333 of 1000; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.57; low certainty) may decrease or increase the need for transfusions. Overall mortality We estimated that 347 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia died overall. Low-certainty evidence from NMA (71 trials; 21,576 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (507 of 1000; RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.43) or oral iron (482 of 1000; RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.22) and intravenous iron alone (521 of 1000; RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.56) or oral iron alone (534 of 1000; RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.56) may decrease or increase overall mortality. Treatment with ESA alone may lead to little or no difference in overall mortality (357 of 1000; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10; low certainty). Thromboembolic events We estimated that 36 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia developed thromboembolic events. Evidence from NMA (50 trials; 15,408 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (66 of 1000; RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.41; moderate certainty) probably slightly increases and with ESA alone (66 of 1000; RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.47; high certainty) slightly increases the number of thromboembolic events. None of the trials reported results on the other comparisons. Thrombocytopenia or haemorrhage We estimated that 76 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia developed thrombocytopenia/haemorrhage. Evidence from NMA (13 trials, 2744 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA alone probably leads to little or no difference in thrombocytopenia/haemorrhage (76 of 1000; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.48; moderate certainty). None of the trials reported results on other comparisons. Hypertension We estimated that 10 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia developed hypertension. Evidence from NMA (24 trials; 8383 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA alone probably increases the number of hypertensions (29 of 1000; RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.19 to 7.25; moderate certainty). None of the trials reported results on the other comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When considering ESAs with iron as prevention for anaemia, one has to balance between efficacy and safety. Results suggest that treatment with ESA and iron probably decreases number of blood transfusions, but may increase mortality and the number of thromboembolic events. For most outcomes the different comparisons within the network were not fully connected, so ranking of all treatments together was not possible. More head-to-head comparisons including all evaluated treatment combinations are needed to fill the gaps and prove results of this review.

Efficacy and Cardiovascular Adverse Effects of Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agents in the Treatment of Cancer-Related Anemia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Anemia is a common complication of cancer. Treatment of anemia in cancer is crucial as anemia adversely affects the quality of life, therapeutic outcomes, and overall survival. Erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) are valuable drugs for treating cancer-related anemia. Cardiovascular adverse effects are a significant concern with ESA therapy, and there is wide variability in therapeutic goals and characteristics of patients who undergo treatment with ESAs. As a result, a careful analysis of the currently available data on the efficacy and safety of these drugs is necessary. This data analysis will aid in the rational use of ESAs for the treatment of anemia in cancer. The objective of this systematic review is to elucidate the pathogenesis of anemia in cancer, assess the effectiveness of ESAs in treating anemia in cancer, and the overall risk of cardiovascular adverse effects associated with the use of ESAs and their impact on prognosis. We searched literature from online databases - PubMed, PubMed Central, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and clinical trials register (clinicaltrials.gov) to identify prospective phase II and phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We chose RCTs that directly compared patients with cancer who were treated with ESAs to those who were not treated with ESAs. January 2008 was taken as the lower date limit and May 2021 as the upper date limit. Only English language literature and human studies were included. The quality appraisal was completed using the Cochrane risk bias assessment tool, and data from a total of 10,738 patients with cancer in 17 RCTs were identified and included for systematic review. Our review concludes that ESAs effectively reduce the necessity for blood transfusions and increase mean hemoglobin levels in anemic cancer patients. ESA therapy is associated with cardiovascular adverse effects, including venous thromboembolism, thrombophlebitis, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, cardiac failure, arrhythmia, arterial thromboembolism, and cardiac arrest. Aggressive ESA dosing to achieve higher hemoglobin levels and preexisting uncontrolled hypertension increases these cardiovascular side effects. Venous thromboembolism is the most significant adverse effect attributed to ESA therapy. However, there is no major change in overall survival with ESA therapy, and administration of ESAs can be carried out in anemic cancer patients with careful assessment of thromboembolism risk factors, risk-benefit ratio, and monitoring of hemoglobin levels.

Impact of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) and Epoetin (EPO) on Hematologic Toxicities and Quality of Life in Patients During Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Early Breast Cancer: Results From the Multi-Center Randomized ADEBAR Trial

BACKGROUND

Hematologic toxicities are one of the greatest challenges in adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. This analysis of the ADEBAR trial aims to evaluate application and effect of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and epoetin alfa (EPO) on hematologic parameters and fatigue in patients with breast cancer during chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the ADEBAR trial, 1493 patients with node-positive primary breast cancer were randomized to either 6 × 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC120) or 4 × epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by 4 × docetaxel (EC-DOC). Co-medication with G-CSF or EPO was applied to treat chemotherapy-induced leukopenia or anemia. Fatigue was assessed at baseline and after one-half of the chemotherapy.

RESULTS

In total, 899 patients could be included in the analysis. There was no evidence for an association between leucocyte or hemoglobin levels and application of G-CSF and EPO in the preceding cycle, respectively. Hemoglobin levels (B = -0.41; P < .001) were affected by treatment regimen. Fatigue during chemotherapy was mostly affected by the level of fatigue before the start of chemotherapy (B = 0.41; P < .001). Patients with G-CSF application in the preceding cycle showed an increased fatigue score (B = 5.43; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

We showed that fatigue during adjuvant chemotherapy was mostly affected by the level of fatigue present before the start of chemotherapy. This result suggests that the level of fatigue before the start of treatment should be included as an important factor when deciding on type and toxicity of chemotherapy in early breast cancer.

Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents in the Management of Anemia in Chronic Kidney Disease or Cancer: A Historical Perspective

Anemia is common in patients with cancer or with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although the introduction of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) has transformed the management of anemia, their use has been complicated by a number of factors including frequent guideline updates, safety concerns and, in the United States, a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program, which aimed to ensure that the benefits of ESAs outweigh the risks. Many previous concerns around ESA use in cancer and CKD have been addressed by the reassuring results of post-approval studies, and biosimilar ESAs have been used in Europe for many years, with safety and efficacy profiles similar to originator products. This review describes the evolution of the use of ESAs from approval to the present day, discussing results from clinical studies of ESAs in cancer and CKD, and the influence of these findings on product labeling and guideline updates. We also discuss the impact of the introduction of ESA biosimilars in Europe, bringing cost savings and increased access to patients.

The Impact of Biosimilars in Supportive Care in Cancer

Collapse

Erythropoietin promoted the proliferation of hepatocellular carcinoma through hypoxia induced translocation of its specific receptor

Background

Erythropoietin (EPO) is a hypoxia-inducible stimulator of erythropoiesis. Besides its traditional application in anemia therapy, it offers an effective treatment in the cancer patients, especially those who receive chemotherapy. Several reports indicated that it could promote the tumor cell proliferation through its specific receptor (EPOR). Unfortunately, the role of EPO/EPOR in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressing is still uncertain.

Methods

Protein in tumor tissue from HCC patients or H22 tumor-bearing mice was detected with immunohistochemistry. Cells were cultured under 1% oxygen to establish hypoxia. RT-PCR and western blotting were used to measure mRNA and protein of EPO/EPOR, respectively. MTT, flow cytometry and PCNA staining were used to detect cell proliferation. Immunofluorescence staining was applied to study the expression and location of cellular EPOR. The EPOR binding studies were performed with ¹²⁵I-EPO radiolabeling assay.

Results

EPO and EPOR protein were up-regulated in HCC tissue of patients and H22-bearing mice. These were positively correlated with hypoxia-inducible factor -1 α and ki-67. Hypoxia up-regulated the expression of EPO and EPOR in HepG2 cells. It also induced the proliferation and increased the percentage of divided cells after 24, 48 and 72 h treatment. These were inhibited in cells pre-treated with 0.5 μg/mL soluble-EPOR. Immunofluorescence staining presented that EPOR was obviously translocated from nucleus to cytoplasm and membrane under hypoxia. EPOR binding activity was also increased after exposure to hypoxia. Recombinant human erythropoietin obviously elevated cell proliferation rate and the percentage of divided under hypoxia but not normoxia, which were also inhibited by soluble-EPOR.

Conclusions

Our result indicated for the first time that EPO promoted the proliferation of HCC cells through hypoxia induced translocation of it specific receptor.

Trial registration TJC20141113, retrospectively registered

Erythropoietin promoted the proliferation of hepatocellular carcinoma through hypoxia induced translocation of its specific receptor

BACKGROUND

Erythropoietin (EPO) is a hypoxia-inducible stimulator of erythropoiesis. Besides its traditional application in anemia therapy, it offers an effective treatment in the cancer patients, especially those who receive chemotherapy. Several reports indicated that it could promote the tumor cell proliferation through its specific receptor (EPOR). Unfortunately, the role of EPO/EPOR in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressing is still uncertain.

METHODS

Protein in tumor tissue from HCC patients or H22 tumor-bearing mice was detected with immunohistochemistry. Cells were cultured under 1% oxygen to establish hypoxia. RT-PCR and western blotting were used to measure mRNA and protein of EPO/EPOR, respectively. MTT, flow cytometry and PCNA staining were used to detect cell proliferation. Immunofluorescence staining was applied to study the expression and location of cellular EPOR. The EPOR binding studies were performed with ¹²⁵I-EPO radiolabeling assay.

RESULTS

EPO and EPOR protein were up-regulated in HCC tissue of patients and H22-bearing mice. These were positively correlated with hypoxia-inducible factor -1 α and ki-67. Hypoxia up-regulated the expression of EPO and EPOR in HepG2 cells. It also induced the proliferation and increased the percentage of divided cells after 24, 48 and 72 h treatment. These were inhibited in cells pre-treated with 0.5 μg/mL soluble-EPOR. Immunofluorescence staining presented that EPOR was obviously translocated from nucleus to cytoplasm and membrane under hypoxia. EPOR binding activity was also increased after exposure to hypoxia. Recombinant human erythropoietin obviously elevated cell proliferation rate and the percentage of divided under hypoxia but not normoxia, which were also inhibited by soluble-EPOR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our result indicated for the first time that EPO promoted the proliferation of HCC cells through hypoxia induced translocation of it specific receptor. Trial registration TJC20141113, retrospectively registered.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (epoetin and darbepoetin) for treating cancer treatment-induced anaemia (including review of technology appraisal no. 142): a systematic review and economic model

BACKGROUND

Anaemia is a common side effect of cancer treatments and can lead to a reduction in quality of life. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are licensed for use in conjunction with red blood cell transfusions to improve cancer treatment-induced anaemia (CIA).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ESAs in anaemia associated with cancer treatment (specifically chemotherapy).

DATA SOURCES

The following databases were searched from 2004 to 2013: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, British Nursing Index, Health Management Information Consortium, Current Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov. The US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency websites were also searched. Bibliographies of included papers were scrutinised for further potentially includable studies.

REVIEW METHODS

The clinical effectiveness review followed principles published by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or systematic reviews of RCTs, of ESAs (epoetin or darbepoetin) for treating people with CIA were eligible for inclusion in the review. Comparators were best supportive care, placebo or other ESAs. Anaemia- and malignancy-related outcomes, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. When appropriate, data were pooled using meta-analysis. An empirical health economic model was developed comparing ESA treatment with no ESA treatment. The model comprised two components: one evaluating short-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (while patients are anaemic) and one evaluating long-term QALYs. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Probabilistic and univariate deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of 1457 titles and abstracts screened, 23 studies assessing ESAs within their licensed indication (based on start dose administered) were included in the review. None of the RCTs were completely aligned with current European Union licenses. The results suggest a clinical benefit from ESAs for anaemia-related outcomes and an improvement in HRQoL scores. The impact of ESAs on AEs and survival remains highly uncertain, although point estimates are lower, confidence intervals are wide and not statistically significant. Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for ESA treatment compared with no ESA treatment ranged from £ 19,429 to £ 35,018 per QALY gained, but sensitivity and scenario analyses demonstrate considerable uncertainty in these ICERs, including the possibility of overall health disbenefit. All ICERs were sensitive to survival and cost.

LIMITATIONS

The relative effectiveness of ESAs was not addressed; all ESAs were assumed to have equivalent efficacy. No studies were completely aligned with their European labelling beyond the starting dose evaluated. There is questionable generalisability given that the included trials were published >20 years ago and there have been many changes to chemotherapy as well as to the quality of supportive treatment. Trial quality was moderate or poor and there was considerable unexplained heterogeneity for a number of outcomes, particularly survival, and evidence of publication bias. Adjustments were not made to account for multiple testing.

CONCLUSIONS

ESAs could be cost-effective when used closer to licence, but there is considerable uncertainty, mainly because of unknown impacts on overall survival.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005812.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Combination with intravenous iron supplementation or doubling erythropoietin dose for patients with chemotherapy-induced anaemia inadequately responsive to initial erythropoietin treatment alone: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Erythropoietin (EPO) is a commonly used option in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA). However, ∼30-50% of patients fail to achieve an adequate response after initial treatment. Prior studies have demonstrated that intravenous iron might synergistically improve therapeutic response to EPO treatment in this patient population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform this multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, active controlled non-inferiority study to compare the two combination therapies of EPO plus intravenous iron regimen versus doubling the dose of EPO in patients with CIA who have an inadequate response to initial EPO treatment at a routine dose. A total of 603 patients with an increase in haemoglobin (Hb) <1 g/dL will be enrolled and randomised to one of the three study treatment groups at a 1:1:1 ratio Group 1: EPO treatment at the original dose plus intravenous iron dextran 200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W) for 15 weeks; Group 2: EPO treatment at the original dose plus intravenous iron dextran 100 mg, twice a week for 5 weeks; Group 3: the control group, doubling the EPO dose without preplanned iron supplementation. The primary outcome measure to compare is the Hb response rate at week 15 and the secondary end points involve therapeutic blood transfusions. Time-to-progression, adverse events and quality of life will also be evaluated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

All participants will provide informed consent; the study protocol has been approved by the independent ethics committee of Shanghai East Hospital. This study would clearly demonstrate the potential benefit of combining epoetin treatment with intravenous iron supplementation. Findings will be shared with participating hospitals, policymakers and the academic community to promote the clinical management of CIA in China.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02731378.

Impact of Hematopoietic Growth Factors on Blood Transfusion Needs, Incidence of Neutropenia, and Overall Survival Among Elderly Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients Treated With Chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of erythropoietin-stimulating agent (ESA) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (CSF) in reducing blood transfusion needs and neutropenia incidence in community-dwelling elderly ovarian cancer patients.

METHODS

The SEER (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results)-Medicare database was used to identify 5572 women with stage III/IV ovarian cancer who received chemotherapy. To assess clinical effectiveness, we categorized patients based on the number of administrations of ESA (ie, epoetin-alfa and darbepoetin-alfa) and CSF (ie, filgrastim and pegfilgrastim). To evaluate effect on survival, patients were categorized as receiving ESA only, CSF only, ESA + CSF, and no ESA/CSF.

RESULTS

Two thirds of patients received growth factor support (24% ESA only, 13% CSF only, 30% ESA + CSF). Depending on the number of epoetin-alfa administrations, ESA was associated with 48% to 56% lower need for blood transfusion compared with no ESA (hazard ratio for 1-3 claims, 0.47; 4-6 claims, 0.52; 7-10 claims, 0.48; ≥11 claims, 0.44). Patients who received at least 3 prophylactic filgrastim administrations had 71% to 98% lower risk of developing neutropenia (hazard ratio for 3-4 claims, 0.29; ≥5 claims, 0.02) compared with those without CSF. Effectiveness was comparable for darbepoetin-alfa and pegfilgrastim use. Overall survival was longer in those who received CSF only; however, the risk of mortality after 24 months was higher in those who received ESA (P = 0.0005). All models were adjusted for relevant covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Erythropoietin-stimulating agents were effective in reducing blood transfusion need. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors were effective in lowering neutropenia incidence and also were associated with improved survival in elderly ovarian cancer patients. Findings are consistent with clinical trials and clinical guidelines.

Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Diagnosed With Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

Considering the high prevalence of lung cancer, our purpose was to summarize the existing literature to identify the several factors that contribute to the increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with lung cancer and to analyze the current recommendations for thromboprophylaxis and treatment of VTE in those patients.

METHODS

We searched the Medline and EMBASE databases from February 1985 to February 2014 to identify retrospective and prospective randomized controlled studies that investigate one or more risk factors for VTEs in patients with lung cancer.

RESULTS

A VTE is a major complication for patients diagnosed with lung cancer. The risk factors for VTE events in patients with lung cancer consist of cancer-related (histological type and stage of cancer), treatment-related (surgery, chemotherapy, angiogenic agents, and supportive care agents), and patient-related factors (comorbidities, immobility, performance status, and prior thrombosis). Low-molecular-weight heparins are recommended for long-term treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis. Duration of anticoagulant therapy beyond 6 months should be based on individual clinical evaluation. Thromboprophylaxis for patients with lung cancer during hospitalization and immediate postoperative period is well established.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to assess thrombotic risk in patients with lung cancer may improve therapeutic and preventive strategies in the future, with final goal to minimize the burden and consequences of thrombotic events in patients with lung cancer.

Epoetin beta for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia: an update

Epoetin beta belongs to the class of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) that are currently available to treat anemic patients receiving chemotherapy. Chemotherapy-induced anemia affects a high percentage of cancer patients and, due to its negative effects on disease outcome and the patient’s quality of life, should be treated when first diagnosed. Initial trials with ESAs have shown efficacy in improving quality of life and reducing the need for blood transfusions in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia. However, recent meta-analyses have provided conflicting data on the impact of ESAs on survival and tumor progression. Here we provide an overview of these recent data and review the role of epoetin beta in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia over the past 20 years.

Erythropoietin and cancer: the unintended consequences of anemia correction

Until 1990, erythropoietin (EPO) was considered to have a single biological purpose and action, the stimulation of red blood cell growth and differentiation. Slowly, scientific and medical opinion evolved, beginning with the discovery of an effect on endothelial cell growth in vitro and the identification of EPO receptors (EPORs) on neuronal cells. We now know that EPO is a pleiotropic growth factor that exhibits an anti-apoptotic action on numerous cells and tissues, including malignant ones. In this article, we present a short discussion of EPO, receptors involved in EPO signal transduction, and their action on non-hematopoietic cells. This is followed by a more detailed presentation of both pre-clinical and clinical data that demonstrate EPO’s action on cancer cells, as well as tumor angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis. Clinical trials with reported adverse effects of chronic erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) treatment as well as clinical studies exploring the prognostic significance of EPO and EPOR expression in cancer patients are reviewed. Finally, we address the use of EPO and other ESAs in cancer patients.

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in the management of cancer patients with anemia: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are widely used in the management of anemia in cancer patients. Despite their apparent effectiveness, recent studies have suggested that ESAs could result in serious adverse events and even higher mortality. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the benefits and risks of ESAs in the management of cancer patients with anemia using a meta-analysis.

METHODS

The initial literature search covered Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials, and identified 1,569 articles. The final meta-analysis included eight randomized controlled trials (n=2,387) in cancer patients with <11 g/dL hemoglobin (Hb) at the baseline and target Hb (for stopping ESA treatment) at no more than 13 g/dL. The assessment measures included Hb response, blood transfusion rate and adverse events that included venous thromboemblism (VTE), hypertension, and on-study mortality. The results are expressed as pooled odds ratio (OR). Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot analysis.

RESULTS

ESAs significantly increased the Hb concentration [OR 7.85, 95% confidence interval (CI): 5.85 to 10.53, P<0.001] and reduced the red blood cell (RBC) transfusion rate (OR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.65, P<0.001). ESAs did not increase the accumulated adverse events (OR 0.95, P=0.82), or the on-study mortality (OR 1.09, P=0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

ESAs are not associated with increased frequency of severe adverse events in anemic cancer patients when the target Hb value is no more than 13 g/dL.

Effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on fatigue- and anaemia-related symptoms in cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analyses of published and unpublished data

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) reduce the need for red blood cell transfusions; however, they increase the risk of thromboembolic events and mortality. The impact of ESAs on quality of life (QoL) is controversial and led to different recommendations of medical societies and authorities in the USA and Europe. We aimed to critically evaluate and quantify the effects of ESAs on QoL in cancer patients.

METHODS

We included data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of ESAs on QoL in cancer patients. Randomised controlled trials were identified by searching electronic data bases and other sources up to January 2011. To reduce publication and outcome reporting biases, we included unreported results from clinical study reports. We conducted meta-analyses on fatigue- and anaemia-related symptoms measured with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) and FACT-Anaemia (FACT-An) subscales (primary outcomes) or other validated instruments.

RESULTS

We identified 58 eligible RCTs. Clinical study reports were available for 27% (4 out of 15) of the investigator-initiated trials and 95% (41 out of 43) of the industry-initiated trials. We excluded 21 RTCs as we could not use their QoL data for meta-analyses, either because of incomplete reporting (17 RCTs) or because of premature closure of the trial (4 RCTs). We included 37 RCTs with 10581 patients; 21 RCTs were placebo controlled. Chemotherapy was given in 27 of the 37 RCTs. The median baseline haemoglobin (Hb) level was 10.1 g dl(-1); in 8 studies ESAs were stopped at Hb levels below 13 g dl(-1) and in 27 above 13 g dl(-1). For FACT-F, the mean difference (MD) was 2.41 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.39-3.43; P<0.0001; 23 studies, n=6108) in all cancer patients and 2.81 (95% CI 1.73-3.90; P<0.0001; 19 RCTs, n=4697) in patients receiving chemotherapy, which was below the threshold (≥ 3) for a clinically important difference (CID). Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents had a positive effect on anaemia-related symptoms (MD 4.09; 95% CI 2.37-5.80; P=0.001; 14 studies, n=2765) in all cancer patients and 4.50 (95% CI 2.55-6.45; P<0.0001; 11 RCTs, n=2436) in patients receiving chemotherapy, which was above the threshold (≥ 4) for a CID. Of note, this effect persisted when we restricted the analysis to placebo-controlled RCTs in patients receiving chemotherapy. There was some evidence that the MDs for FACT-F were above the threshold for a CID in RCTs including cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with Hb levels below 12 g dl(-1) at baseline and in RCTs stopping ESAs at Hb levels above 13 g dl(-1). However, these findings for FACT-F were not confirmed when we restricted the analysis to placebo-controlled RCTs in patients receiving chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In cancer patients, particularly those receiving chemotherapy, we found that ESAs provide a small but clinically important improvement in anaemia-related symptoms (FACT-An). For fatigue-related symptoms (FACT-F), the overall effect did not reach the threshold for a CID.

Questionnaire-based survey on chemotherapy-induced anemia

A questionnaire-based survey on chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) in cancer patients was conducted between September and November 2010. The number of patients treated with chemotherapy, rate of blood transfusion, volume of blood transfused, severity of anemia, and factors affecting blood transfusion were analyzed according to the type of cancer, in an attempt to clarify the current status of CIA in Japan. During the survey period, among the eight types of cancer analyzed (breast, lung, stomach, colorectal, liver, gynecologic cancer, urologic cancer, and malignant lymphoma), chemotherapy was given to 5.4-13.6 % (mean 9.2 %) of patients, among whom 1.6-24.0 % (mean 7.5 %) required blood transfusion. The number of units of red blood cells transfused was 3.9-7.3 units (mean 5.9 units) per patient. According to a nationwide patient survey conducted by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, it is estimated that approximately 146,000 units of red blood cells, which account for 2.2 % of the annual total supply of red blood cell products, are transfused to cancer patients with CIA yearly. In addition, it is estimated that annually approximately 172,000 cancer patients with CIA, accounting for 40 % of patients receiving chemotherapy, have hemoglobin (Hb) levels below 10 g/dL. Possible factors affecting blood transfusion include a history of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, as well as the use of platinum agents. In patients who received red blood cell transfusions, the average Hb level prior to chemotherapy was 9.5 g/dL, and the average lowest Hb level after starting chemotherapy was 6.9 g/dL. By contrast, in patients who did not receive transfusion, these values were 11.6 and 10.4 g/dL, respectively. Furthermore, in all cancer types, almost no red blood cell transfusion was performed in patients with an Hb level of 8.0 g/dL or higher, but also many patients with an Hb level of 6.9 g/dL or lower did not receive red blood cell transfusions. There was no significant difference in the ratio of adverse events following blood transfusion in this survey compared with that in the nationwide survey. The present results demonstrate the strict restriction of red blood cell transfusion to cancer patients with CIA. Therefore, there is a need to consider the use of alternative therapies to allogeneic blood transfusion, such as erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, to increase Hb levels, and consequently improve the quality of life in cancer patients with CIA.

Impact of anemia management with EPO on psychologic distress in cancer patients: results of a multicenter patient survey

ABSTRACT: Aim: We investigated the role of erythropoietin (EPO) in reducing anemia and preventing the development of psychological distress in patients treated with chemotherapy. Patients & methods: This prospective observational study enrolled 591 adult patients receiving EPO at a dose of 30,000 IU administered once weekly for chemotherapy-induced anemia (mean baseline hemoglobin [Hb] level was 9.55 g/dl) over a 12-month period. Results: The majority of patients (371 [71%] patients) achieved a Hb increase >2 g/dl after 4 weeks of treatment. Interestingly, the nonresponder group had a statistically significant deterioration of their psychological conditions as indicated by psychological distress score (p = 0.01). However, within the group of responders to EPO, the Psychological Distress Inventory score remained unchanged. In the present study, severe side effects associated with EPO were not recorded. Conclusion: Hb increase, induced by EPO, ameliorates the psychological conditions of cancer patients.

Erythropoietin treatment in chemotherapy-induced anemia in previously untreated advanced esophagogastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The impact of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in chemotherapy-induced anemia has been a constant topic of debate over recent years. We prospectively assessed the efficacy of epoetin beta (Epo-b) in improving hemoglobin (Hb) levels and outcome in patients within an open label, randomized clinical phase II trial with advanced or metastatic gastric/esophagogastric cancer.

METHODS

Previously untreated patients were randomized to receive 3-weekly cycles of capecitabine (1000 mg/m(2) bid) for 14 days plus on day 1 either irinotecan 250 mg/m(2) or cisplatin 80 mg/m(2). Epo-b (30000 IU once weekly) was initiated in patients with Hb <11 g/dl and continued until Hb ≥12 g/dl was reached. If after 4 weeks the Hb increase was <0.5 g/dl, Epo-b was increased to 30000 IU, twice weekly.

RESULTS

Of 118 patients enrolled, 32 received Epo-b treatment; of these, 65 % achieved an increase in Hb levels of at least 2 g/dl, with 74 % achieving the target Hb of ≥12 g/dl. Within the study population, patients receiving Epo-b showed better overall survival (median 14.5 vs. 8.0 months, P = 0.056) as well as a significantly improved disease control rate (78 vs. 55 %, P = 0.025). Patients in the irinotecan group profited significantly (P < 0.05) in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival under Epo-b treatment (median 6.5 vs 4.1 months and median 15.4 vs 8.4 months, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Epo-b was effective in raising Hb levels in patients with advanced esophagogastric cancer. Patients receiving Epo-b had a significantly increased response to chemotherapy and a clear trend to improved survival.

Meta-analysis of epoetin beta and darbepoetin alfa treatment for chemotherapy-induced anemia and mortality: Individual patient data from Japanese randomized, placebo-controlled trials

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) reduce the need for transfusions and improve the quality of life in patients receiving chemotherapy, but several clinical trials have suggested that ESA might have a negative impact on survival. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ESA, epoetin beta and darbepoetin alfa, including their impact on overall survival and thromboembolic events, we conducted an individual data-based meta-analysis of three randomized, placebo-controlled trials studying Japanese patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia. All trials were conducted in compliance with Good Clinical Practice. A total of 511 patients with solid tumor or lymphoma (epoetin beta or darbepoetin alfa, n = 273; placebo, n = 238) were included. The ESA significantly reduced the risk of transfusion (relative risk, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.76). No significant effect of the ESA on overall survival was observed (unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.34). A prespecified subgroup analysis showed no strong interaction between the baseline hemoglobin concentration and the effect of ESA on overall survival. Among the ESA-treated patients, the highest hemoglobin achieved during the treatment period in each patient had no impact on mortality. No increase in thromboembolic events was observed in the ESA-treated patients (0.7% vs 1.7% placebo). The ESA reduced the risk of transfusion without a negative impact on the survival of patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia.

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.