Abstract

BACKGROUND Anaemia is highly prevalent in people with advanced, palliative cancer yet sufficiently effective and safe treatments are lacking. Oral iron is poorly tolerated, and blood transfusion offers only transient benefits. Intravenous iron has shown promise as an effective treatment for anaemia but its use for people with advanced, palliative cancer lacks evidence. AIMS To assess feasibility of the trial design according to screening, recruitment, and attrition rates. To evaluate the efficacy of intravenous iron to treat anaemia in people with solid tumours, receiving palliative care. DESIGN A multicentre, randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous iron (ferric derisomaltose, Monofer(®)). Outcomes included trial feasibility, change in blood indices, and change in quality of life via three validated questionnaires (EQ5D5L, QLQC30, and the FACIT-F) over 8 weeks. (ISRCTN; 13370767). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS People with anaemia and advanced solid tumours who were fatigued with a performance status ⩽2 receiving support from a specialist palliative care service. RESULTS 34 participants were randomised over 16 months (17 iron, 17 placebo). Among those eligible 47% of people agreed to participate and total study attrition was 26%. Blinding was successful in all participants. There were no serious adverse reactions. Results indicated that intravenous iron may be efficacious at improving participant haemoglobin, iron stores and select fatigue specific quality of life measures compared to placebo. CONCLUSION The trial was feasible according to recruitment and attrition rates. Intravenous iron increased haemoglobin and may improve fatigue specific quality of life measures compared to placebo. A definitive trial is required for confirmation.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The impact of blood transfusion on ovarian cancer survival is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To investigate whether peri-operative blood transfusion negatively impacted progression-free survival, overall survival, and quality of life in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS We performed an ancillary analysis of the European Organization for Research and Treatment (EORTC) 55971 phase III trial, in which patients were randomized to primary debulking surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients included in the per-protocol analysis were categorized by receipt of a transfusion. RESULTS 612 of 632 (97%) of patients had adequate data for analysis. Of those, 323 (53%) received a transfusion. The transfusion cohort was more likely to have had better Word Health Organization (WHO) performance status, serous histology, undergone primary debulking surgery, and received more aggressive surgery, with higher rates of no gross residual disease. Median overall survival was 34.0 vs 35.2 months in the no transfusion and transfusion cohorts (p=0.97). The adjusted HR for death was 1.18 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.48) in favor of the transfusion cohort. Median progression-free survival was 13.6 vs 12.6 months in the no transfusion and transfusion cohorts (p=0.96). The adjusted HR for progression was 1.14 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.43). There were no significant differences in global quality of life, fatigue, dyspnea, or physical functioning between the two cohorts at baseline or at any of the four assessment times. Grade 3 and 4 surgical site infections were more common in the transfusion cohort. CONCLUSION Transfusion did not negatively impact progression-free survival or overall survival; however, it was associated with increased peri-operative morbidity without improvements in quality of life.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Packed red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is frequently used in patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) because retrospective data suggest that anemic patients may respond sub-optimally to RT. No high-quality evidence currently exists to guide transfusion practices and establish hemoglobin (Hb) transfusion thresholds for this patient population, and practice varies significantly across centers. This systematic review investigated whether maintaining higher Hb via transfusion in radiation oncology patients leads to improved outcomes. METHODS We performed a literature search of studies comparing RBC transfusion thresholds in radiation oncology patients. Included studies assessed patients receiving RT for malignancy of any diagnosis or stage. Excluded studies did not evaluate Hb or transfusion as an intervention or outcome. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included locoregional control, number of transfusions and adverse events. RESULTS One study met inclusion criteria. The study pooled results from two randomized controlled trials that stratified anemic patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma to RBC transfusion versus no transfusion. The study found no significant differences in overall survival or locoregional control after five years, despite increased Hb levels in the transfused group. We conducted a narrative review by extracting data from 10 non-comparative studies involving transfusion in patients receiving RT. Results demonstrated no consistent conclusions regarding whether transfusions improve or worsen outcomes. CONCLUSIONS There is a lack of data on the effects of RBC transfusion on outcomes in patients undergoing RT. Well-designed prospective studies are needed in this area.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Patients with colorectal cancer have a high risk of iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) due to chronic tumour induced blood loss, a reduced dietary iron intake from poor nutrition or gastrointestinal malabsorption. This pilot, double blinded, randomised controlled trial (RCT) examined the effect and feasibility of using preoperative iron isomaltoside for treating iron deficiency anaemia. METHODS Forty eligible adults with IDA were randomised to receive either intravenous iron isomaltoside (20 mg.kg-1 up to 1000 mg over 30 minutes) or usual preoperative care (control) three weeks before scheduled colorectal surgery. The primary outcomes were perioperative changes in haemoglobin and ferritin concentrations. RESULTS The recruitment rate was 78% of all eligible referred patients (1.9 patients/month). The haemoglobin and ferritin concentrations were higher in the iron isomaltoside group than the control group over the perioperative period (group*time interaction P = 0.042 and P < 0.001 respectively). Mean haemoglobin change from baseline to before surgery was higher in the iron isomaltoside group (7.8, 95% CI: 3.2 to 12.3 g.l-1) than the control group (1.7, 95% CI: -1.9 to 5.3 g.l-1) [mean difference 6.1, 95% CI: 0.3 to 11.8 g.l-1; P = 0.040]. The ferritin change from baseline to before surgery between groups was large in favour of the iron isomaltoside group (mean difference 296.9, 95% CI: 200.6 to 393.2 μg.l-1; P < 0.001]. There were no differences between groups in packed red blood cell transfusions needed, surgical complications, quality of recovery and days (alive and) at home within 30 days after surgery. CONCLUSION Iron isomaltoside therapy was safe and had a minimal effect on perioperative changes in haemoglobin concentration. Given the slow recruitment and new evidence emerging during the conduct of this study, conducting a multi-centre RCT based on the current pilot trial protocol is unlikely to be feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03565354.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Iron supplementation improves the erythropoiesis-stimulating agents' (ESAs) response in chemotherapy-related anemia. The primary aim of our study is to assess the efficacy of sucrosomial iron, a new oral iron formulation, in cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia treated with ESAs. The secondary objectives included the efficacy into two subgroups of patients (iron replete and functional iron deficiency) between the two study arms, safety and the effect on transfusion need. METHODS In this randomized, multicentre, open-label, phase III clinical trial, 60 cancer patients were enrolled. Each patient was randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 12 weeks of oral sucrosomial iron at the dose of 30 mg daily in combination with ESAs or no supplementation to ESA treatment. The endpoint considered for efficacy was the proportion of patients achieving complete hematological response at 12 weeks (increase in Hb > 2 g/dL from baseline, without RBC transfusions in the previous 28 days or achieving Hb ≥ 12 g/dL). RESULTS There was a statistically significant association between oral sucrosomial iron supplementation in combination with ESAs and the achievement of a complete hematological response. This response was achieved within 12 weeks by 31% of patients in the control group and by 52% of patients supplemented with oral sucrosomial iron. A trend of greater response in sucrosomial iron arm was found in both subgroups. No difference was observed about safety and transfusion need. CONCLUSIONS Sucrosomial iron is well tolerated and its combination with ESAs improves the hematological response in cancer patients with chemotherapy-related anemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION This study has been reviewed by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, Pavia, Italy (28/04/2015; prot. N. 20,150,002,059), and by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the other Italian oncological centers involved in this study.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT) is common during treatment with antineoplastic therapies and may adversely impact chemotherapy dose intensity. There is no approved therapy for CIT. In our recent phase II randomized study, romiplostim led to correction of platelet counts in 85% of treated patients and allowed resumption of chemotherapy, with low rates of recurrent CIT in the first two cycles or 8 weeks of chemotherapy. However, there is a lack of long-term data on the efficacy and safety of romiplostim in CIT. OBJECTIVES To analyze efficacy and safety of romiplostim in the patients in the phase 2 study, who received romiplostim for ≥1 year. PATIENTS/METHODS Twenty-one patients remained on romiplostim for ≥1 year. We analyzed the effect of romiplostim on platelet counts, absolute neutrophil counts, and hemoglobin, as well as impact on ongoing chemotherapy. We also tracked venous or arterial thrombotic events. RESULTS During the study period, romiplostim was effective in preventing reduction of chemotherapy dose intensity due to CIT. Fourteen of the 20 (70%) analyzable patients experienced no episode of CIT, 4 subjects experienced a single chemotherapy dose delay due CIT, and 2 patients required a chemotherapy dose reduction. Platelet counts were preserved throughout the duration of the extension analysis. One patient experienced a proximal deep vein thrombosis, and one patient experienced multiple tumor-related ischemic events. CONCLUSIONS Long-term use of romiplostim for treatment of CIT was effective and safe, with no evidence of resistance or increased risk of thrombosis.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia is common and causes chemotherapy dose reductions or treatment delays, bleeding, and suboptimal oncological outcomes. We aimed to evaluate avatrombopag, a thrombopoietin receptor agonist that increases platelet counts, in patients with non-haematological cancer and platelet counts lower than 50 ×10(9) cells per L. METHODS In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, patients aged 18 years or older at 71 hospitals or cancer treatment centres in China, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Ukraine, and the USA and with ovarian, bladder, or lung cancer receiving chemotherapy who had severe thrombocytopenia were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral avatrombopag 60 mg or oral placebo once daily given 5 days before and after chemotherapy, with randomisation stratified by number of chemotherapy drugs used. Patients, investigators, and data collectors were masked to group allocation. Eligibility required two previous lines of chemotherapy or fewer, an ECOG performance status of 2 or less, and no previous history of chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia. The composite primary endpoint was the proportion of responders not requiring platelet transfusion or either a 15% or more chemotherapy dose reduction or a 4-day or more chemotherapy delay due to thrombocytopenia following study treatment until the start of the subsequent cycle. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat and per protocol populations. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of avatrombopag. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471078, and has been completed. FINDINGS Between Oct 12, 2018, and June 28, 2020, 122 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive avatrombopag (n=82) or placebo (n=40). Median follow-up was 31 days (IQR 22-61). Similar proportions of patients reached the primary endpoint in the avatrombopag and placebo groups (intention-to-treat: 57 [70%, 95% CI 58-79] of 82 vs 29 [73%, 95% CI 56-85] of 40; difference -3·0% (95% CI -21·6 to 15·6); p=0·72; per protocol: 51 [85%, 95% CI 73-93] of 60 vs 27 [84%, 95% CI 67-95] of 32; 0·6% (95% CI -20·8 to 22·1); p=0·96). 15 (18%) of 82 patients had serious adverse events in the avatrombopag group and eight (20%) of 40 in the placebo group, of which thrombocytopenia was most common (4 [5%] of 82 and 4 [10%] of 40 patients). Common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (22 [27%] of 82 and 16 [40%] of 40 patients), leukopenia (19 [23%] of 82 and 5 [13%] of 40), anaemia (16 [20%] of 82 and 9 [23%] of 40), and thrombocytopenia (16 [20%] of 82 and 14 [35%] of 40). Most adverse events were considered unrelated to study drug. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION In this population of patients with non-haematological malignancies who are relatively chemotherapy naive, chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia treatment outcomes were similar between the avatrombopag and placebo groups. Given its safety and ability to augment platelet counts in patients with chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia, evaluation of avatrombopag in populations with more persistent chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia is warranted. FUNDING Dova Pharmaceuticals, a Sobi company.

Abstract

Although many studies have shown that supplementation with iron and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) is frequently used for managing chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA), optimal combination therapy using these agents together to ameliorate anemia is not well characterized. To assess the effects of ESA combined with oral or intravenous (IV) iron on relieving CIA, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched for articles. Data collected in the articles were meta-analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software with a random-effects model. Our comprehensive search yielded 1666 potentially relevant trials. A total of 41 trials randomizing 4200 patients with CIA fulfilled inclusion criteria, including 34 Chinese articles and 7 English articles. Meta-analysis showed that treatment with both ESA and iron more effectively improved CIA relative to iron supplementation alone, with increased hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell count and haematopoietic response rate. Subgroup analyses revealed iron administration, both oral and IV iron, improved anemia in ESA-treated cancer patients with CIA. Our analysis demonstrates that iron supplementation combined with ESA more effectively ameliorates CIA relative to iron supplementation alone, without regard to whether IV or oral iron was used. Together, our findings may contribute to the clinical treatment of CIA using iron therapy with or without ESA. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Abstract

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been reported to increase the risk of death in cancer patients. In this study, we selected breast cancer, which is currently the most prevalent cancer worldwide, for a meta-analysis to re-examine the advantages and disadvantages of using ESAs. All relevant studies were searched by PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Library. Endpoints including mortality, incidence of thrombo-vascular events, hemoglobin, and transfusion requirements were meta-analyzed based on random-effects model or fixed-effect model. 10 studies were finally included, with a total sample size of 6785 patients. The risk of mortality was higher in patients using ESA than in controls (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.13, P = 0.03); subgroup analysis found that the mortality rate was higher in patients treating with ESA for > 6 months (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05-1.55, P = 0.01) and epoetin α (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.14, P = 0.03). The incidence of thrombo-vascular adverse events was higher in patients using ESA than in controls (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.27-1.86, P < 0.0001). The ESA group was more effective in improving anemia in cancer patients (MD 1.20, 95% CI 0.77-1.63, P < 0.00001). The blood transfusion needs of patients in the ESA group were significantly lower (RR 0.52, 95%CI 0.44-0.60, P < 0.00001). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in disease progression-related conditions (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.95-1.12, P = 0.52). ESAs increase the risk of mortality and the incidence of thrombo-vascular adverse events in breast cancer patients, while reducing their anemia symptoms and transfusion requirements. Registration PROSPERO CRD42022330450.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is a commonly described adverse event following polypectomy. Prophylactic clipping may prevent DPPB in some patient subgroups. We performed a meta-analysis to assess both the efficacy and real-world effectiveness of prophylactic clipping. METHODS We performed a database search through March 2020 for clinical trials or observational studies assessing prophylactic clipping and DPPB. Pooled risk ratios (RR) were calculated using random effects models. Subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses were performed to elucidate clinical or methodological factors associated with effects on outcomes. RESULTS A total of 2771 citations were screened, with 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 9 observational studies included, representing 24,670 colonoscopies. DPPB occurred in 2.0% of patients overall. The pooled RR of DPPB was 0.47 (95% CI 0.29-0.77) from RCTs enrolling only patients with polyps ≥ 20 mm. Remaining pooled RCT data did not demonstrate a benefit for clipping. The pooled RR of DPPB was 0.96 (95% CI 0.61-1.51) from observational studies including all polyp sizes. For patients with proximal polyps of any size, the RR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.33-1.62) from RCTs. Meta-regression confirmed that polyp size ≥ 20 mm significantly influenced the effect of clipping on DPPB. CONCLUSION Pooled evidence demonstrates a benefit when clipping polyps measuring ≥ 20 mm, especially in the proximal colon. In lower-risk subgroups, prophylactic clipping likely results in little to no difference in DPPB.