0
selected
-
1.
Transfusion use and effect on progression-free, overall survival, and quality of life in upfront treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: evaluation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment EORTC-55971 Cohort
Prescott LS, Vergote I, Sun CC, Bodurka DC, Coleman RL
International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society. 2022
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.
-
2.
Influence of perioperative leukodeplated red blood cell transfusion on immune function of patients with bladder cancer
Shi J, Gao B, Yang Y, Yang L, Li X
Xi Bao Yu Fen Zi Mian Yi Xue Za Zhi = Chinese Journal of Cellular and Molecular Immunology. 2018;34((7)):632-636.
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effect of leukodeplated red blood cell (RBC) transfusion on immune function of patients with bladder cancer. Methods A total of 48 patients with bladder cancer who required perioperative RBC transfusion were randomized into two groups: 22 received leukodeplated RBC transfusion (Group I) and 26 received suspended RBC transfusion (Group II ). T-cell subgroup, natural killer cell activity, erythrocyte-C3b receptor rosette formation rate, and immunosuppressive acidic protein (IAP) level were determined for the two groups before and after transfusion, and the results were statistically analyzed. Results There was no obvious difference in immune function between the two groups before transfusion. After transfusion, the immune function of both groups was lower. However, it was higher in Group I than in Group II . IAP level was higher after transfusion than before transfusion; however, it was lower in Group I than in Group II . Conclusion Perioperative RBC transfusion can decrease immune function in patients with bladder cancer. Compared with suspended RBC transfusion, leukodeplated RBC transfusion can improve immune function in patients with bladder cancer.
-
3.
Randomised feasibility study of a more liberal haemoglobin trigger for red blood cell transfusion compared to standard practice in anaemic cancer patients treated with chemotherapy
Yakymenko D, Frandsen KB, Christensen IJ, Norgaard A, Johansson PI, Daugaard G, Mau-Sorensen M
Transfusion Medicine (Oxford, England). 2017;28((3):):208-215
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The primary objective of this feasibility study was to identify quality of life (QoL) scores and symptom scales as tools for measuring patient-reported outcomes (PRO) associated with haemoglobin level in chemotherapy-treated cancer patients. Secondary objectives included comparing QoL and symptoms between randomisation arms. BACKGROUND Anaemia in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy is associated with decreased QoL. One treatment option is red blood cell transfusion (RBCT). However, the optimal haemoglobin trigger for transfusion is unknown. METHODS Patients were randomised to a haemoglobin trigger for RBCT of either < 9.7 g dL-1 (arm A) or < lower normal level, female: 11.5 g dL-1 , male: 13.1 g dL-1 (arm B). Four PROs were used: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) and the FACT-Anaemia (FACT-An), a Numeric Rating Scale on symptoms of anaemia and self-reported Performance Status (PS). The association between haemoglobin and PRO variables was assessed using a linear mixed model with random effects. RESULTS A total of 133 patients were enrolled, of which 86 patients received RBCT (28 in arm A, 58 in arm B). Baseline questionnaires were filled out in 79.7% of cases. Haemoglobin levels were significantly correlated with FACT-An, FACT-An Total Outcome Index (TOI), Functional Well-Being, fatigue and PS. Improvement on several PRO variables was observed in both arms after RBCT, with clinically minimal important differences observed in FACT-G, Physical Well-Being, FACT-An, FACT-An TOI, fatigue and dyspnoea. CONCLUSIONS QoL scores of physical and functional domains as well as self-reported anaemia-related symptoms correlated well with haemoglobin level in chemotherapy-treated cancer patients.
-
4.
Transfusion of irradiated red blood cell units with a potassium adsorption filter: A randomized controlled trial
Cid J, Villegas V, Carbasse G, Alba C, Perea D, Lozano M
Transfusion. 2016;56((5):):1046-51
Abstract
BACKGROUND The irradiation of red blood cells (RBCs) causes damage of the RBC membrane with increased potassium (K) leak during storage compared with nonirradiated RBC units of similar age. A previous in vitro study showed a mean reduction of K of 94 +/- 5% with a potassium adsorption filter (PAF). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A prospective, single-center, nonblinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transfusing irradiated RBC units with the PAF. Patients 18 years of age or older who received irradiated RBC units due to chemotherapy-induced anemia were randomly assigned to receive irradiated RBC units with the PAF (PAF group) or with the standard blood infusion set (control group). Primary outcome measures were safety and efficacy of the PAF (absolute change in hemoglobin [Hb] and K, respectively, in patient's blood values after transfusing the irradiated RBC units with or without the PAF). RESULTS A total of 63 irradiated RBC units were transfused to 17 patients in the control group, and a total of 56 irradiated RBC units were transfused to 13 patients in the PAF group. The absolute change of Hb (9.3 +/- 6.3 g/L vs. 8.1 +/- 5.8 g/L; p = 0.3) and the absolute change of K (-0.01 +/- 0.4 mmol/L vs. -0.01 +/- 0.3 mmol/L; p = 0.2) were comparable between the two groups of the trial. CONCLUSION The transfusion of 1 irradiated RBC unit with the PAF was as safe and efficacious as the transfusion of 1 irradiated RBC unit with the standard blood infusion set in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia.
-
5.
Transfusion requirements in surgical oncology patients: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
Pinheiro de Almeida J, Vincent JL, Barbosa Gomes Galas FR, Pinto Marinho de Almeida E, Fukushima JT, Osawa EA, Bergamin F, Lee Park C, Nakamura RE, Fonseca SM, et al
Anesthesiology. 2015;122((1):):29-38.
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several studies have indicated that a restrictive erythrocyte transfusion strategy is as safe as a liberal one in critically ill patients, but there is no clear evidence to support the superiority of any perioperative transfusion strategy in patients with cancer. METHODS In a randomized, controlled, parallel-group, double-blind (patients and outcome assessors) superiority trial in the intensive care unit of a tertiary oncology hospital, the authors evaluated whether a restrictive strategy of erythrocyte transfusion (transfusion when hemoglobin concentration <7 g/dl) was superior to a liberal one (transfusion when hemoglobin concentration <9 g/dl) for reducing mortality and severe clinical complications among patients having major cancer surgery. All adult patients with cancer having major abdominal surgery who required postoperative intensive care were included and randomly allocated to treatment with the liberal or the restrictive erythrocyte transfusion strategy. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of mortality and morbidity. RESULTS A total of 198 patients were included as follows: 101 in the restrictive group and 97 in the liberal group. The primary composite endpoint occurred in 19.6% (95% CI, 12.9 to 28.6%) of patients in the liberal-strategy group and in 35.6% (27.0 to 45.4%) of patients in the restrictive-strategy group (P = 0.012). Compared with the restrictive strategy, the liberal transfusion strategy was associated with an absolute risk reduction for the composite outcome of 16% (3.8 to 28.2%) and a number needed to treat of 6.2 (3.5 to 26.5). CONCLUSION A liberal erythrocyte transfusion strategy with a hemoglobin trigger of 9 g/dl was associated with fewer major postoperative complications in patients having major cancer surgery compared with a restrictive strategy.
Clinical Commentary
What is known?
Thresholds for red cell transfusion are currently under much scrutiny with a growing number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) supporting the safety of restrictive transfusion practices in specified patient groups e.g. patients treated on the intensive care unit (TRICC) [1], following hip (FOCUS) [2] and cardiac surgery (TRACS) [3, 4], and patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding [5] and sepsis (TRISS) [6]. Patients with cancer who are anaemic have poorer outcomes than those who are not [7] but there are no previous RCTs examining risks and benefits of transfusion in surgical patients with malignancy.
What did this paper set out to examine?
This paper describes 198 critically ill patients following surgery for abdominal malignancy randomised to restrictive (threshold 7 g/dl) and liberal (9 g/dl) transfusion strategies [8]. The primary outcome was a composite 30-day endpoint of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular complications, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy, septic shock and reoperation.
What did they show?
This is the first RCT to demonstrate a worse outcome for patients assigned a restrictive threshold. There is an almost two-fold increase in the composite 30-day endpoint in the restrictive group (35.6% versus 19.6%, p=0.012). Thirty day mortality was 8.2% (liberal) versus 22.8% (restrictive), p= 0.005. The most common causes of death were septic shock and multisystem organ failure. Cardiovascular events and intra-abdominal sepsis were more frequent in the restrictive group.
The extent of the worse outcomes in the restrictive group is unexpected following larger RCTs supporting the safety of restrictive transfusion practice. The least supportive of this strategy was the recently published cardiac surgery RCT which concluded that a restrictive threshold was not superior to a liberal threshold [4]; they showed no difference in the primary outcome (serious infection or ischaemic event at 3 months). However, there was an increased mortality in the restrictive group (4.2% versus 2.6%, p=0.045).
There are significant differences in outcomes between the 2 groups in Almeida’s study and so we must consider whether these are attributable to differences in transfusion practice. Importantly, 57.7% of those even in the liberal group (79.2% in the restrictive group) were not transfused during the randomisation period. The reported difference in haemoglobin between the groups relates to the pre-transfusion haemoglobin and therefore does not include haemoglobins of those not transfused (68.9% of total study population).
Although the target thresholds were 7.0 and 9.0 g/dl, patients were transfused on average at 6.8 g/dl (restrictive group) and 7.9 g/dl (liberal). Compared to the preceding large RCTs there is a lack of separation in haemoglobin levels between groups [2, 6]. All 13 protocol deviations in the liberal group occurred when patients with haemoglobin <9.0 g/dl were not transfused; all 7 deviations in the restrictive group were for transfusions given with haemoglobin >7.0 g/dl.
The median duration for which patients remained randomised (i.e. length of ICU stay) was 4 days, compared to 11 days in the TRICC trial and until discharge or death in the Villanueva and FOCUS trials. In this study the small difference in haemoglobin between the groups only emerges at 4 days.
These factors together call into doubt whether the differences in outcomes can be attributed to differences in transfusion alone, and so an alternative explanation for the differences in outcomes must be sought. One possible reason is the small excess in major operations (oesophagectomy, gastroduodenopancreatectomy) as compared to cystectomy and hysterectomy in the restrictive group; this may also explain the excess of abdominal sepsis. There was a small, non-significant, excess of patients with diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and congestive heart failure in the restrictive group.
The question addressed in the study is important and there are positive aspects to the trial which should be highlighted. This is the first randomised study specifically assessing post-operative patients with malignancy; the FOCUS study is the only other large RCT to include significant numbers of cancer patients (18.0 and 18.8% in the two arms) but the types, stage or remission status are not given. In the current study there were attempts to blind patients and investigators and the clinical practice described is deliverable on most ICUs. There were small numbers of protocol deviations and follow-up to the primary endpoint was complete.
What are the implications for practice and for future work?
It is important to consider the limitations of this study if its findings are to be used to inform practice. In the presence of multiple other RCT data supportive of restrictive transfusion practice we would caution against changing practice based on this research. Despite its unexpected findings, this study questions the safety of restrictive transfusion practice and it is important that future trials continue to address the safety this approach among different patient groups.
References
1. Hébert PC, et al., A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. N Engl J Med, 1999. 340(6): 409-17.
-
6.
Blood transfusions and prognosis in colorectal cancer: long-term results of a randomized controlled trial
Harlaar JJ, Gosselink MP, Hop WC, Lange JF, Busch OR, Jeekel H
Annals of Surgery. 2012;256((5):):681-6; discussion 686-7.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Perioperative blood transfusions may adversely affect survival in patients with colorectal malignancy, although definite proof of a causal relationship has never been reported. BACKGROUND We report the long-term outcomes of a randomized controlled trial performed between 1986 and 1991 to compare the effects of allogeneic blood transfusions and an autologous blood transfusion program in colorectal cancer patients. METHODS All 475 randomized patients operated upon for colorectal cancer were tracked via a national computerized record-linkage system to investigate survival and cause of death. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed and multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to study 20 years' overall survival. Colorectal cancer-specific survival was analyzed over the 10-year time period after surgery. RESULTS The overall survival percentage at 20 years after surgery was worse in the autologous group (21%) compared to the allogeneic group (28%) (P = 0.041; log-rank test). Cox regression, allowing for tumor stage, age, and sex, resulted in a hazard ratio (autologous vs allogeneic group) for overall mortality of 1.24 (95% confidence interval 1.00-1.54; P = 0.051). Colorectal cancer-specific survival at 10 years for the whole study group was 48% and 60% for the autologous and allogeneic group, respectively (P = 0.020; log-rank test). The adjusted hazard ratio was 1.39 (95 confidence interval 1.05-1.83; P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS At long-term follow-up colorectal cancer patients did not benefit from autologous transfusion compared with standard allogeneic transfusion. On the contrary, the overall and colorectal cancer-specific survival rates were worse in the patients in the autologous transfusion group.
-
7.
Does transfusion improve the outcome for HNSCC patients treated with radiotherapy? - Results from the randomized DAHANCA 5 and 7 trials
Hoff CM, Lassen P, Eriksen JG, Hansen HS, Specht L, Overgaard M, Grau C, Johansen J, Bentzen J, Andersen L, et al
Acta Oncologica. 2011;50((7):):1006-14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and a low level of hemoglobin often have a poor response to radiation that may be related to hypoxia-induced radioresistance. We have previously published the importance of hemoglobin level and the effect of transfusion by the results from the randomized DAHANCA 5 trial, including 414 patients in the analysis. Aim of the current analysis was to gain additional power by adding patients from the continued subrandomization in the DAHANCA 7 trial, now including a total of almost 1200 patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients were randomized to treatment in the DAHANCA 5 and 7 study (nimorazole vs. placebo and five fx/week vs. six fx/week), and in addition, patients with lowpre-irradiation hemoglobin values (females <13 g/dl; males <14.5 g/dl) were subrandomized to plus or minus transfusion. Transfusion was given with packed red blood cells with the aim to achieve a hemoglobin level in the highvalue range. RESULTS A total of 1166 patients were included, 701 patients had high hemoglobin levels and 465 had low hemoglobin levels. Among the low hemoglobin patients, 235 were randomized to receive transfusion. Patient characteristics and treatment arms were well balanced. In the majority of patients, transfusion resulted in increased hemoglobin levels although this decreased slightly throughout treatment as in the non-transfused patients. Overall, the patients with low hemoglobin level had a significant reduced probability of locoregional control, disease-specific and overall survival. In the low hemoglobin group, transfusion did not improve the outcome in locoregional control, disease-specific or overall survival. In multivariate analyses, HPV/p16 status, T and N classification were significant factors for all outcome measures, whereas there was no significant influence of transfusion or hemoglobin level on endpoints. CONCLUSION Transfusion prior to and during radiation treatment did not improve the outcome in patients with HNSCC and low hemoglobin values, but may have a negative impact on survival.
-
8.
The importance of haemoglobin level and effect of transfusion in HNSCC patients treated with radiotherapy--results from the randomized DAHANCA 5 study
Hoff CM, Hansen HS, Overgaard M, Grau C, Johansen J, Bentzen J, Overgaard J
Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2011;98((1):):28-33.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and a low level of haemoglobin (Hb) often have a poor response to radiation which may be related to hypoxia induced radioresistance. The aim of the study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of low Hb level and its modification by transfusion in HNSCC patients treated with radiotherapy. The study was performed as a subrandomization in the DAHANCA 5 trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients were randomized to treatment with the hypoxic radiosensitizer nimorazole or placebo, and in addition, patients with lowpre-irradiation Hb values (females<13 g/dL; males<14.5 g/dL) were subrandomized to plus or minus transfusion. Transfusion was given with packed red blood cells with the aim to achieve a Hb level in the highvalue range. RESULTS A total of 414 patients were included, 243 patients had high Hb levels and 171 patients had low Hb levels. Of the low Hb patients, 82 were randomized to receive transfusion and 89 not to receive transfusion. The treatment arms were well balanced. In the majority of patients, transfusion resulted in increased Hb levels although this tended to decline throughout treatment. Patients with high Hb levels had a significantly better probability of locoregional control, disease-specific survival and overall survival compared to 'low Hb no transfusion' patients. In the low Hb group, transfusion did not improve the outcome in locoregional control, disease-specific survival or overall survival. In multivariate analyses, T and N classifications were significant for all outcome measures, whereas there was no significant influence of transfusion or Hb level on endpoints. CONCLUSION The univariate prognostic significance of high Hb level was demonstrated in patients with HNSCC treated with radiotherapy; however, transfusion prior to and during treatment did not improve the outcome in patients with low Hb values.
-
9.
A randomized comparison of hemoglobin content-based vs standard (unit-based) RBC transfusion policy efficiencies
Atilla E, Topcuoglu P, Yavasoglu S, Karakaya A, Gencturk C, Bozdag S, Arslan O
Vox Sanguinis. 2011;101((s2):):121. Abstract No. P-303.
-
10.
HaemOPtimal: Randomized feasibility study of the optimal haemoglobin trigger for red blood cell transfusion (RBC) of anaemic cancer patients (PTS) treated with chemotherapy (CT)
Bruun KH, Norgaard A, Johansson P, Daugaard G, Sorensen M
Transfusion Alternatives in Transfusion Medicine. 2011;12((1, Poster Abstracts):):19-20.