-
1.
Palliative Radiotherapy for Haemostasis in Malignancy: a Systematic Review
Song, J., Brown, C., Dennis, K., Gaudet, M., Haddad, A.
Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)). 2023
Abstract
AIMS: Palliative radiotherapy is commonly used to achieve haemostasis for malignancy-induced haemorrhages. Our study aimed to examine the efficacy of palliative radiotherapy in the control of haemorrhages caused by various types of malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review of the literature was conducted to determine the level of evidence for the use of palliative radiotherapy in achieving haemostasis. Searches of the Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were completed for studies published between January 1947 and May 2017. Studies that reported either a qualitative or a quantitative effect of radiotherapy were selected for inclusion during the review process. RESULTS In total, 836 abstracts were screened; 13 prospective and 45 retrospective studies met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Selected studies were sorted based on the underlying tumour type to provide readers the opportunity to compare dose and fractionation schedules. Significant variations in reporting of outcomes and low total patient numbers did not allow for a quantitative analysis to be carried out. A higher median dose and a hypofractionated schedule seem to provide numerically higher rates of control based on the available data. CONCLUSIONS Palliative radiotherapy is useful in the management of bleeding related to advanced and incurable malignancies. Brachytherapy seems to be effective in haemostasis of certain malignancies, especially that of gynaecological origin. Treatment should be tailored to individual patient situations given the palliative goals of any such therapy. Further prospective studies could help to delineate optimal dose and fractionation schedules.
-
2.
Efficacy of topical hemostatic agents in malignancy-related gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Karna R, Deliwala S, Ramgopal B, Mohan BP, Kassab L, Becq A, Dhawan M, Adler DG
Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2022
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Despite advances in endoscopic therapies, malignancy-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding remains difficult to manage with high rates of treatment failure and rebleeding. Topical hemostatic agents (THA) are easier to apply to the wide bleeding surface of tumors. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of THAs in malignancy-related GI bleed. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases to identify studies reporting on the use of THAs in malignancy-related GI bleeding. The primary outcome was the achievement of hemostasis; secondary outcomes were early rebleeding (≤ 3 days), delayed rebleeding (>3 days), aggregate rebleeding, all-cause mortality, and GI bleed related mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions was done for all outcomes. RESULTS Out of 355 citations, total 16 studies with 530 patients were included. Primary hemostasis was achieved in 94.1% (95% CI: 91.5 - 96.0%). Early rebleeding was seen in 13.9% (95% CI: 9.7 - 19.4%) while delayed rebleeding was seen in 11.4% (95% CI: 5.8 - 21.1%). Aggregate rebleeding was seen in 24.2% (95% CI:18.5 - 31.0%). All-cause mortality was 33.1% (95% CI: 23.7 - 44.0%) while GI bleed related mortality occurred in 5.9% (95% CI: 2.2% - 14.8%). CONCLUSIONS THAs are highly effective for achieving primary hemostasis in malignancy-related GI bleeding. It should be considered as an alternative to traditional endotherapy methods in malignancy-related GI bleeds. Future studies should be designed to evaluate its efficacy and safety as a primary method of hemostasis as compared to traditional endotherapy measures.
-
3.
Intravenous Iron Supplementation for the Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Buchrits S, Itzhaki O, Avni T, Raanani P, Gafter-Gvili A
Journal of clinical medicine. 2022;11(14)
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND The pathophysiology of cancer-related anemia is multifactorial, including that of chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). The guidelines are not consistent in their approach to the use of intravenous (IV) iron in patients with cancer as part of the clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS All randomized controlled trials that compared IV iron with either no iron or iron taken orally for the treatment of CIA were included. We excluded trials if erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were used. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients requiring a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion during the study period. The secondary outcomes included the hematopoietic response (an increase in the Hb level by more than 1 g/dL or an increase above 11 g/dL), the iron parameters and adverse events. For the dichotomous data, risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (Cis) were estimated and pooled. For the continuous data, the mean differences were calculated. A fixed effect model was used, except in the event of significant heterogeneity between the trials (p < 0.10; I(2) > 40%), in which we used a random effects model. RESULTS A total of 8 trials published between January 1990 and July 2021 that randomized 1015 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 553 patients were randomized to IV iron and were compared with 271 patients randomized to oral iron and 191 to no iron. IV iron decreased the percentage of patients requiring a blood transfusion compared with oral iron (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55-0.95) with a number needed to treat of 20 (95% CI 11-100). IV iron increased the hematopoietic response (RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.5). There was no difference with respect to the risk of adverse events (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.88-1.07; 8 trials) or severe adverse events (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.76-1.57; 8 trials). CONCLUSIONS IV iron resulted in a decrease in the need for RBC transfusions, with no difference in adverse events in patients with CIA. IV iron for the treatment of CIA should be considered in clinical practice.
PICO Summary
Population
People with chemotherapy induced anaemia enrolled in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and identified by systematic review (n= 1,015, 8 RCTs).
Intervention
Intravenous [IV] iron (n= 553).
Comparison
Oral iron (n= 271), or no iron (n= 191).
Outcome
IV iron decreased the percentage of patients requiring a blood transfusion compared with oral iron (Risk ratio [RR] 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.95) with a number needed to treat of 20 (95% CI 11-100). IV iron increased the hematopoietic response (RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.5). There was no difference with respect to the risk of adverse events (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.88-1.07; 8 trials) or severe adverse events (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.76-1.57; 8 trials).
-
4.
Comparison of early mortality between leukapheresis and non-leukapheresis in adult acute myeloid leukemia patients with hyperleukocytosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Rinaldi I, Sutandyo N, Winston K
Hematology (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2022;27(1):141-149
-
-
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
OBJECTIVES One of the treatment modalities that can be used for hyperleukocytosis is leukapheresis. However, the result of studies showing the benefit of early mortality through the use of leukapheresis versus no leukapheresis is still inconclusive. Hence, we aimed to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine the effect of leukapheresis on early mortality in AML patients with hyperleukocytosis. METHODS We conducted a literature search on five databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost, Scopus, Clinicalkey, and JSTOR) up to October 2021 for studies comparing early mortality outcomes between hyperleukocytosis AML patients treated with leukapheresis versus no leukapheresis. Summary odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models. Heterogeneity tests were presented in I(2) value and publication bias was analyzed using a funnel plot. RESULTS Eleven retrospective cohort studies were eligible based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pooled analysis showed that there was no significant difference in early mortality between patients receiving leukapheresis and not receiving leukapheresis in studies using hyperleukocytosis cutoff of 95,000/mm(3) or 100,000/mm(3) (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.74-1.86; p: 0.50; I(2): 0%). Similarly, studies using hyperleukocytosis cutoff of 50,000/mm(3) also showed no benefits of early mortality (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.43-1.05; p: 0.08; I(2): 0%). Most of the studies used had a moderate risk of bias due to being observational studies. Funnel plot showed an indication of publication bias on studies using hyperleukocytosis cutoff of ≥50,000/mm(3). CONCLUSION The use of leukapheresis does not provide early mortality benefit in adult AML patients with hyperleukocytosis.
PICO Summary
Population
Adult acute myeloid leukemia patients (11 studies, n= 1,407).
Intervention
Leukapheresis intervention (n= 1,090).
Comparison
Not receiving leukapheresis (n= 317).
Outcome
Pooled analysis showed that there was no significant difference in early mortality between patients receiving leukapheresis and not receiving leukapheresis in studies using hyperleukocytosis cutoff of 95,000/mm3 or 100,000/mm3. Studies using hyperleukocytosis cutoff of 50,000/mm3 showed no benefits of early mortality.
-
5.
Systemic therapy of necrobiotic xanthogranuloma: a systematic review
Steinhelfer L, Kühnel T, Jägle H, Mayer S, Karrer S, Haubner F, Schreml S
Orphanet journal of rare diseases. 2022;17(1):132
Abstract
BACKGROUND Even though a plethora of systemic therapies have been proposed for necrobiotic xanthogranuloma (NXG), there is no systematic review on this topic in literature. OBJECTIVE To review all existing literature on the systemic therapy of NXG in order to identify the most effective therapies. METHODS All reported papers in the literature were screened for systemic treatments of NXG. Papers without proper description of the therapies, papers describing topical therapy, and articles without assessment of effectiveness were excluded. Subsequently, we analyzed 79 papers and a total of 175 cases. RESULTS The most effective treatments for NXG are intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), corticosteroids, and combination therapies including corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS Corticosteroids and IVIG should therefore be considered first-line treatments in patients with NXG.
-
6.
Outcomes and Clinical Characteristics of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Patients with Hematological Malignancies: A Systematic Literature Review
Raghavan A, Wright CH, Wright JM, Jensen K, Malloy P, Elder T, Burant C, Sajatovic M, Hoffer A
World Neurosurg. 2020
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many clinical and demographic factors can influence survival of patients with hematological malignancies who have intracranial hemorrhages. Understanding the influence of these factors on patient survival can guide treatment decisions and may inform prognostic discussions. We conducted a systematic literature review to determine survival of patients with intracranial hemorrhages and concomitant hematologic malignancy. METHODS A systematic literature review was conducted and followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Pubmed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Ovid, SCOPUS, and Embase databases were queried with the following terms: ("intracranial hemorrhages" OR "brain hemorrhage" OR "cerebral hemorrhage" OR "subdural hematoma" OR "epidural hematoma" OR "intraparenchymal hemorrhage") AND ("Hematologic Neoplasms" OR "Myeloproliferative Disorders" OR "Myelofibrosis" OR "Essential thrombocythemia" OR "Leukemia"). Abstracts and articles were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria that were determined a priori. RESULTS Literature review yielded 975 abstracts from which a total of 68 full-text articles were reviewed. 12 articles capturing 634 unique patients were included in the final qualitative analysis. Median overall survival for all patients ranged from 20 days - 1.5 months while median overall survival for the subset of patients having ICH within 10 days of diagnosis of hematological malignancy was 5 days. Intraparenchymal hemorrhages, multiple foci of hemorrhage, transfusion-resistant low platelet counts, leukocytosis, low GCS scores at presentation, and ICH early in treatment course were associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Survival for patients with hematological malignancies and concomitant ICHs remains poor. Early detection, recognition of poor prognostic and correction of hematological abnormalities appears essential to prevention and treatment of ICHs in this patient population.
-
7.
Leukapheresis for the management of hyperleukocytosis in acute myeloid leukemia-A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bewersdorf JP, Giri S, Tallman MS, Zeidan AM, Stahl M
Transfusion. 2020
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Up to 20% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) present with hyperleukocytosis, usually defined as a white blood cell (WBC) count greater than 100 × 10(9) /L. Given the high early mortality rate, emergent cytoreduction with either leukapheresis, hydroxyurea, or chemotherapy is indicated, but the optimal strategy is unknown. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS For this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE via Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science from inception through March 2020 for multiarm studies comparing early mortality rates of patients with AML treated with leukapheresis and those who were not. The risk ratio (RR) of early death for patients who received leukapheresis vs patients who did not was estimated using a sum of the log-ratio of individual study estimates weighted by sample size. RESULTS Among 13 two-arm, retrospective studies with 1743 patients (486 leukapheresis and 1257 nonleukapheresis patients), leukapheresis did not improve the primary outcome of early mortality compared to treatment strategies in which leukapheresis was not used (RR, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.13; P = .321) without statistically significant heterogeneity between studies (Cochran's Q, 18; P = .115; I(2) , 33.4%). Patients presenting with clinical leukostasis tended to be more likely to undergo leukapheresis (odds ratio, 2.01; 95% CI, 0.99-4.08; P = .052). CONCLUSION As we did not find evidence of a short-term mortality benefit and considering the associated complications and logistic burden, our results argue against the routine use of leukapheresis for hyperleukocytosis among patients with AML.
-
8.
Prophylaxis of thromboembolism during therapy with asparaginase in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia
Rank CU, Lynggaard LS, Als-Nielsen B, Stock W, Toft N, Nielsen OJ, Frandsen TL, Tuckuviene R, Schmiegelow K
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;10:Cd013399
Abstract
BACKGROUND The risk of venous thromboembolism is increased in adults and enhanced by asparaginase-based chemotherapy, and venous thromboembolism introduces a secondary risk of treatment delay and premature discontinuation of key anti-leukaemic agents, potentially compromising survival. Yet, the trade-off between benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is uncertain. OBJECTIVES The primary objectives were to assess the benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis for first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism in adults with ALL receiving asparaginase-based therapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. The secondary objectives were to compare the benefits and harms of different groups of primary systemic thromboprophylaxis by stratifying the main results per type of drug (heparins, vitamin K antagonists, synthetic pentasaccharides, parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors, direct oral anticoagulants, and blood-derived products for antithrombin substitution). SEARCH METHODS We conducted a comprehensive literature search on 02 June 2020, with no language restrictions, including (1) electronic searches of Pubmed/MEDLINE; Embase/Ovid; Scopus/Elsevier; Web of Science Core Collection/Clarivate Analytics; and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and (2) handsearches of (i) reference lists of identified studies and related reviews; (ii) clinical trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov registry; the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry; the World Health Organisation's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP); and pharmaceutical manufacturers of asparaginase including Servier, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Ohara Pharmaceuticals, and Kyowa Pharmaceuticals), and (iii) conference proceedings (from the annual meetings of the American Society of Hematology (ASH); the European Haematology Association (EHA); the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO); and the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)). We conducted all searches from 1970 (the time of introduction of asparaginase in ALL treatment). We contacted the authors of relevant studies to identify any unpublished material, missing data, or information regarding ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs); including quasi-randomised, controlled clinical, cross-over, and cluster-randomised trial designs) comparing any parenteral/oral preemptive anticoagulant or mechanical intervention with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or comparing two different pre-emptive anticoagulant interventions in adults aged at least 18 years with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based chemotherapy regimens. For the description of harms, non-randomised observational studies with a control group were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Using a standardised data collection form, two review authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each outcome using standardised tools (RoB 2.0 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies) and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes included first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included asymptomatic venous thromboembolism, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, adverse events (i.e. clinically relevant non-major bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia for trials using heparins), and quality of life. Analyses were performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. For non-randomised studies, we evaluated all studies (including studies judged to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains) in a sensitivity analysis exploring confounding. MAIN RESULTS We identified 23 non-randomised studies that met the inclusion criteria of this review, of which 10 studies provided no outcome data for adults with ALL. We included the remaining 13 studies in the 'Risk of bias' assessment, in which we identified invalid control group definition in two studies and judged outcomes of nine studies to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains and outcomes of two studies at serious risk of bias. We did not assess the benefits of thromboprophylaxis, as no RCTs were included. In the main descriptive analysis of harms, we included two retrospective non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at serious risk of bias. One study evaluated antithrombin concentrates compared to no antithrombin concentrates. We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.19 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on venous thromboembolism-related mortality (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.94 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We do not know whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and quality of life in adults with ALL treated with asparaginase-based chemotherapy, as data were insufficient. The remaining study (224 participants) evaluated prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin versus no prophylaxis. However, this study reported insufficient data regarding harms including all-cause mortality, major bleeding, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and quality of life. In the sensitivity analysis of harms, exploring the effect of confounding, we also included nine non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at critical risk of bias primarily due to uncontrolled confounding. Three studies (179 participants) evaluated the effect of antithrombin concentrates and six studies (1224 participants) evaluated the effect of prophylaxis with different types of heparins. When analysing all-cause mortality; venous thromboembolism-related mortality; and major bleeding (studies of heparin only) including all studies with extractable outcomes for each comparison (antithrombin and low-molecular-weight heparin), we observed small study sizes; few events; wide CIs crossing the line of no effect; and substantial heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots. Although the observed heterogeneity could arise through the inclusion of a small number of studies with differences in participants; interventions; and outcome assessments, the likelihood that bias due to uncontrolled confounding was the cause of heterogeneity is inevitable. Subgroup analyses were not possible due to insufficient data. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We do not know from the currently available evidence, if thromboprophylaxis used for adults with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is associated with clinically appreciable benefits and acceptable harms. The existing research on this question is solely of non-randomised design, seriously to critically confounded, and underpowered with substantial imprecision. Any estimates of effect based on the existing insufficient evidence is very uncertain and is likely to change with future research.
-
9.
A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study and Systematic Review of Necrobiotic Xanthogranuloma With Proposed Diagnostic Criteria
Nelson CA, Zhong CS, Hashemi DA, Ashchyan HJ, Brown-Joel Z, Noe MH, Imadojemu S, Micheletti RG, Vleugels RA, Wanat KA, et al
JAMA dermatology. 2020
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Importance: Necrobiotic xanthogranuloma (NXG) is a non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis classically associated with paraproteinemia attributable to plasma-cell dyscrasias or lymphoproliferative disorders. Despite the morbidity of NXG, the literature is limited to case reports and small studies, and diagnostic criteria are lacking. Objective: To evaluate the characteristics of NXG and propose diagnostic criteria. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted at tertiary academic referral centers and followed by a systematic review and a consensus exercise. The multicenter cohort included patients with NXG diagnosed at the Brigham and Women's and Massachusetts General Hospitals (2000-2018), the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (2000-2018), and the University of Pennsylvania Health System (2008-2018). The systematic review was conducted in 2018 and included patients with NXG identified in the Cochrane, Ovid EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. The consensus exercise was conducted by 8 board-certified dermatologists to identify diagnostic criteria. Main Outcomes and Measures: Demographic factors, comorbidities, clinical features, and treatment response. Results: Of 235 included patients with NXG (34 from the multicenter cohort and 201 from the systematic review results), the mean (SD) age at presentation was 61.6 (14.2) years; 147 (62.6%) were female. Paraproteinemia was detected in 193 patients (82.1%), most often IgG-kappa (117 patients [50.0%]). A malignant condition was detected in 59 patients (25.1%), most often multiple myeloma (33 patients [14.0%]). The overall rate of paraproteinemia and/or a malignant condition was 83.8% (197 patients). In the multicenter cohort, evolution of paraproteinemia into multiple myeloma was observed up to 5.7 years (median [range], 2.4 [0.1-5.7] years) after NXG presentation. Cutaneous lesions consisted of papules, plaques, and/or nodules, typically yellow or orange in color (113 of 187 [60.4%]) with a periorbital distribution (130 of 219 [59.3%]). The eye was the leading site of extracutaneous involvement (34 of 235 [14.5%]). In the multicenter cohort, intravenous immunoglobulin had the best treatment response rate (9 of 9 patients [100%]), followed by antimalarial drugs (4 of 5 patients [80%]), intralesional triamcinolone (6 of 8 patients [75%]), surgery (3 of 4 patients [75%]), chemotherapy (8 of 12 patients [67%]), and lenalidomide or thalidomide (5 of 8 patients [63%]). The consensus exercise yielded 2 major criteria, which were (1) clinical and (2) histopathological features consistent with NXG, and 2 minor criteria, consisting of (1) paraproteinemia, plasma-cell dyscrasia, and/or other associated lymphoproliferative disorder and (2) periorbital distribution of cutaneous lesions. In the absence of foreign body, infection, or another identifiable cause, fulfillment of both major and at least 1 minor criterion were proposed to establish the diagnosis of NXG. Conclusions and Relevance: Necrobiotic xanthogranuloma is a multisystem disorder associated with paraproteinemia and malignant conditions. The proposed diagnostic criteria may advance clinical research and should be validated.
-
10.
Restrictive versus liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies for people with haematological malignancies treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without haematopoietic stem cell support
Estcourt LJ, Malouf R, Trivella M, Fergusson DA, Hopewell S, Murphy MF
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017;((1)):CD011305.
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many people diagnosed with haematological malignancies experience anaemia, and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion plays an essential supportive role in their management. Different strategies have been developed for RBC transfusions. A restrictive transfusion strategy seeks to maintain a lower haemoglobin level (usually between 70 g/L to 90 g/L) with a trigger for transfusion when the haemoglobin drops below 70 g/L), whereas a liberal transfusion strategy aims to maintain a higher haemoglobin (usually between 100 g/L to 120 g/L, with a threshold for transfusion when haemoglobin drops below 100 g/L). In people undergoing surgery or who have been admitted to intensive care a restrictive transfusion strategy has been shown to be safe and in some cases safer than a liberal transfusion strategy. However, it is not known whether it is safe in people with haematological malignancies. OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and safety of restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion strategies for people diagnosed with haematological malignancies treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without a haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). SEARCH METHODS We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised trials (NRS) in MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1982), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 6), and 10 other databases (including four trial registries) to 15 June 2016. We also searched grey literature and contacted experts in transfusion for additional trials. There was no restriction on language, date or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs and prospective NRS that evaluated a restrictive compared with a liberal RBC transfusion strategy in children or adults with malignant haematological disorders or undergoing HSCT. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We identified six studies eligible for inclusion in this review; five RCTs and one NRS. Three completed RCTs (156 participants), one completed NRS (84 participants), and two ongoing RCTs. We identified one additional RCT awaiting classification. The completed studies were conducted between 1997 and 2015 and had a mean follow-up from 31 days to 2 years. One study included children receiving a HSCT (six participants), the other three studies only included adults: 218 participants with acute leukaemia receiving chemotherapy, and 16 with a haematological malignancy receiving a HSCT. The restrictive strategies varied from 70 g/L to 90 g/L. The liberal strategies also varied from 80 g/L to 120 g/L.Based on the GRADE rating methodology the overall quality of the included studies was very low to low across different outcomes. None of the included studies were free from bias for all 'Risk of bias' domains. One of the three RCTs was discontinued early for safety concerns after recruiting only six children, all three participants in the liberal group developed veno-occlusive disease (VOD). Evidence from RCTsA restrictive RBC transfusion policy may make little or no difference to: the number of participants who died within 100 days (two trials, 95 participants (RR: 0.25, 95% CI 0.02 to 2.69, low-quality evidence); the number of participants who experienced any bleeding (two studies, 149 participants; RR:0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18, low-quality evidence), or clinically significant bleeding (two studies, 149 participants, RR: 1.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.43, low-quality evidence); the number of participants who required RBC transfusions (three trials; 155 participants: RR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05, low-quality evidence); or the length of hospital stay (restrictive median 35.5 days (interquartile range (IQR): 31.2 to 43.8); liberal 36 days (IQR: 29.2 to 44), low-quality evidence).We are uncertain whether the restrictive RBC transfusion strategy: decreases quality of life (one trial, 89 participants, fatigue score: restrictive median 4.8 (IQR 4 to 5.2); liberal m
PICO Summary
Population
Children or adults with malignant haematological disorders treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without a haematopoietic stem cell transplant (6 studies).
Intervention
Restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy.
Comparison
Liberal RBC transfusion strategy.
Outcome
Evidence from randomised controlled trials showed that a restrictive RBC transfusion policy may make little or no difference to: the number of participants who died within 100 days (RR: 0.25); the number of participants who experienced any bleeding (RR: 0.93), or clinically significant bleeding (RR: 1.03); the number of participants who required RBC transfusions (RR: 0.97); or the length of hospital stay. It was uncertain whether the restrictive RBC transfusion strategy: decreases quality of life, or reduces the risk of developing any serious infection (RR: 1.23).