1.
Blood transfusions may adversely affect survival outcomes of patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Cho S, Park J, Lee M, Lee D, Choi H, Gim G, Kim L, Kang CY, Oh Y, Viveiros P, et al
Translational lung cancer research. 2021;10(4):1700-1710
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite common use in clinical practice, the impact of blood transfusions on prognosis among patients with lung cancer remains unclear. The purpose of the current study is to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the influence of blood transfusions on survival outcomes of lung cancer patients. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid MEDLINE for publications illustrating the association between blood transfusions and prognosis among people with lung cancer from inception to November 2019. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were the outcomes of interest. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using the random-effects model. Study heterogeneity was evaluated with the I(2) test. Publication bias was explored via funnel plot and trim-and-fill analyses. RESULTS We included 23 cohort studies with 12,175 patients (3,027 cases and 9,148 controls) for meta-analysis. Among these records, 22 studies investigated the effect of perioperative transfusions, while one examined that of transfusions during chemotherapy. Two studies suggested the possible dose-dependent effect in accordance with the number of transfused units. In pooled analyses, blood transfusions deleteriously influenced both OS (HR=1.35, 95% CI: 1.14-1.61, P<0.001, I(2)=0%) and DFS (HR=1.46, 95% CI: 1.15-1.86, P=0.001, I(2)=0%) of people with lung cancer. No evidence of significant publication bias was detected in funnel plot and trim-and-fill analyses (OS: HR=1.26, 95% CI: 1.07-1.49, P=0.006; DFS: HR=1.35, 95% CI: 1.08-1.69, P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS Blood transfusions were associated with decreased survival of patients with lung cancer.
2.
The effects of erythropoiesis stimulating therapy for anemia in chronic heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Kang J, Park J, Lee JM, Park JJ, Choi DJ
International Journal of Cardiology. 2016;218:12-22.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although anemia is common in chronic heart failure (CHF), the use of erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) in CHF patients remains controversial. In this meta-analysis, we sought to clarify the efficacy and safety of ESAs in anemic patients with CHF. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the U.S. National Institutes of Health registry of clinical trials. We included 13 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the meta-analysis. The co-primary outcome was all-cause mortality and rehospitalization. The safety analysis outcome was thromboembolic events. RESULTS Preliminary analysis showed that ESA-treatment did not have any effect for all-cause mortality and rehospitalization. However, we revealed a significant small-study bias, and used the trim-and-fill method to reduce this bias. The summary effect of ESA-treatment was insignificant for all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.42, p=0.69) and for rehospitalization (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.67-1.23, p=0.53). Regarding symptoms, ESA-treatment improved dyspnea (NYHA grade improvement: 1.63, 95% CI 0.65-2.62, p<0.001) and quality-of-life measured by subjective questionnaires. However, in safety analysis, ESAs increased the over-all risk for thromboembolic events (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03-1.58, p=0.026), however, no specific increase was observed in severe thromboembolic events. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in ESA-treatment according to the type of ESAs (darbepoetin vs. erythropoietin) and between studies of different follow-up durations (<6months or ≥6months). CONCLUSION Among CHF patients with anemia, ESA-treatment has a neutral effect on all-cause mortality and rehospitalization and improves symptoms, but has harmful effects on thromboembolic events.