Abstract

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.

Abstract

PURPOSE To determine whether epoetin alfa reduces anemia-related fatigue, improves other aspects of health-related patient-recorded outcomes (PROs), reduces the number of RBC transfusions, and has an impact on freedom from treatment failure (FFTF) and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). PATIENTS AND METHODS The prospectively randomized HD15EPO study performed by the German Hodgkin Study Group investigated epoetin alfa administered at doses of 40,000 U weekly during and after chemotherapy (six to eight cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone [BEACOPP]) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled setting. The study accrued 1,379 patients, of whom 1,328 were assessable for safety, 1,303 were assessable for clinical outcome, and 930 were assessable for PROs. RESULTS PROs were not different in patients receiving placebo or epoetin alfa, both after the end of chemotherapy and 6 months thereafter. There was no difference between patients treated with epoetin alfa or placebo with respect to FFTF and OS. There were also no differences in the numbers of deaths, progressions, relapses, and thromboembolic events. The median number of RBC transfusions was reduced from four per patient in the placebo group to two per patient in the epoetin alfa group (P < . 001), with 27. 4% of patients needing no RBC transfusion in the placebo group compared with 36. 7% of patients in the epoetin alfa group (P < . 001). CONCLUSION Epoetin alfa administered at 40,000 U weekly parallel to BEACOPP chemotherapy was safe in patients with advanced-stage HL and reduced the number of RBC transfusions but had no impact on fatigue and other PRO domains.

Abstract

This is an updated systematic review of 57 trials and 9353 cancer patients from articles, abstracts, and reports published between January 1, 1985, and April 30, 2005, on the effects of epoetin alfa and beta (i.e., epoetin) and darbepoetin alfa (i.e., darbepoetin). We included randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin or darbepoetin plus red blood cell transfusion with red blood cell transfusion alone for prophylaxis or treatment of anemia in cancer patients with or without concurrent antineoplastic therapy. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and conference proceedings were searched. Effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with fixed-effects models. Treatment with epoetin or darbepoetin statistically significantly reduced the risk for red blood cell transfusions (relative risk (RR) = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.68; 42 trials and 6510 patients) and improved hematologic response (RR = 3.43, 95% CI = 3.07 to 3.84; 22 trials and 4307 patients). Treatment with epoetin or darbepoetin increased the risk of thrombo-embolic events (RR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.35 to 2.06; 35 trials and 6769 patients) . Uncertainties remain as to whether and how epoetin or darbepoetin affects overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.18; 42 trials and 8167 patients). Caution is advised when using epoetin or darbepoetin in combination with thrombogenic chemotherapeutic agents or for cancer patients who are at high risk for thrombo-embolic events.

Abstract

Cancer and cancer therapy-associated anemia may have an impact on tumor response and overall survival. Additionally, anemia represents an important economic factor. Therefore, therapeutic alternatives such as erythropoietin (EPO) and red blood cell transfusions have to be evaluated systematically. The effectiveness of recombinant human EPO to prevent or alleviate anemia in patients with malignant disease was determined. Randomized controlled trials comparing prophylaxis or treatment of anemia with EPO plus red blood cell transfusion (RBCT) or RBCT only in patients with malignant disease undergoing antineoplastic therapy were included. The endpoints needed for RBCT were hematological response (hemoglobin increase of 2g/dL or hematocrit increase of 6%), tumor response, and overall survival. Medical databases (Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE) and conference proceedings were searched (1985-2001). Full-text and abstract publications were included as well as unpublished data. Data extraction and quality assessment were done in duplicate. All authors were contacted to obtain missing data. Out of 33 eligible studies, 27 trials with 3,287 randomized patients were included.