Recombinant human erythropoietin in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia and prevention of transfusion requirement associated with solid tumors: a randomized, controlled study

Anaemia and pathologic complete response rate according to carboplatin dose in HER2+ breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant TCHP

Grade 3/4 anaemia, which is mainly induced by carboplatin, frequently occurs in patients treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab/pertuzumab (TCHP). However, dose reduction of carboplatin may raise concerns about the oncological outcome. This study investigated the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, occurrence of grade 3/4 anaemia, and transfusion rate according to carboplatin dose in patients treated with neoadjuvant TCHP. We retrospectively analysed 294 patients treated with neoadjuvant TCHP between April 2015 and December 2020. Case matching was performed using propensity score matching. Among patients treated with neoadjuvant TCHP, carboplatin area under the plasma concentration-time curve 6 (AUC6) was used in 234 patients (79.6%) and upfront carboplatin AUC5 was used in 60 patients (20.4%). No significant difference in pCR rate was found between the two groups (AUC6: 70.9%, AUC5: 80.0%). In both oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) and ER- patients, no significant differences were observed between the AUC6 and AUC5 groups (ER+: 54.3% vs. 50.0%, ER-: 81.7% vs. 86.0%). The case-matched cohort showed consistent findings. The AUC5 group had lower frequencies of grade 3/4 anaemia (18.3% vs. 34.2%) and transfusion events (10.0% vs. 21.8%) than the AUC6 group. Compared with AUC5, carboplatin at AUC6 would associate with a 2.7-fold increased risk of grade 3 or 4 chemotherapy-induced anaemia. Carboplatin AUC5 has comparable cytotoxic effects to carboplatin AUC6 in patients with HER2+ breast cancer treated with six cycles of neoadjuvant TCHP, with fewer complications associated with clinically meaningful anaemia. AUC5 may be the optimal carboplatin dose to reduce TCHP-induced anaemia in patients with HER2+ breast cancer treated with TCHP.

Intravenous iron versus oral iron versus no iron with or without erythropoiesis- stimulating agents (ESA) for cancer patients with anaemia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anaemia is common among cancer patients and they may require red blood cell transfusions. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and iron might help in reducing the need for red blood cell transfusions. However, it remains unclear whether the combination of both drugs is preferable compared to using one drug.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the effect of intravenous iron, oral iron or no iron in combination with or without ESAs to prevent or alleviate anaemia in cancer patients and to generate treatment rankings using network meta-analyses (NMAs).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by searching bibliographic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase; until June 2021). We also searched various registries, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing intravenous, oral or no iron, with or without ESAs for the prevention or alleviation of anaemia resulting from chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combination therapy or the underlying malignancy in cancer patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes were on-study mortality, number of patients receiving red blood cell transfusions, number of red blood cell units, haematological response, overall mortality and adverse events. We conducted NMAs and generated treatment rankings. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-six trials (25,157 participants) fulfilled our inclusion criteria; 62 trials (24,603 participants) could be considered in the NMA (12 different treatment options). Here we present the comparisons of ESA with or without iron and iron alone versus no treatment. Further results and subgroup analyses are described in the full text. On-study mortality We estimated that 92 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia died up to 30 days after the active study period. Evidence from NMA (55 trials; 15,074 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (12 of 1000; risk ratio (RR) 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.29; low certainty) or oral iron (34 of 1000; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.01 to 27.38; low certainty) may decrease or increase and ESA alone (103 of 1000; RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.35; moderate certainty) probably slightly increases on-study mortality. Additionally, treatment with intravenous iron alone (271 of 1000; RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.71 to 12.34; low certainty) may increase and oral iron alone (24 of 1000; RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.00 to 19.73; low certainty) may increase or decrease on-study mortality. Haematological response We estimated that 90 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia had a haematological response. Evidence from NMA (31 trials; 6985 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (604 of 1000; RR 6.71, 95% CI 4.93 to 9.14; moderate certainty), ESA and oral iron (527 of 1000; RR 5.85, 95% CI 4.06 to 8.42; moderate certainty), and ESA alone (467 of 1000; RR 5.19, 95% CI 4.02 to 6.71; moderate certainty) probably increases haematological response. Additionally, treatment with oral iron alone may increase haematological response (153 of 1000; RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.69 to 4.20; low certainty). Red blood cell transfusions We estimated that 360 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia needed at least one transfusion. Evidence from NMA (69 trials; 18,684 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (158 of 1000; RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.63; moderate certainty), ESA and oral iron (144 of 1000; RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.66; moderate certainty) and ESA alone (212 of 1000; RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.69; moderate certainty) probably decreases the need for transfusions. Additionally, treatment with intravenous iron alone (268 of 1000; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.28; low certainty) and with oral iron alone (333 of 1000; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.57; low certainty) may decrease or increase the need for transfusions. Overall mortality We estimated that 347 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia died overall. Low-certainty evidence from NMA (71 trials; 21,576 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (507 of 1000; RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.43) or oral iron (482 of 1000; RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.22) and intravenous iron alone (521 of 1000; RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.56) or oral iron alone (534 of 1000; RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.56) may decrease or increase overall mortality. Treatment with ESA alone may lead to little or no difference in overall mortality (357 of 1000; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.10; low certainty). Thromboembolic events We estimated that 36 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia developed thromboembolic events. Evidence from NMA (50 trials; 15,408 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA and intravenous iron (66 of 1000; RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.41; moderate certainty) probably slightly increases and with ESA alone (66 of 1000; RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.47; high certainty) slightly increases the number of thromboembolic events. None of the trials reported results on the other comparisons. Thrombocytopenia or haemorrhage We estimated that 76 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia developed thrombocytopenia/haemorrhage. Evidence from NMA (13 trials, 2744 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA alone probably leads to little or no difference in thrombocytopenia/haemorrhage (76 of 1000; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.48; moderate certainty). None of the trials reported results on other comparisons. Hypertension We estimated that 10 of 1000 participants without treatment for anaemia developed hypertension. Evidence from NMA (24 trials; 8383 participants) suggests that treatment with ESA alone probably increases the number of hypertensions (29 of 1000; RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.19 to 7.25; moderate certainty). None of the trials reported results on the other comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When considering ESAs with iron as prevention for anaemia, one has to balance between efficacy and safety. Results suggest that treatment with ESA and iron probably decreases number of blood transfusions, but may increase mortality and the number of thromboembolic events. For most outcomes the different comparisons within the network were not fully connected, so ranking of all treatments together was not possible. More head-to-head comparisons including all evaluated treatment combinations are needed to fill the gaps and prove results of this review.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Different Erythropoietin Usage Strategies

Aim

There is no comprehensive study that compares the different usage strategies of recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) in platinum-induced anemia. In order to clarify this issue, we conducted a prospective clinical study.

Material and methods

Seventy-seven patients were studied in three main groups. Group 1 (n = 17) consisted of cancer patients without anemia. These patients received rHuEPO starting from the first chemotherapy cycle. Group 2 (n = 26) consisted of patients whose hemoglobin (Hb) values decreased by at least 1 g/dL after the first cycle of chemotherapy. Group 3 (n = 34) consisted of patients whose Hb values dropped below 10.5 g/dL after the second chemotherapy cycle. Groups 2 and 3 were each divided into two subgroups. In groups 1, 2A and 3A rHuEPO (5000 U/day subcutaneously three times a week) treatment was continued until three weeks after the completion of chemotherapy. In groups 2B and 3B, rHuEPO was given for 12 weeks only.

Results

There were no prominent differences between the Hb values of these groups throughout the chemotherapy cycles. Transfusion rates and the number of patients who became anemic were also not different between groups.

Conclusion

No rHuEPO usage strategies are superior to others in terms of Hb levels and transfusion requirements. The decision as to when rHuEPO is to be added to platinum-containing therapy should be tailored to the health conditions of individual patients.

Does access to clinical study reports from the European Medicines Agency reduce reporting biases? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in cancer patients

Since 2010, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has provided access to clinical study reports (CSRs). We requested CSRs for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in cancer patients from EMA and identified RCT publications with literature searches. We assessed CSR availability and completeness, the impact of unreported and unpublished data obtained from CSRs on the effects of ESAs on quality of life (QoL) of cancer patients, and discrepancies between data reported in the public domain and in CSRs. We used random-effects meta-analyses to evaluate the effect of ESAs on QoL measured with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An), FACT-Fatigue (FACT-F) and FACT-Anemia Total (FACT-An Total) stratified by data source and the impact of discrepancies on QoL, mortality, adverse events, and clinical effectiveness outcomes. We identified 94 eligible RCTs; CSRs or other study documentation were available for 17 (18%) RCTs at EMA. Median report length was 1,825 pages (range 72-14,569). Of 180 outcomes of interest reported in the EMA documentation, 127 (71%) were publicly available. For 80 of those (63%) we noted discrepancies, but these had little impact on the pooled effect estimates. Of 27 QoL outcomes reported in the CSRs, 17 (63%) were unpublished. Including six unpublished comparisons (pooled mean difference [MD] 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.93, 2.33) reduced the pooled effect of ESAs for FACT-An from MD 5.51 (95% CI 4.20, 6.82) in published data to MD 3.21 (95% CI 1.38, 5.03), which is below a clinically important difference (defined as MD ≥4). Effects were similar for FACT-F and FACT-An Total. Access to CSRs from EMA reduced reporting biases for QoL outcomes. However, EMA received documentation for a fraction of all RCTs on effects of ESAs in cancer patients. Additional efforts by other agencies and institutions are needed to make CSRs universally available for all RCTs.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (epoetin and darbepoetin) for treating cancer treatment-induced anaemia (including review of technology appraisal no. 142): a systematic review and economic model

BACKGROUND

Anaemia is a common side effect of cancer treatments and can lead to a reduction in quality of life. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are licensed for use in conjunction with red blood cell transfusions to improve cancer treatment-induced anaemia (CIA).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ESAs in anaemia associated with cancer treatment (specifically chemotherapy).

DATA SOURCES

The following databases were searched from 2004 to 2013: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, British Nursing Index, Health Management Information Consortium, Current Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov. The US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency websites were also searched. Bibliographies of included papers were scrutinised for further potentially includable studies.

REVIEW METHODS

The clinical effectiveness review followed principles published by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or systematic reviews of RCTs, of ESAs (epoetin or darbepoetin) for treating people with CIA were eligible for inclusion in the review. Comparators were best supportive care, placebo or other ESAs. Anaemia- and malignancy-related outcomes, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. When appropriate, data were pooled using meta-analysis. An empirical health economic model was developed comparing ESA treatment with no ESA treatment. The model comprised two components: one evaluating short-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (while patients are anaemic) and one evaluating long-term QALYs. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Probabilistic and univariate deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of 1457 titles and abstracts screened, 23 studies assessing ESAs within their licensed indication (based on start dose administered) were included in the review. None of the RCTs were completely aligned with current European Union licenses. The results suggest a clinical benefit from ESAs for anaemia-related outcomes and an improvement in HRQoL scores. The impact of ESAs on AEs and survival remains highly uncertain, although point estimates are lower, confidence intervals are wide and not statistically significant. Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for ESA treatment compared with no ESA treatment ranged from £ 19,429 to £ 35,018 per QALY gained, but sensitivity and scenario analyses demonstrate considerable uncertainty in these ICERs, including the possibility of overall health disbenefit. All ICERs were sensitive to survival and cost.

LIMITATIONS

The relative effectiveness of ESAs was not addressed; all ESAs were assumed to have equivalent efficacy. No studies were completely aligned with their European labelling beyond the starting dose evaluated. There is questionable generalisability given that the included trials were published >20 years ago and there have been many changes to chemotherapy as well as to the quality of supportive treatment. Trial quality was moderate or poor and there was considerable unexplained heterogeneity for a number of outcomes, particularly survival, and evidence of publication bias. Adjustments were not made to account for multiple testing.

CONCLUSIONS

ESAs could be cost-effective when used closer to licence, but there is considerable uncertainty, mainly because of unknown impacts on overall survival.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005812.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Impact of Hematopoietic Growth Factors on Blood Transfusion Needs, Incidence of Neutropenia, and Overall Survival Among Elderly Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients Treated With Chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of erythropoietin-stimulating agent (ESA) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (CSF) in reducing blood transfusion needs and neutropenia incidence in community-dwelling elderly ovarian cancer patients.

METHODS

The SEER (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results)-Medicare database was used to identify 5572 women with stage III/IV ovarian cancer who received chemotherapy. To assess clinical effectiveness, we categorized patients based on the number of administrations of ESA (ie, epoetin-alfa and darbepoetin-alfa) and CSF (ie, filgrastim and pegfilgrastim). To evaluate effect on survival, patients were categorized as receiving ESA only, CSF only, ESA + CSF, and no ESA/CSF.

RESULTS

Two thirds of patients received growth factor support (24% ESA only, 13% CSF only, 30% ESA + CSF). Depending on the number of epoetin-alfa administrations, ESA was associated with 48% to 56% lower need for blood transfusion compared with no ESA (hazard ratio for 1-3 claims, 0.47; 4-6 claims, 0.52; 7-10 claims, 0.48; ≥11 claims, 0.44). Patients who received at least 3 prophylactic filgrastim administrations had 71% to 98% lower risk of developing neutropenia (hazard ratio for 3-4 claims, 0.29; ≥5 claims, 0.02) compared with those without CSF. Effectiveness was comparable for darbepoetin-alfa and pegfilgrastim use. Overall survival was longer in those who received CSF only; however, the risk of mortality after 24 months was higher in those who received ESA (P = 0.0005). All models were adjusted for relevant covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Erythropoietin-stimulating agents were effective in reducing blood transfusion need. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors were effective in lowering neutropenia incidence and also were associated with improved survival in elderly ovarian cancer patients. Findings are consistent with clinical trials and clinical guidelines.

Identification of Cell Type-Specific Differences in Erythropoietin Receptor Signaling in Primary Erythroid and Lung Cancer Cells

Lung cancer, with its most prevalent form non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and is commonly treated with chemotherapeutic drugs such as cisplatin. Lung cancer patients frequently suffer from chemotherapy-induced anemia, which can be treated with erythropoietin (EPO). However, studies have indicated that EPO not only promotes erythropoiesis in hematopoietic cells, but may also enhance survival of NSCLC cells. Here, we verified that the NSCLC cell line H838 expresses functional erythropoietin receptors (EPOR) and that treatment with EPO reduces cisplatin-induced apoptosis. To pinpoint differences in EPO-induced survival signaling in erythroid progenitor cells (CFU-E, colony forming unit-erythroid) and H838 cells, we combined mathematical modeling with a method for feature selection, the L₁ regularization. Utilizing an example model and simulated data, we demonstrated that this approach enables the accurate identification and quantification of cell type-specific parameters. We applied our strategy to quantitative time-resolved data of EPO-induced JAK/STAT signaling generated by quantitative immunoblotting, mass spectrometry and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) in CFU-E and H838 cells as well as H838 cells overexpressing human EPOR (H838-HA-hEPOR). The established parsimonious mathematical model was able to simultaneously describe the data sets of CFU-E, H838 and H838-HA-hEPOR cells. Seven cell type-specific parameters were identified that included for example parameters for nuclear translocation of STAT5 and target gene induction. Cell type-specific differences in target gene induction were experimentally validated by qRT-PCR experiments. The systematic identification of pathway differences and sensitivities of EPOR signaling in CFU-E and H838 cells revealed potential targets for intervention to selectively inhibit EPO-induced signaling in the tumor cells but leave the responses in erythroid progenitor cells unaffected. Thus, the proposed modeling strategy can be employed as a general procedure to identify cell type-specific parameters and to recommend treatment strategies for the selective targeting of specific cell types.

A major challenge in the development of therapeutic interventions is the selective inhibition of a signal transduction pathway in one cell type such as a cancer cell leaving the other cell type such as a healthy cell as unaffected as possible. Here, we propose a new approach that combines mathematical modeling based on quantitative experimental data with statistical methods. We demonstrate based on simulated data that our approach can determine which parameters are the same and which parameters differ in two exemplary cell types. We compare a lung cancer cell line to the precursor cells of red blood cells. We show that the same signal transduction network induced by erythropoietin (EPO), a hormone that is frequently employed to treat anemia in cancer patients, regulates survival of both cell types. Based on our experimental data in combination with our computational approach, we identify seven cell type-specific differences in this signaling pathway. Our strategy allows predicting therapeutic targets that could be inhibited to interfere with survival of lung cancer cells while leaving production of red blood cells unaffected.

Impact of anemia management with EPO on psychologic distress in cancer patients: results of a multicenter patient survey

ABSTRACT: Aim: We investigated the role of erythropoietin (EPO) in reducing anemia and preventing the development of psychological distress in patients treated with chemotherapy. Patients & methods: This prospective observational study enrolled 591 adult patients receiving EPO at a dose of 30,000 IU administered once weekly for chemotherapy-induced anemia (mean baseline hemoglobin [Hb] level was 9.55 g/dl) over a 12-month period. Results: The majority of patients (371 [71%] patients) achieved a Hb increase >2 g/dl after 4 weeks of treatment. Interestingly, the nonresponder group had a statistically significant deterioration of their psychological conditions as indicated by psychological distress score (p = 0.01). However, within the group of responders to EPO, the Psychological Distress Inventory score remained unchanged. In the present study, severe side effects associated with EPO were not recorded. Conclusion: Hb increase, induced by EPO, ameliorates the psychological conditions of cancer patients.

The Effects of Anemia and Blood Transfusion on Patients With Stage III-IV Ovarian Cancer

Objectives

The objective of this study was to examine the overall and recurrence-free survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer based on hemoglobin and blood transfusions.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed between 2003 and 2007 on patients with pathologically confirmed stage 3–4 ovarian, fallopian, or peritoneal cancers. Data were collected on date of diagnosis, recurrence and death, stage, grade, age, surgery, estimated blood loss, hemoglobin (nadir and average levels), and number of blood transfusions.

Results

Two hundred sixteen patients were included in the final analysis. In the perichemotherapy, perioperative, and total time frames, 88%, 81%, and 95% of patients were anemic, and 9%, 22%, and 26% of the patients had severe anemia. After adjusting for age, stage, and optimal debulking status, the perichemotherapy hemoglobin level as a continuous variable was weakly associated with recurrence-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.98;P= 0.03), and as a categorical variable with both recurrence-free survival (AHR, 2.49;P= 0.003) and overall survival (AHR, 1.91;P= 0.02). The total number of transfusions was also weakly associated with poor recurrence-free survival (AHR, 1.06;P= 0.03).

Conclusions

Our study is a retrospective analysis of the effects of anemia and transfusion on ovarian cancer. The rates of anemia in chemotherapy patients are higher than previously reported. Although maintaining average hemoglobin greater than 80 g/L during chemotherapy portends an improved overall survival, blood transfusion does not have any effect. The role of transfusion should therefore be limited to symptomatic patients while giving 1 unit at a time. Further prospective studies will be needed to confirm these results.

Protective effects of erythropoietin on endotoxin-related organ injury in rats

The protective effect of erythropoietin (EPO) on tissues following ischemia and reperfusion injuries remains poorly understood. We aimed to investigate the effect of EPO in preventing endotoxin-induced organ damage. Rat model of multiple organ failure (MOF) was established by tail vein injection of 10 mg/kg lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Recombinant human EPO treatment (5000 U/kg) was administered by tail vein injection at 30 min after LPS challenge. Twenty-four h after EPO treatment, changes in serum enzyme levels, including aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine transaminase (ALT), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine (Cr), were evaluated by biochemical analysis. Serum levels of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were determined by using immunoradiometric assay. Histological examination of tissue sections was carried out by hematoxylin and eosin staining, while ultrastructure evaluation of organ tissues was assessed by transmission electron microscopy. Protein expression levels were detected by using Western blotting. EPO treatment showed a modest effect in preventing LPS-induced elevation of AST, ALT, BUN, Cr, and TNF-α levels, and in protecting against LPS-induced tissue degeneration and injured ultrastructure in the lung, liver, and kidney. Moreover, LPS promoted phosphorylation of alanine aminotransferase (AKT) and increased nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) activation in the lung, liver, and kidney (P<0.05 vs. control). However, EPO treatment significantly decreased the LPS-induced pAKT up-regulation in these tissues (P<0.05 vs. LPS treatment alone). The present study demonstrates that EPO may play a protective role against LPS-induced MOF by reducing the inflammatory response and tissue degeneration, possibly via the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT and NF-κB signaling pathways.

Erythropoietin or darbepoetin for patients with cancer

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.

Effect of treatment with epoetin Beta on thromboembolic events in anemic patients with cancer: a metaanalysis

PURPOSE

Epoetin therapy is associated with a slight increase in thromboembolic event (TEE) incidence, although causality is uncertain. This metaanalysis compared TEE incidence in patients with cancer-related anemia treated with epoetin beta versus a control group (placebo or standard treatment) and investigated the impact of hemoglobin (Hb) parameters on thromboembolic risk.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients from 9 randomized trials were pooled (epoetin beta group, n = 800; control group, n = 613). Adverse event reports were reviewed for all TEEs recorded during treatment and 28 days thereafter. Thromboembolic event incidence was compared between 2 groups, and standard statistical analyses were conducted to investigate the potential of Hb parameters to modulate thromboembolic risk.

RESULTS

For epoetin beta, 5.9% of patients (n = 47) experienced >/= 1 TEE versus 4.2% of controls (n = 26; not significant).Thromboembolic-related mortality rates were 1% in both groups. Thromboembolic event rates in patients stratified by tumor type were consistent with the overall population. For epoetin beta, greater baseline-adjusted Hb area under the concentration-time curve and greater Hb increases during the first 4 weeks of treatment significantly correlated with reduced risk of TEEs. Conversely, treatment in those with higher baseline Hb levels was associated with increased TEE risk.

CONCLUSION

When administered in accordance with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines, epoetin beta did not appear to be associated with increased thromboembolic risk. Although risk of TEEs might be marginally increased in patients with cancer treated with epoetin beta, there is no increased risk of thromboembolic mortality.

[Epoetin beta for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia in solid and haematological malignancies. Results of an open-label, multicentric clinical trial]

AIM

Evaluate efficacy and safety of epoetin beta in anaemic patients receiving chemotherapy for a non-myeloid malignancy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This open-label, multicentric, clinical trial was conducted in France among 691 anaemic patients (haemoglobin < or = 12 g/dL) with a solid or haematological malignancy to evaluate the benefit of epoetin beta 30,000 IU/week subcutaneously for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the rate of therapeutic response.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 60.4% (CI 95%: [56.6%-64.1]). According to initial haemoglobin level < 11 g/dL or between 11 and 12 g/dL, it was 61.2% and 57.5% respectively. Response rates by tumour type (solid and haematological) were similar. The mean haemoglobin level increases were respectively 1.1 g/dL, approximately 2 and 2.2 g/dL at 4, 9, and 12 weeks after treatment initiation. In patients with haemoglobin level < 11 g/dL at inclusion the mean increases in haemoglobin level were respectively 1.17, 2.03 and 2.45 g/dL at 4, 9 and 12 weeks. During study period, 23% of patients required red blood cell transfusion. Overall treatment with epoetin beta was well-tolerated and 7.1% of patients only experienced thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSION

For treating chemotherapy-induced anaemia in patients with solid or haematological malignancy (especially if haemoglobin level < 11 g/dL), epoetin beta 30.000 IU subcutaneously once-weekly (450 IU/kg/week) is rapidly effective and overall well-tolerated.

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in oncology: a study-level meta-analysis of survival and other safety outcomes

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often develop the potentially debilitating condition of anaemia. Numerous controlled studies indicate that erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) can raise haemoglobin levels and reduce transfusion requirements in anaemic cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. To evaluate recent safety concerns regarding ESAs, we carried out a meta-analysis of controlled ESA oncology trials to examine whether ESA use affects survival, disease progression and risk of venous-thromboembolic events.

METHODS: This meta-analysis included studies from the 2006 Cochrane meta-analysis, studies published/updated since the 2006 Cochrane report, and unpublished trial data from Amgen and Centocor Ortho Biotech. The 60 studies analysed (15 323 patients) were conducted in the settings of chemotherapy/radiochemotherapy, radiotherapy only treatment or anaemia of cancer. Data were summarised using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS: Results indicated that ESA use did not significantly affect mortality (60 studies: OR=1.06; 95% CI: 0.97–1.15) or disease progression (26 studies: OR=1.01; 95% CI: 0.90–1.14), but increased the risk for venous-thromoboembolic events (44 studies: OR=1.48; 95% CI: 1.28–1.72).

CONCLUSION: Though this meta-analysis showed no significant effect of ESAs on survival or disease progression, prospectively designed, future randomised clinical trials will further examine the safety and efficacy of ESAs when used according to the revised labelling information.

Epoetin-beta treatment in patients with cancer chemotherapy-induced anaemia: the impact of initial haemoglobin and target haemoglobin levels on survival, tumour progression and thromboembolic events

BACKGROUND

Epoetin-beta is used to treat patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy to alleviate the symptoms of anaemia, reduce the risk of blood transfusions and improve quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

This meta-analysis of all 12 randomised, controlled studies of epoetin-beta evaluated the impact of therapy at different Hb-initiation levels and to different target Hb levels on overall survival, tumour progression and thromboembolic events (TEE). An analysis of risk factors pre-disposing patients to TEEs under epoetin-beta therapy was also performed. A total of 2297 patients are included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Analyses based on various Hb-initiation levels indicate no detrimental impact on survival (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.70, 1.40) and a favourable impact on disease progression (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57, 0.94) when epoetin-beta was used within its licensed indication (Hb initiation < or = 10 g dl(-1)) or the EORTC recommended level of 11 g dl(-1). An increased risk of TEEs is seen for all Hb-initiation level strata and a detrimental impact on survival is seen when initiating epoetin-beta therapy at Hb levels >11 g dl(-1). We observe no association between high target Hb levels (> or = 13 g dl(-1)) and an increased risk of mortality, disease progression or TEEs with epoetin-beta compared with control.

CONCLUSION

The results of this analysis indicate that epoetin-beta therapy has no detrimental impact on survival or tumour progression when initiated at Hb levels up to 11 g dl(-1). Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that high Hb values achieved during epoetin-beta therapy are associated with an increased mortality, disease progression or TEE rate.

Erythropoietin or Darbepoetin for patients with cancer--meta-analysis based on individual patient data

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) reduce anemia in cancer patients and may improve quality of life, but there are concerns that ESAs might increase mortality.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to examine the effect of ESAs and identify factors that modify the effects of ESAs on overall survival, progression free survival, thromboembolic and cardiovascular events as well as need for transfusions and other important safety and efficacy outcomes in cancer patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and conference proceedings for eligible trials. Manufacturers of ESAs were contacted to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin or darbepoetin plus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) versus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) alone, to prevent or treat anemia in adult or pediatric cancer patients with or without concurrent antineoplastic therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin alpha, epoetin beta or darbepoetin alpha plus red blood cell transfusions versus transfusion alone, for prophylaxis or therapy of anemia while or after receiving anti-cancer treatment. Patient-level data were obtained and analyzed by independent statisticians at two academic departments, using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis. Analyses were according to the intention-to-treat principle. Primary endpoints were on study mortality and overall survival during the longest available follow-up, regardless of anticancer treatment, and in patients receiving chemotherapy. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effects of ESAs on mortality across pre-specified subgroups. The present review reports only the results for the primary endpoint.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 13933 cancer patients from 53 trials were analyzed, 1530 patients died on-study and 4993 overall. ESAs increased on study mortality (combined hazard ratio [cHR] 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.30) and worsened overall survival (cHR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00-1.12), with little heterogeneity between trials (I(2) 0%, p=0.87 and I(2) 7.1%, p=0.33, respectively). Thirty-eight trials enrolled 10441 patients receiving chemotherapy. The cHR for on study mortality was 1.10 (95% CI 0.98-1.24) and 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.11) for overall survival. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of patients receiving different cancer treatments (P for interaction=0.42).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ESA treatment in cancer patients increased on study mortality and worsened overall survival. For patients undergoing chemotherapy the increase was less pronounced, but an adverse effect could not be excluded.

Benefits and harms of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for anemia related to cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents are used to treat anemia in patients with cancer. However, their safety and effectiveness is controversial. We did a systematic review of the clinical efficacy and harms of these agents in adults with anemia related to cancer or chemotherapy.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using accepted methods for literature searches, article selection, data extraction and quality assessment. We included RCTs involving anemic adults with cancer. We compared the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with nonuse and assessed clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events and hypertension, health-related quality of life, blood transfusions and tumour response) and harms (serious adverse events) between groups.

RESULTS

We identified 52 trials (n = 12 006) that met our selection criteria. The pooled all-cause mortality during treatment was significantly higher in the group receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating therapy than in the control group (relative risk [RR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03 to 1.29). Compared with no treatment, use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents led to clinically detectable improvements in disease-specific measures of quality of life. It also reduced the use of blood transfusions (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.73). However, it led to an increased risk of thrombotic events (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.24) and serious adverse events (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.25).

INTERPRETATION

Use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients with cancer-related anemia improved some disease-specific measures of quality of life and decreased the use of blood transfusions. However, it increased the risk of death and serious adverse events. Our findings suggest that such therapy not be used routinely as an alternative to blood transfusion in patients with anemia related to cancer.

Recombinant human epoetin beta in the treatment of chemotherapy-related anemia

Anemia is a common complication of systemic anti-cancer treatment. In this context epoetin beta, like other erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), has demonstrable efficacy in raising Hb concentration and reducing the requirement for red cell transfusion. Consequently ESA therapy has gained increasing prominence in the management of chemotherapy-related anemia. However, recent trial data have suggested a higher rate of thromboembolic events, enhanced tumor progression and reduced survival in some patients with cancer who receive ESA therapy. In response, regulatory authorities have mandated increasingly restrictive label changes. In light of these new developments we consider the current role of epoetin beta in the management of chemotherapy-related anemia.

Recombinant human erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and mortality in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents reduce anaemia in patients with cancer and could improve their quality of life, but these drugs might increase mortality. We therefore did a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in which these drugs plus red blood cell transfusions were compared with transfusion alone for prophylaxis or treatment of anaemia in patients with cancer.

METHODS

Data for patients treated with epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, or darbepoetin alfa were obtained and analysed by independent statisticians using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis. Analyses were by intention to treat. Primary endpoints were mortality during the active study period and overall survival during the longest available follow-up, irrespective of anticancer treatment, and in patients given chemotherapy. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on mortality across prespecified subgroups.

FINDINGS

Data from a total of 13 933 patients with cancer in 53 trials were analysed. 1530 patients died during the active study period and 4993 overall. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents increased mortality during the active study period (combined hazard ratio [cHR] 1.17, 95% CI 1.06-1.30) and worsened overall survival (1.06, 1.00-1.12), with little heterogeneity between trials (I(2) 0%, p=0.87 for mortality during the active study period, and I(2) 7.1%, p=0.33 for overall survival). 10 441 patients on chemotherapy were enrolled in 38 trials. The cHR for mortality during the active study period was 1.10 (0.98-1.24), and 1.04 (0.97-1.11) for overall survival. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of patients given different anticancer treatments (p for interaction=0.42).

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients with cancer increased mortality during active study periods and worsened overall survival. The increased risk of death associated with treatment with these drugs should be balanced against their benefits.

FUNDING

German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Medical Faculty of University of Cologne, and Oncosuisse (Switzerland).

Once-weekly epoetin beta therapy in patients with solid tumours and chemotherapy-induced anaemia: a randomized, double-blind, dose-finding study

Anaemia is common in patients receiving chemotherapy, causing symptoms that have a major impact on quality of life (QoL). Epoetin beta rapidly increases haemoglobin (Hb) levels and improves QoL in anaemic patients with a variety of tumours. This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-finding study assessing the efficacy and safety of once-weekly epoetin beta in patients with solid tumours receiving chemotherapy. Adult patients with anaemia (Hb < 11 g/dL) were randomized to receive epoetin beta 30,000 IU or 20,000 IU once weekly for 12 weeks. All patients received oral iron supplementation. Haemoglobin levels, transfusion need and QoL [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-fatigue (FACT-F) subscale score] were assessed at regular intervals. Fifty patients were randomized; 30 patients received epoetin beta 30,000 IU once weekly and 20 received 20,000 IU once weekly. Mean (+/- SD) increase in Hb from baseline to week 12 was 1.75 +/- 2.15 g/dL in the 30,000 IU group (P = 0.008 vs. baseline) and 1.04 +/- 1.75 g/dL in the 20,000 IU group (non-significant). Haemoglobin response (increase in Hb >or=2 g/dL from baseline) was observed in 78.3% of patients receiving epoetin beta 30,000 IU and 66.7% receiving epoetin beta 20,000 IU. Improvements in FACT-F subscale score were significantly (P < 0.001) correlated with increases in Hb level. Transfusion use was low during the study in both groups. Both epoetin beta regiments were well tolerated and there were no dose-dependent adverse events. Epoetin beta 30,000 IU once weekly is an effective and well-tolerated treatment of anaemia in patients with solid tumours.

Effect of treatment with epoetin-beta on survival, tumour progression and thromboembolic events in patients with cancer: an updated meta-analysis of 12 randomised controlled studies including 2301 patients

Epoetin-β is used to treat patients with metastatic cancer undergoing chemotherapy to alleviate the symptoms of anaemia, reduce the risk of blood transfusions and improve quality of life. This meta-analysis of 12 randomised, controlled studies evaluated the impact of epoetin-β on overall survival, tumour progression and thromboembolic events (TEEs). A total of 2297 patients were included in the analysis (epoetin-β, n=1244; control, n=1053; 65% solid and 35% nonmyeloid haematological malignancies). A prespecified subgroup analysis assessed the effects in patients with a baseline Hb⩽11 g dl⁻¹, corresponding to current European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) guidelines. No statistically significant effect on mortality was observed with epoetin-β vs control, both overall (hazard ratio (HR)=1.13; 95% CI: 0.87, 1.46; P=0.355) and in patients with baseline Hb⩽11 g dl⁻¹ (HR=1.09; 95% CI: 0.80, 1.47; P=0.579). A trend for a beneficial effect on tumour progression was seen overall (HR=0.85; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.01; P=0.072) and in patients with an Hb⩽11 g dl⁻¹ (HR=0.80; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.99; P=0.041). An increased frequency of TEEs was seen with epoetin-β vs control (7 vs 4% of patients); however, TEEs-related mortality was similar in both groups (1% each). The results of this meta-analysis indicate that when used within current EORTC treatment guidelines, epoetin-β has no negative impact on survival, tumour progression or TEEs-related mortality.

Early intervention with epoetin beta prevents severe anaemia in lung cancer patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy: A subgroup analysis of the NeoPrevent study

The NeoPrevent study showed that early intervention with epoetin beta could prevent severe anaemia in patients with solid tumours receiving platinum-based chemotherapy. An early intervention strategy may be particularly warranted in patients with lung cancer, as anaemia is very common in these patients and can be severe. The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of epoetin beta in the subpopulation of patients with lung cancer included in the NeoPrevent study. Patients were enrolled if baseline haemoglobin (Hb) levels were <or=13 g/dl (men) or <or=12 g/dl (women), or fell to these levels during platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients received epoetin beta 150 IU/kg three times weekly, until 4 weeks after last chemotherapy cycle. The anaemia prevention response was measured as the proportion of patients with an Hb response (Hb increase of >1g/dl) plus the proportion whose Hb was maintained at +/-1g/dl of baseline. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using the linear analogue scale assessment. The NeoPrevent study included 255 patients in total, and the results for the 102 patients with lung cancer (non-small-cell lung cancer 64%; small-cell lung cancer 36%) are presented here. The overall anaemia prevention response was 90%, with Hb response in 60% of patients and maintenance of baseline Hb level in 30%. Only 9% of patients required transfusions. QoL improved significantly in patients with Hb response (p<0.01) and was maintained in non-responders (p>or=0.578). Epoetin beta was effective in preventing severe anaemia in lung cancer patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy.

Speed of haemoglobin response in patients with cancer: a review of the erythropoietic proteins

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer-related anaemia generally have a poor prognosis. Evidence suggests that an effective erythropoietic protein (epoetin)-mediated haemoglobin (Hb) response provides marked improvement in quality of life (QoL). An early Hb response to erythropoietic protein therapy in these patients would appear ideal but few studies have compared the speed of response to different erythropoietic proteins, or the potential benefits associated with an early Hb response.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of commercially available erythropoietic proteins are reviewed along with available clinical data to examine Hb response and associated clinical outcomes for each of these agents. Randomised, head-to-head trials comparing epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa suggest that patients administered with epoetin alfa achieve a satisfactory Hb response significantly earlier than those given darbepoetin alfa, and with consistently lower monthly transfusion rates. Non-comparative studies support this, suggesting also that epoetin beta may provide a relatively faster Hb response in a greater number of patients than either epoetin alfa or darbepoetin alfa, irrespective of malignancy or chemotherapy type. Moreover, studies suggest consistently that a 'front-loading' dosing regimen with epoetin alfa does not convey improved speed of Hb response over epoetin beta administered according to current clinical practice guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the poor prognosis of anaemic patients with cancer, the use of an agent which provides clinical benefits quickly but with minimal thromboembolic risk, should be considered an essential component of anaemia management in these patients. However, more head-to-head studies are required to confirm the relative efficacy of currently available erythropoietic proteins.

Once-weekly epoetin beta (30,000IU) in anemic patients with lung cancer receiving chemotherapy

Anemia occurs frequently in patients with lung cancer receiving chemotherapy and has a negative impact on quality of life (QoL). Erythropoietic proteins effectively increase hemoglobin (Hb) levels, reduce transfusion requirements and improve QoL in anemic patients with a range of malignancies. This prospective, observational study evaluated epoetin beta 30,000 IU once weekly in patients with lung cancer in a real-life, clinical-practice setting. Forty patients (72.5% with NSCLC and 27.5% with SCLC) were treated with epoetin beta during any cycle of chemotherapy when Hb decreased to <12 g/dL. Hb levels were assessed at regular intervals and transfusion needs were monitored throughout the study. In total, 72.5% of patients required epoetin treatment by the second cycle of chemotherapy. Epoetin beta treatment duration ranged from 1 to >9 (median 4) weeks. Mean (+/-S.D.) baseline Hb was 10.4+/-1.2 g/dL. Epoetin beta was associated with a rapid increase in Hb levels, with a mean increase of 1.3 g/dL by week 4. Most patients (95%) remained transfusion-free throughout the study. Epoetin beta was well tolerated. This early intervention strategy with epoetin beta 30,000 IU once weekly is an effective and well-tolerated therapy for anemia in patients with lung cancer.

Effect of treatment with epoetin beta on short-term tumour progression and survival in anaemic patients with cancer: A meta-analysis

To assess the early effect of epoetin beta on survival and tumour progression in anaemic patients with cancer, data were pooled from nine randomised clinical trials comparing epoetin beta with placebo or standard care. Studies were not primarily designed to assess these end points. Follow-up was for treatment duration plus 4 weeks following therapy completion. All adverse events (AEs) were retrospectively reviewed blinded, for progression. Thromboembolic events were also assessed. Data analysis involved standard statistical tests. Overall, 1413 patients were included (epoetin beta, n=800; control, n=613; 56% haematological, and 44% solid). Median initial epoetin beta dose was 30 000 IU/week. Overall survival during months 0–6 was similar with epoetin beta and control (0.31 vs 0.32 deaths/patient-year). No increased mortality risk was seen with epoetin beta (relative risk (RR) 0.97, 95% CI: 0.69, 1.36; P=0.87). There was a significantly reduced risk of rapidly progressive disease for epoetin beta (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.99; P=0.042). Epoetin beta was associated with a slightly higher frequency of thromboembolic events vs control (5.9% vs 4.2% of patients) but thromboembolic-related mortality was identical in both groups (1.1%). Epoetin beta provided a slight beneficial effect on tumour progression and did not impact on early survival or thromboembolic-related mortality.

Clinical benefits and risks associated with epoetin and darbepoetin in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating proteins (ESPs) are indicated for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). Evidence-based guidelines and systematic reviews of the management of CIA do not yet include all currently approved ESPs or all of the clinically relevant benefits and risks of ESPs.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this work were to provide up-to-date assessments of the clinical efficacy and effectiveness (ie, transfusions and quality-of-life [QoL] benefits) and safety (ie, risk of venous thromboembolism [VTE] and all-cause or treatment-associated death) of epoetin-alfa, epoetin-beta, and darbepoetin-alfa for the treatment of CIA in cancer patients with hemoglobin<11 g/dL. We also considered the impact of differences in study design, patients, and treatments on the results.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify and analyze English-language studies (controlled trials and prospective uncontrolled studies with >or=300 patients) published between 1980 and July 2005. The databases searched were MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Relevant abstracts from the last 2 annual meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, and European Society for Medical Oncology were also included. Studies were selected, using predefined eligibility criteria. Two reviewers had to agree on all included and excluded studies, and on all data extracted from each accepted study before they were entered into a relational database. Meta-analyses were performed to quantify benefit and risk outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 40 studies including 21,378 patients were eligible for analysis. Each ESP was found to have efficacy relative to standard care or placebo. The odds ratio (OR) for transfusions in studies of epoetin versus controls was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.35-0.55) and of darbepoetin versus controls was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.31-0.55). Patients receiving ESPs experienced a significant improvement in QoL; the mean difference in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue score for ESPs versus controls was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.10-0.36; P=0.001). The frequency of VTE and death was not significantly different between ESPs and control (VTE OR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.81-2.47]; all-cause mortality OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.69-1.44]).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of key clinical benefits and risks of epoetin and darbepoetin in the treatment of CIA found no clinically relevant differences between these drugs.

Cancer-related anemia and recombinant human erythropoietin--an updated overview

For cancer patients, anemia can be a debilitating problem that negatively influences their overall quality of life and worsens their prognosis. The condition is caused either by the cancer itself or by cytotoxic treatment. Anemia is the primary indication for transfusion of red blood cells, but the development of recombinant human erythropoietins (epoetins) provides an alternative to red blood cell transfusions. Treatment with epoetins has been shown to reduce transfusion rates and increase hemoglobin response. There is some evidence that epoetins improve quality of life. It remains unclear, however, whether erythropoietin affects tumor growth and survival, and this area requires further investigation. Data from clinical trials suggest that erythropoietin increases the risk of thromboembolic complications. In the management of anemic patients, physicians should follow closely the dosing recommendations in products' package inserts or the ASCO/American Society of Hematology guidelines. Treatment of patients beyond the correction of anemia, however, has to be regarded as experimental and is potentially harmful, so should only be conducted in clinical trials.

Erythropoietin or darbepoetin for patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Anaemia associated with cancer and cancer therapy is an important clinical factor in the treatment of malignant diseases. Therapeutic alternatives are recombinant human erythropoietin (Epo), darbepoetin (Darbepo) and red blood cell transfusions.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of Epo or Darbepo to either prevent or treat anaemia in cancer patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE and other data bases. Searches were done for the periods 01/1985 to 12/2001 for the first review and 1/2002 to 04/2005 for the update. We also contacted experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on managing anaemia in cancer patients that compared the use of Epo/Darbepo (plus transfusion if needed) with observation until red blood cell transfusion was required.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

This update of the systematic review included a total of 57 trials with 9,353 patients. Of these, 27 trials with 3,287 adults were also included in the first Cochrane Review. Thirty trials with 6,066 patients were added during the update process. Use of Epo/Darbepo significantly reduced the relative risk of red blood cell transfusions (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.68, 42 trials, n = 6,510). On average participants in the Epo/Darbepo group received one unit of blood less than the control group (WMD -1.05; 95% CI -1.32 to -0.78, 14 trials, n = 2,353). For participants with baseline haemoglobin below 12 g/dL haematological response was observed more often in participants receiving Epo/Darbepo (RR 3.43; 95% CI 3.07 to 3.84, 22 trials, n = 4,307). There was suggestive evidence that Epo/Darbepo may improve Quality of Life (QoL). The relative risk for thrombo embolic complications was increased in patients receiving Epo/Darbepo compared to controls (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.06; 35 trials, n = 6,769). Uncertainties remain whether and how Epo/Darbepo effects tumour response (fixed effect RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.23, 13 trials, n = 2,833; random effects: RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.26) or overall survival (unadjusted and adjusted data: HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.18; 42 trials, n = 8,167).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is consistent evidence that administration of Epo/Darbepo reduces the relative risk for blood transfusions and the number of units transfused in cancer patients. For patients with baseline haemoglobin below 12 g/dL (mild anaemia) there is strong evidence that Epo/Darbepo improves haematological response. There is suggestive evidence that Epo/Darbepo may improve QoL. However, there is strong evidence that Epo/Darbepo increases the relative risk for thrombo embolic complications. Whether and how Epo/Darbepo effects tumour response and overall survival remains uncertain.

Clinical and economic impact of epoetin in adjuvant-chemotherapy for breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Anaemia is a common toxicity in cancer patients and epoetins (EPOs) are now an established treatment. The economic profile of EPO treatment was assessed in patients with breast cancer treated by adjuvant-chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two strategies were compared: without treatment by EPO and with the possible use of treatment by EPO (epoetin alfa) when required. The clinical effectiveness criterion was time adjusted to quality of life and economic data included only direct medical costs.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred ninety-two patients were included. In the group with the strategy containing the possible use of EPO, 45.5% of patients effectively received EPO. A significant difference in the haemoglobin level profile over time was observed which provided a significant overall benefit of 0.0052 (p<10(-4)) quality-adjusted life year (QALY) associated with an extra cost of <euro>1,615 (p<10(-4)). In the base case analysis, the cost per added QALY was estimated as <euro>310,577 with the strategy containing the possible use of EPO.

CONCLUSION

This robust result seems to be unacceptable, but the only relevant point of discussion might be the level of acceptable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a patient.

Recombinant human erythropoietins and cancer patients: updated meta-analysis of 57 studies including 9353 patients

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.

Epoetin beta in oncology: examining the current evidence

Anemia is highly prevalent in patients with cancer and its impact on quality of life and long-term outcome in these patients is well documented. Recombinant human erythropoietins, or epoetins, have been used to treat cancer-related or antitumor therapy-induced anemia for many years. Through a combination of clinical studies and extensive experience in the real-life clinical setting, epoetin beta has been shown to be efficacious and well tolerated, increasing hemoglobin levels, reducing the need for transfusion and improving quality of life. This favorable efficacy and safety profile has been demonstrated across a broad range of malignancy types, irrespective of the treatment used (platinum or nonplatinum based). The effect of treatment with epoetin beta is rapid, with mean hemoglobin increases of 1 g/dl seen as early as 4 weeks following the start of therapy. Furthermore, there is no evidence that epoetin beta negatively affects overall survival or tumor progression in anemic patients with cancer. The approved 30,000 IU once-weekly dosing regimen (as opposed to the 10,000 IU three-times weekly regimen) provides greater convenience and may result in improved treatment compliance.

Pharmacokinetics of Darbepoetin Alfa after Intravenous or Subcutaneous Administration in Patients with Non-myeloid Malignancies Undergoing Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The pharmacokinetics of darbepoetin alfa after intravenous (IV) administration in the oncology setting have not been previously reported. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of IV or subcutaneous (SC) darbepoetin alfa in patients with non-myeloid malignancies undergoing multicycle chemotherapy.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients (haemoglobin <or=13.0 g/dL) received weekly darbepoetin alfa 2.25 microg/kg administered either IV (n=27) or SC (n=29) during up to three cycles of chemotherapy. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis was performed, including analysis of intensive pharmacokinetic profiles collected over 168 hours during week 1 of both the first and third cycles of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Darbepoetin alfa serum concentrations exhibited a biphasic profile (a rapid distributive phase followed by a slower terminal elimination phase) after IV administration, whereas darbepoetin alfa was slowly absorbed after SC administration. Darbepoetin alfa exhibited limited extravascular distribution after IV administration, with both initial and steady-state mean volumes of distribution (36.1 mL/kg and 55.2 mL/kg, respectively, after a single IV dose) approximating the plasma volume. After a single IV dose, darbepoetin alfa exhibited a mean clearance of 1.05 mL/h/kg, with a mean terminal half-life of 38.8 hours. Similar pharmacokinetic results were observed after single and multiple doses of darbepoetin alfa, for both SC and IV administration.

CONCLUSION

Darbepoetin alfa is cleared slowly after IV administration to patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy, resulting in a terminal half-life of 38.8 hours. No evidence of accumulation and no changes in pharmacokinetic profiles after repeated administration were observed in cancer patients undergoing cyclic chemotherapy, for both IV and SC dosing.

Anaemia management strategies: optimising treatment using epoetin beta (NeoRecormon)

Anaemia has a detrimental impact on quality of life and it is important that this condition is recognised and treated in patients with cancer. Epoetin beta is an effective and well-tolerated treatment of anaemia in patients with a wide range of solid and haematological malignancies. A study in patients with lymphoid malignancies confirms that epoetin beta is equally effective at the same overall weekly dose (30,000 IU weekly) when given once-weekly or three-times weekly. This once-weekly regimen has also proved effective in patients with solid tumours. Once-weekly treatment is more convenient for the patient, potentially improving compliance and is associated with reduced hospital administration costs. The majority of patients with cancer will respond to epoetin therapy with an increase in haemoglobin levels. However, it is of value to identify those patients who are likely to respond, so that cost-effectiveness can be improved. Despite much research into potential predictive factors, follow-up studies are required and clinical judgement remains key to managing the anaemia of cancer. In addition, studies suggest that intravenous iron supplementation can improve response to epoetin therapy in patients with functional iron deficiency. Epoetin beta offers an effective, safe and convenient therapy for the management of anaemia in patients with cancer. Ongoing studies are expected to lead to a greater understanding of the optimal use of epoetins in cancer-related anaemia.

Management of cancer-related anemia with erythropoietic agents: doubts, certainties, and concerns

The management of cancer-related anemia with erythropoietic agents presents many unresolved issues. We reviewed the literature relating to epoetin alfa (Eprex)/Epypo); Ortho Biotech/Janssen-Cilag, High Wycombe, United Kingdom, http://www.orthobiotech.co.uk; Procrit); Ortho Biotech Products, L.P., Bridgewater, NJ, http://www.orthobiotech.com), epoetin beta (NeoRecormon); Hoffman-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland, http://www.roche.com), and darbepoetin alfa (Aranesp); Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, http://www.amgen.com) highlighting the results of published clinical trials, safety, and cost-effectiveness. Studies were identified through MEDLINE and the bibliographies of relevant articles. Epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, and darbepoetin alfa have differing pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. They are all effective at reducing transfusion requirements and improving health-related quality-of-life parameters, irrespective of tumor response. A direct comparison between epoetin alfa and darbe poetin alfa is based on limited evidence, which does not allow definitive conclusions about relative efficacy and cost-effectiveness. No predictive factors for response to erythropoietic agents have been validated in prospective trials. The most consistent adverse events are thrombotic and may occur irrespective of an increase in hemoglobin. Recent research indicates that the erythropoietin receptor is expressed in several cancer cell lines, raising the concern of possible stimulation of tumor cell growth by these drugs. Studies on the cost-effectiveness of erythropoietins, particularly compared with transfusion therapy, have been challenging to conduct and analyze and have generated ambiguous results. The use of erythropoietins needs to be optimized in terms of cost-effectiveness, and issues surrounding safety need to be clarified. A stronger methodology for clinical studies and the design of new, randomized, clinical trials is a major priority.

Recombinant human erythropoietin in oncology: current status and further developments

Anaemia effects up to 90% of cancer patients, with more than 60% requiring blood transfusion during or after treatment. With the advent of recombinant human erythropoietins (rHuEPO), an alternative to red blood cell transfusion has become available. So far, three drugs have been approved for the treatment of anaemia in patients with malignancies (epoetin alfa, epoetin beta and darbepoetin alfa). New concepts for the use of erythropoietin in cancer patients include 3- and 4-weekly dosing, as well as loading-dose concepts. Important factors helping to judge the impact of erythropoietin in cancer treatment include pharmacoeconomics and better predictive factors. Lately, the influence of erythropoietin therapy on survival in cancer patients has been discussed very intensively, because conflicting data have emerged. Studies aimed at correcting anaemia in cancer patients had indicated a possible survival advantage of those patients receiving erythropoietin. In contrast, two recent trials aimed at correction of haemoglobin levels beyond anaemia reported a poorer survival of patients receiving erythropoietin. This might grossly be attributed to a higher risk of thrombosis in these patients. The largest systematic review on the use of erythropoietin in cancer patients undergoing treatment indicates a suggestive but not significant survival advantage of erythropoietin-treated patients. In addition, very recent results of a Food and Drug Administration meeting on safety and survival of patients treated with erythropoietin are presented.

Management of anaemia in patients with breast cancer: role of epoetin

Many patients with breast cancer suffer from anaemia, as a consequence of the disease itself or its treatment. Anaemia has a negative impact on treatment outcome and overall survival, and affects the quality of life (QoL) of patients with cancer. Previously, cancer-related anaemia was treated with blood transfusion, but this is inconvenient, offers only temporary improvement in haemoglobin (Hb) level and is associated with several risks. Consequently, blood transfusion is usually reserved for patients with severe anaemia (Hb levels <8 g/dl). Recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin) is an effective and convenient treatment for cancer-related anaemia without the risks associated with red blood cell transfusion. Epoetin therapy effectively increases Hb levels, thereby reducing the need for emergency blood transfusion and improving the QoL of patients with anaemia and breast cancer. Epoetin beta is also effective for the prevention of anaemia and reduction of transfusion requirements in patients with a high risk of developing anaemia during chemotherapy. With the increased use of dose-intensified chemotherapy in an attempt to improve response rates, administration of epoetin to prevent anaemia could potentially benefit many patients with breast cancer.

Recombinant Human Erythropoietin and Overall Survival in Cancer Patients: Results of a Comprehensive Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anemia associated with cancer and cancer therapy is an important clinical and economic factor in the treatment of malignant diseases.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review to assess the efficacy of erythropoietin to prevent or treat anemia in cancer patients with regard to red blood cell transfusions, hematologic response, adverse events, and overall survival. We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE, and other databases for relevant articles published from January 1985 to December 2001. We included all randomized controlled trials that compared the use of recombinant human erythropoietin (plus transfusion, if needed) with no erythropoietin treatment (plus transfusion, if needed). Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated under a fixed-effects model. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity were examined with sensitivity analyses and meta-regression. Statistical tests for effect estimates were two-sided.

RESULTS

We identified 27 trials involving 3287 adult patients. Patients treated with erythropoietin had a lower relative risk of having a blood transfusion than untreated patients (RR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.62 to 0.73). Erythropoietin-treated patients with baseline hemoglobin levels lower than 10 g/dL were more likely to have a hematologic response than untreated patients (RR = 3.60, 95% CI = 3.07 to 4.23). The relative risk for thromboembolic complications after erythropoietin treatment was not statistically significantly increased (RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.94 to 2.66) compared with that of untreated patients. There is suggestive but inconclusive evidence that erythropoietin may improve overall survival (adjusted data: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.99; unadjusted data: HR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Erythropoietin treatment may reduce the risk for blood transfusions and improve hematologic response in cancer patients. However, our favorable survival outcome is in contrast to two large (N = 351 and 939) recently published randomized controlled trials in which erythropoietin-treated patients had statistically significantly worse survival than untreated patients. Possible reasons for the disparity with our results include differences in study population and design, higher target hemoglobin levels and higher risk of thromboembolic complications, and concerns that erythropoietin may stimulate tumor growth.

Survival is better predicted with a new classification of stage III unresectable non-small cell lung carcinoma treated by chemotherapy and radiotherapy

The 1997 International staging system (ISS) classification separated stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) into stages IIIA and IIIB. In a previous study including unresectable NSCLC initially treated with chemotherapy, we analysed survival according to tumour (T) and node (N) stages and derived a classification into stages IIIbeta (T3-4N3) and IIIalpha (other TN stage III) that had a better discrimination on survival distribution. The aim of this study was to validate these results in a further set of patients. Patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC included in a phase III trial assessing the role of increased dose chemotherapy (SuperMIP: mitomycin 6 mg/m2, ifosfamide 4.5 g/m2, cisplatin 60 mg/m2, carboplatin 200 mg/m2) in comparison to standard chemotherapy MIP (mitomycin 6 mg/m2, ifosfamide 3 g/m2, cisplatin 50 mg/m2), before thoracic irradiation (60 Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks) were the subject of this study. Survival distributions were assessed by the method of Kaplan-Meier. Survival comparisons were made by the log-rank test. Multivariate analyses using Cox regression models, included all potential prognostic factors for survival with a P-value <0.2 in univariate analysis. According to the 1997 International staging system classification, 328 eligible patients were included in the study. There was no imbalance between the two arms. Five parameters were significantly associated (P < or = 0.05) with survival in univariate analysis: European lung cancer working party (ELCWP) staging (IIIalpha[n = 294 pts] versus IIIbeta [n = 46]), Karnofsky index, weight loss, platelet count and haemoglobin level. These variables as well as the 1997 ISS staging, white blood cell (WBC) count, LDH and sodium levels were included in a multivariate analysis. Two models were constructed, including either the ELCWP or the 1997 ISS. In model 1 (ISS included), Karnofsky index (HR 0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-1.00; P = 0.05) and haemoglobin (HR 1.49; 95% CI 1.11-1.99; P = 0.007) were found significant. In model 2, including ELCWP staging, two variables were associated with survival: ELCWP staging (HR 1.68; 95% CI 1.20-2.35; P = 0.002) and haemoglobin (HR 1.54; 95% CI 1.15-2.07; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In initially unresectable stage III NSCLC treated by chemotherapy and radiotherapy, we validated the results of our previous study. The classification into stages IIIbeta (T3-4N3M0) and IIIalpha (other TN stage III) better discriminates the patients in term of survival than the 1997 ISS classification.

Evolving treatment strategies for anaemia in cancer: experience with epoetin beta

Epoetin represents the standard of care in the management of cancer therapy-related anaemia, increasing haemoglobin levels, reducing transfusion need and improving patient quality of life (QoL). Recent research aimed at improving convenience and ease of use has involved all epoetins. In particular, it has confirmed that epoetin beta 30,000 IU once weekly is equally effective as the conventional 10,000 IU three-times weekly regimen in alleviating cancer-related anaemia. Ongoing research aimed at improving still further the effectiveness of epoetins in anaemia treatment is examining the role of concomitant intravenous iron during epoetin beta therapy. With the recent debate over whether epoetin therapy has an effect on treatment outcome and survival, well-designed trials specifically powered to assess survival are required. The BReast cancer-Anaemia and the Value of Erythropoietin (BRAVE) trial is such a study, assessing the impact of epoetin beta on survival and QoL of patients with metastatic breast cancer scheduled to receive anthracycline- and/or taxane-based chemotherapy. The findings of such studies are expected to lead to a greater understanding of the optimal use of epoetins in cancer-related anaemia.

Role of epoetin in the management of anaemia in patients with lung cancer

Lung cancer is associated with the one of the highest rates of anaemia of all solid tumours. Anaemia has a negative impact on treatment outcome and overall survival of patients with cancer and also affects their quality of life. Recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin) provides an effective and safe treatment of cancer-related anaemia without the risks associated with red blood cell transfusion. Epoetin therapy increases haemoglobin levels, reduces the need for blood transfusions and improves the quality of life of patients with anaemia and lung cancer. Epoetin beta is also effective for preventing the development of anaemia and decreasing transfusion requirements when administered with concomitant platinum-based chemotherapy. In addition, preliminary evidence suggests that treatment with erythropoietic agents may improve survival of lung cancer patients, although this needs to be verified in prospective clinical trials specifically designed to evaluate survival. Therefore, early initiation of epoetin beta to prevent chemotherapy-associated anaemia may represent the best strategy for patients with lung cancer being treated with chemotherapy.

Optimising Anaemia Management with Epoetin Beta

The contribution of epoetin beta to the management of cancer-related anaemia over the past decade has been a significant one; increased haemoglobin (Hb) levels, reduced transfusion need and improved patient quality of life (QoL) have been well documented in patients across a wide range of malignancies. In recent years, concerns have been raised over the inconvenience and costs associated with the conventional three-times weekly (tiw) epoetin dosing regimen. As a result, optimising therapy through less frequent dosing (i.e. once weekly) has become a focus of research. The NeoRecormon Once Weekly (NOW) study compared the efficacy and tolerability of epoetin beta 30,000 IU once weekly with a standard 10,000 IU tiw regimen in patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies. The study showed that the once weekly regimen was equally effective as the tiw regimen in increasing Hb levels and reducing transfusion need. Furthermore, the response to once weekly treatment was rapid, with 1 and 2 g/dl increases in Hb level seen at approximately 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. Studies with other erythropoietic agents have also shown the efficacy of the once weekly dosing strategy. Epoetin beta 30,000 IU is now approved for once weekly administration in patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies receiving antitumour therapy, and can be administered using a new 30,000 IU pre-filled syringe. Once weekly administration of epoetin beta offers greater convenience and should reduce administration costs compared with the tiw regimen.