Impact of epoetin-beta on survival of patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies: long-term follow up of a large randomized study.

Department of Oncology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
British Journal of Haematology (Impact Factor: 4.96). 05/2005; 129(2):206-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2005.05440.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recent studies have suggested that epoetin treatment of anaemia may influence the survival of patients with cancer. We conducted an analysis of long-term survival in patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies treated with epoetin-beta or placebo in a large-scale study. This was a randomized, double-blind trial in which patients with transfusion-dependent anaemia and lymphoproliferative malignancy received epoetin-beta 150 IU/kg or placebo three times weekly for 16 weeks. Long-term survival data were analysed by standard Kaplan-Meier methods and differences between groups were assessed using a log-rank test. The intention-to-treat population consisted of 343 patients (epoetin-beta, n = 170; placebo, n = 173). There were no major differences between the two treatment groups in demographic or clinical characteristics/prognostic factors. A total of 110 (65%) patients died in the epoetin-beta group (censored, n = 60) and 109 (63%) died in the placebo group (censored, n = 64) up to the end of long-term follow up. Kaplan-Meier curves for survival were similar in both groups. Median survival was 17 months with epoetin-beta and 18 months with placebo. A log-rank test indicated no significant difference in survival (P = 0.76). This long-term follow up indicated that epoetin-beta has no significant effect on survival compared to placebo in anaemic patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Erythropoietin (EPO) provides an alternative to transfusion for increasing red blood cell mass and treating anemia in cancer patients. However, recent studies have reported increased adverse events and/or reduced survival in patients receiving both EPO and chemotherapy, potentially related to EPO-induced cancer progression. Additional preclinical studies that elucidate the possible mechanism underlying EPO cellular growth stimulation are needed. Using commercial tissue microarray (TMA) of a variety of cancers and benign tissues, EPO and EPO receptor immunohistochemical staining was performed. Furthermore using a panel of human renal cells (Caki-1, 786-O, 769-P, RPTEC), in vitro and in vivo experiments were performed with the addition of EPO in normoxic and hypoxic states to note phenotypic and genotypic changes. EPO expression score was significantly elevated in lung cancer and lymphoma (compared to benign tissues), while EPOR expression score was significantly elevated in lymphoma, thyroid, uterine, lung and prostate cancers (compared to benign tissues). EPO and EPOR expression scores in RCC and benign renal tissue were not significantly different. Experimentally, we show that exposure of human renal cells to recombinant EPO (rhEPO) induces cellular proliferation, which we report for the first time, is further enhanced in a hypoxic state. Mechanistic investigations revealed that EPO stimulates the expression of cyclin D1 while inhibiting the expression of p21cip1 and p27kip1 through the phosphorylation of JAK2 and ERK1/2, leading to a more rapid progression through the cell cycle. We also demonstrate an increase in the growth of renal cell carcinoma xenograft tumors when systemic rhEPO is administered. In summary, we elucidated a previously unidentified mechanism by which EPO administration regulates progression through the cell cycle, and show that EPO effects are significantly enhanced under hypoxic conditions.
    Journal of Hematology & Oncology 09/2013; 6(1):65. · 4.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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. To assess the effects of ESAs to either prevent or treat anaemia in cancer patients. 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. 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). 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. 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). 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.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 01/2012; 12:CD003407. · 5.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anemia is common in cancer patients who are receiving chemotherapy treatment and may result in symptoms such as fatigue and reduced exercise tolerance. Treatment with recombinant human erythropoietin, an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA), in anemic patients with solid tumors and nonmyeloid hematological malignancies results in an improvement in mean hemoglobin concentration, a reduction in transfusion requirement along with an improvement in quality of life scores. In patients with myelodysplasia, the response to single-agent ESAs is disappointing but combining ESAs with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor improves the response rates substantially. Unfortunately, a significant proportion of people remain refractory to treatment. Possible causes of ESA refractoriness include true or functional iron deficiency and concomitant intravenous iron supplementation improves response rates when compared with supplementation with oral iron. There are no factors that predict response to ESAs with sensitivity and specificity in people with nonmyeloid tumors, although a promising model for myelodysplasia has been developed that awaits large-scale evaluation. Treatment with ESAs is generally very safe, with just a small increased risk of venous thrombosis. Some recent data have suggested that ESAs may increase the risk of tumor progression in certain settings. These data are worrying but all the trials reporting this outcome have had flaws in design and further data are required.
    Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology 03/2008; 1(2):307-17.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Sep 21, 2014