Österborg A, Brandberg Y, Hedenus MImpact of epoetin-beta on survival of patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies: long-term follow up of a large randomized study. Br J Haematol 129: 206-209

Sundsvall Hospital, Sundsvall, Västernorrland, Sweden
British Journal of Haematology (Impact Factor: 4.71). 05/2005; 129(2):206-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2005.05440.x
Source: PubMed


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.

Download full-text


Available from: Michael Hedenus, Sep 21, 2014
  • Source
    • "Of the 10 studies that reported mortality data, five [7,10,17,26,27,29] also reported a disease progression outcome; a meta-analysis of these five studies was performed. In this analysis, the OR for disease progression was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.81–1.30, "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are approved to treat anemia in patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. ESAs reduce transfusion rates, but some clinical studies suggest that ESAs may reduce survival or increase disease progression. This study-level meta-analysis examined the effects of darbepoetin alfa, epoetin alfa or epoetin beta on mortality, disease progression and transfusion incidence in patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies, using randomized, controlled trials of patients receiving chemotherapy and ESAs or standard of care. The odds ratio (OR) for mortality was 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.34, random-effects model, 10 studies); the risk difference was - 0.01 (95% CI, - 0.03-0.02). The OR for disease progression was 1.02 (95% CI 0.81-1.30, random-effects model, five studies). A lower proportion of ESA-treated patients than controls received transfusions (seven studies). In this meta-analysis, ESAs reduced transfusions with no clear effect on mortality or disease progression in patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies receiving chemotherapy.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2012 · Leukemia & lymphoma
  • Source
    • "A retrospective study of 257 MM patients indicated that ESA use was associated with improved survival (Baz et al, 2007), whereas another multivariate analysis of 323 patients suggested that ESA use had a detrimental effect on survival (Katodritou et al, 2008). A third, long-term follow-up study in patients with lymphoproliferative malignancies showed that epoetin-beta had no significant effect on OS compared with placebo (Osterborg et al, 2005). However, it should be noted that many of these studies were conducted before the change in recommendations regarding ESA use was made; current guidelines state that ESAs should only be initiated when haemoglobin is <100 g/l (Durie et al, 2003) and discontinued once haemoglobin reaches 120 g/l (Juneja et al, 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although haematological toxicities, such as anaemia, are common in multiple myeloma (MM), no clear consensus exists on the use and impact of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) on outcomes in MM. This analysis characterizes haematological toxicities and associated interventions in the phase III VISTA (Velcade(®) as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Assessment with Melphalan and Prednisone) study of bortezomib plus melphalan/prednisone (VMP, n = 344) versus MP (n = 338) in previously untreated MM patients ineligible for high-dose therapy, and evaluates the impact of ESA use or red-blood-cell (RBC) transfusions on outcomes and thromboembolic risk. Incidence of haematological toxicities was similar with VMP and MP; similar rates of interventions and associated complications (e.g. bleeding, febrile neutropenia) were observed. Two hundred thirty three patients received ESA; 204 had RBC transfusions. Frequency of thromboembolic events was low and not affected by ESA use. Median time-to progression (TTP) was similar between ESA/non-ESA [hazard ratio: 1·03 (95% confidence interval 0·76-1·39); P = 0·8478] in both arms (VMP: 19·9/not reached; MP: 15·0/17·5 months). Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were similar between ESA/non-ESA in each arm. Patients receiving RBC transfusions had significantly shorter OS (P < 0·0001) versus non-RBC-transfusion patients. In conclusion, bortezomib did not add to melphalan haematological toxicity. Concomitant ESA use with VMP/MP in previously untreated MM patients did not adversely affect TTP or OS, or increase thromboembolic risk. However, RBC transfusion was associated with significantly shorter survival.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2011 · British Journal of Haematology
  • Source
    • "In all , 4 of the 20 chemotherapy studies could not be included in the patient - level analysis as primary data were not available ( Oster - borg et al , 2005 ; Engert , 2007 ; Strauss et al , 2008 ; Aapro et al , 2008a ) . However , the published manuscripts for Aapro et al ( 2008a ) and Osterborg et al ( 2005 ) provided HRs for survival . Thus , sensitivity analyses were also carried using the published HRs for these two studies . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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. 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 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). 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.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2010 · British Journal of Cancer
Show more