Search

Anemia is a widely prevalent complication among cancer patients. At the time of diagnosis, 30% to 40% of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or Hodgkin lymphoma and up to 70% of patients with multiple myeloma are anemic; rates are higher among persons with myelodysplastic syndromes. Among patients with solid cancers or lymphomas, up to half develop anemia following chemotherapy. For almost 2 decades, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were the primary treatment for cancer-related anemia. However, reassessments of benefits and risks of ESAs for cancer-associated anemia have occurred internationally. We reviewed guidelines and notifications from regulatory agencies and manufacturers, reimbursement policies, and utilization for ESAs in the cancer and chronic kidney disease settings within the United States, Europe, and Canada. In 2008 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricted ESAs from cancer patients seeking cure. Reimbursement is limited to hemoglobin levels < 10 g/dL. In the United States, ESA usage increased 340% between 2001 and 2006, and decreased 60% since 2007. The European Medicines Agency (EMEA) recommended that ESA benefits do not outweigh risks. In Europe between 2001 and 2006, ESA use increased 51%; since 2006, use decreased by 10%. In 2009, Canadian manufacturers recommended usage based on patient preferences. In Canada in 2007, approximately 20% of anemic cancer patients received ESAs, a 20% increase since 2004. In contrast to Europe, where ESA use has increased over time, reassessments of ESA-associated safety concerns in the United States have resulted in marked decrements in ESA use among cancer patients.

Background: Since 1988, millions of patients have received epoetin products intravenously (IV) and subcutaneously. In 1998, epoetin-associated pure red cell aplasia (PRCA) was first reported and causation was attributed to formulations without human serum albumin (HSA), subcutaneous administration, and uncoated rubber stoppers., Study Design and Methods: Data on erythropoietin (EPO)-associated PRCA were obtained from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), regulatory authorities in other countries, and the manufacturers of epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, and darbepoetin. The data included information on numbers of PRCA cases and estimated exposure-adjusted incidence rates by EPO product, anemia etiology, administration route, country of PRCA identification, and date reported., Results: In 1999, academicians in Paris identified 12 EPO-treated patients with antibody-mediated PRCA; 11 of these patients were on hemodialysis and had received subcutaneous Eprex (Johnson & Johnson). In 2002, authorities in Europe, Australia, Singapore, and Canada mandated Eprex by IV route to hemodialysis patients, and the relevant manufacturers added Teflon coating to prefilled syringes of Eprex; PRCA cases subsequently decreased by 90 percent. By 2003, 180 Eprex-associated PRCA cases were identified in Europe, Canada, Australia, and Asia, despite improvements in handling. Since 2002, FDA safety databases include information on 59 new cases of antibody-associated PRCA, primarily associated with subcutaneous epoetin alfa and darbepoetin that does not contain HSA., Conclusion: Independent actions by regulatory authorities, manufacturers, and academic researchers identified significant numbers of PRCA cases between 1998 and 2003 and characterized the probable etiology. Today, antibody-mediated PRCA is an infrequent class toxicity occurring among some hemodialysis patients on EPOs.

Context: The erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) erythropoietin and darbepoetin are licensed to treat chemotherapy-associated anemia in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies. Although systematic overviews of trials have identified venous thromboembolism (VTE) risks, none have identified mortality risks with ESAs., Objective: To evaluate VTE and mortality rates associated with ESA administration for the treatment of anemia among patients with cancer., Data Sources: A published overview from the Cochrane Collaboration (search dates: January 1, 1985-April 1, 2005) and MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (key words: clinical trial, erythropoietin, darbepoetin, and oncology), the public Web site of the US Food and Drug Administration and ESA manufacturers, and safety advisories (search dates: April 1, 2005-January 17, 2008)., Study Selection: Phase 3 trials comparing ESAs with placebo or standard of care for the treatment of anemia among patients with cancer., Data Extraction: Mortality rates, VTE rates, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted by 3 reviewers from 51 clinical trials with 13 611 patients that included survival information and 38 clinical trials with 8172 patients that included information on VTE., Data Synthesis: Patients with cancer who received ESAs had increased VTE risks (334 VTE events among 4610 patients treated with ESA vs 173 VTE events among 3562 control patients; 7.5% vs 4.9%; relative risk, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.31-1.87) and increased mortality risks (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01-1.20)., Conclusions: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent administration to patients with cancer is associated with increased risks of VTE and mortality. Our findings, in conjunction with basic science studies on erythropoietin and erythropoietin receptors in solid cancers, raise concern about the safety of ESA administration to patients with cancer.

Background: Between 1988 and 1998, antibody-associated pure red-cell aplasia was reported in three patients who had undergone treatment with recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin). Between 1998 and 2000, 13 such cases were reported from France — 12 in patients who had received the Eprex formulation of epoetin alfa and 1 in a patient who had received Neorecormon (a formulation of epoetin beta); both are products that are marketed outside the United States. Methods: We obtained reports of epoetin-associated pure red-cell aplasia from the Food and Drug Administration and from the manufacturers of Eprex, Epogen (another formulation of epoetin alfa), and Neorecormon. The numbers of case reports and estimates of exposure-adjusted incidence were analyzed according to the product, the cause of anemia, the route of administration, the country in which pure red-cell aplasia was identified, and the date on which pure red-cell aplasia was reported. Results: Between January 1998 and April 2004, 175 cases of epoetin-associated pure red-cell aplasia were reported for Eprex, 11 cases for Neorecormon, and 5 cases for Epogen. Over half these cases had occurred in France, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Spain. Between 2001 and 2003, the estimated exposure-adjusted incidence was 18 cases per 100,000 patient-years for the Eprex formulation without human serum albumin, 6 per 100,000 patient-years for the Eprex formulation with human serum albumin, 1 case per 100,000 patient-years for Neorecormon, and 0.2 case per 100,000 patient-years for Epogen. After procedures were adopted to ensure appropriate storage, handling, and administration of Eprex to patients with chronic kidney disease, the exposure-adjusted incidence decreased by 83 percent worldwide. Conclusions: After the peak incidence of Eprex-associated pure red-cell aplasia was reached in 2001, interventions designed in response to drug-monitoring programs worldwide resulted in a reduction of more than 80 percent in the incidence of pure red-cell aplasia due to Eprex. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1403-8. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]