Search

We aimed to evaluate the performance of the Khorana score in predicting venous thromboembolic events in ambulatory cancer patients. Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2008 to June 2018 for studies which evaluated the Khorana score. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Additional data on the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism were sought by contacting corresponding authors. The incidence in each Khorana score risk group was estimated with random effects meta-analysis. A total of 45 articles and eight abstracts were included, comprising 55 cohorts enrolling 34,555 ambulatory cancer patients. For 27,849 patients (81%), 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Overall, 19% of patients had a Khorana score of 0 points, 64% a score of 1 or 2 points, and 17% a score of 3 or more points. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in the first six months was 5.0% (95% CI: 3.9-6.5) in patients with a low-risk Khorana score (0 points), 6.6% (95% CI: 5.6-7.7) in those with an intermediate-risk Khorana score (1 or 2 points), and 11.0% (95% CI: 8.8-13.8) in those with a high-risk Khorana score (3 points or higher). Of the patients with venous thromboembolism in the first six months, 23.4% (95% CI: 18.4-29.4) had been classified as high risk according to the Khorana score. In conclusion, the Khorana score can be used to select ambulatory cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism for thromboprophylaxis; however, most events occur outside this high-risk group.

Simple Summary Thromboembolic events (TEs) are the second cause of death in cancer patients. Two forms of thromboembolic events may arise: arterial, such as ischemic stroke or myocardial infarction; and venous, such as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against vascular endothelial-derived growth factor, and is widely used in advanced ovarian cancer. However, whether bevacizumab increases the risk of thromboembolic events in ovarian cancer is matter of debate since studies have shown conflicting results. In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we included 14 trials with bevacizumab in ovarian cancer. We found that the risk of arterial thromboembolic events more than doubled with a risk ratio of 2.45. Also the risk of venous thromboembolism increased 30% with bevacizumab treatment. Bevacizumab, therefore, can be considered an additional risk factor for selecting patients for primary prophylaxis with anticoagulants. Abstract Thromboembolic events are the second cause of death in cancer patients. In ovarian cancer, 3–10% of patients present with venous thromboembolism (VTE), but the incidence may rise to 36% along the disease course. Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against vascular endothelial-derived growth factor, and in in vitro studies it showed a predisposition to hemostasis perturbation, including thrombosis. However, in vivo and clinical studies have shown conflicting results for its use as a treatment for ovarian cancer, so we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the risk of arterial thromboembolism (ATE) and VTE in ovarian cancer patients treated with bevacizumab. The review comprised 14 trials with 6221 patients: ATE incidence was reported in 5 (4811 patients) where the absolute risk was 2.4% with bevacizumab vs. 1.1% without (RR 2.45; 95% CI 1.27–4.27, p = 0.008). VTE incidence was reported in 9 trials (5121 patients) where the absolute risk was 5.4% with bevacizumab vs. 3.7% without (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.02–1.79, p = 0.04). Our analysis showed that the risk of arterial and venous thromboembolism increased in patients treated with bevacizumab. Thrombolic events (TEs) are probably underreported, and studies should discriminate between ATE and VTE. Bevacizumab can be considered as an additional risk factor when selecting patients for primary prophylaxis with anticoagulants.

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of exercise interventions on sleep disturbances and sleep quality in patients with mixed cancer diagnoses, and identify demographic, clinical, and intervention-related moderators of these effects. Methods: Individual patient data (IPD) and aggregated meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Using data from the Predicting OptimaL cAncer Rehabilitation and Supportive care project, IPD of 2173 adults (mean age = 54.8) with cancer from 17 RCTs were analyzed. A complementary systematic search was conducted (until November 2018) to study the overall effects and test the representativeness of analyzed IPD. Effect sizes of exercise effects on self-reported sleep outcomes were calculated for all included RCTs. Linear mixed-effect models were used to evaluate the effects of exercise on post-intervention outcome values, adjusting for baseline values. Moderator effects were studied by testing interactions for demographic, clinical and intervention-related characteristics. Results: For all 27 eligible RCTs from the updated search, exercise interventions significantly decreased sleep disturbances in adults with cancer (g = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.16; -0.02]). No significant effect was obtained for sleep quality. RCTs included in IPD analyses constituted a representative sample of the published literature. The intervention effects on sleep disturbances were not significantly moderated by any demographic, clinical, or intervention-related factor, nor by sleep disturbances. Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides some evidence that, compared to control conditions, exercise interventions may improve sleep disturbances, but not sleep quality, in cancer patients, although this effect is of a small magnitude. Among the investigated variables, none was found to significantly moderate the effect of exercise interventions on sleep disturbances.

Chronic fatigue complaints are frequently reported in the general population and fatigue ranks among the most commonly reported symptoms in chronic disease. In contrast to its high prevalence and impact on quality of life, relatively little is understood about the etiology of chronic fatigue. We present a cognitive-behavioral framework, the 'ALT+F' model, that conceptualizes fatigue from an associative learning perspective, and we will evaluate the current evidence for this position. Central to this framework is the notion that interoceptive and exteroceptive stimuli can become associated with the fatigue experience. Consequently, these stimuli may acquire the capacity to elicit fatigue as well as anticipatory fear-related avoidance behavior. We will argue that associative learning processes may contribute to the development of chronic fatigue, fear of fatigue, avoidance of fatigue and activity, and eventually, functional disability. The extent to which associative learning processes give rise to chronic fatigue and fear-related avoidance behavior may depend on a number of risk factors, including perceptual-cognitive biases, sensitization, fatigue catastrophizing, and excessive generalization. The presented framework offers a new window on treatment and intervention options for chronic fatigue.

International audience; Cancer management in the elderly is often considered as suboptimal, highly variable, and rarely evidence-based. Data are needed to understand decision-making processes in this population. A survey was performed in France to describe decision-making in gynaecologic patients over 70. It followed a three-step method: (1) 101 representative physicians questioned about treatment decision criteria; (2) simplified individual data were collected; (3) as well as detailed data patients receiving chemotherapy. This analysis refers to breast cancer subgroup of patients. Main decision criteria were performance status, comorbidities, and renal function. In adjuvant setting, the main concern was life expectancy, whereas it was quality of life in metastatic setting. Of the 631 patients entered in the simplified analysis, 41% had been evaluated by a geriatrician, 67% received chemotherapy. In the detailed analysis, patients older than 75 were more likely to receive a monochemotherapy and to be treated with weekly/divided dose. In adjuvant setting, respectively, 19, 55, and 26% of the patients were treated with regimen validated in the elderly, validated in a younger population, and not validated. A G-CSF was prescribed in 48% of the patients, as primary prophylaxis in 78 and in 41% of patients with a risk of febrile neutropenia \textless 10%. Geriatric covariates become an increasing concern in the decision-making process. This survey also suggests an insufficient use of validated chemotherapy regimens. To date, age remains a risk factor for heterogeneity in oncologic practice justifying a persistent effort for elaborating and disclosing specific recommendations.

In ambulatory patients with solid cancer, routine thromboprophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism is not recommended. Several risk prediction scores to identify cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism have been proposed, but their clinical usefulness remains a matter of debate. We evaluated and directly compared the performance of the Khorana, Vienna, PROTECHT, and CONKO scores in a multinational, prospective cohort study. Patients with advanced cancer were eligible if they were due to undergo chemotherapy or had started chemotherapy in the previous three months. The primary outcome was objectively confirmed symptomatic or incidental deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism during a 6-month followup period. A total of 876 patients were enrolled, of whom 260 (30%) had not yet received chemotherapy. Fifty-three patients (6.1%) developed venous thromboembolism. The c-statistics of the scores ranged from 0.50 to 0.57. At the conventional positivity threshold of 3 points, the scores classified 13-34% of patients as high-risk; the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism in these patients ranged from 6.5% (95% CI: 2.8-12) for the Khorana score to 9.6% (95% CI: 6.6-13) for the PROTECHT score. High-risk patients had a significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism when using the Vienna (subhazard ratio 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0-3.1) or PROTECHT (subhazard ratio 2.1; 95% CI: 1.23.6) scores. In conclusion, the prediction scores performed poorly in predicting venous thromboembolism in cancer patients. The Vienna CATS and PROTECHT scores appear to discriminate better between low-and high-risk patients, but further improvements are needed before they can be considered for introduction into clinical practice.

Background: The risk of venous thromboembolism is increased in adults and enhanced by asparaginase-based chemotherapy, and venous thromboembolism introduces a secondary risk of treatment delay and premature discontinuation of key anti-leukaemic agents, potentially compromising survival. Yet, the trade-off between benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is uncertain. Objectives: The primary objectives were to assess the benefits and harms of primary thromboprophylaxis for first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism in adults with ALL receiving asparaginase-based therapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. The secondary objectives were to compare the benefits and harms of different groups of primary systemic thromboprophylaxis by stratifying the main results per type of drug (heparins, vitamin K antagonists, synthetic pentasaccharides, parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors, direct oral anticoagulants, and blood-derived products for antithrombin substitution). Search methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature search on 02 June 2020, with no language restrictions, including (1) electronic searches of Pubmed/MEDLINE; Embase/Ovid; Scopus/Elsevier; Web of Science Core Collection/Clarivate Analytics; and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and (2) handsearches of (i) reference lists of identified studies and related reviews; (ii) clinical trials registries (ClinicalTrials.gov registry; the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry; the World Health Organisation's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP); and pharmaceutical manufacturers of asparaginase including Servier, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Ohara Pharmaceuticals, and Kyowa Pharmaceuticals), and (iii) conference proceedings (from the annual meetings of the American Society of Hematology (ASH); the European Haematology Association (EHA); the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO); and the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)). We conducted all searches from 1970 (the time of introduction of asparaginase in ALL treatment). We contacted the authors of relevant studies to identify any unpublished material, missing data, or information regarding ongoing studies. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs); including quasi-randomised, controlled clinical, cross-over, and cluster-randomised trial designs) comparing any parenteral/oral preemptive anticoagulant or mechanical intervention with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or comparing two different pre-emptive anticoagulant interventions in adults aged at least 18 years with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based chemotherapy regimens. For the description of harms, non-randomised observational studies with a control group were eligible for inclusion. Data collection and analysis: Using a standardised data collection form, two review authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each outcome using standardised tools (RoB 2.0 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies) and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes included first-time symptomatic venous thromboembolism, all-cause mortality, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included asymptomatic venous thromboembolism, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, adverse events (i.e. clinically relevant non-major bleeding and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia for trials using heparins), and quality of life. Analyses were performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. For non-randomised studies, we evaluated all studies (including studies judged to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains) in a sensitivity analysis exploring confounding. Main results: We identified 23 non-randomised studies that met the inclusion criteria of this review, of which 10 studies provided no outcome data for adults with ALL. We included the remaining 13 studies in the 'Risk of bias' assessment, in which we identified invalid control group definition in two studies and judged outcomes of nine studies to be at critical risk of bias in at least one of the ROBINS-I domains and outcomes of two studies at serious risk of bias. We did not assess the benefits of thromboprophylaxis, as no RCTs were included. In the main descriptive analysis of harms, we included two retrospective non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at serious risk of bias. One study evaluated antithrombin concentrates compared to no antithrombin concentrates. We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.19 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We are uncertain whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on venous thromboembolism-related mortality (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.94 (intention-to-treat analysis); one study, 40 participants; very low certainty of evidence). We do not know whether antithrombin concentrates have an effect on major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and quality of life in adults with ALL treated with asparaginase-based chemotherapy, as data were insufficient. The remaining study (224 participants) evaluated prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin versus no prophylaxis. However, this study reported insufficient data regarding harms including all-cause mortality, major bleeding, venous thromboembolism-related mortality, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and quality of life. In the sensitivity analysis of harms, exploring the effect of confounding, we also included nine non-randomised studies with outcomes judged to be at critical risk of bias primarily due to uncontrolled confounding. Three studies (179 participants) evaluated the effect of antithrombin concentrates and six studies (1224 participants) evaluated the effect of prophylaxis with different types of heparins. When analysing all-cause mortality; venous thromboembolism-related mortality; and major bleeding (studies of heparin only) including all studies with extractable outcomes for each comparison (antithrombin and low-molecular-weight heparin), we observed small study sizes; few events; wide CIs crossing the line of no effect; and substantial heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots. Although the observed heterogeneity could arise through the inclusion of a small number of studies with differences in participants; interventions; and outcome assessments, the likelihood that bias due to uncontrolled confounding was the cause of heterogeneity is inevitable. Subgroup analyses were not possible due to insufficient data. Authors' conclusions: We do not know from the currently available evidence, if thromboprophylaxis used for adults with ALL treated according to asparaginase-based regimens is associated with clinically appreciable benefits and acceptable harms. The existing research on this question is solely of non-randomised design, seriously to critically confounded, and underpowered with substantial imprecision. Any estimates of effect based on the existing insufficient evidence is very uncertain and is likely to change with future research.

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of exercise interventions on sleep disturbances and sleep quality in patients with mixed cancer diagnoses, and identify demographic, clinical, and intervention-related moderators of these effects.Methods: Individual patient data (IPD) and aggregated meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Using data from the Predicting OptimaL cAncer Rehabilitation and Supportive care project, IPD of 2173 adults (mean age = 54.8) with cancer from 17 RCTs were analyzed. A complementary systematic search was conducted (until November 2018) to study the overall effects and test the representativeness of analyzed IPD. Effect sizes of exercise effects on self-reported sleep outcomes were calculated for all included RCTs. Linear mixed-effect models were used to evaluate the effects of exercise on post-intervention outcome values, adjusting for baseline values. Moderator effects were studied by testing interactions for demographic, clinical and intervention-related characteristics.Results: For all 27 eligible RCTs from the updated search, exercise interventions significantly decreased sleep disturbances in adults with cancer (g = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.16; -0.02]). No significant effect was obtained for sleep quality. RCTs included in IPD analyses constituted a representative sample of the published literature. The intervention effects on sleep disturbances were not significantly moderated by any demographic, clinical, or intervention-related factor, nor by sleep disturbances.Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides some evidence that, compared to control conditions, exercise interventions may improve sleep disturbances, but not sleep quality, in cancer patients, although this effect is of a small magnitude. Among the investigated variables, none was found to significantly moderate the effect of exercise interventions on sleep disturbances.

We aimed to evaluate the performance of the Khorana score in predicting venous thromboembolic events in ambulatory cancer patients. Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2008 to June 2018 for studies which evaluated the Khorana score. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Additional data on the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism were sought by contacting corresponding authors. The incidence in each Khorana score risk group was estimated with random effects meta-analysis. A total of 45 articles and eight abstracts were included, comprising 55 cohorts enrolling 34,555 ambulatory cancer patients. For 27,849 patients (81%), 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Overall, 19% of patients had a Khorana score of 0 points, 64% a score of 1 or 2 points, and 17% a score of 3 or more points. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in the first six months was 5.0% (95% CI: 3.9-6.5) in patients with a low-risk Khorana score (0 points), 6.6% (95% CI: 5.6-7.7) in those with an intermediate-risk Khorana score (1 or 2 points), and 11.0% (95% CI: 8.8-13.8) in those with a high-risk Khorana score (3 points or higher). Of the patients with venous thromboembolism in the first six months, 23.4% (95% CI: 18.4-29.4) had been classified as high risk according to the Khorana score. In conclusion, the Khorana score can be used to select ambulatory cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism for thromboprophylaxis; however, most events occur outside this high-risk group.

Background The study objective was to assess the influence of neutropenia on outcome of critically ill cancer patients by meta-analysis of individual data. Secondary objectives were to assess the influence of neutropenia on outcome of critically ill patients in prespecified subgroups (according to underlying tumor, period of admission, need for mechanical ventilation and use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)). Methods Data sources were PubMed and the Cochrane database. Study selection included articles focusing on critically ill cancer patients published in English and studies in humans from May 2005 to May 2015. For study selection, the study eligibility was assessed by two investigators. Individual data from selected studies were obtained from corresponding authors. Results Overall, 114 studies were identified and authors of 30 studies (26.3% of selected studies) agreed to participate in this study. Of the 7515 included patients, three were excluded due to a missing major variable (neutropenia or mortality) leading to analysis of 7512 patients, including 1702 neutropenic patients (22.6%). After adjustment for confounders, and taking study effect into account, neutropenia was independently associated with mortality (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.23–1.62; P = 0.03). When analyzed separately, neither admission period, underlying malignancy nor need for mechanical ventilation modified the prognostic influence of neutropenia on outcome. However, among patients for whom data on G-CSF administration were available (n = 1949; 25.9%), neutropenia was no longer associated with outcome in patients receiving G-CSF (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.70–1.51; P = 0.90). Conclusion Among 7512 critically ill cancer patients included in this systematic review, neutropenia was independently associated with poor outcome despite a meaningful survival. Neutropenia was no longer significantly associated with outcome in patients treated by G-CSF, which may suggest a beneficial effect of G-CSF in neutropenic critically ill cancer patients. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42015026347. Date of registration: Sept 18 2015 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2076-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and pelvic surgery are significant risk factors for thromboembolic events. Our study objectives were to investigate the timing, incidence and characteristics of thromboembolic events during and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent radical cystectomy in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. Materials and Methods: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of 761 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical cystectomy for muscle invasive bladder cancer from 2002 to 2014. Median followup from diagnosis was 21.4 months (range 3 to 272). Patient characteristics included the Khorana score, and the incidence and timing of thromboembolic events (before vs after radical cystectomy). Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression were used to compare survival between patients with vs without thromboembolic events. Results: The Khorana score indicated an intermediate thromboembolic event risk in 88% of patients. The overall incidence of thromboembolic events in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 14% with a wide variation of 5% to 32% among institutions. Patients with thromboembolic events were older (67.6 vs 64.6 years, p = 0.02) and received a longer neoadjuvant chemotherapy course (10.9 vs 9.7 weeks, p = 0.01) compared to patients without a thromboembolic event. Of the thromboembolic events 58% developed preoperatively and 72% were symptomatic. On multivariable regression analysis the development of a thromboembolic event was not significantly associated with decreased overall survival. However, pathological stage and a high Khorana score were adverse risk factors for overall survival. Conclusions: Thromboembolic events are common in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer who undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy before and after radical cystectomy. Our results suggest that a prospective trial of thromboembolic event prophylaxis during neoadjuvant chemotherapy is warranted.

Background: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) increase red blood cell production in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). In Europe, short-acting ESAs (epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, epoetin zeta, and epoetin theta) and a long-acting ESA (darbepoetin alfa) are available to treat CIA. Objective: This systematic review aimed to determine potential dose efficiency associated with the use of different ESAs for the treatment of CIA according to European labeling. Methods: A systematic review of ESA studies with starting doses according to European labeling was conducted according to published methodology. Measures of dose efficiency were defined as mean weekly doses to achieve target hemoglobin level or final dose and dose adjustments (dose increase, decrease, or withheld). Electronic databases and grey literature sources were searched up to July 2012. Data were selected for analysis using an evidence hierarchy and quantitatively analyzed to assess statistical homogeneity. Where pooling of data was not appropriate, a narrative summary with descriptive statistics (medians and ranges) was reported. Results: Fifty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies considered to represent the highest level of evidence were extracted and included in the analysis. The analysis showed a high degree of statistical heterogeneity, often precluding metaanalysis. The patients included in the analysis were representative of those encountered in clinical practice, and patient characteristics were similar between the short-acting and the darbepoetin alfa groups. Mean weekly doses appeared similar to 30% lower with darbepoetin alfa versus short-acting ESAs (median, 136.5 mu g or 27,300 RI [range, 21,560-38,260 IU] vs 38,230 IU [range, 31,634-42,714 RI], respectively), resulting in a mean weekly dose ratio of 1:280. Darbepoetin alfa patients appeared to need fewer dose increases compared with short-acting ESAs (pooled, 0.75%; I-2 = 21% vs median 26.6% [range, 7.6%-44.6%]) and more dose decreases (median, 74% [range, 57%-75%] vs 22% [range, 2.8%- 59%]). A similar percentage of darbepoetin alfa and short-acting ESA patients required a dose to be withheld (20% and 33% [2 studies] vs median 33.2% [range, 12.6%-51.1%]). Conclusions: Statistical heterogeneity between studies was high, although clinically the studies represented medical practice. Without randomized clinical trials directly comparing darbepoetin alfa and short-acting ESAs, these findings are tentative and future research is warranted. This review shows that good-quality, reliable data from head-to-head trials are lacking. The best available evidence comes from prospective ESA-arm data. Mean weekly doses, dose increases, and dose decreases suggest a dose efficiency for darbepoetin alfa compared with short-acting ESAs. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

The use of chemotherapy regimens with moderate or high risk of febrile neutropenia (defined as having a FN incidence of 10% or more) and the respective incidence and clinical management of FN in breast cancer and NHL has not been studied in Belgium. The existence of a medical need for G-CSF primary and secondary prophylaxis with these regimens was investigated in a real-life setting., Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published