help button home button The Oncologist
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Oncologist, Vol. 10, No. 5, 357-360, May 2005; doi:10.1634/theoncologist.10-5-357
© 2005 AlphaMed Press

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow eLetters: Submit a response to this article
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Reprints/Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Littlewood, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Liss, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Littlewood, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Liss, M.

Effect of Patient Exclusion Criteria on the Efficacy of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents in Patients with Cancer-Related Anemia

Timothy J. Littlewooda, Brad Schenkelb, Martin Lissc

a John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford, United Kingdom; b Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Services, LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA; c Liberty Mutual Group, Boston, MA, USA (formerly of Policy Analysis Inc., Brookline, MA, USA)

Correspondence: Timothy J. Littlewood, M.D., John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, OX3 9DU, Oxford, United Kingdom. Telephone: 44-0-1865220331; Fax: 44-0-1865221778; e-mail: tim.littlewood{at}btinternet.com

Comparison of the efficacies of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) between different clinical trials is becoming increasingly common, although differences in study design and populations evaluated can have a considerable effect on results. A comparison of two seemingly similar trials of ESAs, one of epoetin alfa and the other of epoetin beta, showed that only 27% of the 115 patients with hematologic malignancies who received epoetin alfa in the epoetin alfa trial met the inclusion criteria for the epoetin beta trial. The mean hemoglobin increase from baseline to week 16 of epoetin alfa therapy in the patients who met these inclusion criteria was 3.3 g/dl. This is substantially higher than the mean hemoglobin increase of 2.2 g/dl from baseline to week 16 of epoetin alfa therapy in the patients who did not meet the epoetin beta study inclusion criteria. These results demonstrate the considerable effects that exclusion criteria can have on trial results and highlight the value of scrutinizing the study design details of clinical trials before comparing outcome data between trials.

Key Words. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents • Epoetin alfa • Study design • Hemoglobin • Anemia • Cancer




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 The OncologistHome page
B. Coiffier
Response to "Effect of Patient Exclusion Criteria on the Efficacy of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents in Patients with Cancer-Related Anemia"
Oncologist, October 1, 2005; 10(9): 762 - 763.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The OncologistHome page
T. J. Littlewood, B. Schenkel, and M. Liss
Response to a Letter to the Editor from Coiffier Regarding "Effect of Patient Exclusion Criteria on the Efficacy of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents in Patients with Cancer-Related Anemia"
Oncologist, October 1, 2005; 10(9): 764 - 765.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE ONCOLOGIST STEM CELLS CME ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS


Copyright © 2005 by AlphaMed Press.