| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
The R.W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute, Raritan, New Jersey, USA
Correspondence: Robert I. Abels, M.D., The R.W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute, 920 Route 202, Raritan, NJ 08869-0602, USA. Telephone: 908-704-5021; Fax: 908-526-1590.
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
A total of 413 patients were enrolled in these trials (124 in the no-chemotherapy group, 157 in the no-cisplatin chemotherapy group and 132 in the cisplatin chemotherapy group). In each trial, patients randomized to rHuEPO had a significantly greater (p < .004) increase in hematocrit than placebo-treated patients. In the two types of chemotherapy trials combined, utilizing an rHuEPO dose of 150 U/kg, rHuEPO-treated patients had significantly lower (p 
.009) transfusion requirements (percentage of patients transfused and mean units of blood transfused per patient) than placebo-treated patients during months two and three, but not during month one. Quality-of-life parameters measured on a 100 mm visual analog scale significantly improved (p<.05) in rHuEPO-treated patients whose hematocrit increased 
6 percentage points, compared to corresponding quality-of-life changes in placebo-treated patients. rHuEPO was well tolerated compared to placebo.
The above results suggest that rHuEPO may be a useful agent to palliate the morbid consequences of the anemia that is often found in association with advanced cancer.
Key Words. Anemia • Cancer • Erythropoietin
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
In addition to the above mechanisms for anemia in cancer patients, red cell production may be further suppressed by chemotherapeutic agents which may inhibit maturation of erythroid lineage cells in the bone marrow. Moreover, severe anemia may be found in cancer patients treated with the nephrotoxic agent cisplatin, which has been postulated to impair the ability of the kidneys to secrete EPO in response to anemia [8].
Since the anemia associated with cancer may be associated with inappropriately low serum EPO levels for the degree of anemia [9], and because the ACD has been successfully treated with rHuEPO, rHuEPO may be a rational therapy for anemia in cancer patients. This paper will describe the effect of rHuEPO on anemia in three separate populations of cancer patients. These populations include: A) patients who were not receiving concomitant chemotherapy, B) patients who were receiving therapy with chemotherapeutic regimens not containing cisplatin, and C) patients who were receiving therapy with chemotherapeutic regimens containing cisplatin. Three separate trials were performed within each study population. However, all trials within each study population were analyzed as a single unit due to their essentially identical design.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Required laboratory values included: hemoglobin/hematocrit (HCT) <10.5 g/dl or 32%, respectively, to document prestudy anemia; neutrophils >500 cells/µl; platelets >75,000 cells/µl (25,000 cells/µl in the no-chemotherapy trials); serum creatinine <2 mg/dl; negative direct Coombs test and no occult blood in the stool. Significant exclusion criteria included organ dysfunction not secondary to malignancy, cerebral metastases, uncontrolled hypertension, iron, folate or Vitamin B12 deficiency, acute illness within seven days of study participation and experimental therapy within 30 days of study participation.
Study Protocol
Patients enrolled in the no-chemotherapy trial were randomized to rHuEPO 100 U/kg or a comparable volume of placebo SC three times per week for eight weeks or until an HCT of 38%-40% was attained. Patients enrolled in the two types of chemotherapy trials were randomized to rHuEPO 150 U/kg or a comparable volume of placebo SC three times per week for 12 weeks or until an HCT of 38%-40% was attained, after which the dose of study medication was titrated to maintain the HCT within the target range. After completion of the double-blind phase of these studies, open-label therapy with rHuEPO was permitted, but this paper will describe only the results of double-blind therapy.
Analytic Technique
The major efficacy criteria pertained to the effects of study medication on HCT, transfusion requirements and quality of life. For the purpose of these studies, "correction of anemia" was defined as attainment of an HCT 38% unrelated to transfusion, and "response to therapy" was defined as an increase of HCT of at least six percentage points unrelated to transfusion. Transfusion requirements were categorized based on the percentage of patients transfused in each treatment group and the mean number of units of blood transfused per patient in each treatment group. Prior to and after completion of double-blind therapy, patients were asked to rate their energy level, ability to perform daily activities and overall quality of life on a 100 mm visual analog scale, the extremes of which represented the best possible and worst possible scores for that category. Changes from prestudy to poststudy in quality-of-life scores were compared in placebo-treated and rHuEPO-treated patients to determine the effect of therapy on functional capacity. Patients were considered valid for efficacy analysis if they completed 15 days of study participation. All patients were considered valid for safety analysis.
Statistical inference was carried out using Fisher’s Exact Test on dichotomous variables that were formulated as 2 x 2 tables, such as proportion of patients transfused by study month. For discrete data not formulated as 2 x 2 tables, the Extended Mantel-Haenszel test was used with integer scores. The two-sample t-test was used for between-group comparison of means, and the paired t-test was used to test changes from baseline to final value. Where appropriate, a linear model approach was used, with treatment group as the design factor and various baseline measures, such as baseline HCT, endogenous EPO level, tumor involvement of the bone marrow and chemotherapy intensity (area under the neutrophil time curve), as covariates. All statistical tests of hypotheses were two-sided and carried out at the 
= 0.05 level.
rHuEPO was supplied by The R.W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute (Raritan, NJ) in single use vials or ampules in a buffered solution containing human serum albumin 2.5 mg/ml. Placebo consisted of an identical buffered solution containing human serum albumin 2.5 mg/ml without added rHuEPO.
All patients gave informed written consent prior to participating in these trials, which were approved at each investigational site by an appropriately constituted institutional review board (IRB).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
A total of 413 patients were enrolled in these studies; 124 were enrolled in the no-chemotherapy trials, 157 were enrolled in the no-cisplatin chemotherapy trials and 132 were enrolled in the cisplatin chemotherapy trials. A total of 213 patients were randomized to rHuEPO, and 200 patients were randomized to placebo. Two hundred and six patients randomized to rHuEPO were considered evaluable for efficacy, and 190 patients randomized to placebo were considered to be evaluable for efficacy (i.e., participated in trials for 15 days).
Table 1
presents demographic characteristics for patients enrolled in these trials. Approximately equivalent numbers of males and females were enrolled. The patients were mainly Caucasian and had a mean age of approximately 62 years. The mean baseline weight of approximately 67 kg suggests that the patients were not grossly wasted at study entry.
|
presents additional baseline characteristics for patients enrolled in these trials. During the baseline period (the two months prior to study participation for the no-chemotherapy trials and the three months prior to study participation for the two types of chemotherapy trials), 45% of the rHuEPO-treated patients and 48% of the placebo-treated patients received RBC transfusions. The mean number of units of blood transfused per patient per month during the baseline period was 0.67 in the rHuEPO group and 0.73 in the placebo group. The mean HCT immediately prior to study participation was 29.1% in rHuEPO-treated patients and 28.5% in the placebo-treated patients. These baseline HCTs were probably somewhat inflated due to the effect of prior red cell transfusions. Finally, the prestudy overall quality-of-life score was approximately 50 mm out of a possible 100 mm, indicating that the enrolled patients had significant limitation of their functional capacity at baseline evaluation.
|
presents the distribution of endogenous serum EPO levels at baseline. In general, serum EPO levels tended to be low or appropriate for the baseline HCT. Approximately 75% of the patients had endogenous serum EPO levels 150 mU/ml, and fewer than 5% of the patients had baseline endogenous serum EPO levels >500 mU/ml. The median endogenous EPO levels in the no-chemotherapy and no-cisplatin chemotherapy trials were 89.5 and 94.5 mU/ml, respectively, whereas the median baseline endogenous EPO level in the cisplatin-treated patients was 54 mU/ml, which was significantly lower (p<.05) than in the no-chemotherapy and no-cisplatin chemotherapy populations.
|
gives the histologic origin of tumors for patients randomized to rHuEPO and placebo. As is evident, patients participating in these trials had a wide variety of different tumor types. However, the distribution of tumor types was relatively similar in patients randomized to rHuEPO and placebo. Overall, approximately 32% of the patients had hematologic tumors (e.g., lymphoma, multiple myeloma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia), and approximately 69% of the patients had solid tumors, the distribution of which is given in Table 3.
|
Effect on Hematocrit
Figures 2, 3 and 4 present mean weekly HCT in rHuEPO-treated and placebo-treated patients over the course of therapy. As is apparent, the mean weekly HCT increased progressively in the rHuEPO-treated patients in all three study types, whereas the mean weekly HCT remained essentially unchanged in the placebo-treated patients.
|
|
|
presents the change in HCT from baseline to final value in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients in each of the three study types. The change in HCT from baseline to final value was significantly greater (p < .004) in rHuEPO-treated patients compared to the corresponding response in placebo-treated patients in each study type. Table 5 presents the percentage of patients in each treatment group whose anemia was corrected (i.e., HCT 38% unrelated to transfusion) or who responded to therapy (i.e., HCT increased 6 percentage points unrelated to transfusion). Within each study type, a significantly greater (p < .008) proportion of rHuEPO-treated patients achieved correction of anemia and responded to therapy compared to the corresponding proportion in placebo-treated patients. Finally, Table 6 presents HCT response by specific tumor type for several common tumors in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients pooled across all trials. The HCT response to rHuEPO appears to be relatively similar in patients with hematologic and solid cancers. The relatively small HCT increase in rHuEPO-treated patients with prostate cancer (2.3 percentage points) may be related to the fact that most of these patients were treated in the no-chemotherapy trials using a relatively modest rHuEPO dose of 100 U/kg and a duration of therapy of only eight weeks.
|
|
|
Transfusion Requirements
Baseline transfusion requirements were similar (p > .05) in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients in the three study types (data not shown). Table 7 shows on-study gross mean transfusion requirements in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients in each of the three study types. Within each study type, the proportion of patients transfused with red cells was lower in the rHuEPO-treated patients than the corresponding proportion in placebo-treated patients, but the differences were not statistically significant (p > .05). In a similar manner, the mean number of units of blood transfused per patient in each study type was lower in the rHuEPO-treated patients than in the corresponding placebo group, but the differences were also not statistically significant (p > .05). Interestingly, the largest transfusion requirements were found in cisplatin-treated patients (Table 7).
|
gives linear model transfusion requirements in the two types of chemotherapy trials stratified by months on therapy, month one versus months two and three combined. As is evident from Table 8, transfusion requirements were similar in rHuEPO and placebo-treated patients during month one, but transfusion requirements were substantially lower in rHuEPO-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients during months two and three. When the data from the chemotherapy trials were combined, transfusion requirements were significantly lower (p<.009) in rHuEPO-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients during months two and three, supporting the conclusion that rHuEPO in a dose of 150 U/kg three times a week can reduce transfusion requirements after the first month of therapy, but not during the first month of therapy. A similar pattern of decreased transfusion requirements after the first month of therapy was not observed in the no-chemotherapy trials (data not shown). However, it is possible that failure to note reduced transfusion use in rHuEPO-treated patients after the first month of therapy in this patient population may have been related to the relatively low dose of rHuEPO employed (100 U/kg) and the relatively short duration of follow-up (eight weeks), compared to the chemotherapy trials (using an rHuEPO dose of 150 U/kg and a follow-up of 12 weeks).
|
presents changes from baseline to final evaluation for quality-of-life scores in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients pooled across all study types. Quality-of-life scores improved in rHuEPO-treated patients from prestudy to poststudy compared to the corresponding changes in placebo-treated patients, but the differences were small and statistically significant only for the overall quality-of-life assessment.
|
presents changes in quality-of-life scores in rHuEPO-treated responders (i.e., in patients whose HCT increased 6 percentage points unrelated to transfusion) and placebo-treated patients. In contrast to the rHuEPO-treated population as a whole, the changes in quality-of-life scores in rHuEPO-treated responders were significantly greater (p < .05) than the corresponding changes in placebo-treated patients. Moreover, quality-of-life scores in rHuEPO-treated responders improved about 24% from baseline values (approximately 47 mm out of a possible 100 mm) despite the presence of advanced cancer and administration of cyclic chemotherapy in approximately three-quarters of the responding population. Taken together, these data would suggest that functional capacity improves in rHuEPO-treated cancer patients whose HCT increases significantly (e.g., 6 percentage points) during the course of therapy.
|
6% unrelated to transfusion) had hematologic tumors, and 66% had solid cancers. The equivalent distribution of rHuEPO-treated patients with hematologic and solid tumors in the rHuEPOtreated population as a whole and in the rHuEPO-treated responder population suggests that patients with hematologic and solid cancers respond equivalently to rHuEPO therapy. This conclusion is also supported by data presented in Table 6
. Twenty-eight percent of rHuEPO-treated patients were considered to have baseline evidence of tumor infiltration of the bone marrow, based on review of available clinical data. Twenty-six percent of the rHuEPO-treated responder population had baseline evidence of tumor infiltration of the bone marrow. The similar distribution of patients with baseline evidence of tumor infiltration of the bone marrow in the rHuEPO-treated population taken as a whole and in the rHuEPO-treated responder population suggests that patients with tumor infiltration of the bone marrow respond to rHuEPO therapy similarly to patients without tumor infiltration of the bone marrow.
Effect of Endogenous Serum EPO Level on Response to Therapy
In the no-chemotherapy trials, multivariate statistical analysis indicated that the response to rHuEPO therapy (change in HCT from baseline to final value) varied inversely with the baseline endogenous EPO level (Fig. 7). The HCT response to rHuEPO therapy was significantly greater than the HCT response in placebo-treated patients for serum EPO levels up to 174 mU/ml.
|
Transfusion Trigger and Intensity of Chemotherapy
In order to ensure that the HCT results reported above were not related to differential transfusion practice in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients, the HCT at the time of transfusion in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients was determined. In each of the study types, the mean HCT at the time of transfusion in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients was in the 24%-25% range. Thus, it is unlikely that the results reported above were related to differential transfusion practice in the rHuEPO- and placebo-treated groups.
The intensity of chemotherapy in the rHuEPO-treated and placebo-treated patients in the two types of chemotherapy trials was also compared to ensure that the reported HCT responses were not related to differential intensity of chemotherapy. Since patients in the two types of chemotherapy studies received a wide variety of different chemotherapeutic regimens, it was considered best to use a surrogate marker for the intensity of chemotherapy. The most appropriate surrogate marker for the intensity of chemotherapy, particularly for the intensity of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression, appeared to be the effect of chemotherapy on the absolute neutrophil count. The effect of chemotherapy on platelet counts was also used as an additional marker for the intensity of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (no hematopoietic growth factors other than EPO were administered in these trials). In addition, in the cisplatin trial, the total dose of cisplatin administered to the rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients was compared. The data presented in Table 9 suggest that the effect of chemotherapy on neutrophil and platelet counts was similar in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients; in addition, the total dose of cisplatin administered to rHuEPO-treated and placebo-treated patients was similar. Taken together, these data suggest that rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients received chemotherapeutic regimens of similar intensity, making it unlikely that the results described above were related to differential intensity of chemotherapy.
|
Hypertension was noted as an adverse experience in 5.2% of rHuEPO-treated patients and in 3.5% of placebo-treated patients. Although the difference was not statistically significant, individual case histories suggest that there may be some risk of hypertension in cancer patients who experience a significant increase in HCT in response to rHuEPO therapy. Seizures were noted in five (2.4%) rHuEPO-treated patients and in four (2%) placebo-treated patients. Seizures in two of the rHuEPO-treated patients occurred in the context of a significant increase in HCT and blood pressure from baseline values. However, these patients also had evidence of central nervous system pathology (e.g., cerebral metastases) which may have contributed to the reported convulsive events. Thrombotic events (e.g., cerebrovascular accident, pulmonary embolism) occurred in 6.1% of rHuEPO-treated patients and in 5.5% of placebotreated patients.
Table 10 gives adverse experiences reported by 10% of patients in either treatment group. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of adverse experiences reported between groups, except for shortness of breath which occurred in a higher incidence in placebo-treated patients. No antibodies against rHuEPO developed during the course of therapy. Variations in clinical laboratory parameters were similar in rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
A total of 413 cancer patients with anemia due to their disease or concomitantly administered chemotherapy were enrolled in these trials. Patients whose anemia appeared to be due to other factors such as iron deficiency or hemolysis were excluded. Three distinct patient populations were studied. They were: A) patients who were not being treated with chemotherapy, B) patients who were being treated with cyclic chemotherapy regimens that did not contain cisplatin, and C) patients who were being treated with chemotherapy regimens containing cisplatin. Cisplatin was selected for separate study because it is a frequently used agent that often causes significant anemia [10].
The results presented above indicate that rHuEPO can increase HCT and correct anemia in all three patient populations studied in short-term trials lasting up to 12 weeks. Responsiveness to rHuEPO appeared to be equivalent in patients with hematologic and solid cancers as well as in patients with or without tumor infiltration of the bone marrow. When rHuEPO was administered in a dose of 150 U/kg three times per week, there was a reduction in red cell transfusion requirements after the first month of therapy, but not during the first month of therapy. The hazards of blood transfusion are well known (e.g., transmission of viral agents), and the benefit of reducing the need for transfusion needs no elaboration. In addition, quality-of-life scores measured by visual analog scale significantly improved in rHuEPO-treated patients who had a substantial HCT response to therapy compared to corresponding changes in quality-of-life scores in placebo-treated patients. These data, which are consistent with data from anemic, predialysis patients with chronic renal failure and AZT (zidovudine)-treated AIDS patients, indicate that increased functional capacity is most noticeable in anemic patients who have a significant HCT response to rHuEPO therapy [7, 11].
Response to rHuEPO therapy in patients receiving no chemotherapy was inversely related to the baseline endogenous serum EPO level. This is consistent with data previously reported for anemic, AZT (zidovudine)-treated AIDS patients [12]. However, there was no significant relationship between the response to rHuEPO and the baseline endogenous EPO level in cancer patients receiving cyclic chemotherapy. It has recently been shown that serum EPO levels may temporarily rise after administration of intense chemotherapy, with a slow return to baseline (or sub-baseline) levels thereafter [13-15]. Consequently, it is possible that failure to find a significant relationship between baseline endogenous serum EPO levels and response to rHuEPO therapy may have been due to fluctuation of prestudy serum EPO levels related to prior cycles of chemotherapy, but this is speculative. The HCT response to rHuEPO therapy did not appear to be related to differential transfusion practice in rHuEPO-treated and placebo-treated patients. In addition, it appeared that rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients received chemotherapy regimens of comparable myelosuppressive intensity based on similar effects on the neutrophil and platelet counts in the rHuEPO- and placebo-treated populations. Moreover, in the cisplatin trials, equivalent total doses of cisplatin were administered to rHuEPO- and placebo-treated patients. Consequently, it is unlikely that the results described herein were related to differential intensity of chemotherapy in the rHuEPO- and placebo-treated populations.
rHuEPO was tolerated well in these trials. Based on a similar percentage of patients in the rHuEPO and placebo groups who prematurely discontinued therapy due to death, adverse experience or disease progression as well as the comparable distribution of prestudy and poststudy performance scores, and the percentage of patients who died within 30 days of study completion in the rHuEPO and placebo groups, rHuEPO did not appear to have a deleterious effect on outcome in the treated population. Although the risk of hypertension in rHuEPO-treated cancer patients appears to be lower than in chronic renal failure patients, hypertension may occasionally occur in rHuEPO-treated cancer patients as the HCT rises significantly above baseline values. This may be related to the generally advanced age of these patients or to the presence of recognized or unrecognized underlying cardiorenal disease.
In summary, rHuEPO therapy increased HCT and corrected anemia in cancer patients receiving no chemotherapy, in cancer patients receiving cyclic chemotherapeutic regimens not containing cisplatin, and in cancer patients receiving cyclic chemotherapeutic regimens containing cisplatin. When administered in a dose of 150 U/kg three times per week, transfusion requirements were lower in rHuEPO-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients after the first month of therapy. Quality-of-life parameters measured by visual analog scale significantly improved in rHuEPO-treated patients who had a significant HCT response to therapy, compared to the corresponding responses in placebo-treated patients. rHuEPO was generally well tolerated compared to placebo. Based on the above, rHuEPO may be a useful therapy to palliate the significant anemia which may be related to advanced cancer or its therapy when other causes of anemia (such as iron deficiency) have been excluded.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENT |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Norwood Anderson, MD
Frank Andrews, MD
John Bennett, MD
Nirmala Bhoopalam, MD
Douglas Blayney, MD
Burke Brooks, MD
Ronald Bukowski, MD
Robert Carey, MD
Delvyn Case, MD
Bruce Dana, MD
Ronald DeConti, MD
Drue Denton, MD
Rajendra Desai, MD
Marc Ernstoff, MD
Elliloth Fishkin, MD
David Henry, MD
Meyer Heyman, MD
James Holland, MD
Robert Jacobson, MD
Stephen Jones, MD
Alan Keller, MD
John Kugler, MD
Gary Lyman, MD
Robert McMillan, MD
John Merrill, MD
Abraham Mittleman, MD
Joseph Moore, MD
John Neefe, MD
Craig Nichols, MD
James Neidhart, MD
David Oblon, MD
John Rainey, MD
John Ruckdeschel, MD
Sydney Salmon, MD
Richard Silver, MD
Milan Slavik, MD
Richard Smalley, MD
Anna Marie Storniolo, MD
Gary Tansino, MD
Mary Todd, MD
Galen Wampler, MD
Richard Wheeler, MD
Ralph Zalusky, MD
Paul Zorsky, MD
Reprinted from Blood Cell Growth Factors: Their Present and Future Use In Hematology and Oncology, Beijing Symposium. Dayton, OH: AlphaMed Press 1991;121-141.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  D. Gordon, G. Nichols, A. Ben-Jacob, D. Tomita, T. Lillie, and C. Miller Treating Anemia of Cancer with Every-4-Week Darbepoetin Alfa: Final Efficacy and Safety Results from a Phase II, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Oncologist, June 1, 2008; 13(6): 715 - 724. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. D. Rizzo, M. R. Somerfield, K. L. Hagerty, J. Seidenfeld, J. Bohlius, C. L. Bennett, D. F. Cella, B. Djulbegovic, M. J. Goode, A. A. Jakubowski, et al. Use of Epoetin and Darbepoetin in Patients With Cancer: 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Society of Hematology Clinical Practice Guideline Update J. Clin. Oncol., January 1, 2008; 26(1): 132 - 149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. D. Rizzo, M. R. Somerfield, K. L. Hagerty, J. Seidenfeld, J. Bohlius, C. L. Bennett, D. F. Cella, B. Djulbegovic, M. J. Goode, A. A. Jakubowski, et al. Use of epoetin and darbepoetin in patients with cancer: 2007 American Society of Hematology/American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update Blood, January 1, 2008; 111(1): 25 - 41. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Abbrederis, F. Bassermann, C. Schuhmacher, V. Voelter, R. Busch, N. Roethling, A. Sendler, J. R. Siewert, C. Peschel, and F. Lordick Erythropoietin-alfa during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Ann. Thorac. Surg., July 1, 2006; 82(1): 293 - 297. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Nieboer, C. Buijs, S. Rodenhuis, C. Seynaeve, L. V.A.M. Beex, E. van der Wall, D. J. Richel, M. A. Nooij, E. E. Voest, P. Hupperets, et al. Fatigue and Relating Factors in High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Adjuvant Standard or High-Dose Chemotherapy: A Longitudinal Study J. Clin. Oncol., November 20, 2005; 23(33): 8296 - 8304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Couture, A.R. Turner, B. Melosky, L. Xiu, R.K. Plante, C.Y. Lau, and I. Quirt Prior Red Blood Cell Transfusions in Cancer Patients Increase the Risk of Subsequent Transfusions With or Without Recombinant Human Erythropoietin Management Oncologist, January 1, 2005; 10(1): 63 - 71. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. P. Davis Hematology in palliative medicine American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, November 1, 2004; 21(6): 445 - 454. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. H. Henry The Evolving Role of Epoetin Alfa in Cancer Therapy Oncologist, February 1, 2004; 9(1): 97 - 107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. J. Littlewood, M. Zagari, C. Pallister, and A. Perkins Baseline and Early Treatment Factors are not Clinically Useful for Predicting Individual Response to Erythropoietin in Anemic Cancer Patients Oncologist, February 1, 2003; 8(1): 99 - 107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. D. Rizzo, A. E. Lichtin, S. H. Woolf, J. Seidenfeld, C. L. Bennett, D. Cella, B. Djulbegovic, M. J. Goode, A. A. Jakubowski, S. J. Lee, et al. Use of Epoetin in Patients With Cancer: Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2002; 20(19): 4083 - 4107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. D. Rizzo, A. E. Lichtin, S. H. Woolf, J. Seidenfeld, C. L. Bennett, D. Cella, B. Djulbegovic, M. J. Goode, A. A. Jakubowski, S. J. Lee, et al. Use of epoetin in patients with cancer: evidence-based clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology Blood, September 18, 2002; 100(7): 2303 - 2320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| THE ONCOLOGIST | STEM CELLS | CME | ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS |
= rHuEPO (100 U/kg); 
= placebo.
= rHuEPO (n = 159); 
= placebo (n = 143). *Significantly different (p < 0.05) than corresponding placebo response.
