OBJECTIVES: While chemotherapy is fundamental to the treatment of many cancers, it is associated with adverse events (AEs), including anemia. CIA is linked to many symptoms, including fatigue and cognitive impairment. Most cancer patients receiving chemotherapy experience CIA. ESAs are indicated for treatment of CIA in non-myeloid cancers. Given the extensive data available, we reviewed SRs of the existing evidence on ESAs for treatment of CIA, to assess their relative efficacy and safety. METHODS: A search for published SRs of ESAs for the treatment of CIA in adults with non-myeloid cancers was conducted across seven databases and three online resources, from inception to July 2020. Data were extracted on hemoglobin-related (Hb)-outcomes; mortality; health-related quality of life (HRQoL), iron use, red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, cancer-related outcomes, and serious AEs (SAEs) including thromboembolic events. Risk of bias was assessed by two reviewers using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool. RESULTS: Of 1027 records assessed, 33 records met eligibility criteria; from these, 14 SRs (from 19 publications) were considered core and were extracted. The majority of SRs (n=13) were meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials. Mortality was evaluated in 9 SRs: 5 reported no difference between ESA vs. control (best supportive care (BSC) and/or placebo and/or no treatment) and 2 reported higher mortality with ESA vs. control (standard care (no iron or oral iron) and/or placebo and/or no treatment). Cancer-related overall survival was not significantly different for ESA vs. control (BSC or placebo) in 2 SRs, or vs. no ESA treatment in 1 SR. Relapse-free, recurrence-free and progression-free survival did not differ between ESA vs. BSC, no treatment, or placebo, according to 1 SR. Two SRs reported a significantly improved change in Hb from baseline for ESA vs. placebo or BSC. Four SRs reported significantly improved hematological response (definitions varied by study) for ESA vs. control (BSC and/or placebo and/or no treatment) (Table). RBC transfusion requirements were reported for 5 treatment comparisons in 12 SRs. For 3 comparisons (ESA vs. control (BSC and/or placebo and/or no treatment); IV iron + ESA vs. standard care; and IV iron + ESA vs. no iron + ESA), there was a consistent statistically significant reduction in transfusion rates with ESA-based treatment. For 2 other comparisons, 1 SR reported no significant difference in transfusion rates with oral iron + ESA vs. no iron + ESA, and 2 SRs found no difference between darbepoetin vs. epoetin. ESA was associated with a requirement for significantly fewer RBC units per patient vs. control (BSC or placebo) in 1 SR. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An, 6 SRs) and FACT-Fatigue (FACT-F, 7 SRs) were the only HRQoL measures reported. Two SRs reported clinically important improvements in FACT-An with ESA vs. control (BSC and/or placebo); the remaining SRs reported difficulty in interpreting results due to study heterogeneity. Five SRs reported significant improvements in FACT-F with ESA vs. control (BSC and/or placebo and/or no treatment). One SR did not present a meta-analysis, stating that FACT-F results did not differ for ESA vs. placebo groups, and 1 SR reported a significant improvement in FACT-F for IV iron + ESA vs. standard care (no iron or oral iron). Of 2 SRs reporting SAEs, 1 found no difference in incidence for IV iron + ESA vs. standard care (no iron or oral iron) and 1 found significantly greater incidence for ESA vs. no treatment. Of 6 SRs that compared ESA vs. control, 3 reported an increased risk of thromboembolic events with ESAs in the treatment of CIA and 2 reported no significant difference between treatment groups. The remaining SR reported numerically higher incidences of thromboembolic events with ESA vs. control (no statistical comparison). Several outcomes of interest were not reported, including time to first rescue therapy and supplementary iron use. Most SRs did not report on study quality. CONCLUSIONS: In all SRs reporting efficacy, there were improvements in Hb change from baseline, Hb response, and reduction in RBC transfusions for patients with CIA treated with ESAs vs. control. Results were less consistent across SRs for mortality, thromboembolic events, and HRQoL for ESA vs. control. Lack of study quality reporting may affect the strength of these findings. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Morga: Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd.: Current Employment. Atzinger: Astellas Pharma Inc.: Current Employment. Arber: York Health Economics Consortium Ltd: Current Employment. King: York Health Economics Consortium Ltd: Current Employment. Phalguni: York Health Economics Consortium Ltd: Current Employment. Sanderson: York Health Economics Consortium Ltd: Current Employment. Alexandre: Astellas Pharma Europe B.V.: Current Employment.
OBJECTIVES: Chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) is a common adverse event of cancer treatment and is associated with several symptoms that negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Due to the nature of CIA signs and symptoms, the use of fit-for-purpose PRO measures reflecting patients' experience of the disease and its treatment is an important step in drug development and evaluation. In this project, we aimed to review and assess the most commonly used PRO measures to best capture the experiences of patients with non-myeloid malignancies. METHODS: A targeted literature review (TLR), including searches of the OVID database, US FDA/European Medicines Agency (EMA), clinical trial databases, regulatory labelling data and health technology assessment (HTA) reports/payer landscape recommendations, was conducted to identify PRO measures used to capture symptoms and HRQoL outcomes in non-myeloid cancer patients with CIA (2008-2021). PRO measures were identified from published studies, phase 2-4 clinical trials, and categorized according to the concept(s) measured and cancer type. Study outcomes were used to determine the optimal PRO strategy to capture the CIA symptoms of patients with non-myeloid cancer. The concepts captured from PROs identified in the TLR were used to develop a preliminary 'conceptual model': a graphical representation of signs and symptoms, and the perceived impact on HRQoL. Selected PRO measures, most relevant to the study objectives, were evaluated for their reliability, validity, responsiveness, and extent to which they cover HRQoL domains of interest and, in relation to the current regulatory environment, industry standards and guidance (e.g., FDA Guidance For Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures, 2009). Reviews of the HTA guidelines and reports were conducted to provide insights into the applicability of PRO data from an HTA perspective. RESULTS: The conceptual model captured fatigue as the most important disease-related symptom experienced by non-myeloid cancer patients with CIA (Figure). The OVID search identified 17 PRO measures, which were then categorized by the key CIA-related concepts they assessed, including: sleep quality; HRQoL; anemia-related symptoms; depression/anxiety; and work productivity/activity impairment. The most frequently used PRO was the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F, N=11), followed by the FACT-Anemia (FACT-An, N=6). Ten PRO measures were identified from Phase 2-4 ongoing/completed US clinical trials and 6 PROs from EU clinical trials, with FACT-F (N=13) being the most common instrument used . FDA and EMA HRQoL-related product labelling information included the FACT-An, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Cancer Linear Analogue Scale (CLAS). From the TLR results, 9 PRO measures were selected for further review: FACT-An (An, Anemia); FACT-F; FACT-G (G, General); Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-F; Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-F; Brief Fatigue Inventory; Visual Analogue Scale-F; Fatigue Symptom Inventory; and EORTC QLQ-C30. Of these, FACT-An was the only PRO measure specifically developed to measure fatigue and HRQoL in anemic cancer patients. FACT-An includes four HRQoL domains (assessing physical, social/family, emotional and functional wellbeing) from the FACT-G, plus an anemia subscale that comprises a fatigue subscale (13 items) and 7 anemia-specific questions. Results from the HTA/payer landscape review also indicated that the majority of recent HTA submissions reported findings from EORTC QLQ-C30 alongside the EORTC disease-specific adaptations for oncology-related indications and the EQ-5D. Many of the recent HTAs reported data from 2 or more different PRO measures. CONCLUSIONS: CIA impacts various aspects of patients' HRQoL; however, current PRO measures may only partially capture concepts of interest to patients. Multiple measures may be needed to adequately reflect all domains affected by CIA. Future studies may consider conducting concept elicitation interviews with patients and clinicians, to inform future updates to the conceptual model, and validation work to estimate meaningful change thresholds for these measures if not available. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Morga: Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd.: Current Employment. Atzinger: Astellas Pharma Inc.: Current Employment. Barsdorf: Clinical Outcomes Solutions: Current Employment. New: IQVIA: Current Employment. Alexandre: Astellas Pharma Europe B.V.: Current Employment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.