Lanfang Xu1, Hairong Xu2, Kimberly Cannavale1, Olivia Sattayapiwat1, Roberto Rodriguez3, John H Page2, Chun Chao4. 1. Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 100 S. Los Robles Ave, 2nd floor, Pasadena, CA, 91101, USA. 2. Center for Observational Research, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 3. Department of Hematology Oncology, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 100 S. Los Robles Ave, 2nd floor, Pasadena, CA, 91101, USA. chun.r.chao@kp.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to examine treatment patterns for chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) between calendar periods when the changes in the US prescribing information, for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) took place. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with breast, lung, colorectal, ovarian, or gastric cancer (2000-2012) who developed grade 2+ CIA (hemoglobin (Hb) <10 g/dl) were identified from Kaiser Permanente Southern California Health Plan. We estimated the proportions of CIA episodes with ESA use, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, or prescription nutritional supplements in three calendar periods: January 1, 2000-December 31, 2006 (P1), January 1, 2007-March 24, 2010 (P2), and March 25, 2010-June 30, 2013 (P3). Multivariable regressions were used to test the differences of CIA treatment approaches and Hb concentration prior to CIA treatment across these calendar periods. RESULTS: The proportions of CIA episodes with ESA use were 28 % in P1, 21 % in P2, and 3 % in P3. For RBC transfusion, they were 8 % in P1, 14 % in P2 and 16 % in P3. The trend of decreasing ESA use and increasing transfusion use were statistically significant. Relative to P1, the odds ratio (OR) was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.86) for P2 and 0.08 (0.30, 0.88) for P3 for ESA use. For RBC transfusion, OR was 2.00 (1.56, 2.56) for P2 and 2.37 (1.88, 3.00) for P3. Use of prescription nutritional supplement was rare across calendar periods. There was a decreasing trend of Hb concentration prior to ESA use (p value <0.01), but no difference in Hb concentrations prior to transfusion. CONCLUSION: In the management of CIA, use of ESA has decreased over time, while use of RBC transfusion has increased.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to examine treatment patterns for chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) between calendar periods when the changes in the US prescribing information, for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) took place. METHODS:Patients diagnosed with breast, lung, colorectal, ovarian, or gastric cancer (2000-2012) who developed grade 2+ CIA (hemoglobin (Hb) <10 g/dl) were identified from Kaiser Permanente Southern California Health Plan. We estimated the proportions of CIA episodes with ESA use, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, or prescription nutritional supplements in three calendar periods: January 1, 2000-December 31, 2006 (P1), January 1, 2007-March 24, 2010 (P2), and March 25, 2010-June 30, 2013 (P3). Multivariable regressions were used to test the differences of CIA treatment approaches and Hb concentration prior to CIA treatment across these calendar periods. RESULTS: The proportions of CIA episodes with ESA use were 28 % in P1, 21 % in P2, and 3 % in P3. For RBC transfusion, they were 8 % in P1, 14 % in P2 and 16 % in P3. The trend of decreasing ESA use and increasing transfusion use were statistically significant. Relative to P1, the odds ratio (OR) was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.86) for P2 and 0.08 (0.30, 0.88) for P3 for ESA use. For RBC transfusion, OR was 2.00 (1.56, 2.56) for P2 and 2.37 (1.88, 3.00) for P3. Use of prescription nutritional supplement was rare across calendar periods. There was a decreasing trend of Hb concentration prior to ESA use (p value <0.01), but no difference in Hb concentrations prior to transfusion. CONCLUSION: In the management of CIA, use of ESA has decreased over time, while use of RBC transfusion has increased.
Authors: J Douglas Rizzo; Melissa Brouwers; Patricia Hurley; Jerome Seidenfeld; Murat O Arcasoy; Jerry L Spivak; Charles L Bennett; Julia Bohlius; Darren Evanchuk; Matthew J Goode; Ann A Jakubowski; David H Regan; Mark R Somerfield Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Brian Leyland-Jones; Vladimir Semiglazov; Marek Pawlicki; Tadeusz Pienkowski; Sergei Tjulandin; George Manikhas; Antoly Makhson; Anton Roth; David Dodwell; Jose Baselga; Mikhail Biakhov; Konstantinas Valuckas; Edouard Voznyi; Xiangyang Liu; Els Vercammen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-08-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J Bohlius; J Wilson; J Seidenfeld; M Piper; G Schwarzer; J Sandercock; S Trelle; O Weingart; S Bayliss; S Brunskill; B Djulbegovic; C L Benett; S Langensiepen; C Hyde; E Engert Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2006-07-19
Authors: James R Wright; Yee C Ung; Jim A Julian; Kathleen I Pritchard; Timothy J Whelan; Column Smith; Barbara Szechtman; Wilson Roa; Liam Mulroy; Leona Rudinskas; Bruno Gagnon; Gord S Okawara; Mark N Levine Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-02-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J A Glaspy; J S Jadeja; G Justice; J Kessler; D Richards; L Schwartzberg; N S Tchekmedyian; S Armstrong; J O'Byrne; G Rossi; A B Colowick Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2002-07-29 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: James Granfortuna; Kaye Shoffner; Stephen E DePasquale; Sejal Badre; Chet Bohac; Cisio De Oliveira Brandao Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 3.603