Antonios Douros1,2, Kathrin Jobski1, Bianca Kollhorst3, Tania Schink1, Edeltraut Garbe1,4. 1. Clinical Epidemiology, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS GmbH, Bremen, Germany. 2. Institute of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 3. Biometry and Data Management, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS GmbH, Bremen, Germany. 4. Core Scientific Area 'Health Sciences' at the University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: Anaemia is common in cancer patients, with treatments including epoetins and blood transfusions. Although an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been associated with both therapeutics, studies comparing the risk of VTE between epoetins and transfusions in cancer patients are lacking. METHODS: A nested case-control study investigated this risk using the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database. Cohort members were incident cancer patients receiving first time treatment with epoetin or transfusion. A subcohort including only patients receiving chemotherapy was created, since the formally approved indication of epoetins is chemotherapy-induced anaemia. Cases were defined as patients developing VTE. For each case up to 10 gender- and age-matched controls were selected from the cohort. Multiple confounder adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for VTE and recent treatment with epoetins or transfusions (last 28 days before index date) compared with past anti-anaemic treatment were calculated by conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 69 888 patients receiving first time treatment with epoetin or transfusion, 3316 VTE cases were identified. The aOR for VTE was 1.31 (95% CI 1.03, 1.65) for epoetins, 2.33 (95% CI 2.03, 2.66) for transfusions, and 2.24 (95% CI 1.34, 3.77) for epoetins and transfusions. Sensitivity analyses with a stricter VTE definition or an expanded time window yielded similar results. In the chemotherapy only subcohort the risk difference between epoetins and transfusions could not be verified (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10, 1.98 vs. aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.49, 2.19). Our study confirmed known VTE risk factors including previous VTE (aOR 14.76, 95% CI 12.79, 17.03) or surgery (aOR 1.83, 95% CI 1.67, 2.01). Epoetin-associated risk decreased after a safety warning by the European Medicines Agency setting maximum haemoglobin target values to 12 g dl(-1) . CONCLUSIONS: Transfusions could be associated with a higher VTE risk than epoetins in cancer patients. Moreover, current prescribing patterns may have decreased the VTE risk for epoetins.
AIMS: Anaemia is common in cancerpatients, with treatments including epoetins and blood transfusions. Although an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been associated with both therapeutics, studies comparing the risk of VTE between epoetins and transfusions in cancerpatients are lacking. METHODS: A nested case-control study investigated this risk using the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database. Cohort members were incident cancerpatients receiving first time treatment with epoetin or transfusion. A subcohort including only patients receiving chemotherapy was created, since the formally approved indication of epoetins is chemotherapy-induced anaemia. Cases were defined as patients developing VTE. For each case up to 10 gender- and age-matched controls were selected from the cohort. Multiple confounder adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for VTE and recent treatment with epoetins or transfusions (last 28 days before index date) compared with past anti-anaemic treatment were calculated by conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 69 888 patients receiving first time treatment with epoetin or transfusion, 3316 VTE cases were identified. The aOR for VTE was 1.31 (95% CI 1.03, 1.65) for epoetins, 2.33 (95% CI 2.03, 2.66) for transfusions, and 2.24 (95% CI 1.34, 3.77) for epoetins and transfusions. Sensitivity analyses with a stricter VTE definition or an expanded time window yielded similar results. In the chemotherapy only subcohort the risk difference between epoetins and transfusions could not be verified (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10, 1.98 vs. aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.49, 2.19). Our study confirmed known VTE risk factors including previous VTE (aOR 14.76, 95% CI 12.79, 17.03) or surgery (aOR 1.83, 95% CI 1.67, 2.01). Epoetin-associated risk decreased after a safety warning by the European Medicines Agency setting maximum haemoglobin target values to 12 g dl(-1) . CONCLUSIONS: Transfusions could be associated with a higher VTE risk than epoetins in cancerpatients. Moreover, current prescribing patterns may have decreased the VTE risk for epoetins.
Authors: C Bokemeyer; M S Aapro; A Courdi; J Foubert; H Link; A Osterborg; L Repetto; P Soubeyran Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2006-12-19 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Hude Quan; Vijaya Sundararajan; Patricia Halfon; Andrew Fong; Bernard Burnand; Jean-Christophe Luthi; L Duncan Saunders; Cynthia A Beck; Thomas E Feasby; William A Ghali Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Heinz Ludwig; Matti Aapro; Carsten Bokemeyer; Karen Macdonald; Pierre Soubeyran; Matthew Turner; Tara Albrecht; Ivo Abraham Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Charles L Bennett; Samuel M Silver; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Athena T Samaras; C Anthony Blau; Kara J Gleason; Sara E Barnato; Kathleen M Elverman; D Mark Courtney; June M McKoy; Beatrice J Edwards; Cara C Tigue; Dennis W Raisch; Paul R Yarnold; David A Dorr; Timothy M Kuzel; Martin S Tallman; Steven M Trifilio; Dennis P West; Stephen Y Lai; Michael Henke Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-02-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Carrie A Sims; Daniel Holena; Patrick Kim; Jose Pascual; Brian Smith; Neils Martin; Mark Seamon; Adam Shiroff; Shariq Raza; Lewis Kaplan; Elena Grill; Nicole Zimmerman; Christopher Mason; Benjamin Abella; Patrick Reilly Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 14.766