A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effectiveness of darbepoetin alfa versus epoetin alfa for the treatment of chemotherapy induced anemia in patients with gynecologic malignancies. | LitMetric

Effectiveness of darbepoetin alfa versus epoetin alfa for the treatment of chemotherapy induced anemia in patients with gynecologic malignancies.

Gynecol Oncol

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 618 South 19th Street, Old Hillman Building- Room 549, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA.

Published: June 2006

Objective: Chemotherapy induced anemia (CIA) commonly occurs in gynecologic oncology patients. This often leads to treatment with erythropoietic stimulating agents in order to prevent chemotherapy delays, dose modifications and transfusion of red blood cells. Our objective was to determine the subsequent transfusion rates following administration of either darbepoetin alfa or epoetin alfa.

Methods: A single institution retrospective chart review was performed utilizing patients from January 2003 to September 2004 who received either darbepoetin alfa or epoetin alfa for CIA (Hgb < or = 10.0). Data collection variables included patient demographics, cancer diagnosis, chemotherapy treatment(s), laboratory data, erythropoeisis stimulation data, and transfusions. Sample size calculations were set to detect a 20% transfusion rate difference between the two groups. Chi-square, Fisher exact test and student t tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results: 123 patients were eligible for analysis (60 darbepoetin alfa; 62 epoetin alfa). 93% of darbepoetin alfa patients received 200 mg every other week, while 86% of epoetin alfa patients received 40,000 U weekly. The darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa groups were similar in respect to age, race, tumor type, histology, previous chemotherapy, number of chemotherapy agents, weeks of erythropoietic stimulation, and baseline serum levels of creatinine and hemoglobin. The mean baseline Hgb and change in Hgb was similar for each group (darbepoetin alfa = 11.2, 2.5 and epoetin alfa = 11.3, 2.3). Twenty one (35%) of the darbepoetin alfa patients received a transfusion of packed red blood cells compared to 12 (19%) of epoetin alfa patients (p = 0.05).

Conclusions: This retrospective analysis powered to detect differences in transfusion rates revealed a statistically significant difference in transfusion rates between darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa for the treatment of CIA. These data warrant a randomized prospective trial in gynecologic oncology patients with careful attention to the timing of initiation of treatment, dosing regimens, and titration of growth factor.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.11.027DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

darbepoetin alfa
36
epoetin alfa
32
alfa epoetin
20
alfa
17
alfa patients
16
transfusion rates
12
patients received
12
epoetin
9
patients
9
alfa treatment
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!