No abstract

Objectives The aim of this study is to provide relevant and accurate information on prevalence and treatment patterns of anaemia in Belgian cancer patients. Methods The Anaemia Day 2008 survey was a single visit, multi-centre, non-interventional study in adult cancer patients under systemic therapy (chemotherapy, hormonal, immunological and/or targeted therapy) and/or radiotherapy. Efforts were made to enrol the maximum number of patients seen in each centre that day. Patients signed an informed consent and relevant data were collected from their files, i.e. disease and disease stage, cancer therapy and anti-anaemic treatment, including transfusions and the use of erythropoietin stimulating agents (ESA). A blood count of each included patient was performed. Haemoglobin (Hb) values (grams per decilitre) were classified into four categories to assess the severity of anaemia, as defined by WHO: no anaemia: Hb≥12 g/dL; mild 10≤Hb≤11.9 g/dL; moderate 8≤Hb≤9.9 g/dL; severe Hb< 8 g/dL. Univariate and multivariate analyses were carried out with anaemia as the dependent variable. Results A total of 1,403 eligible patients aged 63±13 years (mean age±SD) were enrolled in 106 oncology or haematology centres. The mean Hb level (±SD) was 11.6 g/dL (±1.8 g/dL) and the prevalence of anaemia (Hb<12 g/dL) was 55.7% (95% CI, 53.1-58.3%), respectively, 35.9% mild, 17.8% moderate and 2.1% severe anaemia. Anaemia was more frequent in females than in males, and in patients with haematological malignancies (73.4%) than in those with solid tumours (51.4%; p<0.001). Anaemia prevalence was higher in hospitalised patients (75.5%) compared to those seen in one-day-clinic (54.3%) or in consultation (33.9%; p<0.001), and in patients treated with chemotherapy (61.3%) compared to those receiving radiotherapy (34.4%) or hormonal therapy (19.5%; p<0.001). There was a clear correlation between severity of anaemia and WHO performance status (p< 0.001). Among anaemic patients, 53.1% received no treatment (mean Hb 10.8±0.9 g/dL). Among the anaemic patients who received therapy for their anaemia (mean Hb 9.7±1.1 g/dL), the most frequent treatments were RBC transfusions (42%), ESA (34.6%), transfusions + ESA (12%), ESA+iron (7.9%) and iron alone (3.5%). Comparison to the ECAS survey shows that there has been no major change in attitude towards anaemia management in the last decade.

BackgroundThe use of chemotherapy regimens with moderate or high risk of febrile neutropenia (defined as having a FN incidence of 10% or more) and the respective incidence and clinical management of FN in breast cancer and NHL has not been studied in Belgium. The existence of a medical need for G-CSF primary and secondary prophylaxis with these regimens was investigated in a real-life setting.MethodsNine oncologists and six hematologists from different Belgian general hospitals and university centers were surveyed to collect expert opinion and real-life data (year 2007) on the use of chemotherapy regimens with moderate or high risk of febrile neutropenia and the clinical management of FN in patients aged <65 years with breast cancer or NHL. Data were retrospectively obtained, over a 6-month observation period.ResultsThe most frequently used regimens in breast cancer patients (n = 161) were FEC (45%), FEC-T (37%) and docetaxel alone (6%). In NHL patients (n = 39), R-CHOP-21 (33%) and R-ACVBP-14 (15%) were mainly used. Without G-CSF primary prophylaxis (PP), FN occurred in 31% of breast cancer patients, and 13% had PSN. After G-CSF secondary prophylaxis (SP), 4% experienced further FN events. Only 1 breast cancer patient received PP, and did not experience a severe neutropenic event. Overall, 30% of chemotherapy cycles observed in breast cancer patients were protected by PP/SP. In 10 NHL patients receiving PP, 2 (20%) developed FN, whereas 13 (45%) of the 29 patients without PP developed FN and 3 (10%) PSN. Overall, 55% of chemotherapy cycles observed in NHL patients were protected by PP/SP. Impaired chemotherapy delivery (timing and/or dose) was reported in 40% (breast cancer) and 38% (NHL) of patients developing FN. Based on oncologist expert opinion, hospitalization rates for FN (average length of stay) without and with PP were, respectively, 48% (4.2 days) and 19% (1.5 days). Similar rates were obtained from hematologists.ConclusionsDespite the studied chemotherapy regimens being known to be associated with a moderate or high risk of FN, upfront G-CSF prophylaxis was rarely used. The observed incidence of severe neutropenic events without G-CSF prophylaxis was higher than generally reported in the literature. The impact on medical resources used is sizeable.

These prospective real-world data demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of bortezomib-based therapy for RRMM and confirm high response rates and long OS for this population.

No abstract