A final analysis from the CHOICE study examining darbepoetin alfa use for chemotherapy-induced anaemia in current European clinical practice

Abstract

Objectives:

The CHOICE study was a prospective, multicentre, observational study designed to assess the level of adherence in current clinical practice to the European product label and the EORTC guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia with darbepoetin alfa (DA).     

Utilization of darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa for chemotherapy-induced anemia.

PURPOSE: The patterns of use and effectiveness of therapy with darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa for chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) in hospital outpatient and community settings were evaluated. METHODS: Data were collected from medical charts at 65 oncology clinics in hospital outpatient and community settings for consecutive patients who received the first dose of either darbepoetin alfa or epoetin alfa between August 1, 2002, and February 15, 2003, and were to have had 12 weeks of follow-up data. RESULTS: Data from the charts of 3123 patients were abstracted. Of these patients, 2785 were treated with only one erythropoietic agent (1444 with darbepoetin alfa and 1341 with epoetin alfa) and were included in the analysis. The most common initial dosage of darbepoetin alfa was 200 microg every two weeks (61% of darbepoetin alfa recipients), and the most common initial dosage of epoetin alfa was 40,000 units weekly (72%). With these regimens, the dosage was escalated for 22% of darbepoetin alfa recipients and 23% of epoetin alfa recipients at a median of six weeks after the initial dose. The mean change from baseline in hemoglobin concentration after 12 weeks of therapy was similar for both groups, as was the percent of patients with red-blood-cell transfusions during treatment. CONCLUSION: The most common initial dosage of darbepoetin alfa for CIA was 200 microg every two weeks, and the most common initial dosage of epoetin alfa was 40,000 units weekly. At these dosages, the two agents appear to have similar clinical effectiveness.     

Economic evaluation of weekly epoetin alfa versus biweekly darbepoetin alfa for chemotherapy-induced anaemia: evidence from a 16-week randomised trial

INTRODUCTION: A 16-week, open-label, multicentre, randomised trial of weekly epoetin alfa 40 000 units versus biweekly darbepoetin alfa 200microg among 358 patients with solid-tumour cancers and chemotherapy-induced anaemia demonstrated superior haematological outcomes with epoetin alfa. We sought to compare resource use, costs and clinical outcomes between treatment groups and report the results using a cost-consequences framework. METHODS: Pre-specified methods were used to assign costs (US dollars, year 2004-5 values) to medical resources and patient time using a societal perspective. Costs for inpatient care, outpatient care and physician services were based on US Medicare reimbursement rates. Indirect costs assigned to patient time spent receiving study medication were based on the mean hourly wage in the US. In the base-case analysis, the average wholesale price was used to assign costs to medications. Clinical outcomes included all haemoglobin levels and transfusions recorded throughout the trial. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of different costing methods, cost sources, perspectives and methods to assign haemoglobin values following a blood transfusion. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up duration of 11.8 weeks, the average cost of study medications and their administration was the single largest component of total costs and was similar between groups (epoetin alfa 5979 US dollars and darbepoetin alfa 5935 US dollars, difference 44 US dollars; 95% CI -590, 692). There were no significant differences in the proportions of patients hospitalised (epoetin alfa 24.6%, darbepoetin alfa 22.0%; p = 0.57). Patients randomised to epoetin alfa experienced more inpatient days, on average, than patients randomised to darbepoetin alfa (2.6 vs 1.6, 95% CI for the difference, 0.07, 2.27). However, with regard to transfusions, patients in the epoetin alfa arm required fewer units of blood than patients in the darbepoetin alfa arm (0.46 vs 0.88, 95% CI for the difference -0.77, -0.08). Mean total costs, comprising costs for study medications and their administration, inpatient care, transfusions, unplanned radiation therapy, haematology and laboratory services, chemotherapy and non-chemotherapy drugs and indirect costs were 14,976 US dollars in the epoetin alfa arm compared with 14,101 US dollars in the darbepoetin alfa arm, a difference of 875 US dollars (95% CI for difference -849, 2607), of which 98% of the difference was attributable to higher inpatient costs in the epoetin alfa arm (2374 US dollars vs 1520 US dollars; 95% CI for difference -33, 1955). Assessments of multiple clinical measures demonstrated improved outcomes with epoetin alfa relative to darbepoetin alfa. CONCLUSION: Most clinical outcome measures suggested greater improvement with epoetin alfa relative to darbepoetin alfa, but most costs for both agents appeared similar. Decision makers must evaluate the differences in costs and efficacy measures that are most relevant from their perspectives.     

A prospective observational study of the effectiveness,safety, and effect on fatigue of darbepoetin alfa for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia

ABSTRACT

Objective: Anaemia is common in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. Darbepoetin alfa (DA) is the only erythropoiesis-stimulating protein approved for administration at weekly and every-three-week intervals in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. This article investigates the effectiveness, tolerability and effect on fatigue of DA.

Methods: Prospective, observational study performed in 30 Spanish centres. Eligible patients were ≥?18?years of age, anaemic (haemoglobin [Hb] ≤?11?g/dL), with non-myeloid malignancies, receiving chemotherapy. DA (150?μg) was administered weekly for a maximum of 16?weeks (dosage doubled if Hb increased <?1?g/dL after 4?weeks).

Main outcome measures: Haematopoietic response (Hb increase ≥?2?g/dL or Hb ≥?12?g/dL in the absence of transfusions in the previous 28?days), transfusion required between Weeks 5 and 16 and fatigue measured by the Fatigue subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy.

Results: 293 adults were recruited (56.4% women), with lymphoproliferative malignancies (44.3%) or solid tumours (55.7%). Baseline Hb was 9–11?g/dL in 83.7% of patients. Sixty-four per cent (95% CI: 58.1–69.4%) had a haematopoietic response and 12% required transfusions. After adjusting for performance status, concomitant diseases and chemotherapy type, an increase in Hb level was significantly associated with an improvement in Fatigue subscale (+1.9 points per 1?g/dL). Only 2% of patients had treatment-related adverse events: thromboembolic pulmonary disease (0.3%); hypersensitivity reaction (0.3%); local pain following DA administration (0.3%); insomnia (0.3%); thrombocytosis (0.3%) and deep vein thrombosis (0.3%).

Conclusions: Fixed-dose DA administered once weekly seems to be an effective, well-tolerated treatment for chemotherapy-induced anaemia in patients with non-myeloid malignancies, and there is an indication of a possible benefit on fatigue in the clinical practice.     

The cost-effectiveness of weekly epoetin alfa relative to weekly darbepoetin alfa in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DARB) for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA), using dosing regimens approved by the FDA (EPO 40,000 U once weekly and DARB 2.25 U once weekly and DARB 2.25 mcg/kg once weekly). METHODS: The study compared published results of two double-blind, randomized, phase III trials one utilizing EPO (N = 166) and the other, DARB (N = 367). Patients in both trials similar baseline characteristics. Effectiveness was measured as the proportion of EPO or DARB patients who were successfully treated (i.e., did not require blood transfusion) during weeks 0-16 and 5-16, respectively. Estimated drug costs were presented in 2005 USD based on wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) and average drug utilization over 16 weeks. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the estimated drug costs divided by transfusion effectiveness. Threshold analysis was used to determine the break-even point at which EPO and DARB had the same drug costs. RESULTS: Estimated drug costs over 16 weeks were $9,039 for EPO and $13,555 for DARB. During weeks 5-16, 85% of EPO patients and 73% of DARB patients were successfully treated, resulting in average cost-effectiveness ratios of $106 for EPO and $186 for DARB per one per cent of successfully treated patients. A 33% reduction in DARB WAC was required to achieve the same drug costs as for EPO. CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing FDA-approved doses, EPO was found to result in lower drug costs and better treatment success when compared to DARB. Hence, EPO is a dominant alternative compared to DARB for the treatment of CIA. The analyses presented here are not without limitations. Specifically, although the studies were comparable, patients were ultimately drawn from different populations.     

Use of darbepoetin alfa in European clinical practice for the management of chemotherapy-induced anaemia in four tumour types: final data from the CHOICE study

Abstract

Objectives:

The CHOICE study was a prospective, multicentre, observational study designed to assess levels of adherence in current clinical practice to the European product label and EORTC guidelines for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA) with darbepoetin alfa (DA). Here we present data split by tumour types: breast, colorectal, ovarian and lung.     

Randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled trial of every-3-week darbepoetin alfa 300 micrograms for treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia

ABSTRACT

Objective: Darbepoetin alfa is effective in treating chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). Administration of subcutaneous darbepoetin alfa every 3 weeks (Q3W) could simplify treatment through synchronization with common Q3W chemotherapy regimens. We report results from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose Q3W darbepoetin alfa in patients with a wide variety of tumor types who experienced CIA.

Research design and methods: Patients aged?≥?18 years with anemia (hemoglobin <11?g/dL) being treated for nonmyeloid malignancy were randomized 1:1 to receive darbepoetin alfa 300?μg (n?=?193) or placebo (n?=?193) subcutaneously Q3W from weeks 1 to 13 in this 16-week study. Doses could be adjusted per prespecified rules.

Main outcome measures: The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received ≥1 red blood cell (RBC) transfusion between week 5 and the end of the treatment period (EOTP). The study also analyzed the proportions of patients achieving a hemoglobin concentration ≥11?g/dL and subsequently maintaining hemoglobin levels above 11?g/dL, and the change in hemoglobin concentration over time.

Results: The proportion of patients requiring RBC transfusions between week 5 and EOTP was significantly lower in the darbepoetin alfa-treated group than in the placebo-treated group (24 vs. 41% of patients, a 16.3% difference, p?<?0.001). There were no differences between the two treatment arms in quality-of-life measures. Cardiovascular/thromboembolic adverse events were uncommon and were not associated with increases in hemoglobin levels. Study limitations suggest caution in the interpretation of these results: transfusions, the primary endpoint, were recommended but not required if hemoglobin concentrations were ≤8.0?g/dL, and protocol deviations (primarily dosing errors) occurred in approximately one-half of the patients in both treatment groups.

Conclusions: In this study, fixed-dose Q3W darbepoetin alfa appeared to be well-tolerated and effective for the treatment of CIA.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00110955.     

Current and future options for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia

Chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA) is a significant source of morbidity in patients receiving treatment for cancer. There are three products currently available for the treatment of CIA: epoetin alfa, epoetin beta and darbepoetin alfa. Several organisations have published recommendations for the use of these agents. Several randomised, controlled trials have been conducted comparing the most popular dosing regimens of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa, with conflicting results. Information regarding survival and adverse event data related to these agents continues to create debate. This review considers four new agents that are under development for the treatment of CIA.     

Current and future options for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia

Chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA) is a significant source of morbidity in patients receiving treatment for cancer. There are three products currently available for the treatment of CIA: epoetin alfa, epoetin beta and darbepoetin alfa. Several organisations have published recommendations for the use of these agents. Several randomised, controlled trials have been conducted comparing the most popular dosing regimens of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa, with conflicting results. Information regarding survival and adverse event data related to these agents continues to create debate. This review considers four new agents that are under development for the treatment of CIA.     

The relative dosing of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa in chronic kidney disease

ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this study was to review and analyze current research to evaluate the dose ratio of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa for the treatment of anemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and to identify determinants of the variation in epoetin alfa: darbepoetin alfa dose ratios across studies.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature for comparative switch and non-switch studies of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa treatments in CKD for the period 2000–2005 was performed. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the information. Data on the study design and outcomes were collected for each selected study. The dose ratio from epoetin alfa to darbepoetin alfa was calculated for each study, and the results were reported stratified by study characteristics. To control for differences in study design and characteristics that could explain the variability in the relative dosages of the two agents across studies, multivariate regression analysis was conducted. Based on these results, a dose conversion ratio for Canada was estimated.

Results: A total of 21 studies involving 16?378 patients exposed to epoetin alfa or darbepoetin alfa in CKD were identified. Univariate analysis of the dose ratios indicated a mean dose ratio of 217:1 (IU of epoetin alfa:µg of darbepoetin alfa). Results from the multivariate analysis demonstrated that the study design (i.e., switch study versus straight comparison studies) and geographical coverage (i.e., United States) affected the results. Based on the multivariate analysis, the dose conversion ratio between epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa for Canada was 169:1.

Conclusions: Despite limitations associated with switching studies and the limited total number of studies available, this systematic review based on aggregated results provides further evidence to the clinical community that the dose conversion ratio for epoetin alfa:darbepoetin alfa in CKD patients in Canada is approximately 169:1. At that ratio, treatment with epoetin alfa is 11–18% cheaper than treatment with darbepoetin alfa in Canada.     

Clinical and economic comparison of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa

BACKGROUND: The pharmacoeconomics of erythropoietic therapy for the treatment of anemia is receiving renewed attention due to the current availability of two agents. Epoetin alfa has been the standard of therapy for patients with renal disease and cancer-related anemia for more than a decade. Darbepoetin alfa, an alternative agent, is now approved for anemia resulting from renal disease and cancer chemotherapy. METHODOLOGY: Although direct comparative trials have not been performed with these agents, information published in the last several years regarding their clinical efficacy, safety, and dosing is sufficient, in most cases, to compare costs. With the disclaimer that any efficacy comparison of competing products using published reports has certain limitations, a cost-minimization approach from a provider's perspective was conducted. RESULTS: To provide background for the economic evaluation, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data for these two agents are discussed. Recent clinical trials in the nephrology and oncology therapeutic areas are summarized, highlighting study designs, dosing regimens, patient entry criteria, study endpoints, and published results. Cost data, based on average wholesale prices (AWP) in 2003, are compared and calculated from available clinical data with an emphasis on efficacy. CONCLUSION: These evaluations largely conclude that epoetin alfa is the better pharmacoeconomic value of the two currently available erythropoietic agents.     

Clinical and economic comparison of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa

SUMMARY

Background: The pharmacoeconomics of erythropoietic therapy for the treatment of anemia is receiving renewed attention due to the current availability of two agents. Epoetin alfa has been the standard of therapy for patients with renal disease and cancer-related anemia for more than a decade. Darbepoetin alfa, an alternative agent, is now approved for anemia resulting from renal disease and cancer chemotherapy.

Methodology: Although direct comparative trials have not been performed with these agents, information published in the last several years regarding their clinical efficacy, safety, and dosing is sufficient, in most cases, to compare costs. With the disclaimer that any efficacy comparison of competing products using published reports has certain limitations, a cost-minimization approach from a provider's perspective was conducted.

Results:To provide background for the economic evaluation, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data for these two agents are discussed. Recent clinical trials in the nephrology and oncology therapeutic areas are summarized, highlighting study designs, dosing regimens, patient entry criteria, study endpoints, and published results. Cost data, based on average wholesale prices (AWP) in 2003, are compared and calculated from available clinical data with an emphasis on efficacy.

Conclusion: These evaluations largely conclude that epoetin alfa is the better pharmacoeconomic value of the two currently available erythropoietic agents.     

A randomized,controlled trial comparing darbepoetin alfa correction/maintenance dosing with weekly dosing for treating chemotherapy-induced anemia

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate if a darbepoetin alfa correction/maintenance dosing regimen is non-inferior to a weekly regimen with respect to red blood cell trans­fusion requirements in patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA).

Research design and methods: In this randomized, active-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial, CIA patients were randomized 1?:?1 to receive darbepoetin alfa in either a correction/maintenance schedule (4.5?μg/kg weekly for 4 weeks followed by 4.5?μg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W)) or a weekly schedule (2.25?μg/kg weekly). The primary endpoint was the transfusion incidence during weeks 1–16. Non-inferiority was to be concluded if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference in transfusion incidence between treatment groups was below 12.5%. Hematologic responses and safety profiles were also compared.

Results: Transfusion incidence (95% CI) during weeks 1–16 was 37% (32–42) and 38% (32–43) in the weekly and correction/maintenance groups, respectively. The difference (95% CI) in transfusions was 0.4% (–7.0 to 7.8), demonstrating non-inferiority between treatment groups. Similar percentages in both groups achieved and maintained hemoglobin in a target range of 11–13?g/dL and had clinically meaningful FACT?F score improvements. The median (range) time to hemoglobin response was 10 (1–17) weeks and 12 (2–17) weeks in the weekly and correction/maintenance groups, respectively. Both groups had similar safety profiles.

Conclusions: A correction/maintenance schedule with its initial two-fold higher weekly dosing and subsequent Q3W dosing yielded outcomes similar to those observed with a weekly schedule. Although correction/maintenance dosing provided no incremental clinical benefit, Q3W dosing could provide benefits of convenience and facilitate patient compliance.