Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28504901›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology practice2017

Tale of Two Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents: Utilization, Dosing, Litigation, and Costs of Darbepoetin and Epoetin Among South Carolina Medicaid-Covered Patients With Cancer and Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia.

Virginia Noxon, Kevin B Knopf, LeAnn B Norris, Brian Chen, Y Tony Yang, Zaina P Qureshi, William Hrushesky, Akida A Lebby, Benjamin Schooley, Neset Hikmet and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Drug Utilization Evaluation of Erythropoietin at a Referral Teaching Hospital in Iran.Advances in pharmacological and pharmaceutical sciences · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Virginia NoxonUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Kevin B KnopfUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
LeAnn B NorrisUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Brian ChenUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Y Tony YangUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Zaina P QureshiUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
William HrusheskyUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Akida A LebbyUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Benjamin SchooleyUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Neset HikmetUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Michael DicksonUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Mae ThamerUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Dennis CotterUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Paul R YarnoldUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
Charles L BennettUniversity of South Carolina; William Jennings Bryan Dorn Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Columbia; Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; George Mason University, Fairfax, VA; and Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute, Washington, DC.
George Mason University · USMedical University of South Carolina · USMedical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute · USMUSC Hollings Cancer Center · US

Funding

Southern Oncology Network on Adverse Reactions (SONAR) - Focus on Tyrosine KinaseR01CA165609 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI BENNETT, CHARLES L. · 2012 to 2016
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA165609
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved epoetin and darbepoetin for chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). Approved epoetin and darbepoetin dosing schedules were three times per week and weekly, respectively, although off-label, less frequent scheduling was common. In 2004, 2007, and 2008, a US Food and Drug Administration Advisory Committees warned of risks associated with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. During this period, lawsuits alleging illegal darbepoetin marketing practices have concluded, resulting in $1.1 billion in fines and settlements and one criminal conviction. No prior study, to our knowledge, has reported on the use of darbepoetin versus epoetin for CIA.

methodsWe evaluated the dosing, utilization, and costs of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents among 3,761 South Carolina Medicaid patients with CIA.

resultsEpoetin and darbepoetin utilization rates were 22% and 28% in 2003, 10% and 33% in 2007, and 3% and 7% in 2010, respectively. Mean per-patient per-administration epoetin and darbepoetin doses were 40,983 IU and 191 µg, respectively, in 2003 and 47,753 IU and 369 µg, respectively, in 2010. Mean monthly patient costs for epoetin and darbepoetin were $1,030 and $981, respectively, in 2003 and $932 and $1,352, respectively, in 2010. Epoetin use decreased steadily between 2002 and 2010; darbepoetin use increased steadily between 2003 and 2007 and then decreased steadily thereafter. Per-patient dosing of darbepoetin, but not epoetin, increased steadily between 2003 and 2010, and monthly per-patient epoetin costs decreased 3% while the per-patients costs of darbepoetin increased 30% between 2003 and 2010.

conclusionTo our knowledge, our findings are the first data reporting on epoetin versus darbepoetin use for CIA and support recently concluded lawsuits involving allegations of illegal marketing practices of the manufacturer of darbepoetin.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnemiaAntineoplastic AgentsBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsDarbepoetin alfaDrug UtilizationEpoetin AlfaErythropoietinFemaleHematinicsHumansLogistic ModelsLung NeoplasmsMaleAntineoplastic AgentsDarbepoetin alfaEpoetin AlfaErythropoietinHematinicsRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID28504901
PMCPMC6366245
OpenAlexW2614492682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.