Location, Location, Location: Reassessing Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agents (ESAs) in the United States (US), Canada, and Europe (2007−2011)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract 4753 Background: Erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) are approved for preventing transfusions (United States (US)) or treating symptomatic anemia (Canada/Europe) among chemotherapy or chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Extensive reassessments of safety, efficacy, dosing, and target hemoglobin levels have occurred. Methods: Regulatory agencies', ESA manufacturer notifications, clinical guidelines, phase III trials and meta-analyses cited in clinical guidelines were reviewed (2007 to 2011). Results: CKD and Cancer: Quality of life benefits are reported in Europe and Canada. In the US, product labels report exercise capacity improvements for CKD patients. CKD: Clinical trials reported cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and mortality risks with ESAs targeting high versus low hemoglobin levels or cardiovascular and mortality risks with ESAs versus placebo. 2011 US' advisories recommend ESA doses sufficient to prevent transfusions among dialysis patients and caution with ESA administration to non-dialysis patients. Canadian and European recommendations target hemoglobin levels between 10 and 12 g/dl and 11 to 12 g/dl, respectively. Following these recommendations among non-dialysis US patients, ESA use decreased 16%. Most US dialysis CKD patients receive ESAs, with lower achieved hemoglobin levels, and 30% decreased ESA usage since 2008. In Europe and Canada, which initially had substantially lower ESA use, there has been a gradual increase. Cancer: Trials identified mortality, tumor progression, and venous thromboembolism risks with ESAs targeting higher versus lower hemoglobin levels. US labels warn against administering ESAs with potentially curative chemotherapy. European guidelines recommend ESAs for symptomatic patients at hemoglobin levels of 9 to 11 g/dL and consider for asymptomatic patients at levels of 11 to 11.9 g/dL. Canadian advisories report cost-utility ratios exceeding accepted standards. ESA use decreased by 70% in the US. Current ESA utilization rates for cancer are higher in Europe and lower in Canada. Conclusions: International differences in interpreting efficacy and safety data and ESA utilization exist. The changes have been most apparent in the US. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".