The year 1991 was truly a water
shed year in medical oncology,
as three events resulted in a
paradigm shift in the tolerability,
safety, and symptom management of
chemotherapy delivery. The first two
events moved chemotherapy administration
from a user-unfriendly hospital
inpatient environment to what
evolved into a highly efficient, sophisticated,
outpatient system led by private
practitioners of medical oncology. Ondansetron(Drug information on ondansetron) (Zofran), the first of the
5HT3-receptor antagonists, provided
reliable prophylaxis of immediate
chemotherapy-induced nausea and
vomiting in highly emetogenic regimens.[
1] Recombinant human granulocyte
colony-stimulating factor
(rhG-CSF, filgrastim(Drug information on filgrastim) [Neupogen]),[2]
if dosed appropriately, significantly
reduced the duration of severe neutropenia
through its role as the primary
regulator of increased production and
release of granulocytes from the bone
marrow.
The third event, the initial publication
of a trial conducted by Abels et
al,[3] which evaluated recombinant
human erythropoietin(Drug information on erythropoietin) (rhEPO, epoetin
alfa [Epogen, Procrit]) in the treatment
of anemia associated with cancer, led
to regulatory approval of this agent for
chemotherapy-induced anemia only
14 years after the initial isolation of
erythropoietin, 6 years after successful
cloning of the gene, and 2 years
after rhEPO received approval for
treatment of anemia in the renal dialysis
setting. Although ondansetron and
rhG-CSF were quickly adopted into
clinical practice, the use of rhEPO
would remain limited until much later
in the decade, due to its inconvenient
schedule and a lack of appreciation of
its benefit.
New Mindset
These three events set the tone for
the decade as the oncologist's mindset
changed from the "no pain, no gain"
of the 1980s to an appropriate weighing
of treatment benefit/toxicity ratios.
Chemotherapy that was clearly palliative
began to be given in least-toxic
regimens, as the use of sequential
single agents and weekly regimens
gained acceptance. Pain management
turned from ablative neurosurgical
procedures to new vehicles-both
mechanical devices and drug formulations-
for the delivery of pain
medication. Surgical morbidity was
decreased by procedures such as
sentinel node biopsy, which would
eliminate the need for roughly threequarters
of the axillary node dissections
performed in breast cancer patients,
reducing the incidence of
lymphedema and neurasthesia, with
similar results in melanoma.
Quality of life became accepted as
a meaningful end point, not just in trials
of supportive care, but also in trials
of cytotoxic and biologic agents.
Conformal radiotherapy limited organ
toxicity, and now intensity-modulated
radiotherapy promises to be even more
effective by not only limiting toxicity
but also allowing escalation of dose
to the tumor.
In this issue of ONCOLOGY, Dr.
John Glaspy reviews the development,
application, and future prospects of
recombinant DNA-derived bone marrow
growth factors. This is another of
this author's insightful and thoughtprovoking
articles on a subject he has
championed since the early 1990s. In
his usual style, Dr. Glaspy asks hard
questions such as: Why do we find
ourselves in the situation of using less
than optimal doses of these agents due
to cost limitations, and why are
nephrologists more uniform and more
successful in treating anemia than
hematologists?
Tremendous advances in the tolerability,
safety, and efficacy of cancer
treatment have resulted from recombinant
DNA-derived bone marrow
growth factors. Dose-dense chemotherapy
is not feasible without myeloid
growth factors. Pegylated rhG-CSF
(pegfilgrastim [Neulasta]) has greatly
improved the convenience and feasibility
of administration, making it available
to more patients with its singledose-
per-cycle pharmacokinetics.
Inadequate Practice Policies
Despite this progress, there remains
inadequate use of rhG-CSF or
pegylated rhG-CSF in regimens associated
with a high risk of neutropenia.
In practice, we unfortunately continue
to find ourselves debating whether the
risk of neutropenia needs to be 40%,
as in prior American Society of Clinical
Oncology guidelines, or the costeffective
threshold of 20% when indirect
costs are included in the analysis.
We frequently find third-party payors
and, even worse, some physicians continuing
to require documented prior
neutropenia before instituting therapy
with myeloid growth factors. This occurs
despite the highest risk of febrile
neutropenia occurring in the first cycle
of a chemotherapy regimen and, despite
antibiotic therapy and other supportive
care, carrying up to a 7% risk
of death.
rhEPO and darbepoetin alfa(Drug information on darbepoetin alfa)
(Aranesp) have received regulatory
approval only for the treatment of
chemotherapy-induced anemia, not for
chronic anemia of cancer. Three decades
ago, Berlin[4] stated that he had
not seen, and did not expect to see, any
remarkable new data on anemia of
cancer. That changed dramatically
with the isolation of erythropoietin and
the eventual cloning of its gene.
Almost a decade ago, Jerry Spivak,
who has been a thought leader in this
area for 2 decades, noted that erythropoietin
was the first hematopoietic
growth factor to be discovered and entered
into clinical trials, extolling physicians
to use it appropriately in the anemia
of cancer and other anemias of
chronic disease. He cautioned, at a time
when this technology was just promising
to unveil its potential benefit, that
"a recombinant growth factor would be
a terrible thing to waste."[5] Through
site-directed mutagenesis, we now have
darbepoetin alfa with its longer half-life
allowing less frequent dosing.
However, millions of patients with
other forms of anemia of chronic disease,
as well as the patients previously
mentioned with chronic anemia of
cancer-all sharing a common etiology
of relatively reduced erythropoietin
production and reduced bone
marrow responsiveness to this growth
factor-remain basically untreated
with recombinant growth factor. The
other anemias of chronic disease,
moreover, are untested in clinical trials
14 years after epoetin alfa(Drug information on epoetin alfa)'s introduction
into clinical use. These patients
have a wide variety of diseases
ranging from congestive heart failure
to inflammatory bowel disease, as well
as rheumatoid and other inflammatory
arthritis conditions. They also include
elderly individuals who are recovering
from prior trauma, surgery, and
medical complications and remain hospitalized
in acute and chronic hospital
facilities because they are unable to perform
rehabilitative therapy, often simply
due to anemia-related fatigue.
Much has been accomplished in
this field, but there is still much to be
done. I salute Dr. Glaspy for championing
these issues for more than a decade
and congratulate him on his orderly,
comprehensive, and thoughtprovoking
article in this issue.
