Sir,
We read this paper with interest and acknowledge the relevance and
power of the trial. However, there are several issues that we would like to raise.
Firstly, although the complication rate between the groups is said to
be similar, no specific mention is made of thromboembolism. This is a relevant
negative that should have been commented on, particularly in view of well-documented evidence that epoetin is strongly associated with an increased
risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality.1
Secondly, given that the annual incidence of cerebral sinus thrombosis
is three to four cases per million in adults,2 can the authors confidently dismiss
their incidence of one in 50 as unrelated to the treatment given?
Thirdly, the FDA recommends that erythropoetin-stimulating agents
should not be used in patients whose Hb level exceeds 12g/dl and should
only be considered if the Hb falls below 11g/dl.3 Although this relates
to cancer patients, how did the authors arrive at their cut-off point of
13g/dl?
L.K. Milnes,
SHO Orthopaedics,
K. Ghosh,
Z. Harb,
St George's Hospital, Tooting,
London, UK.
1. Bennett CL, Silver SM, Djulbegovic B, et al. Venous thromboembolism and mortality associated
with recombinant erythropoietin and darbepoetin administration for the
treatment of cancer-associated anemia. JAMA 2008;299:914-24.
2. Einhäupl K, Bousser MG, de Bruijn SF, et al. EFNS guideline on the treatment of cerebral venous and sinus thrombosis. Eur J Neurol 2006;13:553–9.
3. Khuri FR. Weighing the hazards of erythropoiesis
stimulation in patients with cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2445-8.