Prognostic value of a number of blood laboratory parameters in the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in anemic patients with lymphoproliferative diseases
AIM: To clarify the prognostic value of the baseline blood levels of endogenous erythropoietin (EE) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) involved in the key components of the pathogenesis of anemia in lymphoproliferative diseases (LPD), the counts of reticulocytes and platelets (hematopoietic preserv...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Russian |
| Published: |
"Consilium Medicum" Publishing house
2013-08-01
|
| Series: | Терапевтический архив |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ter-arkhiv.ru/0040-3660/article/view/31338 |
| Summary: | AIM: To clarify the prognostic value of the baseline blood levels of endogenous erythropoietin (EE) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) involved in the key components of the pathogenesis of anemia in lymphoproliferative diseases (LPD), the counts of reticulocytes and platelets (hematopoietic preservation indicators) in the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) to correct anemia syndrome (AS) in patients with LPD/MATERIAL AND METHODS: The results of AS treatment with ESAs were analyzed in 48 patients with LPD. A study group comprised patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (n=13), indolent lymphomas (n=14), and multiple myeloma (n=21). Their hemograms (hemoglobin concentration, red blood cells, packed cell volume, reticulocytes, and platelets) and blood EE and TNF-α levels were examined before using ESAs. The hemogram was monitored during treatment. ESAs (eralfon (epoietin alpha) in 21 patients and epres in 27) were subcutaneously injected in a dose of 150 IU/kg thrice weekly (for not more than 16 weeks). A control group included 21 anemic patients with multiple myeloma who did not receive ESAs. Increasing hemoglobin concentrations up to 120 g/l was regarded as a positive response to ESA treatment/RESULTS: By and large, the efficacy of epoietin alpha was 62.5% (61.9% for eralfon and 63.0% for epres), which was significantly higher than that in the control group (23.4%; p |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0040-3660 2309-5342 |