The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) in cancer patients is still under debate. However, little is known about rationales, strategies, objectives, and effectiveness of anaemia treatments in common practice. The Cancer Anaemia Registry prospectively surveyed about 2000 cancer patients with anaemia throughout Germany. The main objectives of anaemia treatment regardless of modality were to improve quality of life (QOL) and to correct haemoglobin (Hb) levels. The Hb threshold for any anaemia treatment (means ± SD: 9.4 ± 1.2 g/dL) but not for blood transfusions (8.7 ± 1.0 g/dL) depended on cancer type and treatment strategy. Physicians preferred ESA as first-line treatment to prevent transfusions in patients with solid tumours, if they thought that chemotherapy caused the anaemia. If they suspected other causes or patients had lymphoproliferative malignancies, physicians preferred transfusions or attempted to correct underlying disorders; both mainly to improve QOL or prognosis. Effectiveness of all strategies was comparable. However, ESA most effectively prevented transfusions; primary transfusions appeared less suitable for correcting Hb or improving QOL. Using supportive treatments for QOL improvement was common whereas diagnostic measures and intravenous iron therapy were underused. Prospective clinical trials using QOL as end point and evaluating diagnostics in cancer-associated anaemia are warranted.
© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.