Red Cell Transfusion Goals in Patients With Acute Leukemias

January 22, 2019 updated by: Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

Prospective Randomized Clinical Feasibility Study of Red Cell Transfusion Goals in Patients With Acute Leukemias

The purpose of this study to determine if a lower hemoglobin transfusion threshold, 7 g/dL, has a safety profile similar to that of the current standard transfusion threshold of 8 g/dL.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) is vitally important for the care of patients undergoing myelosuppressive therapy for acute leukemia. The therapeutic approach to this disease involves the use of high doses of chemotherapy to treat the blood cancers and bone marrow disorders; but it damages the marrow and blood system. Malignant and healthy stem cells are affected by the chemotherapy, and even when the malignant cells are killed, it can take weeks for the healthy cells to reconstitute the marrow. At diagnosis and before bone marrow recovery post treatment, RBCs are needed to support the patient. Current practices at major comprehensive cancer centers all utilize liberal hemoglobin transfusions triggers of 8-9 g/dL or higher. Higher hemoglobin levels in these high risk patients may have benefits such as better energy and organ function. However, research in a variety of clinical settings, suggests that a higher hemoglobin transfusion threshold is associated with the same or even higher mortality rates compared to lower hemoglobin thresholds (7-8 g/dL). These other settings include prospective randomized trials in high-risk orthopedic surgery patients, critically ill adult and pediatric ICU patients, acute GI bleed patients, and patients undergoing cardiac surgery. One clinical scenario where the ideal transfusion threshold is unknown is in patients receiving chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies. Transfusion requirements and triggers have not been systematically studied in acute leukemia or other cancers. Acute leukemia carries a high mortality; any unnecessary increase in morbidity or mortality is not acceptable. Without a clear benefit of higher transfusion thresholds, the added risks and costs of transfusion may be substantial and unnecessary. The investigators plan to study this issue in this pilot and feasibility study by randomly assigning patients treated for acute leukemia to be transfused with RBCs at either a higher or lower hemoglobin concentration trigger point. In this way, the investigators will be able to accurately determine if there is benefit or harms to having a lower or higher red cell count during the induction treatment and recovery period for patients with acute leukemias. This study will also collect information evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of the two transfusion thresholds and the feasibility of expanding the study to a large randomized trial.This safety data will serve as a platform for a larger mortality study in leukemia and possibly additional studies in solid tumors.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
90

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 1

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Maryland
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21287
        • The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Acute leukemia patients (AML, ALL, APL, treatment-related myeloid neoplasm, high grade MDS)
  • Admitted with plans for inpatient myelosuppressive chemotherapy (with standard of care or protocol regimens)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age less than 18 years
  • Acute coronary syndrome as defined by active chest pain, dynamic ECG changes, troponin greater than 2.5
  • Active blood loss
  • Receiving erythropoietin stimulating agents prior to admission
  • Chronic Renal Failure in Renal Replacement Therapy
  • Documented wish against transfusion for personal or religious beliefs

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Low transfusion threshold
Patients receive red blood cell transfusions with a transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL hemoglobin (Hb). Transfusions will not be given on schedule but will be given whenever Hb dips below the threshold.
Biological: Red blood cell transfusion
Other Names:
  • PRBC transfusion
  • RBC transfusion
Active Comparator: High transfusion threshold
Patients receive red blood cell transfusions with a transfusion threshold of 8 g/dL hemoglobin (Hb). Transfusions will not be given on schedule but will be given whenever Hb dips below the threshold.
Biological: Red blood cell transfusion
Other Names:
  • PRBC transfusion
  • RBC transfusion

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Tolerance of low transfusion threshold as assessed by the percentage of participants who crossed over from the low arm to the high arm.
Time Frame: 60 days
60 days

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Safety of low vs. high transfusion threshold as assessed by total difference in number of transfusions given per participant
Time Frame: 60 days
Overall safety is determined by the total difference between arms for the number of transfusions given per participant
60 days
Safety of low vs. high transfusion threshold as assessed by number of participants experiencing neutropenic infections
Time Frame: 60 days
Overall safety is determined by the total difference between arms for number of participants experiencing neutropenic infections, where neutropenia is defined as absolute neutrophil count < 500/mcL.
60 days
Safety of low vs. high transfusion threshold as assessed by number of grade 3-4 bleeding events as defined by CTCAE 4.0
Time Frame: 60 days
60 days
Safety of low vs. high transfusion threshold as assessed by number of deaths attributed to induction chemotherapy
Time Frame: 60 days
60 days
Safety of low vs. high transfusion threshold as assessed by number of participants with at least one grade 3-5 non-hematological toxicity by CTCAE 4.0.
Time Frame: 60 days
60 days
Feasibility as determined by percentage of participants consented
Time Frame: 60 days
As per protocol-defined criteria, the transfusion strategy being tested would be deemed feasible if all of the following criteria are met: 1) More than 50% of eligible patients could be consented; 2) More than 75% of participants randomized to the low arm tolerated the 7 g/dL transfusion threshold; 3) Fewer than 15% of participants crossed over from the low arm to the high arm; 4) The study was not paused for safety concerns.
60 days
Feasibility as determined by percentage of participants who tolerate 7g/dL transfusion
Time Frame: 60 days
As per protocol-defined criteria, the transfusion strategy being tested would be deemed feasible if all of the following criteria are met: 1) More than 50% of eligible patients could be consented; 2) More than 75% of participants randomized to the low arm tolerated the 7 g/dL transfusion threshold; 3) Fewer than 15% of participants crossed over from the low arm to the high arm; 4) The study was not paused for safety concerns.
60 days
Feasibility as determined by percentage of participants who crossed over from the low arm to the high arm
Time Frame: 60 days
As per protocol-defined criteria, the transfusion strategy being tested would be deemed feasible if all of the following criteria are met: 1) More than 50% of eligible patients could be consented; 2) More than 75% of participants randomized to the low arm tolerated the 7 g/dL transfusion threshold; 3) Fewer than 15% of participants crossed over from the low arm to the high arm; 4) The study was not paused for safety concerns.
60 days
Number of transfusions
Time Frame: 60 days
Median number of red cell and platelet transfusions given per participant.
60 days
Neutropenic infections
Time Frame: 60 days
Number of participants in each arm experiencing neutropenic infections, where neutropenia is defined as absolute neutrophil count < 500/mcL.
60 days
Bleeding
Time Frame: 60 days
Number of grade 3-4 bleeding events as defined by CTCAE 4.0.
60 days
Length of stay
Time Frame: 60 days
Median length of inpatient stay in days. This is for the initial inpatient stay for induction chemotherapy only (chemotherapy itself was not part of this protocol).
60 days
Treatment-related mortality
Time Frame: 60 days
Number of deaths attributed to induction chemotherapy.
60 days
End organ dysfunction
Time Frame: 60 days
Number of participants with at least one grade 3-5 nonhematological toxicity as defined by CTCAE 4.0.
60 days
Performance status scores
Time Frame: 60 days
Number of participants with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status < 2. The ECOG scale is rated from 0 to 5, where 0 is best health and 5 is dead.
60 days
Incidence of crossover
Time Frame: 60 days
Number of participants who crossed over from the low to the high arm due to symptomatic anemia (defined as Hb < 8 g/dL with symptoms).
60 days
Cost savings
Time Frame: 60 days
Estimated per-patient cost savings of the low transfusion threshold compared to the high transfusion threshold.
60 days
Fatigue scores
Time Frame: 60 days
Median difference in fatigue scores as graded on the National Cancer Institute Fatigue Scale. Scores are from 0 to 10, where 0 is no fatigue and 10 is the worst possible fatigue.
60 days

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Amy DeZern, MD, MHS, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
April 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
September 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
September 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
March 4, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 11, 2014

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 13, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
January 24, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 22, 2019

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • J13126
  • NA_00089706 (Other Identifier: JHM IRB)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings