ReviewDrugs in context2026
Recombinant human erythropoietin therapy in patients with cancer: efficacy, risks and the controversy of EpoR expression.
Review in Drugs in context, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEpo) is widely used to treat anaemia in patients with cancer. Concerns regarding its safety arose from early experimental studies suggesting erythropoietin receptor (EpoR) expression in tumour cells and potential pro-tumorigenic effects. However, many of these findings were generated using non-specific antibodies or incomplete molecular validation, leading to uncertainty about the clinical relevance of EpoR in oncology. A structured narrative review was conducted through a PubMed/MEDLINE search (1990-2025) using predefined terms related to EpoR and cancer. Additional references were identified via citation tracking. Studies evaluating EpoR expression in tumour-derived cell lines or human tumour tissues or exploring the clinical implications of rHuEpo therapy were included. A bibliometric analysis was also performed to contextualize historical trends in publication volume. Early studies reported widespread EpoR expression in cancer models; however, most used non-validated polyclonal antibodies and lacked molecular confirmation. When more rigorous approaches were adopted, EpoR detection in tumours was inconsistent or negligible. Clinical trials reporting adverse outcomes with rHuEpo were largely conducted before current regulatory restrictions, used variable haemoglobin targets or enrolled patients who would not be eligible for treatment today. Current evidence does not support a biologically meaningful role of EpoR in solid tumours. When used within approved indications and modern safety guidance, rHuEpo has not been consistently associated with tumour progression or reduced survival. Continued methodological rigour is essential to clarify remaining uncertainties and optimize rHuEpo use in oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.