4.6 Review

From Biology to Clinical Practice: Iron Chelation Therapy With Deferasirox

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.752192

关键词

iron chelation therapy (ICT); deferasirox; myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS); myelofibrosis (MF); radical oxygen species (ROS); iron toxicity; anemia

类别

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma, Italy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Iron chelation therapy has become a mainstay in heavily transfused hematological patients to reduce iron overload and prevent organ damage. It is widely used in thalassemic patients and low-risk MDS patients, and has been proposed for high-risk MDS patients and other disorders requiring significant transfusion support. Data suggests that iron toxicity exacerbates anemia and clinical comorbidities, and with the availability of approved oral iron chelators, a larger use of ICT is envisioned in the near future.
Iron chelation therapy (ICT) has become a mainstay in heavily transfused hematological patients, with the aim to reduce iron overload (IOL) and prevent organ damage. This therapeutic approach is already widely used in thalassemic patients and in low-risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) patients. More recently, ICT has been proposed for high-risk MDS, especially when an allogeneic bone marrow transplantation has been planned. Furthermore, other hematological and hereditary disorders, characterized by considerable transfusion support to manage anemia, could benefit from this therapy. Meanwhile, data accumulated on how iron toxicity could exacerbate anemia and other clinical comorbidities due to oxidative stress radical oxygen species (ROS) mediated by free iron species. Taking all into consideration, together with the availability of approved oral iron chelators, we envision a larger use of ICT in the near future. The aim of this review is to better identify those non-thalassemic patients who can benefit from ICT and give practical tips for management of this therapeutic strategy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据