4.4 Article

Hematologic responses to deferasirox therapy in transfusion-dependent patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

期刊

HAEMATOLOGICA-THE HEMATOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 97, 期 9, 页码 1364-1371

出版社

FERRATA STORTI FOUNDATION
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2011.048546

关键词

myelodysplastic syndromes; deferasirox; iron overload; iron chelation therapy; hematologic response

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma AG
  2. Novartis Pharmaceuticals

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Reductions in transfusion requirements/improvements in hematologic parameters have been associated with iron chelation therapy in transfusion-dependent patients, including those with myelodysplastic syndromes; data on there reductions/improvements have been limited to case reports and small studies. Design and Methods To explore this observation in a large population of patients, we report a post-hoc analysis evaluating hematologic response to deferasirox in a cohort of iron-overloaded patients with myelodysplastic syndromes enrolled in the Evaluation of Patients' Iron Chelation with Exjade (R) (EPIC) study using International Working Group 2006 criteria. Results Two-hundred and forty-seven, 100 and 50 patients without concomitant medication for myelodysplastic syndromes were eligible for analysis of erythroid, platelet and neutrophil responses, respectively. Erythroid, platelet and neutrophil responses were observed in 21.5% (53/247), 13.0% (13/100) and 22.0% (11/50) of the patients after a median of 109, 169 and 226 days, respectively. Median serum ferritin reductions were greater in hematologic responders compared with non-responders at end of study, although these differences were not statistically significant. A reduction in labile plasma iron to less than 0.4 mu mol/L was observed from week 12 onwards; this change did not differ between hematologic responders and non-responders. Conclusions This analysis suggests that deferasirox treatment for up to 1 year could lead to improvement in hematologic parameters in some patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

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

4.4
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