-
Cureus Nov 2023Despite the established efficacy of iron chelation therapy in transfusion-induced iron-overloaded patients, there is no universal agreement regarding the choice of an... (Review)
Review
Despite the established efficacy of iron chelation therapy in transfusion-induced iron-overloaded patients, there is no universal agreement regarding the choice of an optimal chelating regimen. Deferasirox (DFX) and deferiprone (DFP) are two oral iron chelators, and combination usage demonstrated effectiveness as an alternative to monotherapies in patients with a limited response to monotherapy. The present systematic review aimed to assess the evidence regarding the outcomes of combined DFP and DFX in iron-overloaded patients. An online search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases. Interventional and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of combined DFP and DFX in iron-overloaded patients were included. Eleven studies (12 reports) were considered in this meta-analysis. The studies included dual iron chelation strategies for a number of diagnoses. Single-arm studies (n =7) showed a reduction of serum ferritin, which reached the level of statistical significance in three studies. Likewise, most studies reported a numerical reduction in liver iron concentration (LIC) and increased cardiac MRI-T2* values after chelating therapy. Alternatively, comparative studies showed no significant difference in post-treatment serum ferritin between DFX plus DFP and DFX/DFP plus deferoxamine (DFO). The adherence to combination therapy was good to average in nearly 66.7-100% of the patients across four studies. One study reported a poor adherence rate. The combined regimen was generally tolerable, with no reported incidence of serious adverse events among the included studies. In conclusion, the DFP and DFX combination is a safe and feasible option for iron overload patients with a limited response to monotherapy.
PubMed: 38058350
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48276 -
PharmacoEconomics - Open Mar 2024Hereditary hemochromatosis (HH) is an autosomal recessive disorder that leads to iron overload and multiorgan failure.
BACKGROUND
Hereditary hemochromatosis (HH) is an autosomal recessive disorder that leads to iron overload and multiorgan failure.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to provide up-to-date evidence of all the current data on the costs and cost effectiveness of screening and treatment for HH.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED), Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (CEA Registry), Health Technology Assessment Database (HTAD), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), and Econlit until April 2023 with no date restrictions. Articles that reported cost-utility, cost-description, cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, or cost-benefit analyses for any kind of management (drugs, screening, etc.) were included in the study. Patients with HH, their siblings, or individuals suspected of having HH were included in the study. All screening and treatment strategies were included. Two authors assessed the quality of evidence related to screening (either phenotype or genotype screening) and treatment (phlebotomy and electrophoresis). Narrative synthesis was used to analyse the similarities and differences between the respective studies.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine papers were included in this study. The majority of the studies reported both the cost of phenotype screening, including transferrin saturation (TS), serum ferritin, and liver biopsy, and the cost of genotype screening (HFE screening, C282Y mutation). Few studies reported the cost for phlebotomy and erythrocytapheresis treatment. Data revealed that either phenotype or genotype screening were cost effective compared with no screening. Treatment studies concluded that erythrocytapheresis might be a cost-effective therapy compared with phlebotomy.
CONCLUSIONS
Economic studies on either the screening, or treatment strategy for HH patients should be performed in more countries. We suggest that cost-effectiveness studies on the role of deferasirox in HH should be carried out as an alternative therapy to phlebotomy.
PubMed: 38279979
DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00463-6 -
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes Feb 2024Understanding consequences of poor chelation compliance is crucial given the enormous burden of post-transfusional iron overload complications. We systematically... (Review)
Review
Understanding consequences of poor chelation compliance is crucial given the enormous burden of post-transfusional iron overload complications. We systematically reviewed iron-chelation therapy (ICT) compliance, and the relationship between compliance with health outcome and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in thalassaemia patients. Several reviewers performed systematic search strategy of literature through PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCOhost. The preferred reporting items of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Of 4917 studies, 20 publications were included. The ICT compliance rate ranges from 20.93 to 75.3%. It also varied per agent, ranging from 48.84 to 85.1% for desferioxamine, 87.2-92.2% for deferiprone and 90-100% for deferasirox. Majority of studies (N = 10/11, 90.91%) demonstrated significantly negative correlation between compliance and serum ferritin, while numerous studies revealed poor ICT compliance linked with increased risk of liver disease (N = 4/7, 57.14%) and cardiac disease (N = 6/8, 75%), endocrinologic morbidity (N = 4/5, 90%), and lower HRQoL (N = 4/6, 66.67%). Inadequate compliance to ICT therapy is common. Higher compliance is correlated with lower serum ferritin, lower risk of complications, and higher HRQoL. These findings should be interpreted with caution given the few numbers of evidence.
Topics: Humans; Iron Chelating Agents; Deferasirox; Deferiprone; Deferoxamine; Quality of Life; Pyridones; Benzoates; Triazoles; Thalassemia; Chelation Therapy; Ferritins; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 38302961
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-023-02221-y