4.6 Article

Iron overload across the spectrum of non-transfusion-dependent thalassaemias: role of erythropoiesis, splenectomy and transfusions

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 176, 期 2, 页码 288-299

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.14373

关键词

non-transfusion-dependent thalassaemia; iron overload; ineffective erythropoiesis; anaemia

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma AG
  2. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-transfusion-dependent thalassaemias (NTDT) encompass a spectrum of anaemias rarely requiring blood transfusions. Increased iron absorption, driven by hepcidin suppression secondary to erythron expansion, initially causes intrahepatic iron overload. We examined iron metabolism biomarkers in 166 NTDT patients with b thalassaemia intermedia (n = 95), haemoglobin (Hb) E/beta thalassaemia (n = 49) and Hb H syndromes (n = 22). Liver iron concentration (LIC), serum ferritin (SF), transferrin saturation (TfSat) and non-transferrin-bound iron (NTBI) were elevated and correlated across diagnostic subgroups. NTBI correlated with soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR), labile plasma iron (LPI) and nucleated red blood cells (NRBCs), with elevations generally confined to previously transfused patients. Splenectomised patients had higher NTBI, TfSat, NRBCs and SF relative to LIC, than non-splenectomised patients. LPI elevations were confined to patients with saturated transferrin. Erythron expansion biomarkers (sTfR, growth differentiation factor-15, NRBCs) correlated with each other and with iron overload biomarkers, particularly in Hb H patients. Plasma hepcidin was similar across subgroups, increased with >20 prior transfusions, and correlated inversely with TfSat, NTBI, LPI and NRBCs. Hepcidin/SF ratios were low, consistent with hepcidin suppression relative to iron overload. Increased NTBI and, by implication, risk of extra-hepatic iron distribution are more likely in previously transfused, splenectomised and iron-overloaded NTDT patients with TfSat >70%.

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