Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21972052›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2012

Addition of iron to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Fausto Petrelli, Karen Borgonovo, Mary Cabiddu, Veronica Lonati, Sandro Barni

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Randomized trial of sucrosomial iron supplementation in patients with chemotherapy-related anemia treated with ESA.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Oral sucrosomial iron versus intravenous iron in anemic cancer patients without iron deficiency receiving darbepoetin alfa: a pilot study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
  16. Intravenous iron therapy for anemic cancer patients: a review of recently published clinical studies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Hematology: cast iron results for ESA use in cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2011
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fausto PetrelliOncology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Treviglio-Caravaggio, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, BG, Italy. faupe@libero.it
Karen Borgonovo
Mary Cabiddu
Veronica Lonati
Sandro Barni
Azienda Ospedaliera Treviglio · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIron supplementation could improve the hematopoietic response of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) used for chemotherapy-induced anemia.

methodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials by comparing parenteral or oral iron and no iron, when added to ESAs in anemic cancer patients, in order to calculate the relative risk (RR) of hematopoietic response and transfusions, the time required to reach this response, and toxicity.

resultsA total of 1,606 patients out of eight trials were available for meta-analysis. The RR of obtaining an hematopoietic response was 1.29 (P = 0.0001) with parenteral iron and 1.04 for oral iron (P = 0.59). The risk of transfusion was reduced with parenteral iron versus no iron (RR 0.77; P = 0.02) but not with oral iron (RR 0.68; P = 0.08). The time to reach hematopoietic response was 1 month shorter and no increased toxicity appeared with iron supplementation.

conclusionOverall parenteral iron reduces the risk of transfusions by 23% and increases the chance of hematopoietic response by 29% when compared with ESAs alone. On the contrary, oral iron does not increase hematopoietic response nor transfusion rate. The significance of these results is that the proportion of non-responders to ESAs will have strongly improved and quality of life and cost ameliorated.

Indexed as

AnemiaAntineoplastic AgentsBlood TransfusionHematinicsHumansIronNeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntineoplastic AgentsHematinicsIron

Identifiers

PMID21972052
PMCPMC11824565
OpenAlexW1994754036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.