ReviewCureus2024
Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Deferoxamine, Deferasirox, and Deferiprone in Patients With Sickle Cell Disease or Transfusion-Dependent Anemia: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Insights into Aspirin's Anticancer Activity: The Predominant Role of Its Iron-Chelating Antioxidant Metabolites.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Ferroptosis as an emerging target in sickle cell disease.Current research in toxicology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This network meta-analysis was conducted with the aim of comparing the efficacy and safety of deferiprone (DFP), deferasirox (DFX), and deferoxamine (DFO) in individuals with sickle cell disease (SCD) or transfusion-dependent anemia. This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)" guidelines. The search was conducted on electronic databases, including PubMed, CINAHIL, and EMBASE, from the inception of databases to January 10, 2024. Outcomes assessed in this study included a change in liver iron concentration (LIC) and a change in ferritin from baseline. For safety analysis, adverse events were compared among three treatment groups. A total of five studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that the change in LIC and serum ferritin from baseline was not significantly different in patients with SCD or other anemias. In terms of adverse events, deferiprone was the safest among all. In conclusion, deferiprone demonstrated noninferiority to deferoxamine and deferasirox in measures of iron load, presenting a viable treatment option. Safety outcomes revealed deferasirox carried a higher risk of adverse events compared to deferiprone, supporting its favorable safety profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.