Deferasirox for managing iron overload in people with thalassaemia.

BACKGROUND

Thalassemia is a hereditary anaemia due to ineffective erythropoiesis. In particular, people with thalassaemia major develop secondary iron overload resulting from regular red blood cell transfusion. Iron chelation therapy is needed to prevent long-term complications.Both deferoxamine and deferiprone have been found to be efficacious. However, a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of the new oral chelator deferasirox in people with thalassaemia is needed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral deferasirox in people with thalassaemia and secondary iron overload.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBMR, Biosis Previews, Web of Science, Derwent Drug File, XTOXLINE and three trial registries: www.controlled-trials.com; www.clinicaltrials.gov; www.who.int./ictrp/en/. Date of the most recent searches of these databases: 24 June 2010.Date of the most recent search of the Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register: 03 November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing deferasirox with no therapy or placebo or with another iron chelating treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies met the inclusion criteria.Two studies compared deferasirox to placebo or standard therapy of deferoxamine (n = 47). The placebo-controlled studies, a pharmacokinetic and a dose escalation study, showed that deferasirox leads to net iron excretion in transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients. In these studies, safety was acceptable and further investigation in phase II and phase III trials was warranted.Two studies, one phase II study (n = 71) and one phase III study (n = 586) compared deferasirox to standard treatment with deferoxamine. Data suggest that a similar efficacy can be achieved depending on the ratio of doses of deferoxamine and deferasirox being compared; in the phase III trial, similar or superior efficacy for surrogate parameters of ferritin and liver iron concentration could only be achieved in the highly iron-overloaded subgroup at a mean ratio of 1 mg of deferasirox to 1.8 mg of deferoxamine corresponding to a mean dose of 28.2 mg/d and 51.6 mg/d respectively. Data on safety at the presumably required doses for effective chelation therapy are limited. Patient satisfaction was significantly better with deferasirox, while rate of discontinuations was similar for both drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Deferasirox offers an important alternative line of treatment for people with thalassaemia and secondary iron overload. Based on the available data, deferasirox does not seem to be superior to deferoxamine at the usually recommended ratio of 1 mg of deferasirox to 2 mg of deferoxamine. However, similar efficacy seems to be achievable depending on the dose and ratio of deferasirox compared to deferoxamine. Whether this will result in similar efficacy in the long run and will translate to similar benefits as has been shown for deferoxamine, needs to be confirmed. Data on safety, particularly on rare toxicities and long-term safety, are still limited.Therefore, we think that deferasirox should be offered as an alternative to all patients with thalassaemia who either show intolerance to deferoxamine or poor compliance with deferoxamine. In our opinion, data are still too limited to support the general recommendation of deferasirox as first-line treatment instead of deferoxamine. If a strong preference for deferasirox is expressed, it could be offered as first-line option to individual patients after a detailed discussion of the potential benefits and risks.