Department of Pediatrics and Radiology, Children's Hospital, Los Angeles, California.
Am J Hematol. 2014 May;89(5):505-8. doi: 10.1002/ajh.23673. Epub 2014 Mar 3.
MRI relaxometry (R2, R2*) has generally replaced liver biopsy for estimation of liver iron stores in response to iron chelation, but there have been no longitudinal studies comparing R2 and R2* techniques. We use R2 and R2* liver iron concentration (LIC) estimates, transfusional iron burdens, and drug compliance data to calculate iron chelation efficiency (ICE) in patients undergoing a Phase II trial of SPD602. Fifty-one patients underwent a baseline examination, 39 patients completed 1 year, and 26 patients completed 2 years. Baseline LICR2 and LICR2* estimates were unbiased, but had limits of agreement exceeding 50%, suggesting that these techniques cannot be interchanged with one another in the same patient. However, ICE estimates across the two techniques compared more favorably, with r(2) values reaching 0.89 at 2 years. 95 confidence intervals for efficiency estimates were 0.0 ± 4.1%. These data indicate that clinical trial and clinical effectiveness data calculated using LICR2 and LICR2* estimates can be compared to one another, even though LIC estimates may be disparate on cross-sectional analysis. While the choice of MRI assessment technique for clinical trials and for clinical management depends on many logistical considerations, one can have confidence comparing conclusions on clinical effectiveness.
MRI 弛豫率(R2、R2*)通常已取代肝活检,用于评估铁螯合治疗后的肝铁储存,但尚无比较 R2 和 R2技术的纵向研究。我们使用 R2 和 R2肝脏铁浓度(LIC)估计值、输血铁负荷和药物依从性数据,计算接受 SPD602 二期试验的患者的铁螯合效率(ICE)。51 例患者接受基线检查,39 例患者完成 1 年,26 例患者完成 2 年。基线 LICR2 和 LICR2估计值无偏,但一致性界限超过 50%,表明这两种技术不能在同一患者中相互替换。然而,两种技术的 ICE 估计值比较更有利,2 年时 r(2)值达到 0.89。效率估计值的 95%置信区间为 0.0±4.1%。这些数据表明,使用 LICR2 和 LICR2估计值计算的临床试验和临床有效性数据可以相互比较,即使在横断面分析中 LIC 估计值可能存在差异。虽然 MRI 评估技术在临床试验和临床管理中的选择取决于许多实际考虑因素,但可以有信心比较临床有效性的结论。