Efficacy and safety of IV ferumoxytol for iron deficiency anemia in patients with cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is common in cancer patients due to blood loss and inflammation. Many do not tolerate oral iron or adequately respond. Intravenous (IV) iron is commonly used as an adjunct to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents; data on the use of IV iron monotherapy in these patients are limited. This study aimed to evaluate IV ferumoxytol for the treatment of cancer patients with IDA with a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy or in whom oral iron could not be used. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This post hoc analysis of pooled data from two multicenter, randomized, controlled, Phase III trials evaluating IV ferumoxytol (510 mg ×2) vs placebo or iron sucrose (200 mg ×5) included a subgroup of 98 patients with cancer that the investigator identified as the primary cause of their IDA, or with cancer whose IDA was attributed to another comorbid condition (ferumoxytol, n=75; iron sucrose, n=13; placebo, n=10). Gastrointestinal cancers were most common (42), followed by breast (14), cervix (ten), and lung (nine). The primary endpoint was the mean change in hemoglobin (Hgb) from baseline to week 5. RESULTS: =0.002], respectively). During the studies, 45 patients received chemotherapy, 19 with platinum-based regimens. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent doses were neither increased >20% nor initiated in any treatment group. Overall rates of adverse events and serious adverse events in the cancer subgroup mirrored those in the overall study population. CONCLUSION: Monotherapy with IV iron appears to be an effective option for cancer patients with IDA who do not respond to or cannot tolerate oral iron therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".