Intravenous iron and iron deficiency anemia in patients with gastrointestinal cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is a prevalent hematological complication associated with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers due to an increased loss of iron and decreased iron absorption. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the use of parenteral iron to treat IDA in patients with GI cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINHAL and Scopus were searched from January 1, 2010 to September 29, 2023 with no language restrictions. We excluded editorials, case reports, abstracts, conference papers, and poster presentations. Studies were included if they discussed IDA, GI neoplasms, use of iron supplementation (with or without erythropoietin-stimulating agents [ESAs]), defined anemia and had an adult patient population. We assessed the efficacy of parenteral iron in comparison to other iron supplementation methods when treating IDA in patients with GI cancer. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 (RoB 2) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tools were used to assess the quality of the included studies. Moreover, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization data collection form was used to collect pertinent study information. RESULTS: Our search yielded 3,969 studies across all databases. Twenty-one studies were included (6 randomized control trials; 15 non-randomized studies). Of the 15 studies evaluating hemoglobin (Hb) response, seven studies found an increase in Hb levels when patients were treated with IV iron. The 14 studies evaluating red blood cell (RBC) transfusion rates found conflicting differences in RBC transfusion needs when treated with IV iron. Studies analyzing health related outcomes typically found an increase in quality of life and decreased post-operative complications. DISCUSSION: This review demonstrates improved outcomes of IDA in patients with GI cancer treated with IV iron instead of other iron supplementation methods. Timely diagnosis and appropriate IDA management can greatly improve quality of life in this patient population, especially if myelosuppressive chemotherapy is required.

Iron Surveillance and Management in Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Patients: A National Physician Survey.

PURPOSE: Iron deficiency (ID) is a complication of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers that may manifest as iron deficiency anemia (IDA). Serum ferritin monitoring and oral iron supplementation have the limitations of being falsely elevated and poorly absorbed, respectively. This study aims to assess the discordance in surveillance, treatment practices, and awareness of ID/IDA in GI cancer patients by Canadian physicians treating these patients. METHODS: From February 2020 to September 2021, a 22-question electronic survey was sent to medical oncologists (MOs), surgical oncologists (SOs), and gastroenterologists (GEs). The survey collected information about four domains: physician demographics, surveillance practices, treatment practices, and awareness of ID/IDA in GI cancer patients and ASCO/ASH guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 108 (34 MOs, 19 SOs, and 55 GEs) of the 872 (12.4%) invited physicians completed the survey. Of these, 26.5% of MOs, 36.8% of SOs, and 70.9% of GEs measured baseline iron parameters, with few continuing surveillance throughout treatment. Ferritin was widely measured by MOs (88.9%), SOs (100%), and GEs (91.4%). Iron was supplemented if ID/IDA was identified pre-treatment by 66.7% of MOs, 85.7% of SOs, and 94.2% of GEs. Parenteral iron was prescribed by SOs (100%), while oral iron was prescribed by MOs (83.3%) and GEs (87.9%). Only 18.6% of physicians were aware of the ASCO/ASH guidelines regarding erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with parenteral iron for treating chemotherapy-induced anemia. CONCLUSION: Results illustrate variations in practice patterns for IDA management across the different physician specialties. Moreover, there appeared to be gaps in the knowledge and care surrounding evidence-based IDA management principles which may contribute to poor clinical outcomes.

Comprehensive genomic profiling for oncological advancements by precision medicine.

Considerable advancements in next generation sequencing (NGS) techniques have sparked the use of comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) as a guiding tool for precision-centered oncological treatments. The past two decades have seen the completion of the human genome project, and the consequential invention of NGS. High-throughput sequencing technologies support the discovery and commonplace use of individualized cancer treatments, specifically immune-centered checkpoint inhibitor therapies, and oncogene and tumor suppressor gene targeted therapies. Nevertheless, CGP is not commonly used in all clinical settings. This review investigates the clinically relevant applications of CGP. Studies published between the years 2000-2023 have shown substantial evidence of the benefits of integrating CGP into routine care practice, while also making important comparisons to current-standard oncological treatment strategies. Findings of a comprehensive genomic profile includes predictive, prognostic, and diagnostic biomarkers, together with somatic mutation identification which can indicate the efficacy of immunotherapies and molecularly guided therapies. This review highlights the importance of CGP in identifying driver mutations in tumors that subsequently can be effectively targeted with molecular therapeutics and lead to drug discovery, allowing for increased precision in treating tumors selectively based on their specific genetic mutations, thereby improving patient outcomes.