Effect of Iron Therapy on Platelet Counts in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease-Associated Anemia

Secondary thrombocytosis is a clinical feature of unknown significance. In inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), thrombocytosis is considered a marker of active disease; however, iron deficiency itself may trigger platelet generation. In this study we tested the effect of iron therapy on platelet counts in patients with IBD-associated anemia.Platelet counts were analyzed before and after iron therapy from four prospective clinical trials. Further, changes in hemoglobin, transferrin saturation, ferritin, C-reactive protein, and leukocyte counts, before and after iron therapy were compared. In a subgroup the effect of erythropoietin treatment was tested. The results were confirmed in a large independent cohort (FERGIcor).A total of 308 patient records were available for the initial analysis. A dose-depended drop in platelet counts (mean 425 G/L to 320 G/L; p<0.001) was found regardless of the type of iron preparation (iron sulphate, iron sucrose, or ferric carboxymaltose). Concomitant erythropoietin therapy as well as parameters of inflammation (leukocyte counts, C-reactive protein) had no effect on the change in platelet counts. This effect of iron therapy on platelets was confirmed in the FERGIcor study cohort (n=448, mean platelet counts before iron therapy: 383 G/L, after: 310 G/L, p<0.001).Iron therapy normalizes elevated platelet counts in patients with IBD-associated anemia. Thus, iron deficiency is an important pathogenetic mechanism of secondary thrombocytosis in IBD

FDG-PET Parameters as Prognostic Factor in Esophageal Cancer Patients: A Review

Background:18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) has been used extensively to explore whether FDG Uptake can be used to provide prognostic information for esophageal cancer patients. The aim of the present review is to evaluate the literature available to date concerning the potential prognostic value of FDG uptake in esophageal cancer patients, in terms of absolute pretreatment values and of decrease in FDG uptake during or after neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: A computer-aided search of the English language literature concerning esophageal cancer and standardized uptake values was performed. This search focused on clinical studies evaluating the prognostic value of FDG uptake as an absolute value or the decrease in FDG uptake and using overall mortality and/or disease-related mortality as an end point. Results: In total, 31 studies met the predefined criteria. Two main groups were identified based on the tested prognostic parameter: (1) FDG uptake and (2) decrease in FDG uptake. Most studies showed that pretreatment FDG uptake and postneoadjuvant treatment FDG uptake, as absolute values, are predictors for survival in univariate analysis. Moreover, early decrease in FDG uptake during neoadjuvant therapy is predictive for response and survival in most studies described. However, late decrease in FDG uptake after completion of neoadjuvant therapy was predictive for pathological response and survival in only 2 of 6 studies. Conclusions: Measuring decrease in FDG uptake early during neoadjuvant therapy is most appealing, moreover because the observed range of values expressed as relative decrease to discriminate responding from nonresponding patients is very small. At present inter-institutional comparison of results is difficult because several different normalization factors for FDG uptake are in use. Therefore, more research focusing on standardization of protocols and inter-institutional differences should be performed, before a PET-guided algorithm can be universally advocated