Soluble transferrin receptor and zinc protoporphyrin - competitors or efficient partners?

• Verfasst von: Metzgeroth, Georgia [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Adelberger, Verena [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Dorn-Beineke, Alexandra [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Kuhn, Christian [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Schatz, Michael [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Maywald, Ole [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Bertsch, Thomas [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Wisser, Hermann [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Hehlmann, Rüdiger [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Hastka, Jan [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Soluble transferrin receptor and zinc protoporphyrin - competitors or efficient partners?
• Verf.angabe: Georgia Metzgeroth, Verena Adelberger, Alexandra Dorn-Beineke, Christian Kuhn, Michael Schatz, Ole Maywald, Thomas Bertsch, Hermann Wisser, Rüdiger Hehlmann, Jan Hastka
• E-Jahr: 2005
• Jahr: 06 September 2005
• Umfang: 9 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 11.05.2022
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: European journal of haematology
• Ort Quelle: Oxford : Wiley-Blackwell, 1987
• Jahr Quelle: 2005
• Band/Heft Quelle: 75(2005), 4, Seite 309-317
• ISSN Quelle: 1600-0609
• DOI: doi:10.1111/j.1600-0609.2005.00515.x
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: anemia
• Sach-SW: iron deficiency
• Sach-SW: soluble transferrin receptor
• Sach-SW: zinc protoporphyrin
• K10plus-PPN: 1801381062

Abstract

Objectives: Soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR) and zinc protoporphyrin (ZPP) are both parameters of iron deficient erythropoiesis (IDE), the sTfR measurement is commonly regarded to be the more sensitive test. sTfR also reflects erythropoietic activity, it is increased in enhanced erythropoiesis. Methods: We investigated the diagnostic accuracy of sTfR in assessment of iron deficiency (ID) and compared it with ZPP. The study was performed on 174 subjects, in which ID has been precisely staged. Results: Individuals without ID and patients with storage iron depletion only, had normal sTfR values. Patients classified as IDE and patients with iron deficiency anemia had significantly increased sTfR. There was a good correlation between sTfR and hemoglobin (r = −0.86; P < 0.0001) and between sTfR and ZPP (r = 0.86; P < 0.0001). When diagnosing ID, ZPP was the more sensitive test. In mildly developed IDE associated with ZPP-ratios between 40 and 70 μmol/mol heme, the sTfR concentration was elevated in only 25% of the cases. Reliably elevated sTfR values were observed only in more advanced IDE, associated with ZPP > 70 μmol/mol heme. Conclusions: ZPP is not inferior to sTfR when diagnosing IDE. Given the good correlation between sTfR and ZPP and because ZPP is uninfluenced by the erythropoietic activity, sTfR and ZPP are not competitors, rather efficient partners in diagnosing anemias. By measuring ZPP and sTfR simultaneously, the diagnostic uncertainty inherent in each of them individually can be eliminated. In particular, the simultaneous determination of ZPP and sTfR enhances the diagnostic power of sTfR in assessment of the erythropoietic activity.