Ferric derisomaltose and Outcomes in the Recovery of Gynecologic oncology: ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) (FORGE) – a protocol for a pilot randomised double-blinded parallel-group placebo-controlled study of the feasibility and efficacy of intravenous ferric derisomaltose to correct preoperative iron-deficiency anaemia in patients undergoing gynaecological oncology surgery
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: IV Iron before surgery

    We appreciate the interest and questions posed by Professor Richards regarding the FORGE trial. The PREVENTT trial was a well-designed and executed trial, however the primary limitation of the trial is the “Two-week rule” described by the author in their letter and discussed in our introduction. It is well known that the biochemical response to all iron replacement improves with time, with most studies noting a larger response at 3 to 4 weeks post infusion[1,2]. In the PREVENTT study, the median time from infusion to surgery was 14 days in the iron infusion group, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 12-21 days. This is perhaps an explanation as to why the study demonstrated a hemoglobin increase of only 4.7g/L while other studies with median time from infusion to surgery demonstrated greater responses[1]. The study by Derman and colleagues found that at 2 weeks only 30% of patients obtained an increase of hemoglobin concentration greater than 20g/L in response to IV ferric derisomaltose (FDI), while at 3 weeks this increased to nearly 50% of patients[2]. Similarly, the work by Froessler and colleagues in 2016 found only an 8g/L difference in hemoglobin when IV iron (ferric carboxymaltose) was administered a median of 8 days (IQR 6-13 days) prior to surgery[3].

    Although expedited surgery for malignancies is often the ideal, in many jurisdictions, this is not feasible, or advisable based on patient, disease, and health system factors. The COVID-19 pandemic afforded a...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    IV iron before surgery

    We read with interest the proposal for the FORGE trial. We are concerned that the authors are repeating work that has already been undertaken, without learning from previous trials. The authors criticise the PREVENTT trial, but fail to elaborate their reasons and then proceed to essentially duplicate the very same protocol.

    In summary, the PREVENTT RCT (1) was the largest multicentre RCT to assess the role of IV iron compared to placebo in patients before major abdominal surgery. Included were 138 patients undergoing gynaecological surgery and most common operation was a Wertheim’s hysterectomy, a debulking procedure in gynaecological oncology. Of note about two thirds had Tsats < 20% (table 10), essentially representing the same PICO (and size) as proposed in the FORGE trial. There are a couple of key aspects of relevance to FORGE aside from the key question of why they need to repeat the data powered for change in haemoglobin?

    A. A key limitation in recruitment was the ‘2-week rule’ whereby patients listed for cancer surgery are mandated to have their operation within 2 weeks (Chapter 4 of the NIHR report (1)). How do the authors propose to overcome this hurdle in FORGE?

    B. The benefit of modern IV iron is the ability to give a full treatment dose, normally 20mg/kg, why are the authors proposing a lower dose?

    We applaud the authors undertaking a randomised controlled trial but urge them to learn from existing studies to avoid future mist...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.