Intravenous Low Molecular Weight Iron Dextran (LMWID) in the Treatment of Children with Iron Deficiency Anemia,

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3184-3184
Author(s):  
Ellen S. Plummer ◽  
Shelley E. Crary ◽  
George R. Buchanan
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Single Dose ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Iron Dextran ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
Iv Iron ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Iron

Abstract 3184 Background: While iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is among the most common hematologic disorders during childhood, management strategies for patients poorly responsive to oral iron therapy have not been well studied. Children treated for IDA often have a poor response to oral iron due to noncompliance, intolerance of side effects, malabsorption, ongoing blood loss, or a combination of these factors. Alternative treatment approaches are therefore needed. Intravenous (IV) iron, including low molecular weight iron dextran (LMWID), offers the possibility of correcting the anemia and repleting iron stores using a single dose, potentially decreasing the overall burden of treatment. Use of LMWID in children has been limited due to concerns about anaphylaxis associated with high molecular weight iron dextran preparations, even though in adults the risk of anaphylaxis is decreased when alternative IV iron preparations, including LMWID, are employed. In this study we report our initial experience with LMWID in children with IDA. Methods: We performed a retrospective record review of patients receiving IV LMWID for IDA in the Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders at Children's Medical Center Dallas between December 1, 2010 and July 31, 2011. Records were reviewed for age, indication for LMWID, concurrent medical problems, use of premedication, initial and follow-up hemoglobin values, adverse events (AEs), and prior or subsequent receipt of other IV iron preparations. The primary study aim was to characterize the clinical course of patients receiving LMWID to inform a planned prospective cohort study of IV iron in children with IDA poorly responsive to oral iron therapy. Results: A total of 18 patients, age 11 months (mos) to 18 years (yrs), received IV LMWID during the study period. 11 of them (median age 13 yrs) received LMWID for IDA secondary to external blood loss due to menorrhagia (n=3), gastrointestinal disease (n=3), hemophilia (n=2), Von Willebrand disease (n=2), and immune thrombocytopenia (n=1). Five (median age 2 yrs) had IDA due to nutritional deficiency, and two patients had multiple causes for their IDA. 14 patients (77.8%) received their initial LMWID infusion without AEs, and all demonstrated an increase in hemoglobin (mean 3 g/dL) 4 to 7 weeks following infusion. Premedication with diphenhydramine, acetaminophen, hydrocortisone, or a combination of these was given to 6 of the 14 patients (42.8%) at the discretion of the treating physician based on history of atopy. The average dose of LMWID was 600 mg (20.2mg/kg) with a range of 150 mg to 1 gram (6.9 mg/kg to 30.9 mg/kg). 3 of these 14 patients (21.4%) required a subsequent infusion to achieve and maintain a normal hemoglobin due to ongoing blood loss. 6 patients (33.3%) had transient AEs during LMWID infusion including hives (n=3), tachycardia (n=2), chest tightness (n=1), fever (n=2), nausea (n=1), vomiting (n=1), sweating (n=2), and cough (n=1). 2 of them were able to complete the infusion without further sequelae after receiving diphenhydramine or hydrocortisone. Only one of the patients with AEs had received premedication, although on review 3 of the 6 patients with AEs had a concurrent medical problem affecting immune function including asthma and orthotopic liver transplant. No patient required hospital admission or treatment of the AE beyond the day of their clinic visit. 4 of the 6 patients with AEs related to LMWID subsequently received IV iron sucrose infusions without any complications. Conclusions: Among 18 children with IDA receiving LMWID planned as a single dose infusion, treatment was well tolerated and effective in 14 of them and associated with only transient AEs in 6. The latter patients were able to either receive the remainder of the LMWID infusion or an alternative iron preparation without complication. Some patients with ongoing blood loss needed additional infusions, although the majority of children were treated effectively with a single dose. These encouraging results support the need for further study of LMWID in children with IDA unresponsive to oral iron therapy or even as an initial treatment alternative to the oral route. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

A Head-to-Head Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Ferumoxytol to Iron Sucrose for the Treatment of Iron Deficiency Anemia

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 5157-5157
Author(s):  
Allen Poma ◽  
Karen Diana ◽  
Justin McLaughlin ◽  
Annamaria Kausz
Keyword(s):  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Sucrose ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Iv Iron ◽  
Iron Replacement

Abstract Abstract 5157 BACKGROUND: Iron replacement therapy is essential for increasing iron stores and raising hemoglobin levels in patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA). Oral iron supplements have limited absorption and are commonly associated with gastrointestinal (GI) side effects that reduce compliance, resulting in limited increases in hemoglobin. In patients without chronic kidney disease (CKD), oral iron therapy is frequently used to treat IDA. However, when oral iron therapy is unsatisfactory or cannot be tolerated, intravenous (IV) iron therapy may be appropriate. In the US, iron dextrans are the only approved IV iron products indicated for the treatment of IDA in non-CKD patients, and have limitations around convenience because they require a test dose and as many as 10 administrations via a slow infusion; iron dextrans have also been associated with a relatively high rate of serious adverse reactions compared to other IV iron products. Other IV irons, such as iron sucrose and sodium ferric gluconate, are only approved in the US for the treatment of IDA in patients with CKD. Like the iron dextrans, both of these products are limited by administration, requiring 5 to 10 clinic visits for the administration of a full therapeutic dose (1 gram of iron). Feraheme® (ferumoxytol) Injection is an IV iron product approved in the US for the treatment of IDA in adult subjects with CKD. Its carbohydrate coating is designed to minimize immunological sensitivity, and it has less free iron than other IV iron preparations. Ferumoxytol is administered as two IV injections of 510 mg (17 mL) 3 to 8 days apart for a total cumulative dose of 1.02 g. METHODS: To date, there have been a limited number of studies that have examined the safety and efficacy of IV irons in a head-to-head manner for the treatment of IDA, and no study has done so in a large number of subjects or in a broad patient population. AMAG, therefore, has initiated a randomized, controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01114204) to compare ferumoxytol with iron sucrose. Iron sucrose is approved in many countries outside the US for the treatment of IDA in patients intolerant to oral iron therapy, and is considered a safer alternative to IV iron dextran. This open-label trial (n=600) will evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 1.02 g of IV ferumoxytol, administered as 2 doses of 510 mg each, compared with 1.0 g of IV iron sucrose, administered as 5 doses of 200 mg each. Enrolled subjects will have IDA associated with a variety of underlying conditions including abnormal uterine bleeding, GI disorders, cancer, postpartum anemia, and others (eg, nutritional deficiency). Endpoints include changes in hemoglobin and transferrin saturation at Week 5, as well as evaluation of the requirement for erythropoiesis stimulating agent therapy and blood transfusion. Patient reported outcomes instruments will be employed to assess the impact of IV iron therapy on anemia symptoms and health-related quality of life (fatigue, energy, etc). Additionally, detailed information on healthcare utilization will be collected. CONCLUSION In the US, non-CKD patients with IDA who have a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy have limited options for iron replacement therapy. Study NCT01114204 will provide novel information comparing the safety and efficacy of two IV iron therapies for the treatment of IDA in a broad patient population. Disclosures: Poma: AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Diana:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. McLaughlin:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Kausz:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment.

Iron Deficiency Anemia: Safety and Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment with Various Intravenous Iron Preparations

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 4661-4661
Author(s):  
Michael F Driscoll ◽  
Derek Forster ◽  
Brandi Dyer ◽  
Damian A. Laber
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
High Molecular Weight ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Iron Sucrose ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Iron Dextran ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Iv Iron ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Iron

Abstract Introduction: Iron deficiency anemia is one of the most commonly encountered hematologic medical conditions in general practice. Oral replacement of iron can be a slow and suboptimal process, limited by low absorption rates and disease-enhanced malabsorption. When clinicians are faced with patients with large iron deficits, intravenous (IV) iron is the best option. Currently there are four IV preparations available; iron sucrose, iron gluconate, low-molecular weight iron dextran and high-molecular weight iron dextran. Upon informal questioning, we found reluctancy by many physicians to use iron dextran due to fear of allergic reactions. We examine these four preparations for clinical utility, adverse drug events (ADEs), and cost-effectiveness. Methods: We performed a systematic review and retrospective meta-analysis of studies investigating various forms of intravenous iron preparations for toxicity, ADEs, and costs. Also, we obtained actual costs of infusing intravenous iron at four hospitals in metro Louisville, KY. Results: Fourteen studies met the criteria and were reviewed. One study compared all four iron preparations, two compared three preparations and the rest compared two. Eight had a small sample size. The number of ADEs were quite small. Data from FDAderived ADE reporting of the four IV iron preparations from 2001–2003 showed a total of 1141 per 30,063,800 doses administered, yielding an ADE rate of approximately 38 per million. Absolute rate of all ADEs for iron sucrose, iron gluconate, low molecular weight iron dextran and high molecular weight iron dextran were 19.2, 18.5, 36.9, and 117.8 per million, respectively. Absolute rates of life-threatening ADEs were significantly lower at 0.6, 0.9, 3.3, and 11.3 per million respectively for iron sucrose, iron gluconate, low molecular weight iron dextran, and high molecular weight iron dextran. Based on cost differences between iron sucrose and dextran preparations, the cost to prevent one lifethreatening ADE related to the use of lower molecular weigh iron dextran was estimated to be $5.0–7.8 million. Also the cost to prevent one low-molecular weight iron dextran related death was estimated to be $33 million. These calculations are based on cost of preparations only. Estimates based on hospital-related costs incurred due to multiple infusions vs total dose infusion (TDI) puts the estimate of cost to prevent one lower molecular weight related death over $150 million. Conclusions: The perceived rate of ADEs related to infusion of IV iron preparations in medical practice has been overstated. Smaller studies with lower patient and total infusion numbers, and anecdotal evidence, tended to overestimate the frequency of life-threatening reactions. The incidence of ADEs and serious life-threatening ADEs, is exceedingly low for all IV iron preparations. In light of costs associated with the use of iron sucrose and iron gluconate vs iron dextran, we recommend that all clinicians re-assess the clinical utility of low molecular weight iron dextran for iron deficiency anemia necessitating parenteral iron replacement. Moreover, large doses of iron dextran can be safely given, thereby reducing costs associated with multiple small infusions of iron sucrose.

Intravenous Iron Monotherapy for Absolute and Functional Iron Deficiency Anemia in Cancer Patients

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 5167-5167
Author(s):  
Sara Hiller ◽  
Jeffrey Gilreath ◽  
David Stenehjem ◽  
Daniel S. Sageser ◽  
George M Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Total Dose ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Iron Dextran ◽  
Iv Iron ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Iron

Abstract Abstract 5167 Objective Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is common in cancer patients. The Hemoglobin (Hb) response rate in cancer patients with IDA who receive an erythropoiesis stimulating agent (ESA) ranges from 25 – 65% and is increased to 68 – 93% when intravenous (IV) iron is added to the ESA. Interestingly, there have been no studies to date that have evaluated Hb response to IV iron monotherapy for the treatment of IDA in cancer patients. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends treating absolute IDA (AIDA, serum ferritin < 30 ng/mL and TSAT < 15%) with iron monotherapy, preferably IV. However, the NCCN recommends that functional IDA (FIDA, serum ferritin ≤ 800 ng/mL and TSAT < 20%) be treated with both IV iron plus an ESA. Unfortunately, ESAs carry black box warnings for increased mortality, cancer progression, and venous thromboembolism. Therefore, it is important to explore other ways to more safely treat IDA in cancer patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the Hb response rate to IV iron monotherapy in cancer patients with AIDA and FIDA. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed at the Huntsman Cancer Institute between January 2006 and June 2011 in cancer patients with AIDA or FIDA who were treated with low molecular weight iron dextran (LMWID) monotherapy. Patients were excluded if they had a ferritin > 800 ng/mL or TSAT ≥ 20%, received an ESA within 6 weeks prior to or within 4 weeks after the LMWID infusion, or received a packed red blood cell transfusion prior to the LMWID infusion without a documented post- transfusion, pre-LMWID infusion Hb. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a Hb response defined as an increase of at least 1 g/dL within 6 weeks post IV iron infusion. The secondary outcome was the Hb response within 6 weeks stratified by dose of IV iron. Results Two hundred patients received LMWID at our institution within the specified time period. However, 182 patients were excluded because they did not have active cancer, did not have a definitive diagnosis of AIDA or FIDA, or received concomitant therapy with an ESA. Eighteen patients with either a hematologic or solid malignancy were included. Thirteen patients had AIDA and 5 patients had FIDA. Eight of the 13 (62%) patients in the AIDA group had a Hb response. The median Hb increase in the AIDA group was 1. 3 g/dL (p < 0. 0001). A Hb response was observed in 4 of the 5 (80%) patients in the FIDA group. The median Hb increase in the FIDA group was 1. 8 g/dL (p = 0. 0224). Of the 8 patients with AIDA achieving a response, 4 received less than and 4 received more than the calculated total IV iron dose (equation per package insert). Of the 4 patients achieving a Hb response in the FIDA group, 3 received less than and 1 received equal to the calculated total dose. The overall Hb response rate to IV iron monotherapy for both groups was roughly 67% which is greater than the Hb response rate reported with ESAs alone. See Table 1 for individual patient details. Conclusion Although our study has limited patient numbers, this is the first data suggesting that IV iron without an ESA may be an effective treatment for both AIDA and FIDA in anemic patients with a variety of malignancies. IV iron monotherapy may eliminate the need for an ESA. This hypothesis should be tested in larger studies. Disclosures: Off Label Use: The total dose infusion of low molecular weight iron dextran is not an FDA approved dosing regimen. However, it is commonly used in practice and has been used in other studies. Rodgers:American Regent: Consultancy.

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Ferric Carboxymaltose in Children with Iron Deficiency Anemia Unresponsive to Oral Iron Therapy

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4552-4552
Author(s):  
Jacquelyn M. Powers ◽  
Mark P. Shamoun ◽  
Timothy L. McCavit ◽  
Leah Adix ◽  
George R. Buchanan
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Test Dose ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
Hematologic Response ◽  
Post Infusion ◽  
Iv Iron

Abstract Background The standard first line therapy for iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is oral iron. Yet, many patients fail to respond to oral iron due to poor adherence and/or adverse effects. Intravenous (IV) iron is an effective means of treating IDA in patients with malabsorption of iron or who are non-adherent and/or experience adverse effects with oral iron. Some IV iron preparations carry an FDA-mandated black box warning and/or require a test dose or prolonged infusion. Ferric carboxymaltose (FCM, Injectafer®) is a relatively new IV iron preparation with demonstrated safety and efficacy in adults with IDA. The manufacturer recommended dosing is 15 mg/kg/dose (maximum 750 mg) x2 doses administered at least 7 days apart, and each individual infusion can be administered over 10 to 15 minutes, without the need for a test dose. Limited data exist on its use in children. Our objective was to assess the hematologic response and adverse effects of IV FCM in a diverse population of infants, children and adolescents with IDA who failed oral iron therapy. Method All children with IDA who received FCM at Children's Health from June 1, 2014 through June 10, 2015 were included. Subjects were identified via search of pharmacy records. All patients received at least one dose of FCM 15 mg/kg (maximum 750 mg) administered as a 15-minute IV infusion (without test dose or pre-medications). Patient characteristics, adverse effects and hematologic response were retrospectively collected from the electronic medical record. Results During the study frame, one hundred twenty-five infusions of FCM were administered to 87 patients (71% female) with a median age of 14 years (range 9 months to 20.8 years). The most common racial/ethnic group was Caucasian/White (Latino) at 45% followed by African American/Black and Caucasian/White (Non-Latino), each at 22%. The primary etiologies were heavy menstrual bleeding (38%), nutritional (24%), and GI bleeding and/or malabsorption (20%) with the remaining 18% representing other/mixed causes of IDA (e.g., inflammatory). The median dose administered during a single infusion was 750 mg (range 132 to 750 mg). No adverse effects were noted during or following the infusion in 77 subjects. Two patients had transient tingling, nausea and/or mild abdominal pain. Five others developed generalized pruritis and/or urticaria and received diphenhydramine and/or hydrocortisone, with prompt resolution. Two adolescents had more clinically significant reactions, 1 with nausea/vomiting post-infusion (likely psychogenic) requiring admission, and 1 with dyspnea 2 minutes into the infusion, requiring its immediate termination and administration of diphenhydramine, hydrocortisone and normal saline with prompt symptom resolution. One patient experienced asymptomatic extravasation during the second infusion which resulted in localized iron-staining of the skin. Median pre-infusion hemoglobin concentration for all patients was 9.1 g/dL (range 3.9 to 13.3 g/dL) (Table). A follow-up measurement was available for 76 patients at a median time of 6 weeks (range 1 to 30 weeks) post-initial infusion with a median hemoglobin increase of 3.3 g/dL (range -1.5 to 9.5 g/dL). Conclusion Intravenous FCM, administered in an outpatient infusion setting as one or two short IV infusions and without need for a test dose, was safe and effective in most children and adolescents with IDA refractory to oral iron therapy. Further clinical data are necessary to more fully characterize the extent of adverse effects in young patients. Prospective studies of IV FCM in children are indicated to assess clinical efficacy, including outcomes such as health related quality of life and fatigue. Table. *Hematologic Response to FCM Pre-Infusion **Post-Infusion Hemoglobin concentration (g/dL) All Etiologies, Pre (n=87), Post (n=76) Heavy menstrual bleeding, Pre (n=33), Post (n=26) Nutritional, Pre (n=21), Post (n=20) - 9.1 (3.9 to 13.3) 9.3 (4.2 to 13.3) 8.8 (4.9 to 12.2) - 12.2 (7.1 to 16) 12.7 (8.8 to 16) 12.2 (10.5 to 13.7) Mean corpuscular volume (fl), Pre (n=87), Post (n=76) 71.6 (49.5 to 97.4) 80.9 (53.3 to 102) Serum ferritin (ng/mL), Pre (n=80), Post (n=60) 5.2 (0.6 to 288.6) 115.7 (2.3 to 679.3) *Median laboratory values are reported. **Follow-up laboratory testing occurred at median time of 6 weeks (range 1 to 30 weeks) post-infusion. Disclosures Powers: Gensavis Pharmaceuticals, LLC: Research Funding. McCavit:Pfizer: Research Funding; Gensavis LLC: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Adix:Gensavis Pharmaceuticals, LLC: Research Funding. Buchanan:Gensavis Pharmaceuticals, LLC: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Clinical Criteria for Transitioning from Oral to IV Iron Replacement Therapy in Patients with Iron Deficiency Anemia

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 211-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Okam ◽  
Todd Koch ◽  
Minh Ha Tran
Keyword(s):  
Reticulocyte Count ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Ferric Carboxymaltose ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
Iron Treatment ◽  
Iv Iron ◽  
Iron Replacement

Abstract Introduction: Oral iron supplementation is an effective means of iron replacement. Nevertheless, there is a frequent need to transition patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA) from oral to intravenous (IV) iron therapy for inadequate response. No definitive guidance on the optimal timing for this change in therapy exists. Serum hepcidin may be a marker in predicting response to oral iron therapy, but currently, hepcidin assays are not commercially available. We evaluated the ability of various early response characteristics to accurately predict for an overall hemoglobin (Hb) response to oral iron. Our objective was to identify an early predictor of overall Hb response in patients on oral iron treatment as a guide to the decision to switch from oral to IV iron in patients unlikely to benefit from continued oral iron. Methods: Proprietary datasets from 6 published randomized studies in which oral iron (325 mg of ferrous sulfate containing 65 mg of elemental iron, t.i.d.[4 studies], 304.3 mg capsules containing 100 mg bivalent iron b.i.d [1 study] and as prescribed by the investigator [1 study]) was used as a comparator to ferric carboxymaltose were analyzed. Five studies were pooled into one primary analysis dataset and one study was analyzed separately due to differences in study design that precluded pooling. Patients were grouped by the underlying etiology of their IDA (postpartum, heavy uterine bleeding, gastrointestinal, and others) and stratified by those who had ≥ 1 g/dL Hb change after 14 days of oral iron therapy (responders) and those who did not (non-responders). Further analyses evaluated Hb response at various time points based on initial 14 day Hb response (≥ 1 g/dL change vs < 1 g/dL). We systemically evaluated changes in hemoglobin, absolute reticulocyte count, % reticulocyte count, ferritin, and transferrin saturation at specific time points to determine their ability to predict overall Hb response. Results: A total of 738 patients who were randomized to oral iron were included in the pooled study analysis. In the separate study, a total of 253 patients, all non-responders, were included. The mean baseline values for the 6 studies were Hb 9.9 g/dL, ferritin 19.9 ng/mL, and TSAT 16.9%. The vast majority of patients (96%) were females with a mean age of 36 years. In the pooled analysis, by day 14 of oral iron treatment, 27.2% (201/738) of patients had a Hb increase of < 1 g/dL (non-responders). Of these 201 patients, less than half (46.8%, 94/201) achieved an increase in Hb ≥ 1 g/dL from baseline after 2 additional weeks of oral iron (by day 28) and only 63.2% (127/201) had an increase in Hb ≥ 1g/dL from baseline after 6 to 8 weeks of oral iron (42 to 56 days). Furthermore, only 27.4% (55/201) and 5.5% (11/201) had an increase in Hb of 2 or 3 g/dL respectively at the Day 42 or 56 measurement. In comparison, responders (those who had a Hb increase ≥ 1 g/dL by 14 days of treatment) sustained a robust Hb response with continued dosing of oral iron. After 4 weeks of oral iron (28 days), 84.9% of the responders had a ≥ 2 g/dL increase in Hb from baseline. After 6 to 8 weeks of oral iron (42 or 56 days), 92.9% of the patients had ≥ 2 g/dL Hb increase from baseline, significantly different from non-responders (p < 0.0001). Patients with etiology of postpartum anemia had the most robust Hb response to oral iron. Results observed in the sixth study were similar to the pooled analysis. Only 10.2% (17/167) of non-responders who continued oral iron after day 14 achieved a Hb ≥ 2g/dL by Day 35, whereas 38.8% (57/147) who were switched to IV ferric carboxymaltose achieved a Hb > 2/dL by Day 35 (p =0.0001). Hb response after 14 days of oral iron was a strong predictor of overall response (sensitivity = 90.1%, specificity = 79.3%, positive predictive value = 92.9%, negative predictive value= 72.7%), surpassing other parameters evaluated in this study. Conclusion: In the absence of significant continuous blood loss, Hb measurements taken 14 days after initiation of oral iron therapy can reliably predict overall response in Hb to oral iron therapy. Accordingly, day 14 Hb may be a useful tool for clinicians in determining when to switch patients from oral to IV iron. Disclosures Koch: Luitpold Pharmaceuticals: Employment.

A comparative study of efficacy of single dose of intravenous ferric carboxymaltose over oral iron therapy in severe iron deficiency Anemia

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-164
Author(s):  
Makarand Balwant Mane ◽  
◽  
Priyanka Makarand Mane ◽  
Akshay Shirshat ◽  
Tejas Uttamrao Bhosale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Iron Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Ferric Carboxymaltose ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy

Potential New Treatment Option for Iron Deficiency Anemia Patients with a History of Unsatisfactory Oral Iron Therapy- Results of a Phase III, Randomized, Open-Label, Active-Controlled Trial of Ferumoxytol.

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 2099-2099 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Hetzel ◽  
Audrone Urboniene ◽  
Kristine Bernard ◽  
William Strauss ◽  
Michael Cressman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Iron Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Iv Iron

Abstract Abstract 2099 Background: While oral iron is the preferred first-line treatment for patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA), there are patients who cannot take oral iron, do not tolerate it or do not adequately respond to oral iron. In the US and Canada, the only approved treatment options for these patients are the iron dextrans, which have boxed safety warnings and inconvenient dosing regimens. Therefore, many of these anemic patients do not receive IV iron, and remain inadequately treated and symptomatic. In the EU, several IV irons, including iron sucrose (IS), are approved for second line use. Few studies have evaluated the IV irons in head-to-head studies. Ferumoxytol (FER) is a new IV iron approved for the treatment of IDA in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) that is formulated to allow for bolus IV injection. This randomized, controlled trial was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of FER compared to IS for the treatment of IDA in patients with a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy or in whom oral iron could not be used. Methods: The study was designed to demonstrate non-inferiority and consisted of a 14 day screening period, treatment and a 5 week follow-up period. Key inclusion criteria included a Baseline hemoglobin (Hgb) less than 10 g/dL and >7 g/dL, and transferrin saturation (TSAT) < 20%. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either FER, administered as 2 injections of 510 mg 5±3 days apart, or IS, administered as 5 infusions or injections of 200 mg on 5 non-consecutive days over a 14 day period. Results: A total of 605 subjects were randomized to the 2 treatment arms (FER, n= 406; IS, n=199). FER demonstrated non-inferiority to IS in the proportion of subjects with a >2.0 g/dL increase in Hgb at any time from Baseline to Week 5 (the primary efficacy endpoint), compared to those treated with IS, (FER, 84%; IS 81%) with the lower bound of the 95% CI [-3.89%] above the predefined non inferiority margin [-15%]. In addition at each post-treatment time point, a higher percentage of FER-treated subjects achieved a >2.0 g/dL increase in Hgb compared to those treated with IS. FER also achieved non-inferiority to IS in the mean change in Hgb from Baseline to Week 5 with a robust 2.7g/dL increase in Hgb compared to 2.4g/dL with IS (the lower bound of the 95% CI [0.06g/dL] was above the predefined non-inferiority margin [-0.5g/dL]); this treatment difference (0.3 g/dL) was statistically significant (p=0.0124), and FER actually achieved superiority over IS. The overall rates of adverse events (AEs) and related AEs were lower in the FER group compared to IS-treated subjects. The serious adverse event (SAE) rate was higher in FER-treated subjects (FER, 4.2%; IS, 2.5%), but no pattern or safety trend was observed to suggest a specific safety signal; treatment-related SAEs were reported in 2 (0.5%) FER-treated subjects (1 anaphylactoid reaction and 1 hypertension). Protocol-defined AEs of Special Interest (signs/symptoms of hypotension or hypersensitivity associated with IV iron use) were reported at a higher rate in IS-treated subjects compared to the FER treatment group (IS, 5.0%; FER, 2.7%). Cardiovascular AE rates were comparable in the 2 treatment groups (1.0%). Overall, the safety profile of FER was comparable to that of IS and no new safety signals were identified. Conclusion: In this randomized, controlled trial, the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of FER were shown to be comparable to IS in treating IDA patients with a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy or in whom oral iron could not be used. For this IDA patient population, which has limited treatment options in the US and Canada, FER may offer an important, new treatment option with a convenient 2 dose regimen. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Feraheme (ferumoxytol) injection. For treatment of iron deficiency anemia in non-CKD patients. Bernard:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Strauss:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Cressman:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Li:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Allen:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment.

Ferumoxytol Treatment Results in Robust Hemoglobin Increases in Iron Deficiency Anemia Patients with a History of Unsatisfactory Oral Iron Therapy in a Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 2098-2098
Author(s):  
Saroj Vadhan Raj ◽  
Michael Cressman ◽  
David Ford ◽  
William Strauss ◽  
Gerri Poss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Iron Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Group Treatment ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Iv Iron

Abstract Abstract 2098 Background: Although oral iron therapy is often the initial approach to the treatment of iron deficiency anemia (IDA), many patients fail to adequately respond or do not tolerate oral iron. Unfortunately for these patients, approved treatment options are limited in the US and Canada to only the IV iron dextrans, which have boxed safety warnings and inconvenient dosing regimens. Many of these patients, therefore, do not get IV iron, and remain inadequately treated and symptomatic. Ferumoxytol (FER), a new IV iron approved for the treatment of IDA in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), is being investigated to treat IDA patients without CKD who have a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy or in whom oral iron cannot be used. This randomized, placebo-controlled, double blind trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of FER for the treatment of these IDA patients. Methods: Key inclusion criteria included a Baseline hemoglobin (Hgb) less than 10 g/dL and >7 g/dL, and transferrin saturation (TSAT) <20%. Subjects were randomized 3:1 to receive 2 injections of either FER (510 mg, 5±3 days apart) or placebo (IV normal saline). Efficacy assessments included comparisons of the change in Hgb, TSAT and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) score in the 2 treatment groups between Baseline and Week 5. Results: A total of 808 subjects were randomized to the 2 treatment arms (FER, n=608; placebo, n=200). FER demonstrated superiority to placebo with 81.1% of subjects achieving an increase in Hgb of >2.0 g/dL from Baseline to Week 5 compared to only 5.5% in the placebo group (treatment difference: 75.6%, p<0.0001). At each post-FER treatment time point, a larger percentage of FER-treated subjects had a >2.0 g/dL increase in Hgb compared with those treated with placebo. The superiority of FER was also demonstrated for the mean change in Hgb from Baseline to Week 5 with a robust 2.7 g/dL increase compared to only 0.1 g/dL in the placebo group (treatment difference: 2.54 g/dL, p<0.0001). An increase in TSAT from Baseline to Week 5 was only observed in FER-treated subjects (mean change: FER, 11.0%; placebo −0.1%). In addition, a statistically significant improvement in fatigue from Baseline to Week 5, as measured by the FACIT-Fatigue, was shown for FER-treated subjects compared to placebo (p<0.0001). The rates of adverse events (AEs) and related AEs were higher in the FER group, although no pattern or safety trend was observed to suggest a specific safety signal. The overall rate of serious adverse events (SAEs) was comparable between the 2 treatment groups (FER, 2.6%; placebo, 3.0%), and treatment-related SAEs associated with the class of IV iron products were reported in 4 (0.7%) FER-treated subjects. As expected, protocol-defined AEs of Special Interest (signs/symptoms of hypotension or hypersensitivity associated with IV iron use) were noted at a higher rate in FER-treated subjects (FER, 3.6%; placebo, 1.0%). All cardiovascular AEs were considered unrelated by the investigators. Overall, FER was well tolerated and no new safety signals were identified. Conclusion: In this randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III trial, 2 doses of FER were shown to be highly effective in raising hemoglobin and iron parameters in non-CKD patients with IDA who had a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy. FER also significantly reduced fatigue, and was generally well tolerated with no new safety signals being identified. Therefore, FER could provide an important, new treatment option for IDA patients with a history of unsatisfactory oral iron therapy or in whom oral iron could not be used. Disclosures: Vadhan Raj: AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Feraheme (ferumoxytol) injection. For treatment of iron deficiency anemia in non-CKD patients. Cressman:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Strauss:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Bernard:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Li:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Allen:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment.

Intravenous Iron Therapy: A Summary of Treatment Options and Review of Guidelines

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 431-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott B. Silverstein ◽  
Jeffrey A. Gilreath ◽  
George M. Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Iron Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Iron Dextran ◽  
Functional Iron Deficiency ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy

Iron replacement for iron-deficiency anemia has historically been accomplished with the use of oral iron therapy. Although oral iron is appropriate for most iron-deficiency anemia patients, many patients do not respond to or may be intolerant of oral iron, or may experience bleeding of sufficient magnitude to require higher iron doses than that achievable with oral iron. Intravenous iron therapy is a useful option for these latter patients. Three intravenous iron products are recommended: low-molecular weight iron dextran (INFeD), ferric gluconate (Ferrlecit), and iron sucrose (Venofer). These intravenous iron products have superior safety profiles compared to high-molecular weight iron dextran. The Food and Drug Administration's approval of erythropoietic-stimulating agents to treat certain types of anemia has increased usage of intravenous iron for functional iron deficiency. This review summarizes the current status of intravenous iron products and discusses their advantages and disadvantages in treating both absolute and functional iron deficiency.

scholarly journals Effect of Oral Iron Therapy in Moderately Affected Anemianic Pregnant Women

2021 ◽  
pp. 501-509
Author(s):  
M. Sarmishta, Anitha
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Oral Therapy ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Iron Dextran ◽  
Maternal Deaths ◽  
Oral Iron Therapy ◽  
Time Period

In India, Iron deficiency anemia is one of the major causes of maternal deaths, over the past years, various oral and intra muscular & intravenous preparations of iron have been used for correction of iron muscular are associated with significant side effects; Intramuscular (Iron dextran) was used as an alternative to oral iron therapy for those who were not compliant to oral therapy. Iron dextran has a lot of side effects such as fever, arthralgia, even anaphylactic reactions extending to pulmonary edema and even death. Further it is not possible to achieve the target rise in Hemoglobin level in a limited time period, when the patient is approaching term. Whereas Intravenous (Iron sucrose complex) is a relatively new drug which is a BOON to medical therapy and is the BEST OPTION of iron therapy when used as an alternative to oral therapy as it restores iron stores more promptly and is able to raise the hemoglobin to satisfactory level .

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document