teferrol and ferric-carboxymaltose

Inflammatory bowel disease affects approximately seven million people globally. Iron deficiency anaemia can occur as a common systemic manifestation, with a prevalence of up to 90%, which can significantly affect quality of life, both during periods of active disease or in remission. It is important that iron deficiency anaemia is treated effectively and not be assumed to be a normal finding of inflammatory bowel disease. The various routes of iron administration, doses and preparations present varying advantages and disadvantages, and a significant proportion of people experience adverse effects with current therapies. Currently, no consensus has been reached amongst physicians as to which treatment path is most beneficial.. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the interventions for the treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in people with inflammatory bowel disease.. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two other databases on 21st November 2019. We also contacted experts in the field and searched references of trials for any additional trials.. Randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness and safety of iron administration interventions compared to other iron administration interventions or placebo in the treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in inflammatory bowel disease. We considered both adults and children, with studies reporting outcomes of clinical, endoscopic, histologic or surgical remission as defined by study authors.. Two review authors independently conducted data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment of included studies. We expressed dichotomous and continuous outcomes as risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology.. We included 11 studies (1670 randomised participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies compared intravenous iron sucrose vs oral iron sulphate (2 studies); oral iron sulphate vs oral iron hydroxide polymaltose complex (1 study); oral iron fumarate vs intravenous iron sucrose (1 study); intravenous ferric carboxymaltose vs intravenous iron sucrose (1 study); erythropoietin injection + intravenous iron sucrose vs intravenous iron sucrose + injection placebo (1 study); oral ferric maltol vs oral placebo (1 study); oral ferric maltol vs intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (1 study); intravenous ferric carboxymaltose vs oral iron sulphate (1 study); intravenous iron isomaltoside vs oral iron sulphate (1 study); erythropoietin injection vs oral placebo (1 study). All studies compared participants with CD and UC together, as well as considering a range of disease activity states. The primary outcome of number of responders, when defined, was stated to be an increase in haemoglobin of 20 g/L in all but two studies in which an increase in 10g/L was used. In one study comparing intravenous ferric carboxymaltose and intravenous iron sucrose, moderate-certainty evidence was found that intravenous ferric carboxymaltose was probably superior to intravenous iron sucrose, although there were responders in both groups (150/244 versus 118/239, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 9). In one study comparing oral ferric maltol to placebo, there was low-certainty evidence of superiority of the iron (36/64 versus 0/64, RR 73.00, 95% CI 4.58 to 1164.36). There were no other direct comparisons that found any difference in the primary outcomes, although certainty was low and very low for all outcomes, due to imprecision from sparse data and risk of bias varying between moderate and high risk. The reporting of secondary outcomes was inconsistent. The most common was the occurrence of serious adverse events or those requiring withdrawal of therapy. In no comparisons was there a difference seen between any of the intervention agents being studied, although the certainty was very low for all comparisons made, due to risk of bias and significant imprecision due to the low numbers of events. Time to remission, histological and biochemical outcomes were sparsely reported in the studies. None of the other secondary outcomes were reported in any of the studies. An analysis of all intravenous iron preparations to all o. Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose probably leads to more people having resolution of IDA (iron deficiency anaemia) than intravenous iron sucrose. Oral ferric maltol may lead to more people having resolution of IDA than placebo. We are unable to draw conclusions on which of the other treatments is most effective in IDA with IBD (inflammatory bowel disease) due to low numbers of studies in each comparison area and clinical heterogeneity within the studies. Therefore, there are no other conclusions regarding the treatments that can be made and certainty of all findings are low or very low. Overall, intravenous iron delivery probably leads to greater response in patients compared with oral iron, with a NNTB (number needed to treat) of 11. Whilst no serious adverse events were specifically elicited with any of the treatments studied, the numbers of reported events were low and the certainty of these findings very low for all comparisons, so no conclusions can be drawn. There may be more withdrawals due to such events when oral is compared with intravenous iron delivery. Other outcomes were poorly reported and once again no conclusions can be made as to the impact of IDA on any of these outcomes. Given the widespread use of many of these treatments in practice and the only guideline that exists recommending the use of intravenous iron in favour of oral iron, research to investigate this key issue is clearly needed. Considering the current ongoing trials identified in this review, these are more focussed on the impact in specific patient groups (young people) or on other symptoms (such as fatigue). Therefore, there is a need for studies to be performed to fill this evidence gap.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Bias; Colitis, Ulcerative; Crohn Disease; Disaccharides; Erythropoietin; Ferric Compounds; Ferric Oxide, Saccharated; Fumarates; Hematinics; Humans; Iron Compounds; Maltose; Middle Aged; Placebos; Pyrones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult

Intravenous (IV) iron in pregnancy is useful where oral iron is not tolerated or a rapid replenishment of iron is required.. To review the literature on the efficacy and safety of different IV iron preparations in the management of antenatal iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA).. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus from inception to June 2016. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, involving administration of IV iron (ferric carboxymaltose (FCM), iron polymaltose (IPM) or iron sucrose (IS)), regardless of comparator, to manage antenatal IDA. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data and assessed quality.. A total of 47 studies were eligible (21 RCTs and 26 observational studies), investigating IS (n = 2635; 41 studies), FCM (n = 276; four studies) and IPM (n = 164; three studies). All IV preparations resulted in significant improvements in haematological parameters, with a median increase of 21.8 g/L at 3-4 weeks and 30.1 g/L by delivery, but there was no evidence of any associated improvements in clinical outcomes. A greater median increase in Hb was observed with a high (25 g/L; range: 20-39.6 g/L) compared with low dose (20 g/L; range: 6.2-50.3 g/L). The median prevalence of adverse drug reactions for IPM (2.2%; range: 0-4.5%) was lower than FCM (5.0%; range: 0-20%) and IS (6.7%; range: 0-19.5%).. While IV iron in pregnancy improves haematological parameters, there is an absence of evidence for improvements in important maternal or perinatal outcomes. No single preparation of IV iron appeared to be superior, with the current IV iron preparation of choice largely determined by cost and convenience around administration.

Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Female; Ferric Compounds; Ferric Oxide, Saccharated; Humans; Maltose; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic; Quality of Life

Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) is the most common nutritional deficiency affecting pregnant women worldwide. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of a newly available intravenous (IV) iron preparation, ferric carboxymaltose (FCM), against IV iron polymaltose (IPM), and standard oral iron (ferrous sulphate) for the treatment of IDA in pregnancy. This is an open-labelled prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) with intention-to-treat analysis conducted at a primary health care facility with a single tertiary referral centre in Launceston. Tasmania, Australia. A 3-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted comparing a single IV infusion of 1000mg of FCM (n = 83 patients) over 15 minutes against a single IV infusion of 1000mg of IPM (n = 82) over 2 hours against 325mg daily oral ferrous sulphate (n = 81) until delivery, for the treatment of IDA in pregnancy. A total of 246 consecutive pregnant women were recruited between September 2013 and July 2014. The median age was 28 years, with a median and mean gestation of 27 weeks. The median serum ferritin was 9µg/L, with a mean of 13µg/L. The mean haemoglobin (Hb) was 114g/L. The primary outcome was the change in ferritin and Hb levels at 4 weeks after intervention. Secondary outcomes included ferritin and Hb improvements at predelivery, safety, tolerability, quality of life (QoL), cost utility, and fetal outcomes. The mean Hb level differences between the baseline intervention time point and 4 weeks thereafter were significantly higher in the FCM versus the oral group by 4.35g/L (95% CI: 1.64-7.05; P = 0.0006) and in the IPM vs the oral group by 4.08g/L (95% CI: 1.57-6.60; P = 0.0005), but not different between the FCM and IPM groups (0.26g/L; 95% CI: -2.59 to 3.11; P = 0.9740). The mean ferritin level differences were significantly higher at 4 weeks in the FCM vs oral iron group by 166µg/L (95% CI: 138-194; P < 0.0001) and in the IPM vs oral iron group by 145µg/L (95% CI: 109-1180, P < 0.0001), but not between the 2 IV groups (21.5µg/L; 95% CI: -23.9 to 66.9; P = 0.4989). Administration of IV FCM during pregnancy was safe and better tolerated than IV IPM or oral iron. Compliance to oral iron was the lowest amongst treatment groups with one-third of the patients missing doses of daily iron tablets. Significant improvement in overall QoL scores was observed in both IV iron supplement groups by achieving normal ferritin following effective and prompt repletion of iron stores, compared to the o

Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Female; Ferric Compounds; Ferrous Compounds; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Maltose; Middle Aged; Pregnancy; Prospective Studies; Young Adult

Background In Australia, iron deficiency anaemia can be managed by ferric carboxymaltose, and iron polymaltose given via either a traditional slow or new rapid infusion protocol. These differ in their manufacturing, administration, and monitoring requirements, with unknown associated costs. Aim To compare the direct costs of iron infusions used in Australia; and explore potential savings associated with increased uptake of the least-expensive option at a local hospital. Method A time-motion method was used to determine the labour and consumables associated with each infusion protocol. Secondly, a frequency analysis identified the most common iron infusion doses prescribed at the study site. The total direct costs per protocol were compared at these doses and then the potential savings from switching to the lowest-costing of these protocols where possible were explored. Results The most common doses were 0.5 g, 1 g, 1.5 g and 2 g. At these dose points, ferric carboxymaltose infusions are the least expensive, but only if national health subsidies are applied. In cases where they do not apply, iron polymaltose prepared from ampoules and infused using the rapid protocol ('Iron Polymaltose Ampoules Rapid') is the least expensive. Switching all applicable ferric carboxymaltose infusions and iron polymaltose infusions administered using the slow infusion protocol to Iron Polymaltose Ampoules Rapid is projected to yield up to $12,000 worth of savings annually. Conclusions Increased use of the Iron Polymaltose Ampoules Rapid protocol when government-subsidised options are not available is projected to have cost-saving outcomes. Investigation of implementation strategies to increase the use of this protocol are warranted.

Topics: Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Ferric Compounds; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Maltose

To examine the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and the efficacy of intravenous iron polymaltose and ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) among gynecology/obstetric patients with anemia.. The present retrospective observational study examined data from anemic obstetrics and gynecology patients who received either iron polymaltose or FCM between January 1, 2011, and April 30, 2015, at The Royal Women's Hospital, Victoria, Australia. Patient demographic data, dosage, ADR documentation, and hemoglobin levels were collected from medical records and compared.. The study included 221 patients; 111 and 110 received iron polymaltose and FCM, respectively. ADRs were documented for 18 (16.2%) patients in the iron polymaltose group and 2 (1.8%) in the FCM group (P<0.001), with no incidences of anaphylaxis. Both formulations achieved increased hemoglobin levels within 12 weeks (P<0.001 for both). Mean hemoglobin level increases were similar in both groups among non-pregnant patients (P=0.186), but were greater in the iron polymaltose cohort among pregnant patients (P=0.005). FCM dose compliance was suboptimal, with 8 of 57 (14%) patients who required second visits for doses greater than 1000 mg returning for the infusion.. FCM was associated with a lower incidence of ADRs than iron polymaltose. Patients receiving FCM infusions were less likely to receive their total required iron dose. Further randomized prospective studies are required to compare clinical efficacy of iron polymaltose versus FCM.

Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Australia; Cohort Studies; Female; Ferric Compounds; Humans; Maltose; Middle Aged; Pregnancy; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Topics: Administration, Oral; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Cholecalciferol; Ferric Compounds; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Infusions, Intravenous; Injections, Intramuscular; Maltose; Vitamin D Deficiency