Dataset Information

A randomized, open-label trial of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) compared with iron sucrose (Venofer®) as maintenance therapy in haemodialysis patients.

ABSTRACT: Iron deficiency anaemia is common in patients with chronic kidney disease, and intravenous iron is the preferred treatment for those on haemodialysis. The aim of this trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) with iron sucrose (Venofer®) in haemodialysis patients.This was an open-label, randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial conducted in 351 haemodialysis subjects randomized 2:1 to either iron isomaltoside 1000 (Group A) or iron sucrose (Group B). Subjects in Group A were equally divided into A1 (500 mg single bolus injection) and A2 (500 mg split dose). Group B were also treated with 500 mg split dose. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects with haemoglobin (Hb) in the target range 9.5-12.5 g/dL at 6 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included haematology parameters and safety parameters.A total of 351 subjects were enrolled. Both treatments showed similar efficacy with >82% of subjects with Hb in the target range (non-inferiority, P = 0.01). Similar results were found when comparing subgroups A1 and A2 with Group B. No statistical significant change in Hb concentration was found between any of the groups. There was a significant increase in ferritin from baseline to Weeks 1, 2 and 4 in Group A compared with Group B (Weeks 1 and 2: P < 0.001; Week 4: P = 0.002). There was a significant higher increase in reticulocyte count in Group A compared with Group B at Week 1 (P < 0.001). The frequency, type and severity of adverse events were similar.Iron isomaltoside 1000 and iron sucrose have comparative efficacy in maintaining Hb concentrations in haemodialysis subjects and both preparations were well tolerated with a similar short-term safety profile.

SUBMITTER: Bhandari S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4550440 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized, open-label trial of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) compared with iron sucrose (Venofer®) as maintenance therapy in haemodialysis patients.

Bhandari Sunil S Kalra Philip A PA Kothari Jatin J Ambühl Patrice M PM Christensen Jeppe H JH Essaian Ashot M AM Thomsen Lars L LL Macdougall Iain C IC Coyne Daniel W DW

Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association 20150428 9

<h4>Background</h4>Iron deficiency anaemia is common in patients with chronic kidney disease, and intravenous iron is the preferred treatment for those on haemodialysis. The aim of this trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) with iron sucrose (Venofer®) in haemodialysis patients.<h4>Methods</h4>This was an open-label, randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority trial conducted in 351 haemodialysis subjects randomized 2:1 to either iron isomaltoside 1000 (G ...[more]

PMID: 25925701

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesIn the largest head-to-head comparison between an oral and an intravenous (IV) iron compound in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) so far, we strived to determine whether IV iron isomaltoside 1,000 is non-inferior to oral iron sulfate in the treatment of iron deficiency anemia (IDA).MethodsThis prospective, randomized, comparative, open-label, non-inferiority study was conducted at 36 sites in Europe and India. Patients with known intolerance to oral iron were excluded. A total of 338 IBD patients in clinical remission or with mild disease, a hemoglobin (Hb) <12 g/dl, and a transferrin saturation (TSAT) <20% were randomized 2:1 to receive either IV iron isomaltoside 1,000 according to the Ganzoni formula (225 patients) or oral iron sulfate 200 mg daily (equivalent to 200 mg elemental iron; 113 patients). An interactive web response system method was used to randomize the eligible patient to the treatment groups. The primary end point was change in Hb from baseline to week 8. Iron isomaltoside 1,000 and iron sulfate was compared by a non-inferiority assessment with a margin of -0.5 g/dl. The secondary end points, which tested for superiority, included change in Hb from baseline to weeks 2 and 4, change in s-ferritin, and TSAT to week 8, number of patients who discontinued study because of lack of response or intolerance of investigational drugs, change in total quality of life (QoL) score to weeks 4 and 8, and safety. Exploratory analyses included a responder analysis (proportion of patients with an increase in Hb ?2 g/dl after 8 weeks), the effect of regional differences and total iron dose level, and other potential predictors of the treatment response.ResultsNon-inferiority in change of Hb to week 8 could not be demonstrated. There was a trend for oral iron sulfate being more effective in increasing Hb than iron isomaltoside 1,000. The estimated treatment effect was -0.37 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.80, 0.06) with P=0.09 in the full analysis set (N=327) and -0.45 (95% CI: -0.88, -0.03) with P=0.04 in the per protocol analysis set (N=299). In patients treated with IV iron isomaltoside 1,000, the mean change in s-ferritin concentration was higher with an estimated treatment effect of 48.7 (95% CI: 18.6, 78.8) with P=0.002, whereas the mean change in TSAT was lower with an estimated treatment effect of -4.4 (95% CI: -7.4, -1.4) with P=0.005, compared with patients treated with oral iron. No differences in changes of QoL were observed. The safety profile was similar between the groups. The proportion of responders with Hb ?2 g/dl (IV group: 67%; oral group: 61%) were comparable between the groups (P=0.32). Iron isomaltoside 1,000 was more efficacious with higher cumulative doses of >1,000 mg IV. Significant predictors of Hb response to IV iron treatment were baseline Hb and C-reactive protein (CRP).ConclusionsWe could not demonstrate non-inferiority of IV iron isomaltoside 1,000 compared with oral iron in this study. Based on the dose-response relationship observed with the IV iron compound, we suggest that the true iron demand of IV iron was underestimated by the Ganzoni formula in our study. Alternative calculations including Hb and CRP should be explored to gauge iron stores in patients with IBD.

Project description:BackgroundIron deficiency is common in pregnancy. If left untreated, iron deficiency can lead to iron deficiency anaemia, which is a condition related to maternal and neonatal morbidity. The prevalence of iron deficiency increases through the trimesters, which means that women with iron deficiency in the beginning of pregnancy also have a great risk of developing iron deficiency anaemia during pregnancy. Standard treatment is oral iron in individualised intensified doses based on screening values in 1st trimester. Maternal symptoms of iron deficiency and iron deficiency anaemia include fatigue, reduced physical performance, and restless legs syndrome (RLS). Severe anaemia may cause dizziness, dyspnea, palpitation, orthostatism, and syncope, and it decreases the woman's ability to cope with blood loss during delivery. The anaemia may also compromise contractility in the uterine musculature increasing the risk for prolonged labour, caesarean section, and postpartum haemorrhage. Foetal iron deficiency may cause low birthweight and adversely affect foetal and early childhood brain development with long-term deficits.MethodsIn this randomised comparative, open-label, single-centre, phase IV trial, 200 pregnant women between 14 and 21 weeks of gestation who have iron deficiency after 4 weeks of standard treatment will be randomised 1:1 to either a single 1000 mg dose of intravenously administered ferric derisomaltose/iron isomaltoside 1000 or a fixed dose of 100 mg oral ferrous fumarate containing 60 mg ascorbic acid. The primary endpoint is to prevent iron deficiency anaemia defined by a low level of haemoglobin throughout the trial. Other endpoints include other haematological indices of iron deficiency and anaemia, clinical outcomes by questionnaires, and collection of adverse events. Explorative endpoints by medical record follow-up include complications up to 7 days after delivery.DiscussionThis trial will provide evidence on how to prevent iron deficiency anaemia. The trial population represents a clinical reality where pregnant women often have sustained iron deficiency despite an increased oral iron dose. Thus, this evidence can be used to consider the optimal 2nd line of treatment in iron-deficient pregnant women.Trial registrationEuropean Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database 2017-000776-29. Registered on 3 May 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03188445 . Registered on 15 June 2017.

Project description:BackgroundAnemia is a frequent complication after cardiac surgery especially following reoperation due to previous prosthetic valve failure or multiple valve surgery (including combined coronary artery bypass grafting). This trial explores whether intravenously administered iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) results in better clinical outcomes in patients undergoing complex heart valve surgery who are expected to receive transfusion.Methods/designIn this prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial, 214 patients undergoing reoperation or multiple valve surgery are randomly allocated to either the iron isomaltoside 1000 (IVFe) or the control group from August 2016 to August 2018. The IVFe group receives iron isomaltoside 1000 mg (maximum dose 20 mg/kg) intravenously 3 days before and after the surgery. The control group receives an equivalent volume of normal saline. The primary endpoint is transfusion requirement (more than 1 unit of packed erythrocytes) for postoperative care until discharge and secondary endpoint are major complications, such as delayed ventilator therapy, acute kidney injury, and mortality. Reticulocyte count, plasma hepcidin, iron profiles (serum iron, serum ferritin, total iron-binding capacity, transferrin, transferrin saturation), coagulation profiles, urinary analysis, and chemical profiles are measured for three preoperative baseline-data days and just before surgery, except for hepcidin. After surgery, daily routine basic laboratory tests are measured just before discharge and reticulocyte count, iron profiles, and hepcidin are repeatedly checked for three postoperative days.DiscussionsFrom our study, we can clarify the following points: the first is the perioperative IVFe effect on the demand for transfusion, and clinical outcomes in reoperation or complex valve surgery and the second is the role of hepcidin in the effect of IVFe on the hemoglobin level increase.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , Identifier: NCT02862665 . Registered on August 2016.

Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, which are the main stay of managing anaemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD), is largely dependent on adequate body iron stores. The iron stores are determined by the levels of serum ferritin concentration and transferrin saturation. These two surrogate markers of iron stores are used to guide iron replacement therapy. Most Aboriginal and/or Torres Islander Australians of the Northern Territory (herein respectfully referred to as First Nations Australians) with end-stage kidney disease have ferritin levels higher than current guideline recommendations for iron therapy. There is no clear evidence to guide safe and effective treatment with iron in these patients. We aim to assess the impact of intravenous iron treatment on all-cause death and hospitalisation with a principal diagnosis of all-cause infection in First Nations patients on haemodialysis with anaemia, high ferritin levels and low transferrin saturation METHODS: In a prospective open-label blinded endpoint randomised controlled trial, a total of 576 participants on maintenance haemodialysis with high ferritin (> 700 μg/L and ≤ 2000 μg/L) and low transferrin saturation (< 40%) from all the 7 renal units across the Northern Territory of Australia will be randomised 1:1 to receive intravenous iron polymaltose 400 mg once monthly (200 mg during 2 consecutive haemodialysis sessions) (Arm A) or no IV iron treatment (standard treatment) (Arm B). Rescue therapy will be administered when the ferritin levels fall below 700 μg/L or when clinically indicated. The primary outcome will be the differences between the two study arms in the risk of hospitalisation with all-cause infection or death. An economic analysis and several secondary and tertiary outcomes analyses will also be performed.DiscussionThe INFERR clinical trial will address significant uncertainty on the safety and efficacy of iron therapy in First Nations Australians with CKD with hyperferritinaemia and evidence of iron deficiency. This will hopefully lead to the development of evidence-based guidelines. It will also provide the opportunity to explore the causes of hyperferritinaemia in First Nations Australians from the Northern Territory.Trial registrationThis trial is registered with The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12620000705987 . Registered 29 June 2020.

Dataset Information

A randomized, open-label trial of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) compared with iron sucrose (Venofer®) as maintenance therapy in haemodialysis patients.

Publications

A randomized, open-label trial of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Monofer®) compared with iron sucrose (Venofer®) as maintenance therapy in haemodialysis patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets