Dataset Information

Randomized Trial Comparing Proactive, High-Dose versus Reactive, Low-Dose Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Hemodialysis (PIVOTAL): Study Design and Baseline Data.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Intravenous (IV) iron supplementation is a standard maintenance treatment for hemodialysis (HD) patients, but the optimum dosing regimen is unknown. METHODS:PIVOTAL (Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis patients) is a multicenter, open-label, blinded endpoint, randomized controlled (PROBE) trial. Incident HD adults with a serum ferritin < 400 µg/L and transferrin saturation (TSAT) levels < 30% receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) were eligible. Enrolled patients were randomized to a proactive, high-dose IV iron arm (iron sucrose 400 mg/month unless ferritin > 700 µg/L and/or TSAT ?40%) or a reactive, low-dose IV iron arm (iron sucrose administered if ferritin <200 µg/L or TSAT < 20%). We hypothesized that proactive, high-dose IV iron would be noninferior to reactive, low-dose IV iron for the primary outcome of first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause. If noninferiority is confirmed with a noninferiority limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio of the proactive strategy relative to the reactive strategy, a test for superiority will be carried out. Secondary outcomes include infection-related endpoints, ESA dose requirements, and quality-of-life measures. As an event-driven trial, the study will continue until at least 631 primary outcome events have accrued, but the expected duration of follow-up is 2-4 years. RESULTS:Of the 2,589 patients screened across 50 UK sites, 2,141 (83%) were randomized. At baseline, 65.3% were male, the median age was 65 years, and 79% were white. According to eligibility criteria, all patients were on ESA at screening. Prior stroke and MI were present in 8 and 9% of the cohort, respectively, and 44% of patients had diabetes at baseline. Baseline data for the randomized cohort were generally concordant with recent data from the UK Renal Registry. CONCLUSIONS:PIVOTAL will provide important information about the optimum dosing of IV iron in HD patients representative of usual clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT number: 2013-002267-25.

SUBMITTER: Macdougall IC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6262676 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized Trial Comparing Proactive, High-Dose versus Reactive, Low-Dose Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Hemodialysis (PIVOTAL): Study Design and Baseline Data.

Macdougall Iain C IC White Claire C Anker Stefan D SD Bhandari Sunil S Farrington Kenneth K Kalra Philip A PA McMurray John J V JJV Murray Heather H Steenkamp Retha R Tomson Charles R V CRV Wheeler David C DC Winearls Christopher G CG Ford Ian I

American journal of nephrology 20181010 4

<h4>Background</h4>Intravenous (IV) iron supplementation is a standard maintenance treatment for hemodialysis (HD) patients, but the optimum dosing regimen is unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>PIVOTAL (Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis patients) is a multicenter, open-label, blinded endpoint, randomized controlled (PROBE) trial. Incident HD adults with a serum ferritin < 400 µg/L and transferrin saturation (TSAT) levels < 30% receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) were eligible. Enrolle ...[more]

PMID: 30304714

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesClinical trials assessing effects of larger cumulative iron exposure with outcomes are lacking, and observational studies have been limited by assessment of short-term exposure only and/or failure to assess cause-specific mortality. The associations between short- and long-term iron exposure on all-cause and cause-specific mortality were examined.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThe study included 14,078 United States patients on dialysis initiating dialysis between 2003 and 2008. Intravenous iron dose accumulations over 1-, 3-, and 6-month rolling windows were related to all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortality in Cox proportional hazards models that used marginal structural modeling to control for time-dependent confounding.ResultsPatients in the 1-month model cohort (n=14,078) were followed a median of 19 months, during which there were 27.6% all-cause deaths, 13.5% cardiovascular deaths, and 3% infection-related deaths. A reduced risk of all-cause mortality with receipt of >150-350 (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.64 to 0.95) or >350 mg (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.62 to 0.99) intravenous iron compared with >0-150 mg over 1 month was observed. There was no relation of 1-month intravenous iron dose with cardiovascular or infection-related mortality and no relation of 3- or 6-month cumulative intravenous iron dose with all-cause or cardiovascular mortality. There was a nonstatistically significant increase in infection-related mortality with receipt of >1050 mg intravenous iron in 3 months (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 3.28) and >2100 mg in 6 months (hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.73 to 3.46).ConclusionsAmong patients on incident dialysis, receipt of ≤ 1050 mg intravenous iron in 3 months or 2100 mg in 6 months was not associated with all-cause, cardiovascular, or infection-related mortality. However, nonstatistically significant findings suggested the possibility of infection-related mortality with receipt of >1050 mg in 3 months or >2100 mg in 6 months. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the safety of exposure to greater cumulative intravenous iron doses.

Project description:Background:There is no consensus on intravenous (IV) iron supplement dose, schedule, and serum ferritin target in functional iron deficiency anemia to maintain optimum target levels of iron stores by several guidelines. Objective:To examine the effect of IV iron supplementation to different targets of serum ferritin on erythropoietin dose and inflammatory markers in chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients with functional iron deficiency anemia. Design:A multicenter, randomized, open-label study. Setting:In a developing country, Thailand. Patients:Chronic HD patients with functional iron deficiency anemia. Measurements:Erythropoietin resistance index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and fibroblast growth factor 23. Methods:Two hundred adult chronic HD patients with transferrin saturation less than 30% and serum ferritin of 200 to 400 ng/mL were randomized 1:1 to maintain serum ferritin 200 to 400 ng/mL (low-serum ferritin group, N = 100) or 600 to 700 ng/mL (high-serum ferritin group, N = 100). During a 6-week titration period, participants randomized to the high-serum ferritin group initially received 600 mg IV iron (100 mg every week), while the participants in the low-serum ferritin group did not receive IV iron. During the 6-month follow-up period, the dose of IV iron was adjusted by protocol. Results:The mean dose of IV iron was 108.3 ± 28.2 mg/month in the low-serum ferritin group and 192.3 ± 36.2 mg/month in the high-serum ferritin group. The mean serum ferritin was 367.0 ± 224.9 ng/mL in the low ferritin group and 619.6 ± 265.2 ng/mL in the high ferritin group. The erythropoietin resistance index was significantly decreased in the high-serum ferritin group compared to the low-serum ferritin group after receiving IV iron in the 6-week titration period (mean difference: -113.43 ± 189.14 vs 41.08 ± 207.38 unit/week/g/dL; P < .001) and 3-month follow-up period (mean differences: -88.88 ± 234.43 vs -10.48 ± 217.75 unit/week/g/dL; P = .02). Limitations:Short follow-up period. Conclusion:Maintaining a serum ferritin level of 600 to 700 ng/mL by IV iron administration of approximately 200 mg per month as a maintenance protocol can decrease erythropoietin dose requirements in chronic HD patients with functional iron deficiency anemia. Trials registration:The study was registered with the Thai Clinical Trials Registry TCTR20180903003.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Intravenous iron therapy for chronic anemia management is largely driven by dosing protocols that differ in intensity with respect to dosing approach (i.e., dose, frequency, and duration). Little is known about the safety of these protocols. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:Using clinical data from a large United States dialysis provider linked to health care utilization data from Medicare, we constructed a cohort of patients with ESKD aged ?65 years who initiated and continued center-based hemodialysis for ?90 days between 2009 and 2012, and initiated at least one of the five common intravenous iron administration strategies; ranked by intensity (the amount of iron given at moderate-to-high iron indices), the order of strategies was 3 (least intensive), 2 (less intensive), 1 (reference), 4 (more intensive), and 5 (most intensive). We estimated the effect of continuous exposure to these strategies on cumulative risks of mortality and infection-related events with dynamic Cox marginal structural models. RESULTS:Of 13,249 eligible patients, 1320 (10%) died and 1627 (12%) had one or more infection-related events during the 4-month follow-up. The most and least commonly initiated strategy was strategy 2 and 5, respectively. Compared with the reference strategy 1, more intensive strategies (4 and 5) demonstrated a higher risk of all-cause mortality (e.g., most intensive strategy 5: 60-day risk difference: 1.3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.8% to 2.1%; 120-day risk difference: 3.1%; 95% CI, 1.0% to 5.6%). Similarly, higher risks were observed for infection-related morbidity and mortality among more intensive strategies (e.g., strategy 5: 60-day risk difference: 1.8%; 95% CI, 1.2% to 2.6%; 120-day risk difference: 4.3%; 95% CI, 2.2% to 6.8%). Less intensive strategies (2 and 3) demonstrated lower risks of all-cause mortality and infection-related events. CONCLUSIONS:Among dialysis patients surviving 90 days, subsequent intravenous iron administration strategies promoting more intensive iron treatment at moderate-to-high iron indices levels are associated with higher risks of mortality and infection-related events.

Project description:Iron deficiency anemia is common in children with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on long-term hemodialysis receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. One approach to maintain the iron profile and hemoglobin levels is maintenance therapy with regular low doses of intravenous (IV) iron after initial iron repletion therapy; however, evidence for the benefits of this approach is lacking. This study evaluated the effect of IV iron maintenance therapy on anemia in children on regular hemodialysis. This retrospective cohort study included 41 pediatric ESRD patients with normal hemoglobin and iron status who underwent regular hemodialysis at the Pediatric Dialysis Unit of Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Indonesia, between January 2015 and April 2019. Among these, 21 received IV iron maintenance therapy with two doses of 2?mg/kg of IV iron sucrose every 2 weeks (the treatment group) and 20 did not (the comparison group). Changes in hemoglobin and transferrin saturation were assessed after 6 weeks of observation and compared between the two groups. There was a significant reduction in the mean hemoglobin level compared with the baseline level in the comparison group (21?g/L; 95% CI, 9.3-33?g/L; p=0.001) but not in the treatment group (0.7?g/L; 95% CI, -6.6-8?g/L; p=0.84). The risk of anemia was lower in the treatment group (relative risk?=?0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.79; p=0.003). Although majority of the patients had high baseline ferritin level, this study indicates that in our setting, ferritin may not be a reliable parameter to review the iron status, as it can be affected by chronic inflammation. Hence, the decision to start IV iron maintenance therapy in patients with hyperferritinemia should consider the patient's clinical condition and morbidity. To conclude, the coadministration of IV iron maintenance therapy is beneficial for maintaining hemoglobin levels and preventing anemia in children with ESRD who are undergoing regular hemodialysis, have achieved the target hemoglobin levels, and have normal iron status.

Dataset Information

Randomized Trial Comparing Proactive, High-Dose versus Reactive, Low-Dose Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Hemodialysis (PIVOTAL): Study Design and Baseline Data.

Publications

Randomized Trial Comparing Proactive, High-Dose versus Reactive, Low-Dose Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Hemodialysis (PIVOTAL): Study Design and Baseline Data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets