+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Oral sucrosomial iron versus intravenous iron in anemic cancer patients without iron deficiency receiving darbepoetin alfa: a pilot study

Oral sucrosomial iron versus intravenous iron in anemic cancer patients without iron deficiency receiving darbepoetin alfa: a pilot study

Supportive Care in Cancer 25(9): 2779-2786

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are often used in treatment of patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia. Many studies have demonstrated an improved hemoglobin (Hb) response when ESA is combined with intravenous iron supplementation and a higher effectiveness of intravenous iron over traditional oral iron formulations. A new formulation of oral sucrosomial iron featuring an increased bioavailability compared to traditional oral formulations has recently become available and could provide a valid alternative to those by intravenous (IV) route. Our study evaluated the performance of sucrosomial iron versus intravenous iron in increasing hemoglobin in anemic cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and darbepoetin alfa, as well as safety, need of transfusion, and quality of life (QoL). The present study considered a cohort of 64 patients with chemotherapy-related anemia (Hb >8 g/dL <10 g/dL) and no absolute or functional iron deficiency, scheduled to receive chemotherapy and darbepoetin. All patients received darbepoetin alfa 500 mcg once every 3 weeks and were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of IV ferric gluconate 125 mg weekly or oral sucrosomial iron 30 mg daily. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate the performance of oral sucrosomial iron in improving Hb response, compared to intravenous iron. The Hb response was defined as the Hb increase ≥2 g/dL from baseline or the attainment Hb ≥ 12 g/dL. There was no difference in the Hb response rate between the two treatment arms. Seventy one percent of patients treated with IV iron achieved an erythropoietic response, compared to 70% of patients treated with oral iron. By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be not statistically significant. There were also no differences in the proportion of patients requiring red blood cell transfusions and changes in QoL. Sucrosomial oral iron was better tolerated. In cancer patients with chemotherapy-related anemia receiving darbepoetin alfa, sucrosomial oral iron provides similar increase in Hb levels and Hb response, with higher tolerability without the risks or side effects of IV iron.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 060051585

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 28391437

DOI: 10.1007/s00520-017-3690-z

Related references

Intravenous ferric gluconate significantly improves response to epoetin alfa versus oral iron or no iron in anemic patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. Oncologist 12(2): 231-242, 2007

Phase III, randomized study of the effects of parenteral iron, oral iron, or no iron supplementation on the erythropoietic response to darbepoetin alfa for patients with chemotherapy-associated anemia. Journal of Clinical Oncology 29(1): 97-105, 2011

Intravenous iron sucrose versus oral iron supplementation for the treatment of iron deficiency anemia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease--a randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter study. American Journal of Gastroenterology 100(11): 2503-2509, 2005

Effect of oral liposomal iron versus intravenous iron for treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in CKD patients: a randomized trial. Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 30(4): 645-652, 2016

Intravenous iron gluconate or iron saccharate for patients with iron deficiency anemia with malabsorption or oral iron intolerance. Blood 90(10 SUPPL 1 PART 2): 11B, Nov 15, 1997

A randomized open-label study of darbepoetin alfa administered every 3 weeks with or without parenteral iron in anemic subjects with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving chemotherapy. Journal of Clinical Oncology 24(18_suppl): 8612-8612, 2016

Intravenous iron monotherapy for the treatment of non-iron-deficiency anemia in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: a pilot study. Drug Design, Development and Therapy 7: 939-944, 2014

Effectiveness of darbepoetin-alfa in combination with intravenous iron sucrose in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and refractory anaemia: a pilot study. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 18(4): 421-425, 2006

Intravenous Iron Sucrose versus Oral Iron in the Treatment of Pregnancy with Iron Deficiency Anaemia: A Systematic Review. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation 80(3): 170-178, 2016

Intravenous iron sucrose versus oral iron in treatment of iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 39(2): 504-510, 2013

Intravenous iron sucrose versus oral iron ferrous sulfate for antenatal and postpartum iron deficiency anemia: a randomized trial. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 26(7): 654-659, 2014

Sucrosomial Iron Supplementation in Anemic Patients with Celiac Disease Not Tolerating Oral Ferrous Sulfate: A Prospective Study. Nutrients 10(3), 2018

Effect of treatment with single total-dose intravenous iron versus daily oral iron(III)-hydroxide polymaltose on moderate puerperal iron-deficiency anemia. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 13: 647-653, 2017

Intravenous versus oral iron for treatment of iron deficiency in non-hemodialysis-dependent patients with chronic kidney disease. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy 69(14): 1206-1211, 2013

Oral Versus Intravenous Iron Treatment in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Iron Deficiency and/or Anemia in Germany. Value in Health 19(7): A511-A512, 2016