Intravenous Iron and Maintenance Hemodialysis

The pathogenesis of CKD complications; Attack of dysregulated iron and phosphate metabolism

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients have a tremendously higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) and infection than the non-CKD population, which could be caused by intertwining actions of hyperphosphatemia and CKD associated misdistribution of iron. CVD is often associated with vascular calcification, which has been attributed to hyperphosphatemia, and could be initiated in mitochondria, inducing apoptosis, and accelerated by reactive oxygen species (ROS). The production of ROS is principally linked to intracellular ferrous iron. For infection, the virulence and pathogenicity of a pathogen is directly related to its capacity to acquire iron for proliferation and to escape or subvert the host's immune response. Iron administration for renal anemia can sometimes be overdosed, which could decrease host immune mechanisms through its direct effect on neutrophils, macrophages and T cell function. Hyperphosphatemia has been demonstrated to be associated with an increased incidence of infection. We hypothesized two possible mechanisms: 1) fibroblast growth factor-23 levels are increased in parallel with serum phosphate levels and directly impair leukocyte recruitment and host defense mechanisms, and 2) circulating non-transferrin-bound iron (NTBI) is increased due to decreased iron binding capacity of the carrier protein transferrin in high-phosphate conditions. From these observations, maintaining an adequate serum range of phosphate levels and minimizing intracellular iron accumulation could attenuate the development of CKD complications.

Potential hazards of recent trends in liberal iron use for renal anemia

A randomized controlled trial,the Proactive IV Iron Therapy in Haemodialysis Patients (PIVOTAL), has recently shown that a high-dose (‘proactive’) intravenous iron regimen was superior to a low-dose (‘reactive’) regimen for hemodialysis patient outcomes and overall safety. However, even in the low-dose group, a substantial amount of iron was administered to maintain serum ferritin >200 ng/mL. This type of comparison may have strongly affected the safety results. Iron has two opposite effects on erythropoiesis: it activates erythroid differentiation directly by supplying iron but inhibits it indirectly by stimulating hepcidin and enhancing oxidative stress. Hepcidin plays an essential role not only in iron homeostasis and the anemia of chronic kidney disease, but also in its complications such as atherosclerosis and infection. Its main stimulation by iron—and to a lesser degree by inflammation—should urge clinicians to avoid prescribing excessive amounts of iron. Furthermore, as serum ferritin is closely correlated with serum hepcidin and iron storage, it would seem preferable to rely mainly on serum ferritin to adjust iron administration, defining an upper limit for risk reduction. Based on our estimations, the optimal range of serum ferritin is ∼50–150 ng/mL, which is precisely within the boundaries of iron management in Japan. Considering the contrasting ranges of target ferritin levels between end-stage renal disease patients in Japan and the rest of the world, the optimal range proposed by us will probably be considered as unacceptable by nephrologists abroad. Only well-balanced, randomized controlled trials with both erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and iron will allow us to settle this controversy.