Effects of iron supplementation on erythropoietic response in patients with cancer-associated anemia treated by means of erythropoietic stimulating agents

The Effects of Preoperative Administration of Erythropoietin in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Cranial Vault Remodeling for Craniosynostosis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Over 90% of patients undergoing cranial vault remodeling for craniosynostosis receive blood transfusions to compensate for intraoperative blood loss. However, transfusions are not without risk and can lead to allergic and immune transfusion reactions as well as rare cases of infectious transmissions. Preoperative use of erythropoietin in cranial vault remodeling has been demonstrated to be safe and to reduce transfusion requirements in prior studies. This study's purpose is to add to the body of data supporting the safe use of a protocolized erythropoietin alfa regimen before cranial vault remodeling and strip craniectomy procedures with decreased blood transfusion requirements and other favorable outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent cranial vault remodeling between 2006 and 2021 at our tertiary care center. Two groups were identified: in the first, preoperative erythropoietin was administered under protocol; and in the second, preoperative erythropoietin was not administered. The groups were compared with respect to age, perioperative hemoglobin levels, estimated blood loss during surgery, packed red blood cell transfusion volume, length of hospital stay, and length of surgery.

RESULTS

Demographics were not significantly different in terms of age, weight, diagnosis, gender, and type of procedure. Patients who were administered preoperative erythropoietin were found to have significantly increased preoperative hemoglobin levels (13.6 versus 12.3 g/dL), as well as decreased estimated intraoperative blood loss (376 versus 1099 mL), the volume of packed red blood cells transfused (316 versus 897 mL), length of hospital stay, and length of surgery. Postoperative hemoglobin levels were not found to be significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, preoperative administration of erythropoietin with elemental iron was beneficial for patients undergoing cranial vault remodeling for craniosynostosis. Specifically, it decreased the need for red blood cell transfusion, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay. No adverse events were recorded in the treatment arm. Further studies may include a separate group administered iron alone.

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

Purpose

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).

Materials and methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusion

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.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00520-017-3690-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Hemoglobin levels and quality of life in patients with symptomatic chemotherapy-induced anemia: the eAQUA study

PURPOSE

To assess hemoglobin (Hb) outcomes and fatigue-related quality-of-life (QoL) (electronic assessment) in patients with solid tumors and symptomatic chemotherapy-induced anemia receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy and darbepoetin alfa (DA) or another erythropoiesis-stimulating agent according to European indication.

METHODS

eAQUA was a Phase IV prospective observational study. The primary outcome (assessed in the primary analysis set [PAS]: patients receiving one or more DA dose who had baseline and week 9 assessments for Hb and QoL) was the proportion of patients receiving DA having both Hb increases ≥1 g/dL and improved QoL between baseline and week 9. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) subscale scores were anchored to fatigue visual analog scale scores to determine the minimally important difference for improved QoL. Overall data/data over time are reported for the full analysis set (patients receiving one or more erythropoiesis-stimulating agent dose, n=1,158); week 9 data (ie, data relating to the primary and secondary outcomes) are reported for the PAS (n=510). Baseline and safety data are included for both the full analysis set and PAS.

RESULTS

In the PAS, 69% of patients had stage IV disease and 96% were fatigued. The minimally important difference in FACT-F change score for QoL improvement was 3.5. From baseline to week 9, 32% (95% confidence interval: 28%-36%) of patients had both improved QoL and an Hb increase ≥1 g/dL; proportions were similar across the most common tumor types. At week 9, 49% and 58% of patients had improved QoL or Hb increases ≥1 g/dL, respectively; 70% and 76% had QoL or Hb improvements between baseline and study end, respectively. In the PAS, 16% of patients required transfusions and 32% required iron supplementation. Few patients (<1%) reported adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSION

In this study, patients with solid tumors receiving DA per European indication for symptomatic chemotherapy-induced anemia had clinically meaningful improvements in Hb and QoL.

Combination treatment with an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent and intravenous iron alleviates anaemia in patients with hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia

BACKGROUND

Patients with hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) suffer from recurrent epistaxis and bleeding from gastrointestinal telangiectasias that occur despite otherwise normal haemostasis and result in iron deficiency anaemia with increasing severity. In advanced disease, anaemia may be severe, be irresponsive to iron supplementation, and may lead to red blood cell transfusion dependency.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study at our Centre for Osler's Disease to evaluate the effectiveness of adding an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) to intravenous iron supplementation in the management of anaemic HHT patients. Blood values and treatment parameters were collected for nine months before combination therapy (iron supplementation only) and 12 months during combination therapy (iron supplementation plus ESA).

RESULTS

Four patients received intravenous iron and an ESA with mean weekly doses of 126 mg and 17,300 units (U), respectively. Mean haemoglobin improved significantly during combination therapy, from 106 g/L to 119 g/L (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Anaemia can be alleviated in patients with HHT who are irresponsive to intravenous iron supplementation, by addition of an ESA. The proposed mechanism behind the iron irresponsiveness is that the anaemia is caused by a combination of recurrent haemorrhage and anaemia of chronic disease.