Intravenous Iron Supplementation for the Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: The pathophysiology of cancer-related anemia is multifactorial, including that of chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). The guidelines are not consistent in their approach to the use of intravenous (IV) iron in patients with cancer as part of the clinical practice. Materials and methods: All randomized controlled trials that compared IV iron with either no iron or iron taken orally for the treatment of CIA were included. We excluded trials if erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were used. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients requiring a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion during the study period. The secondary outcomes included the hematopoietic response (an increase in the Hb level by more than 1 g/dL or an increase above 11 g/dL), the iron parameters and adverse events. For the dichotomous data, risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (Cis) were estimated and pooled. For the continuous data, the mean differences were calculated. A fixed effect model was used, except in the event of significant heterogeneity between the trials (p < 0.10; I2 > 40%), in which we used a random effects model. Results: A total of 8 trials published between January 1990 and July 2021 that randomized 1015 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 553 patients were randomized to IV iron and were compared with 271 patients randomized to oral iron and 191 to no iron. IV iron decreased the percentage of patients requiring a blood transfusion compared with oral iron (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55−0.95) with a number needed to treat of 20 (95% CI 11−100). IV iron increased the hematopoietic response (RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01−1.5). There was no difference with respect to the risk of adverse events (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.88−1.07; 8 trials) or severe adverse events (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.76−1.57; 8 trials). Conclusions: IV iron resulted in a decrease in the need for RBC transfusions, with no difference in adverse events in patients with CIA. IV iron for the treatment of CIA should be considered in clinical practice.

Active Tuberculosis in Patients with Psoriasis Receiving Biologic Therapy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies pose a risk for opportunistic infections, especially for reactivating latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). OBJECTIVE: The aim was to describe the clinical features and mortality rate of active Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB) in psoriasis patients receiving biologic therapies. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was performed. Studies describing active TB in patients with psoriasis receiving biologic therapy from inception to May 31, 2018 were included. Clinical data as well as mortality rates were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included, evaluating 78 patients with active TB: 11 prospective studies, 13 retrospective, and 27 case reports/series. Most patients (73%) with active TB were male, the mean age was 48 ± 13 years, and 85% were of European or Asian origin. Pre-treatment LTBI screening was negative for 63% of patients. Disease presented in 33% of patients within the first 3 months of treatment, and in 51% within the first 6 months. Most patients (72%) presented with extra-pulmonary TB, and 49% had disseminated disease. The mortality rate was 7%. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this review are its small sample size and inclusion of case reports. CONCLUSIONS: Some patients develop active TB despite LTBI screening. Clinicians initiating biologic therapy in patients with psoriasis should be aware of the clinical features of active TB in this scenario.

Iron supplementation for restless legs syndrome - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Iron supplementation, is recommended for the treatment of restless legs syndrome (RLS). We gathered evidence for the efficacy and safety of iron supplementation for RLS. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared iron supplementation versus no iron for patients with RLS was performed. Multiple databases were searched. The primary outcome was the effect of iron on the International Restless Legs Syndrome score (IRLSS) at 4 weeks after treatment. For dichotomous data, risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated and pooled. For continuous data, weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated. RESULTS: Ten trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Iron therapy was associated with a significant decrease of the IRLSS of -3.55 [95% CI (-5.41) - (-1.68)] points and an increase in the percentage of patients with improvement of the IRLSS score, RR of 2.16 [95% CI 1.56-2.98]. IV FCM was associated with improvement in both the IRLSS (WMD of -2.79 (95% CI (-4.62) - (-0.96), 4 trials, I2 = 0%) and on the RLS-QOL by WMD of 8.67 (95% CI 1.68-15). Iron was associated with an increased rate of adverse events RR 2.04 (95% CI 1.46-2.85), which were not severe and not associated with increased rate of treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: Iron supplementation is associated with improvement of the IRLSS score. Our meta-analysis supports the use of iron, oral or IV, as effective therapy for patients with RLS. Further studies should assess subgroups of patients most likely to benefit from iron supplementation.

Intravenous Versus Oral Iron Supplementation for the Treatment of Anemia in CKD: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Iron supplementation is crucial for the treatment of anemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although intravenous (IV) iron is preferred for patients with CKD receiving dialysis (CKD stage 5D), the method of iron replacement for patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 is controversial. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. A search was performed until October 2015 of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, conference proceedings in nephrology, and reference lists of included trials. SETTING & POPULATION: Patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 or 5D. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: All randomized controlled trials, regardless of publication status or language. INTERVENTION: IV versus oral iron supplementation. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was defined as percentage of patients reaching an elevation in hemoglobin (Hb) concentration > 1g/dL. Secondary end points included percentage of patients who reached Hb levels > 11g/dL, absolute Hb concentration, change in Hb concentration, transferrin saturation, ferritin levels, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and blood transfusion requirement, and quality of life. Safety analysis included all-cause mortality and serious and all adverse events. RESULTS: 24 trials were identified, 13 including 2,369 patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 and 11 including 818 patients with CKD stage 5D. Patients treated with IV iron were more likely to reach an Hb response > 1g/dL (risk ratios [RRs] of 1.61 [95% CI, 1.39-1.87] for CKD stages 3-5 and 2.14 [95% CI, 1.68-2.72] for CKD stage 5D). Safety analysis showed similar rates of mortality and serious and any adverse effects. IV iron replacement was associated with higher risk for hypotension (RR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.74-7.94) and fewer gastrointestinal adverse events (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28-0.67). LIMITATIONS: Significant heterogeneity between trials; follow-up was usually limited to 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our results agree with current recommendations for IV iron replacement for patients with CKD stage 5D and support increased use of IV iron for patients with CKD stages 3 to 5.

Iron supplementation for the treatment of chronic heart failure and iron deficiency: systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Over half of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients are anaemic, and iron deficiency is common. Iron replacement therapy (oral or i.v.) might improve exercise capacity and quality of life (QOL). METHODS AND RESULTS: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized control trials that compared iron with no therapy for CHF patients with iron deficiency, whether or not they were anaemic. We searched electronic databases as well as haematology and cardiology conferences up to August 2011. The primary outcome was the effect of iron on QOL parameters such as New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHWFQ). Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, mean ejection fraction, 6 min walk distance (6MWD), hospitalizations due to any cause, iron indices, C-reactive protein levels, and adverse events. Four trials performed fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 370 patients were treated with i.v. iron, compared with 224 control patients. There was significant improvement in QOL in the iron arm according to the MLWHFQ score at 26 weeks, with a weighted mean difference of -18.00 (-22.54, -13.46, I(2) = 0%]. The point estimate for improvement in NYHA class was in favour of iron. Iron reduced the number of hospitalizations and C-reactive protein levels, and increased the 6MWD and mean ejection fraction. Iron indices were significantly improved without a change in haemoglobin levels. No increase in the rate of adverse events was found. CONCLUSION: Intravenous iron therapy is associated with improved QOL parameters, reduction in hospitalizations, and increased 6MWD. Treatment with i.v. iron is safe, with no increased rate of adverse events. The results of our analysis are limited by the paucity of trials, and significant heterogeneity between trials.