Genetic regulation of iron homeostasis in sideropenic patients with mild COVID-19 disease under a new oral iron formulation: Lessons from a different perspective.

BACKGROUND: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) needs iron to replicate itself. Coronaviruses are able to upregulate Chop/Gadd153 and Arg1 genes, consequently leading to CD8 lymphocytes decrease, degradation of asparagine and decreased nitric oxide (NO), thus impairing immune response and antithrombotic functions. Little is known about regulation of genes involved in iron metabolism in paucisymptomatic patients with COVID-19 disease or in patients with iron deficiency treated with sucrosomial iron. METHODS: Whole blood was taken from the COVID-19 patients and from patients with sideropenic anemia, treated or not (control group) with iron supplementations. Enrolled patients were: affected by COVID19 under sucrosomal iron support (group A), affected by COVID-19 not under oral iron support (group B), iron deficiency not under treatment, not affected by COVID19 (control group). After RNA extraction and complementary DNA (cDNA) synthesis of Arg1, Hepcidin and Chop/Gadd153, gene expression from the 3 groups was measured by qRT-PCR. M2 macrophages were detected by cytofluorimetry using CD163 and CD14 markers. RESULTS: Forty patients with COVID-19 (group A), 20 patients with iron deficiency treated with sucrosomial iron (group B) and 20 patients with iron deficiency not under treatment (control group) were enrolled. In all the patients supported with oral sucrosomial iron, the gene expression of Chop, Arg1 and Hepcidin genes was lower than in sideropenic patients not supported with iron, M1 macrophages polarization and functional iron deficiency was also lower in group A and B, than observed in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: New oral iron formulations, as sucrosomial iron, are able to influence the expression of genes like Chop and Arg1 and to influence M2 macrophage polarization mainly in the early phase of COVID-19 disease.

Oral high-dose sucrosomial iron vs intravenous iron in sideropenic anemia patients intolerant/refractory to iron sulfate: a multicentric randomized study.

Iron deficiency anemia is among the most frequent causes of disability. Intravenous iron is the quickest way to correct iron deficiency, bypassing the bottleneck of iron intestinal absorption, the only true mechanism of iron balance regulation in human body. Intravenous iron administration is suggested in patients who are refractory/intolerant to oral iron sulfate. However, the intravenous way of iron administration requires several precautions; as the in-hospital administration requires a resuscitation service, as imposed in Europe by the European Medicine Agency, it is very expensive and negatively affects patient's perceived quality of life. A new oral iron formulation, Sucrosomial iron, bypassing the normal way of absorption, seems to be cost-effective in correcting iron deficiency anemia at doses higher than those usually effective with other oral iron formulations. In this multicentric randomized study, we analyze the cost-effectiveness of intravenous sodium ferrigluconate vs oral Sucrosomial iron in patients with iron deficiency anemia refractory/intolerant to oral iron sulfate without other interfering factors on iron absorption.

Iron Support in Erythropoietin Treatment in Myelodysplastic Syndrome Patients Affected by Low-Risk Refractory Anaemia: Real-Life Evidence from an Italian Setting.

Refractory anaemia (RA) among myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is associated with a partial functional iron deficit and may require transfusions. In low-risk lymphoma and solid tumour patients, iron support improves erythropoietin (EPO) cost-effectiveness in treating anaemia. The aim of this study is to see if oral sucrosomial iron support improves the cost-effectiveness of EPO treatment in MDS patients affected by low-risk RA. We treated patients with EPO only or with EPO plus oral sucrosomial iron or intravenous (i.v.) iron. The need for transfusions was lowest in the group taking oral iron (p = 0.016) or not receiving supplementation at all (p = 0.022). We compared costs of EPO with i.v. ferric gluconate or oral sucrosomial iron supplementation or no iron supplementation. The oral iron group had fewer side effects, fewer patient medical visits in the out-patient setting, and fewer transfusions; this led to higher savings on direct hospital costs and indirect patient costs (lost days at work) and translated into a 50% abatement of overall expenditures. EPO treatment-related expenditures in MDS-RA patients were lowest with oral sucrosomial iron supplementation (Sideral®), with a longer interval between EPO administration in maintenance treatment, quicker hemoglobin recovery, lower ferritin increase and fewer blood transfusions.