ABSTRACT
Background: Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) is the leading cause of years lost to disability in most sub-Saharan African countries and is especially common in young children. The IHAT-GUT trial assessed the efficacy and safety of a novel nano iron supplement, which is a dietary ferritin analogue termed iron hydroxide adipate tartrate (IHAT), for the treatment of IDA in children under 3 years of age. Methods: In this single-country, randomised, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority Phase II study in The Gambia, children 6-35 months with IDA (7≤Hb < 11 g/dL and ferritin<30 µg/L) were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either IHAT, ferrous sulphate (FeSO4) or placebo daily for 3 months (85 days). The daily iron dose was 12.5 mg Fe equivalent for FeSO4 and the estimated dose with comparable iron-bioavailability for IHAT (20 mg Fe). The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of haemoglobin response at day 85 and correction of iron deficiency. The non-inferiority margin was 0.1 absolute difference in response probability. The primary safety endpoint was moderate-severe diarrhoea analysed as incidence density and prevalence over the 3 months intervention. Secondary endpoints reported herein include hospitalisation, acute respiratory infection, malaria, treatment failures, iron handling markers, inflammatory markers, longitudinal prevalence of diarrhoea and incidence density of bloody diarrhoea. Main analyses were per-protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02941081). Findings: Between Nov 2017 and Nov 2018, 642 children were randomised into the study (214 per group) and included in the ITT analysis, the PP population included 582 children. A total of 50/177 (28.2%) children in the IHAT group achieved the primary efficacy endpoint, as compared with 42/190 (22.1%) in the FeSO4 group (OR 1.39, 80% CI 1.01-1.91, PP population) and with 2/186 (1.1%) in the placebo group. Diarrhoea prevalence was similar between groups, with 40/189 (21.2%) children in the IHAT group developing at least one episode of moderate-severe diarrhoea over the 85 days intervention, compared with 47/198 (23.7%) in the FeSO4 group (OR 1.18, 80% CI 0.86-1.62) and 40/195 (20.5%) in the placebo group (OR 0.96, 80% CI 0.7-1.33, PP population). Incidence density of moderate-severe diarrhoea was 2.66 in the IHAT group and 3.42 in the FeSO4 group (RR 0.76, 80% CI 0.59-0.99, CC-ITT population).There were 143/211 (67.8%) children with adverse events (AEs) in the IHAT group, 146/212 (68.9%) in the FeSO4 group and 143/214 (66.8%) in the placebo group. There were overall 213 diarrhoea-related AEs; 35 (28.5%) cases reported in the IHAT group compared with 51 (41.5%) cases in the FeSO4 group and 37 (30.1%) cases in the placebo group. Interpretation: In this first Phase II study conducted in young children with IDA, IHAT showed sufficient non-inferiority compared to standard-of-care FeSO4, in terms of ID correction and haemoglobin response, to warrant a definitive Phase III trial. In addition, IHAT had lower incidence of moderate-severe diarrhoea than FeSO4, with no increased adverse events in comparison with placebo. Funding: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1140952).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Anemia is one of the most impactful nutrient deficiencies in the world and disproportionately affects children in low-resource settings. Point-of-care devices (PoCDs) measuring blood hemoglobin (Hb) are widely used in such settings to screen for anemia due to their low cost, speed, and convenience. Here we present the first iteration of Aptus, a new PoCD which measures Hb and hematocrit (HCT). AIM: To evaluate the accuracy of Aptus and HemoCue® Hb 301 against an automated hematology analyzer (Medonic®) in Gambian children aged 6-35 months and the Aptus' usage in the field. METHODS: Aptus, HemoCue® and Medonic® were compared using venous blood (n = 180), and Aptus and HemoCue® additionally using capillary blood (n = 506). Agreement was estimated using Bland-Altman analysis and Lin's concordance. Usage was assessed by error occurrence and user experience. RESULTS: Mean Hb values in venous blood did not significantly differ between Aptus and HemoCue® (10.44±1.05 vs 10.56±0.93g/dl, p>0.05), but both measured higher Hb concentrations than Medonic® (9.75±0.99g/dl, p<0.0001). Lin's coefficient between Aptus and Medonic® was rc = 0.548, between HemoCue® and Medonic® rc = 0.636. Mean bias between the PoCDs venous measurements was -0.11g/dl with limits of agreement (LoA) -1.63 and 1.40g/dl. The bias was larger for the comparisons between the Medonic® and both Aptus (0.69g/dl, LoA 0.92 and 2.31g/dl) and HemoCue® (0.81g/dl, LoA 0.17 and 1.78g/dl). ROC curves showed an AUC of 0.933 in HemoCue® and 0.799 in Aptus. Capillary Hb was higher with Aptus than HemoCue® (10.33±1.11g/dl vs 10.01±1.07g/dl, p<0.0001). Mean bias was 0.32g/dl with LoA of -1.91 and 2.54g/dl. Aptus' usage proved intuitive, yet time-to-results and cuvettes could be improved. CONCLUSION: Both PoCDs showed a relatively limited bias but large LoA. Aptus and HemoCue® showed similar accuracy, while both overestimated Hb levels. Aptus showed promise, with its operation unimpaired by field conditions as well as being able to show HCT values.
