Effect of Iron Polymaltose Complex Prophylaxis on Frequency of Iron Deficiency and Iron Deficiency Anemia.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of national iron prophylaxis policy in 9-12 mo-old infants in Turkey. METHODS: This study was planned as a cross-sectional study, and it included healthy infants aged 9 to 12 mo who presented to the pediatric outpatient clinic for routine check-ups. Parents were interviewed to identify risk factors for iron deficiency (ID) and gather information on Fe+3 - iron polymaltose complex (IPC) prophylaxis usage. Blood samples were collected for hemogram and ferritin analysis. Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine risk factors for ID and iron deficiency anemia (IDA). RESULTS: The study included 317 infants. In the non-prophylaxis group, the frequency of IDA was 31.1%, compared to 13.4% in the regular prophylaxis group. Iron deficiency was detected in 25% of individuals receiving regular prophylaxis and 13.1% of those without prophylaxis. The risk factors for IDA were insufficient iron diets (OR 2.45, 95% CI: 1.35-4.45) and not receiving Fe+3 - IPC prophylaxis (OR 2.57, 95% CI: 1.24-5.31). The relationship between Fe+3 - IPC prophylaxis and ID did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.253). CONCLUSIONS: Fe+3 - IPC prophylaxis is associated with a lower risk of iron deficiency anemia, but not iron deficiency.

Effectiveness of iron polymaltose complex in treatment and prevention of iron deficiency anemia in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is commonly treated with iron formulations. Despite the expanding acceptance of iron polymaltose complex (IPC) among clinicians, there is sparse and contradictory evidence regarding its efficacy in the management of IDA in children. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of IPC in the treatment and prevention of IDA in children. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Epistemonikos for all randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing oral IPC with standard oral iron supplementation for the treatment or prevention of IDA in children. We independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified trials before the full text of relevant trials was evaluated for eligibility. We then independently extracted data on the methods, interventions, outcomes, and risk of bias from the included trials. A random-effects model was used to estimate the risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Eight trials comprising 493 randomized patients were included and analyzed using three comparison groups. The comparison group of which was used to evaluate IPC and ferrous sulphate (FS) for treatment of IDA showed that IPC is less effective in increasing Hb (MD -0.81, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.53; I2 = 48%, P < 0.001; six studies, 368 participants; high certainty of evidence), ferritin (MD -21.24, 95% CI -39.26 to -3.23, random-effects; I2 = 65%, P = 0.020; 3 studies, 183 participants; moderate certainty of evidence) and MCV levels (MD -3.20, 95% CI -5.35 to -1.05; P = 0.003; one study, 103 participants; low certainty of evidence). There was no difference in the occurrence of side effects between IPC and FS group (MD 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.31; I2 = 4%, P = 0.35; three studies, 274 participants; high certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: There was moderate to high certainty evidence that FS is superior to IPC with a clinically meaningful difference in improving the Hb and ferritin levels in the treatment of IDA in children. There was no difference in the occurrence of gastrointestinal side effects with high certainty evidence between the IPC and FS groups. The body of evidence did not allow a clear conclusion regarding the effectiveness of IPC with iron gluconate and iron bisglycinate in the prevention and treatment of IDA. The certainty of evidence was low. Adequately powered and high-quality trials with large sample sizes that assess both hematological and clinical outcomes are required.

Iron polymaltose complexes: Could we spot physicochemical differences in medicines sharing the same active pharmaceutical ingredient?

Oral iron therapy can efficaciously treat both iron deficiency and iron deficiency anemia. To overcome the recurrent side effects of iron(II) salts, medicines containing iron(III) such as iron polymaltose complex (IPC) have been introduced in several markets. Despite the claimed improved safety versus iron(II) preparations, divergent evidences are currently available on IPC efficacy. Indeed, the use of either an originator drug or a follow-on version ("similar") of this medicine might result in different clinical performances. The aim of this work was the pioneer evaluation of physicochemical properties of IPC vs. iron polymaltose complex similars (IPCSs) as nanomedicines. This, to assess the presence of deviations for commercially available products supposedly containing the same active pharmaceutical ingredient and currently considered as generics. Significant differences with respect to size, size distribution, stability and degradation kinetics of the products are reported here. Therapeutic equivalence of IPC and IPCSs is not proven, and new guidelines are needed to determine whether these nanomedicines can be regarded as interchangeable.

Comparison of Therapeutic Efficacy of Ferrous Ascorbate and Iron Polymaltose Complex in Iron Deficiency Anemia in Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the therapeutic efficacy of Ferrous ascorbate (FA) and Iron polymaltose complex (IPC) in Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) in children. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at a tertiary care hospital with 125 (1-12 y) children having clinical symptoms and signs of IDA. Participants were randomized into FA group and IPC group. Both the groups received iron salts (FA or IPC) randomly in a dose of 6 mg/kg elemental iron for 3 mo and followed up on day 3, day 7, at the end of 1 mo and 3 mo for Hemoglobin (Hb), Mean corpuscular volume (MCV), Red cell distribution width (RDW) and reticulocyte count. RESULTS: Both groups had an improvement in hematological parameters at 3 mo of intervention. The difference in the rise of Hb (g%) at the end of 1 mo in FA group (3.13 ± 1.01) vs. IPC group (2.0 ± 0.85); p = 0.017 and at 3 mo in FA group (4.88 ± 1.28) vs. IPC group (3.33 ± 1.33); p = 0.001 was statistically significant. The difference in the rise of mean Hb was significantly better in FA than the IPC group F [3392] =1.79; p = 0.00 (ANOVA). The difference in the mean increase in MCV (fL) at day 7 in FA group (6.71 ± 8.32) vs. IPC group (2.91 ± 6.16); p = 0.011 and at 1 mo FA group (9.80 ± 8.56) vs. IPC group (5.35 ± 6.11); p = 0.004 was statistically significant. The mean decrease in RDW (%) at 1 mo in FA group (4.23 ± 3.27) vs. IPC group (2.67 ± 1.95); p = 0.005 and at 3 mo in FA group (5.74 ± 3.63) vs. IPC group (4.04 ± 2.17); p = 0.006 was statistically significant. The difference in the rise in mean reticulocyte count at day 3 in FA group (0.88 ± 0.50) vs. IPC group (0.43 ± 1.20); p = 0.017 and at day 7 in FA group (4.00 ± 1.69) vs. IPC group (2.19 ± 1.24); p = 0.001 was statistically significant. F [2294] = 29.2, p = 0.00 (ANOVA). During the study period, the FA group had minor adverse reactions whereas the IPC group had none. CONCLUSIONS: Both the iron salts (FA and IPC) used in the treatment of IDA showed statistically significant improvement in the hematological parameters during the 3 mo of intervention. The improvement in hematological parameters was better in FA supplemented patients as compared to IPC.

The complex interplay of iron metabolism, reactive oxygen species, and reactive nitrogen species: insights into the potential of various iron therapies to induce oxidative and nitrosative stress.

Production of minute concentrations of superoxide (O2(*-)) and nitrogen monoxide (nitric oxide, NO*) plays important roles in several aspects of cellular signaling and metabolic regulation. However, in an inflammatory environment, the concentrations of these radicals can drastically increase and the antioxidant defenses may become overwhelmed. Thus, biological damage may occur owing to redox imbalance-a condition called oxidative and/or nitrosative stress. A complex interplay exists between iron metabolism, O2(*-), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and NO*. Iron is involved in both the formation and the scavenging of these species. Iron deficiency (anemia) (ID(A)) is associated with oxidative stress, but its role in the induction of nitrosative stress is largely unclear. Moreover, oral as well as intravenous (iv) iron preparations used for the treatment of ID(A) may also induce oxidative and/or nitrosative stress. Oral administration of ferrous salts may lead to high transferrin saturation levels and, thus, formation of non-transferrin-bound iron, a potentially toxic form of iron with a propensity to induce oxidative stress. One of the factors that determine the likelihood of oxidative and nitrosative stress induced upon administration of an iv iron complex is the amount of labile (or weakly-bound) iron present in the complex. Stable dextran-based iron complexes used for iv therapy, although they contain only negligible amounts of labile iron, can induce oxidative and/or nitrosative stress through so far unknown mechanisms. In this review, after summarizing the main features of iron metabolism and its complex interplay with O2(*-), H2O2, NO*, and other more reactive compounds derived from these species, the potential of various iron therapies to induce oxidative and nitrosative stress is discussed and possible underlying mechanisms are proposed. Understanding the mechanisms, by which various iron formulations may induce oxidative and nitrosative stress, will help us develop better tolerated and more efficient therapies for various dysfunctions of iron metabolism.