Before the introduction of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in 1989, repeated transfusions given to patients with end-stage renal disease caused iron overload, and the need for supplemental iron was rare. However, with the widespread introduction of ESAs, it was recognized that supplemental iron was necessary to optimize hemoglobin response and allow reduction of the ESA dose for economic reasons and recent concerns about ESA safety. Iron supplementation was also found to be more efficacious via intravenous compared to oral administration, and the use of intravenous iron has escalated in recent years. The safety of various iron compounds has been of theoretical concern due to their potential to induce iron overload, oxidative stress, hypersensitivity reactions, and a permissive environment for infectious processes. Therefore, an expert group was convened to assess the benefits and risks of parenteral iron, and to provide strategies for its optimal use while mitigating the risk for acute reactions and other adverse effects.

Background. Intravenous (i.v.) iron sucrose similar (ISS) preparations are available but clinical comparisons with the originator iron sucrose (IS) are lacking.Methods. The impact of switching from IS to ISS on anaemia and iron parameters was assessed in a sequential observational study comparing two periods of 27 weeks each in 75 stable haemodialysis (HD) patients receiving i.v. iron weekly and an i.v. erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) once every 2 weeks. Patients received IS in the first period (P1) and ISS in the second period (P2).Results. Mean haemoglobin value was 11.78 ± 0.99 g/dL during P1 and 11.48 ± 0.98 g/dL during P2 (P = 0.01). Mean serum ferritin was similar for both treatment periods (P1, 534 ± 328 μg/L; P2, 495 ± 280 μg/L, P = 0.25) but mean TSAT during P1 (49.3 ± 10.9%) was significantly higher than during P2 (24.5 ± 9.4%, P <0.0001). The mean dose of i.v. iron per patient per week was 45.58 ± 32.55 mg in P1 and 61.36 ± 30.98 mg in P2 (+34.6%), while the mean ESA dose was 0.58 ± 0.52 and 0.66 ± 0.64 μg/kg/week, respectively (+13.8%). Total mean anaemia drug costs increased in P2 by 11.9% compared to P1.Conclusions. The switch from the originator IS to an ISS preparation led to destabilization of a well-controlled population of HD patients and incurred an increase in total anaemia drug costs. Prospective comparative clinical studies are required to prove that ISS are as efficacious and safe as the originator i.v. IS.

No abstract

Dialysis patients exhibit an inverse, L- or U-shaped association between blood pressure and mortality risk, in contrast to the linear association in the general population. We prospectively studied 9333 hemodialysis patients in France, aiming to analyze associations between predialysis systolic, diastolic, and pulse pressure with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and nonfatal cardiovascular endpoints for a median follow-up of 548 days. Blood pressure components were tested against outcomes in time-varying covariate linear and fractional polynomial Cox models. Changes throughout follow-up were analyzed with a joint model including both the time-varying covariate of sequential blood pressure and its slope over time. A U-shaped association of systolic blood pressure was found with all-cause mortality and of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure with cardiovascular mortality. There was an L-shaped association of diastolic blood pressure with all-cause mortality. The lowest hazard ratio of all-cause mortality was observed for a systolic blood pressure of 165 mm Hg, and of cardiovascular mortality for systolic/diastolic pressures of 157/90 mm Hg, substantially higher than currently recommended values for the general population. The 95% lower confidence interval was approximately 135/70 mm Hg. We found no significant correlation for either systolic, diastolic, or pulse pressure with myocardial infarction or nontraumatic amputations, but there were significant positive associations between systolic and pulse pressure with stroke (per 10-mm Hg increase: hazard ratios 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.07 and 1.23; and 1.20, 1.11 and 1.31, respectively). Thus, whereas high pre-dialysis blood pressure is associated with stroke risk, low pre-dialysis blood pressure may be both harmful and a proxy for comorbid conditions leading to premature death.

Survival in dialysis patients with incident cancer was poor. It is crucial to consider anticancer drug treatment in these patients as for non-dialysis patients and to use current available specific drug management recommendations in order to (i) adjust the dose and (ii) avoid premature elimination of the drug during dialysis sessions.