Background
Anemia due to deficient renal erythropoietin production is nearly universal among hemodialysis (HD) patients. Treatment with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and intravenous (IV) iron has been the cornerstone of anemia management for over two decades, and it is well established that IV iron is vital to support hemoglobin (Hgb) levels and optimize ESA dosing [
1‐
5].
Despite this, the optimal IV iron management practice to support ESA therapy remains uncertain. First, there may be safety considerations that should limit the amount of IV iron given to patients. While pre-clinical and small clinical studies have indicated that IV iron may lead to oxidative stress, inflammation, risk of infection, and tissue iron overload, large observational studies have reported incongruent associations with clinical outcomes [
6‐
21]. A 2014 KDIGO Controversies Conference on iron management in CKD focused nearly exclusively on the safety of IV iron [
22]. Similarly, an ongoing multicenter clinical trial in the UK will compare the safety of a high-dose versus a low-dose IV iron regimen [
23].
These questions about the safety of IV iron underlie the imperative to understand the most effective IV iron management strategies, i.e., to give the ‘right amount’ of IV iron to support ESA use and target hemoglobin levels in everyday practice. Data from small clinical trials show that Hgb responsiveness to ESA dosing improves with IV iron dosing that achieves higher levels of iron measures, e.g., transferrin saturation (TSAT) levels of 30%-35% [
24‐
30]. However, ‘real world’ data on the best IV iron dosing strategies to support anemia management are lacking, with a dearth of publications comparing the effectiveness of different IV iron dosing approaches.
Uncertainty regarding optimally effective IV iron management strategies, including IV iron dosing and TSAT and ferritin targets, is reflected in clinical practice recommendations that differ conspicuously: e.g., the KDIGO anemia guideline in 2012 and the ERBP and KDOQI responses to this guideline in 2013 [
31‐
35]. In this context, it is not surprising that previous DOPPS publications have demonstrated that protocols for anemia management and IV iron dosing are widely variable within and across countries [
36‐
39]. As a consequence, patients receive markedly different cumulative exposures to IV iron and ESAs, and ferritin levels are now much higher in the US than in other countries, as are TSAT levels to a lesser extent [
40‐
42].
The primary goal of this study was to help to determine if there is an IV iron management strategy that would optimize the effect of IV iron dosing on Hgb levels and, secondarily, on TSAT, ferritin, and ESA dose in common clinical practice. In the context of unresolved safety questions, we hope to inform optimal IV iron management practices to support Hgb levels while limiting unnecessary or excessive use of ESAs and IV iron.
Discussion
Our findings, from a multinational observational study of practice patterns in national samples of hemodialysis centers, provide support for the effectiveness of IV iron dosing to raise or sustain Hgb across a wide range of starting Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin values in everyday practice. Specifically, the results support the possibility that IV iron dosing of less than 300 mg/month, as commonly used for maintenance IV iron dosing at 50 mg per week or 50-100 mg every other week (the dominant dose range for this category was 100-200 mg/month) may be the most effective strategy to support Hgb while keeping TSAT and ferritin levels stable and limiting ESA dose. Higher IV iron doses were associated with lower doses of ESA, but at a price of a rise in ferritin (especially with maintenance dosing) and/or TSAT (especially with replacement dosing). Along with studies supporting the safety of IV iron in the 100-200 mg/month dose range, these results provide greater clarity to help guide the rational use of IV iron in common clinical practice across a diverse range of dialysis centers and patients, and across diverse countries.
A motivation for our analysis was the paucity of data providing practical guidance for the comparative effectiveness of different IV iron doses to optimize Hgb outcomes and ESA responsiveness in dialysis patients, which could help providers to limit administration of higher doses than necessary given uncertainty about clinical risk. Among HD patients with absolute or functional iron deficiency, the effectiveness of IV iron to raise Hgb levels is established [
2,
31‐
33]. For most HD patients, who have neither absolute nor functional iron deficiency, small clinical studies consistently have shown that optimizing IV iron dosing supports Hgb levels while decreasing ESA dose requirements [
22‐
30]. However, no interventional trials or adequately controlled large observational studies have sufficiently evaluated the effectiveness of different IV iron dosing strategies to support Hgb responsiveness to ESA dosing in broader dialysis practice. Absent clear evidence or consensus guidelines, anemia management protocols are highly diverse, and patients receive markedly different cumulative exposures to IV iron and ESAs [
31‐
38].
To help address this evidence gap, our analysis corroborates the positive dose response (relative change) between IV iron and Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin levels, well known from smaller studies, in a large database reflective of routine clinical care in diverse settings internationally. This work also provides estimates of the magnitude of the effect of IV iron on 3-month change in Hgb in routine clinical practice, demonstrating a median difference of 0.18 g/dL for IV iron doses of <300 mg/month versus 0, and of 0.13 g/dL for IV iron doses of ≥300 versus <300 mg/month, varying modestly across Hgb0, TSAT0, or ferritin0 strata.
Based on our Medical Director Survey data (not shown) specifying target ranges for Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin levels, the majority of patients in this analysis had values of these measures that were at or near target range. For such patients, an important goal of anemia management is to maintain Hgb at stable levels (i.e.,
absolute change of zero), while optimizing ESA dosing. Deviations have been referred to as Hgb variability, cycling, or excursions, and have been associated with adverse clinical outcomes [
46‐
49]. Furthermore, maintaining stable TSAT and ferritin levels in the target range plausibly has beneficial clinical and cost implications. In our analyses, we note that Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin levels were most often unchanged (absolute change = 0) from before to after IV iron dosing of <300 mg/month. This finding held across broad ranges of prior Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin levels, inclusive of common targets such as Hgb 10-12 g/dL, TSAT 20%-34%, and ferritin 200-799 ng/mL. The <300 mg/month IV iron dosing category includes some common maintenance IV iron dosing regimens, e.g., 50 mg/week or 50-100 mg every other week (Additional file
3: Figure S3). We therefore extrapolate that this IV iron dosing strategy may be the best means to maintain stable Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin levels in many patients.
Among patients receiving IV iron at ≥300 mg/month, our analysis estimated the effects of high dose maintenance (e.g., 100 mg weekly) versus replacement (e.g., 500mg or 1000 mg bolus) dosing (Additional file
5: Figure S4). While the observed effects on Hgb levels were comparable, both strategies were associated with increases in TSAT and ferritin levels even among patients with high prior TSAT (up to 35%) and ferritin (up to 1200 ng/mL) levels. These observed effects may indicate administration of unnecessarily high cumulative IV iron doses; for example, maintenance dosing (which has lesser short-term, but perhaps greater long-term, effect on raising ferritin levels than replacement dosing) was associated with an increase in ferritin of an additional 63 ng/mL for patients with ferritin levels already at 500-799 ng/mL. These findings provide further support for use in common practice of IV iron dosing at <300 mg/month, compared to ≥300 mg/month whether by maintenance or replacement dosing.
Relative decreases in 3-month ESA dose were consistently seen for IV iron dose <300 mg/month compared to no IV iron, especially at low Hgb0 and TSAT0 levels. While IV iron ≥300 mg/month was associated with even larger relative decreases in 3-month ESA dose, the absolute change in ESA dose was generally closest to 0 following IV iron dosing of <300 mg/month. This finding supports the possibility that IV iron dosing at <300 mg/month may, on average, limit the need for ESA dosing adjustments, a desirable goal in everyday dialysis practice. Especially for patients with low Hgb0 (<11 g/dL) or low TSAT0 (<20%) levels, the large increase in Hgb level and large decline in ESA dose following IV iron dosing emphasize the importance of sufficient IV iron dosing in such patients to limit unnecessarily high ESA dose.
Our analysis evaluated effectiveness rather than safety outcomes, but our conclusion that IV iron dosing at 100-200 mg/month (the most common doses in <300mg/month group) may be optimally effective to support Hgb levels is notable when placed in the context of existing literature because, to our knowledge, studies have found elevation in clinical risk only at higher (e.g., ≥300 mg/month) IV iron doses [
6‐
14].
Regarding interpretation of our findings, several caveats merit mention. First, though we evaluated the effect of IV iron dose over up to 6 months, analyses are needed to confirm our findings over longer follow-up intervals. Second, the analysis provides information on average, but doesn’t provide insight into the most effective IV iron dosing strategies for all situations in clinical practice, such as patients with Hgb levels substantially above or below target or patients who are hyporesponsive to ESA therapy. Third, this was a study of prevalent HD patients, most of whom are not naïve to anemia treatment; however, prior treatment history cannot be fully represented in the analysis. Fourth, all observational studies are subject to biased interpretation due to confounding. However, the associations seen are directionally consistent with causal rather than confounded interpretations. Confounding would tend to bias the effect of IV iron on Hgb to the null, since patients receiving higher doses of IV iron are more likely to be ESA resistant than patients receiving lower dose or no IV iron. Fifth, we were unable to report estimated effects of different IV iron formulations because, within a geographic region, there was often only one product in predominant use [
38,
40].
Conclusion
Though IV iron use in dialysis units is nearly ubiquitous, the optimal way to dose and manage iron parameters to treat anemia is controversial and deserves input from analyses of actual clinical practice. Our observational findings from the international DOPPS provide support for the effectiveness of IV iron dosing to raise or sustain Hgb levels across a wide range of Hgb, TSAT, and ferritin values. Further, the findings indicate that IV iron dosing at <300 (typically 100-200) mg/month, as used for some maintenance IV iron dosing protocols, may be a more suitable strategy for average patients to support Hgb, while keeping TSAT and ferritin levels stable and reducing or limiting ESA doses, than the higher doses, by either maintenance or replacement dosing, that are common in many European and North American dialysis clinics. Along with studies that support the safety of IV iron in the same 100-200 mg/month dose range, these findings can help to inform clinical practice guidelines and anemia management protocols in everyday hemodialysis practice.
Acknowledgements
Jennifer McCready-Maynes, an employee of Arbor Research Collaborative for Health, provided editorial assistance.