Search in the Abstract Database

Abstracts Search 2014

* = Presenting author

P530. Comparison between liposomial iron and ferrous sulfate in patients with iron deficiency anemia and inflammatory bowel disease. A pilot controlled study

A. Indriolo, P. Ravelli, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Bergamo, Italy

Background

15–75% of patients (pts) with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have anemia. Iron deficiency is the most important cause of anemia in IBD pts. Ferrous sulfate is the oral iron supplement most used in iron deficiency anemia (IDA) therapy. About 20% of the IBD pts interrupt the therapy because of gastrointestinal side effects. Liposomial iron is a new oral supplement iron based on the liposome technology.

Today, there are no studies on liposomal iron therapy in the pts with IDA and IBD.

Aims of this study are to compare the efficacy and the safety between liposomal iron and ferrous sulfate in pts with IDA and IBD.

Methods

Twenty-three pts with haemoglobin (Hb) above 9 g/dl have been treated with iron therapy, liposomial iron (1 tablet-iron 30 mg per day for 12 weeks (n = 11, group A), ferrous sulfate (1 tablet-iron 105 mg per day for 12 weeks (n = 12, group B), and eleven controls who did not receive iron therapy (group C). The three groups were matched with a similar clinical IBD condition, age, and gender. The principal objective of the study was to evaluate the increase (delta) of the Hb (g/dl) (median, range) at week 12. The secondary objective was to evaluate the % of pts with increased Hb of 1 and 2 g/dl. Side effects of the therapy were recorded in all groups.

Results

We observed an increase of the Hb from 10.5 (9.1–11.9) to 12.4 (10.8–15.4) (delta: +1.9) (group A), from 10.8 (9.0–11.9) to 11.7 (9.1–13.4) (delta: +0.9) (group B), and from 11.3 (10.3–11.9) to 11.9 (9.0–12.9) (delta: +0.6) (group C), respectively. The % of pts with an increase of 1 g of Hb at week 12 was 62.5% (group A), 33.3% (group B), and 57.1% (group C), respectively. The % of pts with an increase of 2 g was 27.2% (group A), 25.0% (group B), and 0.0% (group C), respectively. Side effects were not present in all groups.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first study on the comparison between liposomial iron and ferrous sulfate in the pts with IDA and IBD.

Preliminary results in our study indicate that the Hb is more increased in pts treated with liposomial iron than whose treated with ferrous sulfate or in the controls. An increase of Hb >2 g/dL is more frequent in pts treated with liposomial iron than the controls and is comparable to those pts treated with ferrous sulfate. Liposomial iron is well tolerated in pts with IDA and IBD.

Liposomial iron could be a useful therapeutic option in pts with IDA and IBD that cannot tolerate the traditional oral iron supplementation.