1.
Preoperative Intravenous Iron Therapy and Survival after Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Long Term Results from the IVICA Randomised Controlled Trial
Dickson EA, Keeler BD, Ng O, Kumar A, Brookes MJ, Acheson AG
Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. 2020
Abstract
AIM: Preoperative iron is frequently used for the correction of anaemia in colorectal cancer surgery. However, enteral iron intake may promote tumour growth and progression which could influence cancer recurrence and patient survival. We explore the long term outcomes of patients receiving either oral or intravenous iron replacement therapy as part of a previous randomised controlled trial. METHODS The IVICA trial randomised anaemic colorectal cancer patients to receive either oral (OI, control) or intravenous (IVI, treatment) iron prior to their elective operation. Follow up analysis of all patients recruited to this multicentre trial who underwent surgical resection with curative intent was performed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare groups. A pooled group multivariable analysis comparing patients who achieved resolution of anaemia preoperatively to those who did not was also undertaken. RESULTS 110 of the 116 patients previously enrolled were eligible for analysis (OI n=56, IVI n=54). Median overall follow up duration was 61 months (IQR 46-67). No significant difference in 5-year overall survival (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.65-2.28 P=0.522) or disease free survival (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.61-1.92 P=0.79) was observed between OI and IVI. Pooled analysis of treatment groups found that preoperative resolution of anaemia led to improved 5 year overall survival on multivariable analysis (HR 3.38 [1.07-11.56, P=0.044). CONCLUSION We recommend IVI for the preoperative correction of anaemia. Route of iron therapy did not significantly influence survival. Preoperative anaemia correction may lead to an overall survival advantage following elective colorectal cancer surgery.
2.
The role of iron in the management of chemotherapy-induced anemia in cancer patients receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents
Mhaskar R, Wao H, Miladinovic B, Kumar A, Djulbegovic B
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016;((2)):CD009624.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are commonly used to treat chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). However, about half of patients do not benefit. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms related to the use of iron as a supplement to ESA and iron alone compared with ESA alone in the management of CIA. SEARCH METHODS We searched for relevant trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (issue 1 January 2016), MEDLINE (1950 to February 2016), and www.clinicaltrials.gov without using any language limits. SELECTION CRITERIA All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 'iron plus ESA' or 'iron alone' versus 'ESA alone' in people with CIA were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included eight RCTs (12 comparisons) comparing ESA plus iron versus ESA alone enrolling 2087 participants. We did not find any trial comparing iron alone versus ESAs alone in people with CIA. None of the included RCTs reported overall survival. There was a beneficial effect of iron supplementation to ESAs compared with ESAs alone on hematopoietic response (risk ratio (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.26; P < 0.0001; 1712 participants; 11 comparisons; high-quality evidence). Assuming a baseline risk of 35% to 80% for hematopoietic response without iron supplementation, between seven and 16 patients should be treated to achieve hematopoietic response in one patient. In subgroup analyses, RCTs that used intravenous (IV) iron favored ESAs and iron (RR 1.20 (95% CI 1.10 to 1.31); P < 0.00001; 1321 participants; eight comparisons), whereas we found no evidence for a difference in hematopoietic response in RCTs using oral iron (RR 1.04 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.24); P = 0.68; 391 participants; three comparisons). There was no evidence for a difference between the subgroups of IV and oral iron (P = 0.16). There was no evidence for a difference between the subgroups of types of iron (P = 0.31) and types of ESAs (P = 0.16) for hematopoietic response.The iron supplementation to ESAs might be beneficial as fewer participants treated with iron supplementation required red blood cell (RBC) transfusions compared to the number of participants treated with ESAs alone (RR 0.74 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.92); P = 0.007; 1719 participants; 11 comparisons; moderate-quality evidence). Assuming a baseline risk of 7% to 40% for RBC transfusion without iron supplementation, between 10 and 57 patients should be treated to avoid RBC transfusion in one patient.We found no evidence for a difference in the median time to hematopoietic response with addition of iron to ESAs (hazard ratio (HR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.28); P = 0.65; 1042 participants; seven comparisons; low-quality evidence). In subgroup analyses, RCTs in which dextran (HR 0.95 (95% CI 0.36 to 2.52); P = 0.92; 340 participants; three comparisons), sucrose iron (HR 1.15 (95% CI 0.60 to 2.21); P = 0.67; 102 participants; one comparison) and sulfate iron (HR 1.24 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.56); P = 0.06; 55 participants; one comparison) were used showed no evidence for difference between iron supplementation versus ESAs alone compared with RCTs in which gluconate (HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.94); P = 0.01; 464 participants; two comparisons) was used for median time to hematopoietic response (P = 0.02). There was no evidence for a difference between the subgroups of route of iron administration (P = 0.13) and types of ESAs (P = 0.46) for median time to hematopoietic response.Our results indicated that there could be improvement in the hemoglobin (Hb) levels with addition of iron to ESAs (mean difference (MD) 0.48 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.86); P = 0.01; 827 participants; seven comparisons; low-quality evidence). In RCTs in which IV iron was used there was evidence for a difference (MD 0.84 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.46); P = 0.009; 436 participants; four comparisons) compared with oral iron (MD 0.07 (95% CI -0.19 to 0.34); P = 0.59; 391 participants; three comparisons) for mean change i
3.
Plasmapheresis in the treatment of renal failure associated with multiple myeloma
Kumar A, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP
Blood. 2006;108((11):): Abstract No. 3585
4.
Effect of partial exchange transfusion in asymptomatic polycythemic LBW babies
Kumar A, Ramji S
Indian Pediatrics. 2004;41((4):):366-72.
Abstract
This randomized controlled trial was conducted to determine the effect of partial exchange transfusion in polycythemic babies. Forty five asymptomatic polycythemic babies with birth weight < or = 2000 g were included and randomly assigned to undergo either partial exchange transfusion using isotonic saline within 4 hours of screening or routine medical management. Outcome measures were neonatal morbidity (especially hypoglycemia and neurological alterations) and mortality; developmental delays using DDST-II, neurological deficits, tone and DTR abnormalities over 18 months follow up period. The overall neonatal morbidity in this study was low and comparable in the two groups. Some of the polycythemic babies in the non-exchanged group found initially at 3 months age with suspected developmentgrew out of their developmental delay at 18 months of age or later while those who underwent exchange transfusion and with retarded development at 3 months of age remained so even at 18 months of age.
5.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of erythropoietin in multiple myeloma
Soares HP, Kumar A, Silvestris F, Djulbegovic B
Blood. 2004;104((11):):70a.. Abstract No. 232.