IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0135967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficiency of Original versus Generic Intravenous Iron Formulations in Patients on Haemodialysis

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Luisa Agüera
  • Alejandro Martin-Malo
  • Maria Antonia Alvarez-Lara
  • Victoria Eugenia Garcia-Montemayor
  • Petra Canton
  • Sagrario Soriano
  • Pedro Aljama

Abstract

Aims: The appropriate use of intravenous (IV) iron is essential to minimise the requirements for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). The clinical efficacy of generic IV iron compared to the original formulation is controversial. We evaluated the changes that were induced after switching from a generic IV iron to an original formulation in a stable, prevalent haemodialysis (HD) population. Methods: A total of 342 patients were included, and the follow-up period was 56 weeks for each formulation. Anaemia parameters and doses of ESA and IV iron were prospectively recorded before and after the switch from generic to original IV iron. Results: To maintain the same haemoglobin (Hb) levels after switching from the generic to the original formulation, the requirements for IV iron doses were reduced by 34.3% (from 52.8±33.9 to 34.7±31.8mg/week, p

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Luisa Agüera & Alejandro Martin-Malo & Maria Antonia Alvarez-Lara & Victoria Eugenia Garcia-Montemayor & Petra Canton & Sagrario Soriano & Pedro Aljama, 2015. "Efficiency of Original versus Generic Intravenous Iron Formulations in Patients on Haemodialysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0135967
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0135967
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0135967&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0135967?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0135967. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.