Background Anaemia is common in haemodialysis (HD) patients and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Intravenous (IV) iron combined with erythropoietin (EPO) is the mainstay treatment of anaemia in these patients. The comparative efficacy and risk of adverse events with IV iron preparations have been assessed in only a few trials. Methods This was an observational longitudinal repeated measures retrospective study designed to compare the safety and efficacy of iron sucrose (IS-Venofer®) versus iron isomaltoside (IIM-Diafer®) in haemodialysis patients. The study included patients currently on dialysis and receiving Venofer who were switched to Diafer and monitored for at least 12 months for each iron preparation. Results A total of 190 patients were included and had a mean age of 65.8 years. Non-inferiority was confirmed with no change in mean haemoglobin per mg of iron administered over a 12-month period. In total there were 41,295 prescriptions of iron isomaltoside and 14,685 of iron sucrose with no difference in the reported adverse events during the study period (7 each, none were severe). There was a statistically significant effect on Hb over time after converting (T0), including after adjustment for multiple comparisons. There were significant improvements in ferritin over time, which remained at 6 months (P<0.01). The weekly iron dose was similar after adjustment (P=0.02). The EPO dose did not differ significantly after month 0 in patients switched to IIM. Conclusions This study demonstrates the comparative safety and efficacy of iron isomaltoside versus iron sucrose, with similar dosing schedules in dialysis patients., with no differential impact on Hb, and ferritin which were maintained at satisfactory levels for at least 12 months. There was no difference in reported adverse events.

Background Anaemia is common in haemodialysis (HD) patients and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Intravenous (IV) iron combined with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) is the mainstay treatment of anaemia in these patients. The comparative efficacy and risk of adverse events with IV iron preparations have been assessed in only a few trials. Methods This was a retrospective observational study in 2 centres designed to compare the safety and efficacy of iron sucrose (IS-Venofer®) versus iron isomaltoside (IIM-Diafer®) in haemodialysis patients. The study included patients currently on dialysis and receiving Venofer who were switched to Diafer® and monitored for at least 12 months for each iron preparation. Results A total of 190 patients were included and had a mean age of 65.8 years (SD ± 15.5). Non-inferiority was confirmed with no change in mean haemoglobin per mg of iron administered over a 12-month period. In total there were 41,295 prescriptions of iron isomaltoside and 14,685 of iron sucrose with no difference in the number of reported adverse events during the study period (7 each, none were severe). There was a statistically significant effect on Hb over time after conversion, including after adjustment for multiple comparisons. There were significant improvements in ferritin over time, which remained at 6 months (P<0.01). The weekly iron dose was similar after adjustment (P=0.02). The EPO dose did not differ significantly after month 0 in patients switched to IIM. Conclusions This study demonstrates the comparative safety and efficacy of iron isomaltoside versus iron sucrose, with similar dosing schedules in dialysis patients. Iron isomaltoside is non-inferior to iron sucrose in maintaining Hb in patients on regular haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration with no difference in the number of reported adverse events.

Background: Anaemia is common in haemodialysis (HD) patients and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Intravenous (IV) iron combined with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) is the mainstay treatment of anaemia in these patients. The comparative efficacy and risk of adverse events with IV iron preparations have been assessed in only a few trials. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study in 2 centres designed to compare the safety and efficacy of iron sucrose (IS-Venofer®) versus iron isomaltoside (IIM-Diafer®) in haemodialysis patients. The study included patients currently on dialysis and receiving Venofer who were switched to Diafer® and monitored for at least 12 months for each iron preparation. Results: A total of 190 patients were included and had a mean age of 65.8 years (SD ± 15.5). Non-inferiority was confirmed with no change in mean haemoglobin per mg of iron administered over a 12-month period. In total there were 41,295 prescriptions of iron isomaltoside and 14,685 of iron sucrose with no difference in the number of reported adverse events during the study period (7 each, none were severe). There was a statistically significant effect on Hb over time after conversion, including adjustment for multiple comparisons. There were significant improvements in ferritin over time, which remained at 6 months (P < 0.01). The weekly iron dose was similar after adjustment (P = 0.02). The EPO dose did not differ significantly after month 0 in patients switched to IIM. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the comparative safety and efficacy of iron isomaltoside versus iron sucrose, with similar dosing schedules in dialysis patients. Iron isomaltoside is non-inferior to iron sucrose in maintaining Hb in patients on regular haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration with no difference in the number of reported adverse events.