Sucrosomial® iron absorption studied by in vitro and ex-vivo models

Fabiano, Angela; Brilli, Elisa; Fogli, Stefano; Beconcini, Denise; Carpi, Sara; Tarantino, Germano; Zambito, Ylenia

doi:10.1016/j.ejps.2017.10.021

Cited by 43 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sucrosomial iron (Sideral® Forte), a preparation of ferric pyrophosphate conveyed within a phospholipid and sucrose esters of fatty acid membrane, is a new generation of oral iron, which shows a high intestinal absorption and high bioavailability with a low incidence of side effects, due to lack of any direct contact with intestinal mucosa [8][9][10]. In comparison with the other standard oral iron preparations, sucrosomial iron seems to be a promising new strategy of iron replacement in several kinds of patients [11][12][13], and in particular in ND-CKD patients [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral Sucrosomial® iron versus intravenous iron for recovering iron deficiency anaemia in ND-CKD patients: a cost- minimization analysis

Riccio

Sabbatini²,

Capuano³

et al. 2020

BMC Nephrol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Oral iron is recommended as first line treatment of anemia in non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (ND-CKD) patients. Sucrosomial® iron, a new generation oral iron with high absorption and bioavailability and a low incidence of side effects, has shown to be not inferior to intravenous (IV) iron in the replacement of iron deficiency anemia in patients with ND-CKD. Besides the clinical benefit, it is also important to determine the comparative total costs of oral versus IV iron administrations. The aim of this study was to perform a cost-minimization analysis of oral Sucrosomial iron, compared with IV iron gluconate from an Italian societal perspective. Methods: Cost analysis was performed on the 99 patients with ND-CKD and iron-deficiency anemia of the randomized trial by Pisani et al. Human and material resources utilization was recorded during each iron administration. According to study perspective, direct and indirect costs were considered. Costs for each resource unit were taken from official Italian sources. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the robustness of the results. Results: The base case analysis showed an average cost/cycle per patient of € 111 for oral iron and € 1302 for IV iron. Thus, the potential saving was equal to € 1191 per patient/cycle. The sensitivity analysis showed that the most sensitive driver is the time loss by patient and caregivers for the therapy and related-care, followed by the minutes of nursing care and the number of kilometres travelled to reach the referral centre. Discussion: This study showed that oral Sucrosomial® iron could offer specific advantages in terms of potential savings, and allowed identifying some implications for future research. Such advantages still persist with the new single dose IV iron formulation available in the market, although to a lesser extent.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral Sucrosomial® iron versus intravenous iron for recovering iron deficiency anaemia in ND-CKD patients: a cost- minimization analysis

Riccio

Sabbatini²,

Capuano³

et al. 2020

BMC Nephrol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also reduces the irritation often caused by iron compounds in the gastric mucosa and it allows its absorption bypassing the hepcidin-dependent pathways involved in conventional iron absorption, being M cells from reticuloendothelial system a key pathway contributing to its absorption also in an inflammatory context [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sucrosomial® oral iron allows that Fisiogen Ferro Forte® can be used in all those patients who are intolerant to treatment by oral route or who present a malabsorption of conventional oral iron preparations [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Budget Impact Analysis of Oral Fisiogen Ferro Forte® versus Intravenous Iron for the Management of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease in Spain

Darbà

Ascanio

2018

Clin Drug Investig

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the most innovative preparation is "sucrosomial" iron (SI), that is a source of ferric pyrophosphate covered by phospholipids plus sucrose esters of fatty acids matrix [84]. In vitro experiments on human intestinal Caco-2 cells suggest that SI could be taken up through a DMT-1 independent mechanism [84], possibly through endocytosis and similarly to what happens with nanoparticles [85,86] (see below). Whether this occurs also in vivo, as well as whether SI utilizes unique mechanisms also to enter the bloodstream remain to be proven.…”

Section: New Preparationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modern iron replacement therapy: clinical and pathophysiological insights

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Iron deficiency, with or without anemia, is extremely frequent worldwide, representing a major public health problem. Iron replacement therapy dates back to the seventeenth century, and has progressed relatively slowly until recently. Both oral and intravenous traditional iron formulations are known to be far from ideal, mainly because of tolerability and safety issues, respectively. At the beginning of this century, the discovery of hepcidin/ferroportin axis has represented a turning point in the knowledge of the pathophysiology of iron metabolism disorders, ushering a new era. In the meantime, advances in the pharmaceutical technologies are producing newer iron formulations aimed at minimizing the problems inherent with traditional approaches. The pharmacokinetic of oral and parenteral iron is substantially different, and diversities have become even clearer in light of the hepcidin master role in regulating systemic iron homeostasis. Here we review how iron therapy is changing because of such important advances in both pathophysiology and pharmacology.

show abstract

Sucrosomial® iron absorption studied by in vitro and ex-vivo models

Cited by 43 publications

References 24 publications

Oral Sucrosomial® iron versus intravenous iron for recovering iron deficiency anaemia in ND-CKD patients: a cost- minimization analysis

Oral Sucrosomial® iron versus intravenous iron for recovering iron deficiency anaemia in ND-CKD patients: a cost- minimization analysis

Budget Impact Analysis of Oral Fisiogen Ferro Forte® versus Intravenous Iron for the Management of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease in Spain

Modern iron replacement therapy: clinical and pathophysiological insights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About