ArticleJournal of nephrology2016
Impact of European medicines agency recommendations for hypersensitivity reactions on intravenous iron prescription in haemodialysis centres of the Lombardy region.
Article in Journal of nephrology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ferric Carboxymatose in Non-Hemodialysis CKD Patients: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Safety concerns about intravenous iron therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease.Clinical kidney journal · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe European Medicines Agency (EMA) has recommended measures to minimize the risk of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to intravenous iron (IVFe). We analysed the effects of these recommendations on IVFe clinical management among haemodialysis centres (HDCs) in Lombardy, Italy. MATERIALS AND
methodsA questionnaire was sent to all 117 HDCs to collect information on centre characteristics, e.g. HDC type [hospital centre (HC) vs. centre with limited assistance (CAL)], presence/absence of intensive care unit (ICU) and/or emergency trained staff, IVFe therapy regarding molecules, administration modalities, side effects, and percentage variations in iron prescription between 2014 and 2013 (outcome, Δ-IVFe%). A linear regression model was applied to evaluate the focus effect (β) of HDC type on the outcome, controlling for possible confounding effects of the other characteristics.
resultsResponse rate was 73.5 %. IVFe therapy was used in 69.1 % (HDC range 11-100) of patients. Following EMA recommendations, prescription was reduced by 12.6 %, with the largest reduction observed in CALs. No severe HSRs were reported. HCs had more frequently an ICU [97.2 vs. 20 %, odds ratio (OR) = 63.6 (95 % confidence interval 15.56; 537.47), p < 0.001], emergency trained staff [97.2 vs. 61.2 %, OR = 10.7 (2.68; 85.33), p < 0.001] and instrumental facilities (91.7 vs. 58 %, OR = 5.8 (2.03; 23.55), p < 0.001] than CALs. Linear regression demonstrated a significant raw effect of HDC type on Δ- IVFe% [β = 19.6 (9.82; 30.63), p < 0.001]. No association was found when HDC type was adjusted for ICU-presence [β = 6.7 (-2.32; 18.30), p = 0.199] or for all-confounding factors [β = 5.6 (-5.50; 17.08), p = 0.337].
conclusionsThis survey shows a disparity in IVFe therapy prescription following EMA recommendations, which is largely influenced by the presence/absence of ICUs in HD centres.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26715394What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.