4.6 Article

Lactoferrin for iron-deficiency anemia in children with inflammatory bowel disease: a clinical trial

Journal

PEDIATRIC RESEARCH
Volume 92, Issue 3, Pages 762-766

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41390-022-02136-2

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Science, Technology & Innovation Funding Authority (STDF)
  2. Egyptian Knowledge Bank (EKB)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lactoferrin is a promising and effective treatment with fewer side effects than oral ferrous sulfate for children with IBD and IDA.
BACKGROUND: Iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) is common in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, oral iron supplements are commonly associated with poor compliance due to gastrointestinal side effects. We compared the effect of lactoferrin versus oral ferrous sulfate for the treatment of IDA in children with IBD. METHODS: Ninety-two IBD children with IDA were included but only 80 children completed the study and they were randomized into two groups: ferrous sulfate group (n = 40) who received ferrous sulfate 6 mg/kg/day for 3 months and lactoferrin group (n = 40) who received lactoferrin 100 mg/day for 3 months. Complete blood count, serum iron, total iron-binding capacity (TIBC), transferrin saturation (TS), serum ferritin, interleukin-6 (IL-6), and hepcidin 25 were measured before and after the treatment. RESULTS: Hemoglobin (Hb), mean corpuscular volume, serum iron, TS, and serum ferritin significantly increased, while TIBC decreased significantly after the administration of either ferrous sulfate or lactoferrin compared to their baseline data. In addition, lactoferrin significantly increased Hb, serum iron, TS, and serum ferritin compared to ferrous sulfate. Moreover, lactoferrin significantly decreased IL-6 and hepcidin levels. CONCLUSION: Lactoferrin is a promising effective treatment with fewer side effects than oral elemental iron in children with IBD and IDA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available