throbber
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 67, 230–238
`& 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0954-3007/13
`
`www.nature.com/ejcn
`
`REVIEW
`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition: a systematic review
`
`A Herna´ ndez-Sa´nchez, P Tejada-Gonza´lez and M Arteta-Jime´ nez
`
`Aluminium (Al) toxicity problem in parenteral nutrition solutions (PNS) is decades old and is still unresolved. The aim of this review
`is to gather updated information about this matter, regarding legislation, manifestations, diagnostics and treatment, patient
`population at risk and the actions to be taken to limit its accumulation. A structured search using MeSH vocabulary and Title/
`Abstract searches was conducted in PubMed (http://www.pubmed.gov) up to November 2012. Al is ubiquitous, facilitating its
`potential for exposure. Nevertheless, humans have several mechanisms to prevent significant absorption and to aid its elimination;
`therefore, the vast majority of the population is not at risk for Al toxicity. However, when protective gastrointestinal mechanisms are
`bypassed (for example, parenteral fluids), renal function is impaired (for example, adult patients with renal compromise and
`neonates) or exposure is high (for example, long-term PNS), Al is prone to accumulate in the body, including manifestations such as
`impaired neurological development, Alzheimer’s disease, metabolic bone disease, dyslipemia and even genotoxic activity. A high Al
`content in PNS is largely the result of three parenteral nutrient additives: calcium gluconate, inorganic phosphates and cysteine
`hydrochloride. Despite the legislative efforts, some factors make difficult to comply with the rule and, therefore, to limit the
`Al toxicity. Unfortunately, manufacturers have not universally changed their processes to obtain a lower Al content of parenteral
`drug products (PDP). In addition, the imprecise information provided by PDP labels and the high lot-to-lot variation make the
`prediction of Al content rather inaccurate.
`
`European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 67, 230–238; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2012.219; published online 13 February 2013
`
`Keywords: aluminium; parenteral nutrition; bone disease; metabolic; Food and Drug Administration; toxicity
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Aluminium (Al) toxicity in parenteral nutrition solutions (PNS) has
`been a problem for decades and is still unresolved. Europe lacks a
`global legislation about the upper limit for Al contamination. In
`the United States, in an effort to limit patients’ exposure to Al and
`to prevent cases of Al toxicity, the American Society for Clinical
`Nutrition (ASCN) and the American Society for Parenteral and
`Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) Working Group on standards for Al
`content in PNS established in 1991 a series of thresholds (upper
`safe limit, unsafe limit, and toxic limit) for Al intake for patients on
`long-term PNS.
`The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
`endocrinologic and metabolic drugs advisory panel, in 2004, and
`after several deferrals, issued a rule governing Al content in large
`volume parenterals (LVPs) and small volume parenterals (SVPs)
`used to prepare PNS.
`Because this regulation applies to industry only, ASPEN issued a
`statement in 2010 on Al in PNS that provides some guidance to
`clinicians.
`Despite the legislative efforts, some factors have made difficult
`to comply with the rules and, therefore, to limit the Al toxicity.
`In this article, we describe how much has been done to limit the Al
`content in PNS, and highlight its importance and the actions that
`should be taken to limit it.
`
`MATERIALS AND METHODS
`A structured search using MeSH vocabulary and Title/Abstract searches
`was conducted in PubMed (http://www.pubmed.gov) up to November
`2012. The language of the publications was restricted to English. The terms
`
`aluminium
`(((aluminium(Title/Abstract)) or
`follows:
`as
`used were
`(Title/Abstract)) and parenteral nutrition (Title/Abstract), rendering 107
`publications. Six were excluded according to language criteria, resulting in
`101 articles. References from these articles chosen were browsed, yielding
`an additional 30 papers for potential consideration.
`
`FINDINGS
`Al characteristics
`Al is the lightest, least dense and third most abundant mineral
`within the earth’s crust (8% by weight) after oxygen and silicon.1–8
`It has no known functions in the human body, although a
`significant role in biomolecular compaction has been proposed.5,9
`Its wide distribution clearly facilitates the potential for human
`exposure, which occurs through air, food and water, but it is also
`present in medical, cosmetic and environmental products.6,9 Of
`these, PNS stand out as a substantial source of this toxic metal, as
`many parenteral drug products (PDP) used to compound them
`contain Al as a contaminant or as a component of the raw
`materials.9,10
`It is estimated that humans ingest between 3 and 20 mg of Al
`per day.1,9 Food and beverages provide 2.5–13 mg of Al daily,
`whereas drinking water may account for 0.2–0.4 mg per day.
`Drugs such as antacids can contribute up to 500 mg.6 However,
`despite this intake, it will not accumulate in the body. Humans
`have several mechanisms to prevent significant absorption of Al
`and to aid its elimination; therefore, the vast majority of the
`population is not at risk for Al toxicity from oral or enteral intake.9
`In healthy people, both the lungs and the skin are very effective at
`reducing Al absorption, as is the gastrointestinal tract, which
`
`Pharmacy department, Hospital Universitario de Getafe, Getafe, Madrid, Spain. Correspondence: Dr A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez, Pharmacy department, Hospital Universitario de
`Getafe, Carretera A-42, 12,500, 28905 Madrid, Spain.
`E-mail: alfredo.hernandez@salud.madrid.org
`Received 9 March 2012; revised 9 December 2012; accepted 26 December 2012; published online 13 February 2013
`
`Eton Ex. 1006
`1 of 9
`
`

`

`typically allows o1% of ingested Al into the blood stream.1,9,11,12
`Ninety nine per cent of absorbed Al is lost in the urine and a minor
`portion being cleared in the bile. Thus, the renal excretion is the
`primarily via of elimination.1,2,12,13
`However, when protective gastrointestinal mechanisms are
`bypassed (for example, parenteral fluids),
`renal
`function is
`impaired (for example, adult patients with renal compromise
`and neonates) or exposure is high (for example, long-term PNS),
`Al is prone to accumulate in the body, notably in bone, liver and
`central nervous system, and also in the spleen, kidneys and other
`tissues.1,14 PNS are then one of the parenteral fluids that pose
`greatest risk for Al accumulation owing to their Al content
`and their administration directly into the circulation bypassing the
`gastrointestinal tract.12
`
`Al in PDP
`Al is present in all the PDP used to elaborate PNS. Furthermore,
`product manipulation, containers and administration sets add Al
`to the mixture.10,15 Al contamination of PNS has been recognised
`since the 1980s, although it was higher than it is at present.9
`Previous studies from the 1980s estimated daily intakes of Al from
`80 to 100 mg/kg/day, which is almost 50-fold more than the
`present mean intake. This change is a function of
`reduced
`contamination of PNS through its additives.16
`A high Al content in PNS is largely the result of three PDP:
`calcium gluconate (CaGluc; up to 81%),
`inorganic phosphates
`(especially potassium) and cysteine hydrochloride.4,8,10,12,17–20
`Historically, replacement of casein hydrolysate with crystalline
`amino acids, which are very low in Al, substantially reduced the Al
`load 50–100 times in adult patients receiving PNS. This protein
`source is no longer available, and thus may no longer be
`considered a source of Al toxicity.1,14,16,21 Currently, there are
`other changes that may lead to Al reduction:
`Calcium and phosphorus are prescribed in small amounts but
`are relevant, as both are important sources of Al and have the
`potential for developing calcium phosphate precipitates. CaGluc is
`commonly used in PNS and has replaced calcium chloride (CaCl),
`because the risk of precipitation with phosphate is lower.17,22
`However, PNS made with CaCl contain significantly less Al
`compared with those made with CaGluc.17,23 Another strategy
`to reduce the risk of calcium phosphate precipitation is to use an
`organic source of phosphorus, more compatible with CaCl than
`the inorganic phosphates.2,3,10 However, although widely used in
`Europe, they are unavailable in many countries including the
`United States and Canada. Furthermore, although inorganic
`phosphates
`are considered as high Al-content products,
`potassium phosphate (KPho) usually renders more Al to PNS
`than sodium phosphate. Therefore, using a sodium or a mixed
`sodium–KPho solution rather than the potassium salt would
`significantly reduce Al exposure through PNS.3,24 Another issue is
`the under-mineralisation of bone in low-birth-weight
`infants
`receiving PNS partly because of
`the delivery of
`insufficient
`amounts of calcium and phosphorus,
`limited by the low
`solubility of calcium phosphate. A possible alternative is calcium
`glycerophosphate, which has confirmed as effective regarding
`mineral retention as equimolar intakes of calcium and phosphorus
`from CaGluc
`and KPho
`respectively. Also,
`and higher
`concentrations of these minerals can be kept in solution when
`they are provided as calcium glycerophosphate.25–27
`The amount of Al leached from glass containers with rubber
`closures is also a significant contributor of Al.10 For instance,
`repackaging CaGluc from glass containers to polyethylene vials
`reduces the mean Al concentration from 5000 to 195 mg/l (a 96%
`decrease).3,10,12 PDP should be stored in containers that do not
`interact physically or chemically with the preparations. This high
`chemical resistance is, however, obtained by the addition of
`mainly boric and Al oxides to glass, consequently turning glass
`
`231
`
`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition
`A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez et al
`
`into a source of Al.28 Low pH favours exchange of metal ions from
`glass, whereas high-pH solutions promote the dissolution of the
`glass surface itself.29 Solutions such as CaGluc, sodium phosphate
`and sodium acetate form complex anions that dissolve Al from the
`glass containers during autoclaving.2,12,24 (Table 1). Table 2 shows
`the content of Al measured in different PNP as published in
`several
`recent studies. Table 3 lists some relevant products
`currently marketed for PNS preparations in Europe.
`
`Patient population at risk
`As the kidneys are the major route of Al elimination, the patients
`at greatest risk of accumulation receiving PNS are those with renal
`compromise and infants with immature renal function, although
`other patients who receive these Al-contaminated parenterals are
`also at risk for Al loading.10,12,14 (Table 4).
`
` During pregnancy, the foetus is susceptible to Al contamination,
`as it is transferred transplacentally. Al does not appear to
`transfer into breast milk in any appreciable. In animal models,
`less than 2% of a daily dose reached breast milk.1,13
` In premature infants,
`toxicity appears
`to be negatively
`correlated with gestational age.
`In addition to possessing
`immature renal function, they are more prone to Al toxicity
`because of their increased calcium and phosphorus require-
`ments,
`thus exposing them to more contaminants from
`parenterals that contain these minerals.1,16 Even intakes of
`o2 mg/kg/day, the level suggested by the ASCN/ASPEN as
`being safe, may be toxic in this population.1 Healthy neonates
`may be able to handle more Al; however, there are no such
`studies available upon which we could safely estimate
`acceptable upper levels of Al from parenteral or injectable
`sources in healthy children.11
` In adults, age represents a risk factor for kidney function
`impairment, as during normal aging humans lose up to 50% of
`their glomeruli between 40 and 85 years of age.11 Elderly
`patients may also be at a similar risk of Al-related toxicity.
`However, a study reveals that most patients with acute kidney
`injury who require PNS do not receive excessive exposure to Al.
`This was due, in part, to the fact that patients with better renal
`function received more calcium and smaller doses of
`phosphorus. Patients with the worst renal function were more
`apt to have hyperphosphatemia and would therefore receive
`PNS without phosphorus.8
` In geriatric patients, Al absorption becomes more efficient with
`advancing age; toxicity may not be as dependent on renal
`function owing to a weakened gastrointestinal protective
`barrier.1
` Other populations at risk for Al toxicity are burn patients who
`have received large amounts of albumin to maintain oncotic
`pressure, and plasmapheresis patients who have been given
`large amounts of albumin.1
`
`Al toxicity manifestations
`Reports of Al toxicity from PNS have been cited in the medical
`literature for several decades.2,12 Unfortunately, the published
`literature is primarily limited to studies published in the 1980s and
`1990s, and the majority of the literature supporting the need to
`minimise Al exposure in the PNS-dependent patient is more than
`30 years old.13 Recent publications refer back to these classic
`papers, and the actual prevalence of Al toxicity in the parenteral
`nutrition-dependent patients still remains to be unknown and
`difficult to calculate, as published evidence consists mainly of case
`reports or small studies.1
`levels include
`increased tissue Al
`Signs and symptoms of
`possibly neurodegenerative disorders such as dialysis encephalo-
`pathy, progressive dementia, impaired neurological development,
`
`& 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited
`
`European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 230 – 238
`
`Eton Ex. 1006
`2 of 9
`
`

`

`232
`
`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition
`A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez et al
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`intravenousfeeding.
`adjustedlossofonepointperdayof
`developmentindex(P¼0.03)withan
`associatedwithareductioninthemental
`impairment,increasingAlexposurewas
`ForpatientsonSwithnoneuromotor
`
`thanintakesunderthatthresholdP¼0.02
`lowerhipBMCby7.6%(95%CI:0.12-13,8)
`Patientsonintakesover55mg/kg/dayhad
`anysite.
`significantpredictorofadjustedBMCat
`continuousvariablefailedtobea
`ThetotalAlexposurefromPNSasa
`
`(n¼)
`PNS(4-5mg/kg/day)
`AD:Al-depleted
`day)(n¼26)
`[45mg/kg/
`S:standard-AlPNS
`PNS)
`of180ml/kg/dayof
`(meanAlexposure
`infants
`182premature
`
`(n¼33)
`PNS(3mg/kg/day)
`AD:Al-depleted
`day)(n¼26)
`[21.3mg/kg/
`S:standard-AlPNS
`(meanAlexposure)
`59patients
`
`Verystrongassociation
`
`Direct
`
`recommendations
`froms.d.PNSandtheFDA
`abovethemeanAlexposure
`significantthresholdiswell
`55mg/kg/dayofAlasa
`Themedianexposureof
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`werethemostheavilycontaminated
`andpotassiumphosphate,bythisorder,
`Calciumgluconate,sodiumphosphate
`
`components
`16differentPN
`123samplesfrom
`
`Samplesmeasured
`manufacturersandsamples.
`Greatvarietyof
`
`Direct
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`Critical
`
`Low
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`1.1±0.3vs0.8±0.3mmolP/kg/day
`1.2±0.2vs1.0±0.2mmolCa/kg/day
`FromCaGlucandKPhotoCaGP
`(mean±s.d.)
`CaandPretention
`
`(Po0.01)
`13.3±0.4vs2.4±0.1mmolP/kg/day
`(Po0.01)
`14.5±0.2vs2.2±0.3mmolCa/kg/day
`FromCaGPtoCaGlucandKPho
`CaandPretention(mean±s.e.m.)
`
`componentes
`werethemostAl-contaminated
`hydrochlorideandCalciumgluconate
`Sodiumphosphate,cysteine
`
`D:27;68;87.
`C:35;75;106.
`B:458;1661;3026.
`A:230;725;1056.
`days:
`Measuresmg/Algaa/l)at15.30and60
`byAl.
`glutamicacid(D)becamecontaminated
`Cysteine(A),cystine(B),aspartic(C)and
`
`higherAlconcentration.
`andsodiumphosphatecontainedthe
`Calciumgluconate,potassiumphosphate
`concentration.(Po0.05)
`significantlylowerthanthelabelled
`MeasuredAlconcentrationswere
`
`(n¼9)
`CaGlucþKPho
`CaGP(n¼6)
`16
`
`(n¼5)
`CaGluc&KPho
`CaGP(n¼5)
`10
`
`16products
`
`differentintervals.
`andAlmeasuredat
`glasstypeIIflask
`solutionsstoredin
`19aminoacid
`
`andP
`EquimolarintakesofCa
`
`Direct
`
`None
`
`None
`
`Strongassociation
`
`Direct
`
`PNScomponents
`Threelotsof16
`
`tested.
`theUnitedStateswere
`manufacturersavailablein
`Allproductsfromall
`
`Direct
`
`Importance
`
`Quality
`
`Effect
`
`Samplesize
`
`Othermodifyingfactors
`
`Summaryoffindings
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`Clinicaltrial
`
`prematurely
`ofinfantsborn
`neurologicdevelopment
`intravenousAlonthe
`perinatalexposureto
`Toinvestigatetheeffectof
`
`1997(31)
`Bishop
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`Clinicaltrial
`
`termbonehealth
`adverselyaffectslong-
`neonatalAlexposurealso
`Totestthehypothesisthat
`
`200924
`Fewtrell
`Aluminiumtoxicitymanifestations
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`study
`Observational
`
`SourcesofAlinPNS
`
`1986(20)
`Koo
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`Clinicaltrial
`
`retention
`CaGlucþKPhoonmineral
`EfficacyofCaGPvs
`
`1991(26)
`Hanning
`
`piglets
`Studyin
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitationsc
`Serious
`
`Clinicaltrial
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`Limitationsa,,b
`
`study
`Observational
`
`retention
`inPNSforCaandP
`CaGPvsCaGlucandKPho
`
`componentsofPNS
`contaminated
`Todeterminethemost
`
`1991(25)
`Draper
`
`2005(19)
`Driscoll
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`study
`Observational
`
`byAl
`contaminationofproducts
`ofglasspackingonthe
`Todeterminetheinfluence
`
`2001(28)
`Bohrer
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`study
`Observational
`
`Directness
`
`Consistency
`
`Quality
`
`Design
`
`compoundingPNS
`tobeusedwhen
`Al-contaminatedproducts
`Determinetheleast
`
`2011(45)
`Poole
`Aluminiuminparenteraldrugproducts
`
`Qualityassessment
`
`Purpose
`
`date
`Study/
`
`Table1.Gradingqualityofevidence
`
`European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 230 – 238
`
`& 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited
`
`Eton Ex. 1006
`3 of 9
`
`

`

`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition
`A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez et al
`
`233
`
`concentrations.dTheAlintakefromPNSwasnotmeasuredthroughtheactualPNSbutitscomponents.
`theintoxication.cCaGPwasinaconcentrationthatprovided3.6and7.1asmuchcalciumandphosphorus,respectively,tothePNSthanCaGPandKphos,asitssolubilityitsbettersolubilityallowhigher
`ourconfidenceintheestimateofeffectandislikelytochangetheestimate.aOnlyonemanufaturertested.bCalculationofAlconcentrationthroughthequantityexpressedonthelabeltendstooverestimate
`Moderate¼Furtherresearchislikelytohaveanimportantimpactonourconfidenceintheestimateofeffectandmaychangetheestimate.Low¼Furtherresearchisverylikelytohaveanimportantimpacton
`Administration;KPho,potassiumphosphate;PNS,parenteralnutritionsolution;sCr:serumcreatinine.Quality:High¼Furtherresearchisveryunlikelytochangeourconfidenceintheestimateofeffect.
`Abbreviations:AD,Alzheimer’sdisease;Al,aluminium;BMC,bonemineralcontent;CaGP,calciumglycerophosphate;CaGluc,calciumgluconate;CI,confidenceintervals;DFO,deferoxamine;FDA,FoodandDrug
`
`of40–80kg
`5typicaladultPNS
`
`None
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`Limitationsa,,b
`
`study
`Observational
`
`PNS
`CalculatingAlcontentin
`
`2005(19)
`Driscoll
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`exposure(o5mg/kg/day)
`29/36hadsafecalculatedaluminium
`
`36PNS
`
`None
`
`admission)
`thatof
`Z1.5times
`injury(sCr
`acuterenal
`adultswith
`Direct:
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`Limitationsb
`
`study
`Observational
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`possibleonpatientsweighing450kg.
`MeetingtheFDArecommendationsonly
`23.14mg/kg/day.
`CalculatedaverageAlexposureis
`
`13384PNS
`
`lowestcontentavailable
`Productsusedwiththe
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`Limitationsb
`
`study
`Observational
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`Measured:3–5timestheFDAlimit
`Calculated5–10timestheFDAlimit
`Alcontent
`wastwiceasmuchastheactualmeasured
`ThecalculatedAlcontamination
`
`40neonatalPNS
`
`Verystrongassociation
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`study
`Observational
`
`C:31.5vs73.3
`B:22.9vs54.9
`A:6vs6.3
`(mg/dl)
`MeasuredvscalculatedAlconcentration
`
`CaGlucþKPhos(C)
`CaGlucþNaPhos(B)
`CaClþNaPhos(A)
`each)
`12PNSsamples(4
`
`andC
`StrongassociationinB
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`Limitationsa
`
`study
`Observational
`
`Importance
`
`Quality
`
`Effect
`
`Samplesize
`
`Othermodifyingfactors
`
`Directness
`
`Consistency
`
`Quality
`
`Design
`
`Summaryoffindings
`
`Qualityassessment
`
`adults
`PNSinacutekidneyinjury
`forAltoxicitycausedby
`Todeterminethepotential
`
`fromPNS
`dailyAlloaddelivered
`Todeterminepatient’s
`
`FDArecommendations
`Alexposureexceedsthe
`ascertainwethertheactual
`contaminationinPNSand
`measuredAl
`Tocomparecalculatedvs
`
`2008(8)
`Brown
`
`2008(2)
`Poole
`
`2010(12)
`Poole
`
`vsCaGluc&KPho
`containingCaClþNaPhos
`concentrationsinPNS
`CalculatedvsmeasuredAl
`
`2012(17)
`Migaki
`Estimatingaluminiumloading
`
`Purpose
`
`date
`Study/
`
`(Continued)
`
`Table1.
`
`Critical
`
`High
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`Critical
`
`Moderate
`
`2.16±0.81mg/kg/day
`MeanAldailyintake
`
`80kg:mg/kg/day.
`70kg:8.4mg/kg/day
`60kg:9.8mg/kg/day
`50kg:11.6mg/kg/day
`40kg:14.3mg/kg/d
`
`57%(P¼0.75)
`Lowdose:62%vsstandarddose
`(sAlriseo50mg/lafterDFOtest)
`Successfultreatmentresponse
`
`(n¼21)
`5mg/kg/week
`Standarddose:
`(n¼21)
`2.5mg/kg/week
`Low-dosegroup:
`42
`
`None
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`Clinicaltrial
`
`10children
`
`None
`
`Direct
`
`inconsistency
`Noimportant
`
`limitations
`Noserious
`
`study
`Observational
`
`Al20mg/lparticipants.
`haemodialysisandserum
`doseofDFOin
`Efficacyofstandardvslow
`
`2010(34)
`Kan
`Deferoxaminetherapy
`
`onlong-termPNS
`contaminationofchildren
`TodeterminetheAl
`
`2003(16)
`Advenier
`
`& 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited
`
`European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 230 – 238
`
`Eton Ex. 1006
`4 of 9
`
`

`

`234
`
`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition
`A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez et al
`
`Table 2. Aluminium measured in different parenteral nutrition products according to recent published studies
`
`Aluminium mg/l
`
`Sterile water
`Amino acids solutions
`Dextrose
`
`Lipid emulsions
`Sodium glicerophosphate
`Calcium gluconate
`Potassium phosphate
`Sodium phosphate
`Potassium acetate
`Sodium acetate
`Calcium chloride
`Potassium chloride
`Sodium chloride
`Zinc chloride
`Magnesium sulphate
`Selenium
`Trace elements
`Paediatric trace elements
`Multi-trace elements
`Vitamins preparations
`Cysteina
`Chromium
`Copper
`
`Migaki et al
`JPEN 2012 (ref.16)
`
`Poole et al.
`JPPT 2011 (ref.45)
`
`Fewtrell et al.
`PNS 2011 (ref.15)
`
`Poole et al.
`JPGN 2010 (ref.12)
`
`Oliveira et al.
`JPEN 2010 (ref.46)
`
`Brown et al.
`2008 (ref.8)
`
`25a
`25d
`25a
`
`9400b
`37000a
`180a
`
`200a
`1000a
`100a
`
`300c
`2500b
`
`o5b, 5c, 6.6a, o5d, o5e
`7d
`20d, 14a
`
`—
`
`11g
`
`2487b, 2812c
`
`30g
`
`2g
`
`776j
`56j
`
`10j
`
`165b, 109c, 122a
`
`6250b, 30e
`
`6g, o2g, 24n
`
`o5e
`o5d
`7a
`
`15g
`
`3234c
`8280c
`622b
`42a
`83a
`o5a
`o5a
`41a
`14a
`87b
`
`414b
`
`14e
`
`3.8f
`90.1g, 124e
`19.2h, 17.3e, 13.5e, 4.6g,
`17.2g, 23f, 20.5i
`19.7g, 112.6g
`263.7g
`9205k, 19400k
`
`o1e
`3.1e, 5.9e
`12.5e
`
`1.3g
`
`278b
`223b
`
`62l
`2.9f, 1.6l, 62.5i
`
`63.1l, 87.3f
`
`1049m, 2065m, 1663m
`549o, 112.1p, 1509p
`
`57a
`
`15b
`
`25a
`10a
`
`Abbreviation: JPEN, Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition; JPGN, Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition; JPPT, The Journal of Pediatric
`Pharmacology and Therapeutics; PNS, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. Manufacturer: aHospira. bAmerican Regent. cAPP pharmaceuticals. dB. Braun
`Medical. eBaxter. fHalex Istar. gFresenius Kabi. hAster. iIsofarma. jNot specified kHypofarma. lEquipex. mDarrow. nIn-house preparation. oCrista´lia. pFarmalab.
`
`Table 3. Relevant products currently marketed for parenteral nutrition
`solutions preparations in Europe
`
`Table 4. Patient population at risk of Al accumulation
`
`Brand name
`
`Amino acid solutions
`Aminofusin
`Aminopaed
`Aminoplasmal
`Aminosteril
`Aminoven
`Glamin
`Nephrotect
`Primene
`Tauramin
`Throphamine
`Travasol
`Synthamin
`Vamin
`Vaminolact
`
`Lipid emulsions
`ClinOleic
`Intralipid
`Ivelip
`Lipofundin
`Lipoplus
`Lipovenos
`Omegaven
`Smoflipid
`Soyacal
`Structolipid
`
`Vitamins preparations
`Cernevit
`Soluvit
`Vitalipid
`
`Trace elements
`Addamel
`Decan
`Peditrace
`
`Manufacturer
`
`Baxter
`Fresenius Kabi
`B. Braun
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`Grifols
`b. Braun
`Baxter
`Baxter
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`
`Baxter
`Fresenius Kabi
`Baxter
`B. Braun
`B. Braun
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`Grifols
`Fresenius Kabi
`
`Baxter
`Fresenius Kabi
`Fresenius Kabi
`
`Fresenius Kabi
`Baxter
`Fresenius Kabi
`
`Patient population
`at risk
`
`Causes
`
`Renal compromise
`Foetus
`
`Premature infants
`
`Elderly patients
`
`Burn patients
`
`Kidneys are the major route of Al elimination
`During pregnancy Al is transferred
`transplacentally
`Al toxicity negatively correlated with
`gestational age: immature renal function,
`increased calcium and phosphorus
`requirements
`Weakened GI protective barrier
`Normal renal function deterioration
`Al-contaminated albumin to maintain oncotic
`pressure
`
`Abbreviations: Al, aluminium, GI, gastrointestinal.
`
`Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease, as well as
`metabolic bone disease including impaired bone growth, bone
`pain, proximal muscle weakness, multiple nonhealing fractures,
`premature osteoporosis, osteopenia and osteomalacia. Microcytic
`anaemia and cholestasis have been described as well.1,2,4,6,11,12,30
`(Table 1).
`
`Impaired neurological development
`A key study by Bishop et al.31 that contributed to the FDA rule
`governing Al contamination compared neurological development
`in premature infants who received a standard PNS formula
`(median: 45 mg/kg/day of Al) or an Al-depleted formula (median:
`4–5 mg/kg/day of Al) for a period of 5–16 days. The authors
`estimated that
`for
`infants receiving the standard PNS,
`the
`expected reduction in the Bayley Mental Development Index
`score would be 1 point per day of intravenous feeding.12
`
`Alzheimer disease
`Al has a direct and active access to the brain, where it accumulates
`in a region-specific manner that highly implicates its involvement
`
`European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 230 – 238
`
`& 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited
`
`Eton Ex. 1006
`5 of 9
`
`

`

`Table 5.
`
`Thresholds for aluminium delivered by parenterales and plasma levels
`
`Safe dose/level
`
`Unsafe dose/level
`
`Toxic dose/level
`
`Large volume parenterals
`
`Small volume parenterals
`
`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition
`A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez et al
`
`235
`
`ASCN/ASPEN
`FDA
`K/DOQI
`
`E15–30 mg/kg/day
`45 mg/kg/day
`50–300 mg/la
`
`E60 mg/kg/day
`—
`4300 mg/la
`
`E2 mg/kg/day
`p5 mg/kg/day
`o50 mg/la
`Abbreviations: ASCN, American Society for Clinical Nutrition; ASPEN, American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition; FDA, Food and Drug
`Administration; K/DOQI, Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative. aAfter deferoxamine test.
`
`—
`p25 mg/l
`—
`
`—
`Not established
`—
`
`in AD. Experimental data clearly show that all neurophysiological
`parameters required for AD are efficiently targeted for impair-
`ment by Al.11
`
`Metabolic bone disease
`complication
`a well-known
`is
`Metabolic
`bone
`disease
`of prolonged PNS use due to Al toxicity.1,10,24 Although their
`exact incidence has not yet been established with certainty,
`percentages range from 30%–40% to 100% in various case
`reports.21
`In the
`The clinical picture of bone involvement is variable.
`majority of cases, patients are asymptomatic, whereas in others
`they may manifest bone pain or fractures for minimal traumas,
`which are typically vertebral fractures. The finding of a reduced
`bone mineral density is common, although not dissimilar to that
`observed in the control groups, and is likely sustained mostly
`by the metabolic consequences of the underlying disease.21 In
`infants, the development of metabolic bone disease can occur
`more quickly.1 Neonates who are exposed to parenteral Al may
`have reduced lumbar spine and hip bone mass during adole-
`scence, which are potential risk factors for later osteoporosis and
`hip fracture.24
`The candidate mechanisms for Al toxicity include suppression of
`parathyroid hormone secretion14,21 and Al accumulation primarily
`in bone , which reduces bone formation thereby contributing to
`adynamic bone disease.3,14,24 Finally, Al-like lead is thought to
`have either a primary or secondary suppressive effect on the renal
`enzyme 25-hydroxyvitamin D-1a hydroxylase. This enzyme
`converts
`circulating
`25-hydroxyvitamin D into
`1,
`25-
`dihydroxyvitamin D at the level of the renal tubule. The latter
`metabolite is the corticosteroid hormone form of the vitamin and
`exerts maximum biological activity.14,21
`
`Hepatotoxicity
`Very little is known about the hepatotoxic effects of Al in either
`animals or humans. The mechanism of Al toxicity is far from clear
`understanding, but it is suggested that Al generates reactive oxygen
`species (ROS) that cause lipid peroxidation and oxidative damage to
`proteins and DNA.
`In addition, Al caused hepatic haemorrhage,
`cellular degeneration and necrosis of hepatocytes.30
`Animal models definitely indicate an effect of Al on bile
`metabolism, although there has never been any proven rela-
`tionship between hepatic Al content in humans and degree of
`cholestasis.14
`
`Dyslipemia
`Al toxicity, along with oxidative stress (H2O2), has been associated
`levels of L-carnitine, diminished b-oxidation and
`with lower
`increased lipid accumulation in human astrocytes and hepato-
`cytes compared with the controls. L-carnitine is an amino acid
`derivative indispensable for the metabolism of lipids. Its synthesis
`is a multistep enzymatic process that necessitates the participa-
`tion of lysine, methionine and a-ketoglutarate (KG). Exposure of
`the Al- and H2O2-treated cells to a-KG led to the recovery
`of L-carnitine production with the concomitant reduction in ROS
`
`levels. It appears that the channelling of KG to combat oxidative
`stress results in decreased L-carnitine synthesis, an event that
`contributes to the dyslipidemia observed during Al and H2O2
`insults in these mammalian cells. Hence, KG may help alleviate
`pathological conditions induced by oxidative stress.32
`
`Genotoxic activity
`There are only a few studies in the literature about the genotoxic
`activities of Al. However,
`it has been found that Al
`induces
`chromosomal aberrations and DNA damage.6
`
`DIAGNOSTICS AND TREATMENT
`The widely used analytical technique for the direct detection of
`the Al in biological fluids is the graphite furnace atomic absorption
`spectrometry,7 although blood levels continue to be a poor
`predictor of the presence or absence of Al toxicity. Similarly, urine
`concentrations have also been used, but the relationship of these
`levels to disease severity has not been clearly established.1 On the
`other hand, although an increased Al intake does not necessarily
`lead to an increased serum Al concentration, as this may be offset
`by an increase in urinary Al excretion, its high value should alert of
`a risk of toxicity.3,16 The deferoxamine (DFO) infusion test has
`been used to determine the total Al load. DFO is a chelating agent
`that removes Al from tissue stores and allows for more accurate
`serum levels (see below).1 However, the lack of standardised
`testing makes the diagnosis of Al toxicity difficult. A thorough
`medical history and evaluation of clinical signs and symptoms in
`conjunction with laboratory tests and imaging studies are
`necessary in order to make an accurate diagnosis.13
`Treatment options in the management of Al toxicity continue to
`be limited. Some agents have been proposed, although DFO is the
`most widely used substance. However, reduction or elimination
`of Al-rich components continues to be the most effective means
`of management.1,13
`
`Taurine
`The toxic effects of Al may be mitigated by taurine through the
`improvement of the cellular antioxidant defence system, stabilisa-
`tion of cell membrane, and prevention of lipid peroxidation. It also
`seems to have direct beneficial effects on liver parenchymal cells.
`The chemical similarity of taurine to acetylcysteine, an agent used
`to treat heavy metal-induced toxicity, and the fact that cysteine is
`a precursor of taurine,
`is an encouraging factor to use taurine
`against metal-induced hepatotoxicity.30
`
`a-ketoglutarate
`Exposure of the Al- and H2O2-treated cells to KG led to the
`recovery of L-carnitine production, with the concomitant reduc-
`tion in ROS levels, reducing lipid accumulation.32
`
`Iron
`The potential for complications of Al exposure is closely related to
`the patient’s iron status. The iron transport protein transferrin
`serves as the primary Al-binding ligand, accounting for as much as
`
`& 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited
`
`European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2013) 230 – 238
`
`Eton Ex. 1006
`6 of 9
`
`

`

`Aluminium in parenteral nutrition
`A Herna´ndez-Sa´nchez et al
`
`236
`
`90% of all binding. Moreover, when iron is bound to transferrin,
`the overall affinity of transferrin for Al is reduced.13
`
`Deferoxamine
`DFO chelation therapy has been used to treat PNS-associated Al
`toxicity. In 2003, the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative
`recommended a DFO test if there are elevated serum Al levels
`(60–200 mg/l) or clinical signs and symptoms of Al toxicity. If Al
`levels are 4200 mg/l, DFO test should be delayed until intensive
`dialysis reduces Al below that threshold to avoid DFO-induced
`neurotoxicity. The test is considered positive if the increment of
`serum Al is 450 mg/l over the serum Al level previous to DFO test,
`and a different management is proposed according to that level
`(algorithm 1).33 The recommended dose of DFO is 5 mg/kg, both
`treatment (weekly) and test, although an article of Wei

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket