Detlef Kindgen-Milles1, Torsten Feldt2, Bjoern Erik Ole Jensen2, Thomas Dimski1, Timo Brandenburger3. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Duesseldorf and Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Duesseldorf, Germany. 2. Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Duesseldorf and Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Duesseldorf, Germany. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Duesseldorf and Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University, 40225 Duesseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: timo.brandenburger@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
In The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, Aurélien Mazeraud and colleagues showed that the application of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIGs) in patients with COVID-19-induced moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome did not improve clinical outcomes but had a non-significant association with more adverse events.We would like to address reasons for the lack of effect that were not discussed in Mazeraud and colleagues’ Article.The rationale to apply IVIGs in infectious diseases can be either to target hyperinflammation, to use the anti-infective properties of IVIGs to treat the primary infection, or both. Beyond that, IVIGs might provide protection against secondary infections and thereby reduce morbidity and mortality. First evidence shows that the beneficial effects of IVIGs might depend on the composition of the IVIG preparation, the immune status of the patient, and the severity of the disease.Concerning the preparation of the IVIG solution, those consisting mainly of IgG (as applied in Mazeraud and colleagues’ study) have been shown to have little or no effect in patients with sepsis.3, 4 By contrast, first data published on IgM-enriched IVIG solution are encouraging.5, 6Concerning the immune status of patients, Mazeraud and colleagues did not investigate parameters of immune function. Notably, in several studies, an increased mortality was associated with low baseline serum levels of immunoglobulins, as shown for instance for influenza.7, 8 From a pathophysiological point of view, it would be possible that beneficial effects of a substitution of IVIGs were observed only in these patients, but not in those with normal or elevated baseline immunoglobulin levels.In this context, we would like to draw attention to a 2018 phase 2 randomised controlled trial in 160 patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia who required invasive mechanical ventilation. In this double-blind study, in addition to standard of care, an IgM-enriched IVIG solution (42 mg IgM/kg per day) was applied. The primary combined endpoint of ventilator-free days and 28-day all-cause mortality was not statistically different in the intention-to-treat cohort (22·2% vs 27·8%). Most importantly, in a prespecified subgroup analysis of patients with a high level of inflammation (C-reactive protein concentrations higher than 70 mg/L), low IgM serum levels (lower than 0·8 g/L) or both, mortality was reduced significantly, with the highest level of mortality reduction in the cohort with high C-reactive protein concentrations and low IgM levels.Therefore, by contrast with the conclusion of Mazeraud and colleagues, we hypothesise that IVIG application in patients with COVID-19 might be beneficial if a specific IgM-enriched IVIG solution is applied in patients with low IgM levels and a high level of inflammation.DKM received lecture honoraria from Biotest. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Authors: Mar Justel; Lorenzo Socias; Raquel Almansa; Paula Ramírez; Maria C Gallegos; Victoria Fernandez; Monica Gordon; David Andaluz-Ojeda; Leonor Nogales; Silvia Rojo; Jordi Vallés; Angel Estella; Ana Loza; Cristobal León; Cristina Lopez-Mestanza; Jesús Blanco; Jose Ángel Berezo; Sara Rosich; Catia Cillòniz; Antoni Torres; Raul Ortiz de Lejarazu; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Jesus F Bermejo-Martin Journal: J Clin Virol Date: 2013-09-18 Impact factor: 3.168
Authors: Karl Werdan; Günter Pilz; Oskar Bujdoso; Peter Fraunberger; Gertraud Neeser; Roland Erich Schmieder; Burkhard Viell; Walter Marget; Margret Seewald; Peter Walger; Ralph Stuttmann; Norbert Speichermann; Claus Peckelsen; Volkhard Kurowski; Hans-Heinrich Osterhues; Ljiljana Verner; Roswita Neumann; Ursula Müller-Werdan Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Christian Krautz; Sarah L Maier; Maximilian Brunner; Melanie Langheinrich; Evangelos J Giamarellos-Bourboulis; Charalambos Gogos; Apostolos Armaganidis; Frank Kunath; Robert Grützmann; Georg F Weber Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Peter Brocklehurst; Barbara Farrell; Andrew King; Edmund Juszczak; Brian Darlow; Khalid Haque; Alison Salt; Ben Stenson; William Tarnow-Mordi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tobias Welte; R Phillip Dellinger; Henning Ebelt; Miguel Ferrer; Steven M Opal; Mervyn Singer; Jean-Louis Vincent; Karl Werdan; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Jordi Almirall; Antonio Artigas; Jose Ignacio Ayestarán; Sebastian Nuding; Ricard Ferrer; Gonzalo Sirgo Rodríguez; Manu Shankar-Hari; Francisco Álvarez-Lerma; Reimer Riessen; Josep-Maria Sirvent; Stefan Kluge; Kai Zacharowski; Juan Bonastre Mora; Harald Lapp; Gabriele Wöbker; Ute Achtzehn; David Brealey; Axel Kempa; Miguel Sánchez García; Jörg Brederlau; Matthias Kochanek; Henrik Peer Reschreiter; Matthew P Wise; Bernd H Belohradsky; Iris Bobenhausen; Benjamin Dälken; Patrick Dubovy; Patrick Langohr; Monika Mayer; Jörg Schüttrumpf; Andrea Wartenberg-Demand; Ulrike Wippermann; Daniele Wolf; Antoni Torres Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2018-04-09 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Estel Güell; Marta Martín-Fernandez; Mari C De la Torre; Elisabet Palomera; Mateu Serra; Rafael Martinez; Manel Solsona; Gloria Miró; Jordi Vallès; Samuel Fernández; Edgar Cortés; Vanessa Ferrer; Marc Morales; Juan C Yébenes; Jordi Almirall; Jesús F Bermejo-Martin Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-05-27 Impact factor: 4.241