Literature DB >> 9049782

Multicenter crossover comparison of the safety and efficacy of Intraglobin-F with Gamimune-N, Sandoglobulin, and Gammagard in patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases.

R I Schiff1, L W Williams, R P Nelson, R H Buckley, W Burks, R A Good.   

Abstract

The safety and clinical efficacy of a liquid, beta-propiolactone-stabilized intravenous gamma-globulin, Intraglobin-F, was evaluated in a multicenter, double-blind study comparing Intraglobin-F to Gamimune-N, Sandoglobulin, or Gammagard. beta-Propiolactone stabilizes the IgG molecule to decrease aggregate formation and is a potent virucidal agent that reduces the risk of viral transmission by intravenous gamma-globulin (IVIG) preparations. Twenty-seven patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases were enrolled at three centers. Each patient received 6 months of therapy with either Intraglobin-F or the IVIG preparation that they had received during the preceding 3 months, then crossed over to the other preparation. Twenty-three patients completed the study. One patient withdrew because of an adverse event, generalized urticaria. A second patient withdrew because of fatigue and perceived decreased efficacy. Adverse reactions were comparable and occurred in 8.7% of the infusions of Intraglobin-F and 6% of the infusions with Sandoglobulin. None were severe or life-threatening. There was no discernible difference in efficacy between any of the products. The number of days when patients noted symptoms in their diaries was similar for Intraglobin-F and the comparison preparations, 4158 vs 4143. Similarly, there were no differences in the number of physician visits (33 vs 22), days missed from work or school (405 vs 404), days with fever (41 vs 47), or days of prophylactic antibiotics (675 vs 642). There was an increase in the number of days when antibiotics were given therapeutically (578 vs 451); most of the difference was attributable to one patient. There also was a difference in the number of days of hospitalization (21 vs 0), but 19 of the days were accounted for by two patients. When the patients were asked to score their feeling of well-being on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being entirely well, the mean score for the patients on Intraglobin-F was 1.86 (range, 1.0 to 3.0), compared to 1.85 (range, 1.0 to 3.2) for patients while on the comparison preparations. Trough IgG levels were slightly lower during the period when patients were treated with Intraglobin-F compared to the other products. There were no abnormalities in blood chemistries or hematologic parameters. Thus, Intraglobin-F is comparable to three of the marketed IVIG preparations in efficacy and safety, as well as patient acceptability, and offers the additional benefit of an extra virucidal step to reduce further the risk of transmitting viral infections.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9049782     DOI: 10.1023/a:1027380210989

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Immunol        ISSN: 0271-9142            Impact factor:   8.317


  30 in total

1.  Safety tests of the intravenous tolerance of immunoglobulins. Multicenter study of the section 'Blood Plasma Constituents' of the German Association of Transfusion Medicine and Immunohematology (DGTI).

Authors:  R Kotitschke; G Harbauer
Journal:  Infusionsther Transfusionsmed       Date:  1992-02

2.  Selection of an intravenous immune globulin for the immunoprophylaxis of cytomegalovirus infections: an in vitro comparison of currently available and previously effective immune globulins.

Authors:  J Chehimi; J Peppard; D Emanuel
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 5.483

3.  Characterisation of various intravenous immunoglobulin preparations.

Authors:  J L Lundblad; N Londeree; G Mitra
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 6.072

4.  Requirements for safety and quality of intravenous immunoglobulin G preparations.

Authors:  G H Rütter
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 10.154

5.  Undegraded human immunoglobulin for intravenous use.

Authors:  W Stephan
Journal:  Vox Sang       Date:  1975       Impact factor: 2.144

6.  Comparison of the clinical efficacy and safety of an intramuscular and an intravenous immunoglobulin preparation for replacement therapy in idiopathic adult onset panhypogammaglobulinaemia.

Authors:  N D Garbett; D C Currie; P J Cole
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 4.330

7.  Safety and patient acceptability of intravenous immune globulin in 10% maltose.

Authors:  H D Ochs; R H Buckley; B Pirofsky; S H Fischer; R H Rousell; C J Anderson; R J Wedgwood
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1980-11-29       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Antibody activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in immune globulins prepared for intravenous use in humans.

Authors:  M Pollack
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 5.226

9.  Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin in primary humoral immunodeficiency disease.

Authors:  C Cunningham-Rundles; F P Siegal; E M Smithwick; A Lion-Boulé; S Cunningham-Rundles; J O'Malley; S Barandun; R A Good
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Hepatitis C infection in patients with primary hypogammaglobulinemia after treatment with contaminated immune globulin.

Authors:  K Bjøro; S S Frøland; Z Yun; H H Samdal; T Haaland
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1994-12-15       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  7 in total

1.  Increased risk of adverse events when changing intravenous immunoglobulin preparations.

Authors:  R Ameratunga; J Sinclair; J Kolbe
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.330

2.  Prospective study on CVID patients with adverse reactions to intravenous or subcutaneous IgG administration.

Authors:  Isabella Quinti; Annarosa Soresina; Carlo Agostini; Giuseppe Spadaro; Andrea Matucci; Ifigeneia Sfika; Helene Martini; Federica Borghese; Andrea Guerra; Vultaggio Alessandra; Marcella Visentini; Alessandro Plebani; Massimo Fiorilli
Journal:  J Clin Immunol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 8.317

3.  A multi-centre study of efficacy and safety of Intratect®, a novel intravenous immunoglobulin preparation.

Authors:  W Kreuz; M Erdös; P Rossi; E Bernatowska; T Espanol; L Maródi
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Efficacy and tolerability of an argentine intravenous immunoglobulin in pediatric patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases.

Authors:  S Krasovec; A Ornani; M Oleastro; S Rosenzweig; A Roy; L Perez; G Campos; N Marín; A Martinez; C Mahieu; M J Manfredi; A Sisti; M Zelazko
Journal:  J Clin Immunol       Date:  2007-01-19       Impact factor: 8.317

Review 5.  Recognition, clinical diagnosis and management of patients with primary antibody deficiencies: a systematic review.

Authors:  P Wood; S Stanworth; J Burton; A Jones; D G Peckham; T Green; C Hyde; H Chapel
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2007-06-12       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 6.  Immunoglobulin replacement therapy in children.

Authors:  Maria Garcia-Lloret; Sean McGhee; Talal A Chatila
Journal:  Immunol Allergy Clin North Am       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 3.479

Review 7.  Clinical Experience with Octagam® 10 %, a solvent detergent virus inactivated intravenous immunoglobulin: a Canadian retrospective review of utilization.

Authors:  Stephen D Betschel; Richard J Warrington; Robert Schellenberg
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 3.406

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.