Developing practice guidelines for the administration of intravenous immunoglobulin

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis: 329 cases from the French pharmacovigilance database analysis

AIMS

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis (DIAM) is an adverse drug reaction of exclusion; only few studies have addressed this iatrogenic disease. The aim was to characterize DIAM and to identify suspected drugs.

METHODS

Data were collected from the analysis of the French Pharmacovigilance Database from inception (1 January 1985) to 8 March 2017. All cases were initially analysed according to the French imputability method by institutional pharmacologists (clinicians or pharmacists). Further analyses of well documented cases were then performed.

RESULTS

In this study, 329 cases of aseptic meningitis were retrieved from the French Pharmacovigilance Database for a total of 429 suspected drugs. Analysis of 203 well documented cases, including 282 drugs, showed that the main reported classes were intravenous polyvalent immunoglobulin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), vaccines, antimicrobials, intrathecal antimetabolites, corticosteroids and antalgics/anaesthetics (except NSAIDs). Lymphocytic (33.0%) and purulent (44.8%) meningitis represented the majority of cases of aseptic meningitis. In other cases, the cerebrospinal fluid was mixed (45-55% of neutrophils +45-55% of lymphocytes) or data about cerebrospinal fluid composition were lacking. Most DIAM cases (96%) had a favourable reported outcome with full recovery or minimal residual symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The most frequently involved drugs in DIAM were intravenous polyvalent immunoglobulin, NSAIDs, vaccines, and antimicrobials and this without being able to differentiate them in terms of biological characteristics. Although further studies are needed to better understand the pathophysiological mechanisms of DIAM, a continuous enrichment of pharmacovigilance databases is essential to identify new signals and to help clinicians in the understanding of DIAM.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Safety Profile of Intravenous Immunoglobulin in 1176 Patients Receiving Home Infusion Therapy

OBJECTIVES

This analysis assessed the safety of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in the treatment of patients with neuroimmunological and immunological disorders in a home-based setting.

METHODS

Adverse reactions (ARs) were assessed in a retrospective review of 1176 patients receiving 28,677 home-based IVIg infusions between 1996 and 2013.

RESULTS

Of 1176 patients, 648 (55.1%) experienced IVIg-related ARs; 536 (45.6%) were mild, 78 (6.6%) moderate, and 34 (2.9%) severe. Thirty-seven (3.1%) patients were hospitalized because of ARs; of these, headache was most common (51.4%). Mean number of ARs per patient increased from 1.4 (low dose) to 3.6 (high dose). Incidence of ARs increased from 41% in the first 5-year moving average in 2003 to 65% in 2008. The number of ARs correlated with the number of infusions (ρ = 0.24; P < 0.001) and the average IVIg dose (ρ = 0.10; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Low- and high-dose IVIg were safe and well tolerated with a few serious ARs in patients with neuroimmunological and immunological disorders.

The safety profile of home infusion of intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with neuroimmunologic disorders

OBJECTIVES

To assess the overall safety of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IG) products used to treat patients with neuroimmunological disorders in a supervised home-based setting.

METHODS

The incidence of adverse reactions was assessed in a retrospective chart review of 420 patients who consecutively received 4076, home-based, individual, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) infusions between January 2009 and December 2009.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients (21.4%) developed adverse reactions related to IVIG administration (2.6% per individual infusion). A total of 95.5% of adverse reactions were mild, and no serious side effects were observed. The incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in the subgroup of patients with neuroimmunological disorders who received premedication (18.2% compared with 29.3%, P = 0.02). There was no significant statistical difference in the incidence of side effects among the different brands of IVIG used in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of premedication and well-defined clinical, IVIG infusion policies may reduce the incidence of high-dose IVIG adverse reactions administered in a home-based setting in patients with neuroimmunological disorders.

Treatment of multiple system atrophy using intravenous immunoglobulin

Background

Multiple system atrophy (MSA) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder of unknown etiology, manifesting as combination of parkinsonism, cerebellar syndrome and dysautonomia. Disease-modifying therapies are unavailable. Activation of microglia and production of toxic cytokines suggest a role of neuroinflammation in MSA pathogenesis. This pilot clinical trial evaluated safety and tolerability of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in MSA.

Methods

This was a single-arm interventional, single-center, open-label pilot study. Interventions included monthly infusions of the IVIG preparation Privigen®, dose 0.4 gram/kg, for 6 months. Primary outcome measures evaluated safety and secondary outcome measures evaluated preliminary efficacy of IVIG. Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS) was measured monthly. Quantitative brain imaging using 3T MRI was performed before and after treatment.

Results

Nine subjects were enrolled, and seven (2 women and 5 men, age range 55–64 years) completed the protocol. There were no serious adverse events. Systolic blood pressure increased during IVIG infusions (p<0.05). Two participants dropped out from the study because of a non-threatening skin rash. The UMSARS-I (activities of daily living) and USMARS-II (motor functions) improved significantly post-treatment. UMSARS-I improved in all subjects (pre-treatment 23.9 ± 6.0 vs. post-treatment 19.0±5.9 (p=0.01). UMSARS-II improved in 5 subjects, was unchanged in 1 and worsened in 1 (pre-treatment 26.1±7.5 vs. post-treatment 23.3±7.3 (p=0.025). The MR imaging results were not different comparing pre- to post-treatment.

Conclusions

Treatment with IVIG appears to be safe, feasible and well tolerated and may improve functionality in MSA. A larger, placebo-controlled study is needed.

A review of current indications, adverse effects, and administration recommendations for intravenous immunoglobulin

OBJECTIVE

To review and summarize the body of literature regarding human intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) therapy in veterinary medicine. Mechanism of action, usage in human medicine, adverse effects of therapy, implications for veterinary use, and administration recommendations are discussed.

DATA SOURCES

Current human and veterinary peer-reviewed medical literature including original research articles and scientific reviews.

HUMAN DATA SYNTHESIS

There are currently 6 labeled uses for hIVIG in human medicine, but preparations are used off-label to successfully treat multiple immune-mediated conditions. To maximize the potential of hIVIG use in animals and identify areas deficient in research, a review of the current literature is warranted.

VETERINARY DATA SYNTHESIS

Investigation of hIVIG therapy in veterinary patients has been limited to the subjects of immune-mediated hemolytic anemia (IMHA), immune-mediated thrombocytopenia (ITP), Evan's syndrome, cutaneous disease, myasthenia gravis (MG), and sudden acquired retinal degeneration (SARDS). Proponents of veterinary hIVIG use believe administration may reduce transfusion requirements and decrease hospitalization time.

CONCLUSION

Immunoglobulin (Ig) has not been shown to decrease transfusion requirements in IMHA patients, but shows great promise for treatment of ITP and dermatological diseases. Although serial transfusion of hIVIG is employed in human medicine, repeated transfusion is not recommended in animals due to risk of severe allergic reaction. Other potential adverse effects of transfusion include delayed hypersensitivity reactions, thromboembolism, renal failure, hypotension, and aseptic meningitis.

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Griflow® Dual, a Pre-Set Two-Flow Infusion Device for Intravenous Immunoglobulin (Flebogamma® 5%) Administration

Purpose

A single center, prospective study was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of Griflow® Dual–-a gravity-fed device for intravenous delivery of human immunoglobulin Flebogamma®.

Methods

A total of 2 infusions in 2 visits per patient were assessed using G2 and G3 Griflow® Dual models that provide different flow rates adjusted to the patient's weight. To follow the most common method of intravenous immunoglobulin administration, infusion through the two-way device commenced with the low flow rate capillary (clamp closed) for 30 minutes and continued with the high flow rate, opening both ways. Reliability of flow delivery (average flow rates), adverse events, as well as functionality in daily practice (questionnaire to nurses) were assessed.

Results

twenty-five valid infusions were evaluated on 13 subjects. Except for the G2 model with closed clamp in which 14.5% deviation was observed, actual average flow rate values fell well into the maximum 10% deviation permitted with respect to expected charted values (G2: 55 and 142 mL/h; G3: 76 and 189 mL/h). Discrepancies could be explained by patient's arm movements or posture change during infusion. No adverse events related to the study device occurred. In the functionality questionnaires, nurse's comfort and safety of infusion with Griflow® Dual were rated higher than without Griflow® Dual but lower than with infusion pumps.

Conclusions

Although it may not be as precise as an infusion pump, Griflow® Dual proved to be a reliable and suitable device to administer Flebogamma® 5%. Correct safety should be confirmed in a larger sample.

Tolerability of a new 10% liquid immunoglobulin for intravenous use, Privigen, at different infusion rates

PURPOSE

The tolerability of L-proline-stabilized Privigen, a new 10% liquid immunoglobulin for intravenous administration, was assessed at high infusion rates in a Phase III, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study in 45 patients with primary immune deficiencies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Maximum infusion rates were not assigned prospectively. For analysis, patients were grouped according to maximum infusion rate in a low infusion rate group (8 mg/kg/min) and high infusion rate group (12 mg/kg/min).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients, selected at the investigators' discretion for the high infusion rate group based on their good tolerability, tolerated Privigen at 12 mg/kg/min with no increase in temporally associated adverse events (AEs) above the level they had experienced at 8 mg/kg/min. The proportion of infusions with temporally associated AEs in these patients was 0.079 [97.5% confidence interval (CI) 0.114] compared to 0.211 (97.5% CI 0.267) in the low infusion rate group. The most frequent AE was headache. Thus, selected patients tolerate Privigen at high infusion rates.

Protocol Recommendations for Administration of Intravenous Immunoglobulin in Canada

A group of Canadian nurses and transfusion safety officers developed 10 recommendations for the infusion of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in acute care hospitals and clinics. The recommendations address issues related to documentation, patient consent, difference among IVIG brands, selection of a brand on the basis of patients' risk factors, contraindications, needs, action plans for adverse events, rapid infusion protocols, and setup of infusion pumps, tubing, and filter equipment. The Canadian group encouraged institutions to include nurses on committees that examine infusion protocols.