Aseptic meningitis associated with high dose intravenous immunoglobulin therapy

Immunoglobulin-Induced Aseptic Meningitis in Juvenile Dermatomyositis: A Case Report

Aseptic meningitis is a known but unusual serious adverse effect of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). It usually resembles infectious meningitis, which makes its diagnosis challenging. In this report, we present the case of a five-and-a-half-year-old Chinese girl with juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) who presented with signs of meningismus 21 hours after the initiation of IVIG infusion. Her blood work at diagnosis showed neutrophilia and lymphopenia. The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis demonstrated neutrophilic pleocytosis, hyperproteinorrachia, and normoglycorrhachia. All microbiological tests were negative. The child fully recovered within 72 hours without neurological sequelae. IVIG-induced aseptic meningitis remains a diagnosis of exclusion. Although it is rare, pediatricians should be aware of this complication and avoid unnecessary investigations or treatment.

Intravenous Immunoglobulin-Induced Aseptic Meningitis—A Narrative Review of the Diagnostic Process, Pathogenesis, Preventative Measures and Treatment

Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIGs) are widely used in the treatment of numerous diseases in both adult and pediatric populations. Higher doses of IVIGs usually serve as an immunomodulatory factor, common in therapy of children with immune thrombocytopenic purpura. Considering the broad range of IgG applications, the incidence of side effects in the course of treatment is inevitable. Aseptic meningitis, an uncommon but significant adverse reaction of IVIG therapy, can prove a diagnostic obstacle. As of April 2022, forty-four cases of intravenous immunoglobulin-induced aseptic meningitis have been reported in the English-language literature. This review aims to provide a thorough overview of the diagnostic process, pathophysiology, possible preventative measures and adequate treatment of IVIG-induced aseptic meningitis.

Safety of intravenous immune globulin in an outpatient setting for patients with neuromuscular disease

INTRODUCTION

Although intravenous immune globulin (IVIg) is used to treat patients in the outpatient setting, there is limited documentation addressing the safety of this practice.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 438 patients with neuromuscular diseases receiving IVIg in an outpatient setting.

RESULTS

Adverse events (AE) overall occurred in 16.9% of patients. Headache was the most common AE, noted in 11.6% of patients. Serious AEs occurred in 0.91% of patients; aseptic meningitis was the only one noted. Multivariate analyses identified the following risk factors for AEs: first-lifetime course of IVIg, higher dose per course of IVIg, diagnosis of myasthenia gravis, women, and younger age.

DISCUSSION

Intravenous immune globulin is generally safe to administer in an outpatient setting. Women, myasthenia gravis patients, and those receiving their first course or a higher total dose of IVIg are at an increased risk of experiencing an AE.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for Guillain-Barré syndrome

BACKGROUND

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute, paralysing, inflammatory peripheral nerve disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is beneficial in other autoimmune diseases. This is an update of a review first published in 2001 and previously updated in 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010 and 2012. Other Cochrane systematic reviews have shown that plasma exchange (PE) significantly hastens recovery in GBS compared with supportive treatment alone, and that corticosteroids alone are ineffective.

OBJECTIVES

We had the following four objectives.1. To examine the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in hastening recovery and reducing the long-term morbidity from Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS).2. To determine the most efficacious dose of IVIg in hastening recovery and reducing the long-term morbidity from GBS.3. To compare the efficacy of IVIg and plasma exchange (PE) or immunoabsorption in hastening recovery and reducing the long-term morbidity from GBS.4. To compare the efficacy of IVIg added to PE with PE alone in hastening recovery and reducing the long-term morbidity from GBS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (2 December 2013), CENTRAL (2013, Issue 12 in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2013) and EMBASE (January 1980 to November 2013). We checked the bibliographies in reports of the randomised trials and contacted the authors and other experts in the field to identify additional published or unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of IVIg compared with no treatment, placebo treatment, PE, or other immunomodulatory treatments in children and adults with GBS of all degrees of severity. We also included trials in which IVIg was added to another treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected papers, extracted data and assessed quality. We collected data about adverse events from the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials were found to be eligible for inclusion in this review. Seven trials with a variable risk of bias compared IVIg with PE in 623 severely affected participants. In five trials with 536 participants for whom the outcome was available, the mean difference (MD) of change in a seven-grade disability scale after four weeks was not significantly different between the two treatments: MD of 0.02 of a grade more improvement in the intravenous immunoglobulin than the plasma exchange group; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to -0.20. There were also no statistically significant differences in the other measures considered. Three studies including a total of 75 children suggested that IVIg significantly hastens recovery compared with supportive care. The primary outcome for this review, available for only one trial with 21 mildly affected children, showed significantly more improvement in disability grade after four weeks with IVIg than supportive treatment alone, MD 1.42, 95% CI 2.57 to 0.27.In one trial involving 249 participants comparing PE followed by IVIg with PE alone, the mean grade improvement was 0.2 (95% CI -0.14 to 0.54) more in the combined treatment group than in the PE alone group; not clinically significantly different, but not excluding the possibility of significant extra benefit. Another trial with 34 participants comparing immunoabsorption followed by IVIg with immunoabsorption alone did not reveal significant extra benefit from the combined treatment.Adverse events were not significantly more frequent with either treatment, but IVIg is significantly much more likely to be completed than PE.Small trials in children showed a trend towards more improvement with high-dose compared with low-dose IVIg, and no significant difference when the standard dose was given over two days rather than five days.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A previous Cochrane review has shown that PE hastens recovery compared with supportive treatment alone. There are no adequate comparisons of IVIg with placebo in adults, but this review provides moderate quality evidence that, in severe disease, IVIg started within two weeks from onset hastens recovery as much as PE. Adverse events were not significantly more frequent with either treatment but IVIg is significantly much more likely to be completed than PE. Also, according to moderate quality evidence, giving IVIg after PE did not confer significant extra benefit. In children, according to low quality evidence, IVIg probably hastens recovery compared with supportive care alone. More research is needed in mild disease and in patients whose treatment starts more than two weeks after onset. Dose-ranging studies are also needed and one is in progress.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for Guillain-Barré syndrome

BACKGROUND

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute, paralysing, inflammatory peripheral nerve disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is beneficial in other autoimmune diseases. This is an update of a review first published in 2001 and previously updated in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2010. Other Cochrane systematic reviews have shown that plasma exchange (PE) significantly hastens recovery in GBS compared with supportive treatment alone, and that corticosteroids alone are ineffective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of IVIg for GBS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (15 August 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (January 1966 to August 2011) and EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2011). We checked the bibliographies in reports of the randomised trials and contacted the authors and other experts in the field to identify additional published or unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of IVIg compared with no treatment, placebo treatment, PE, or other immunomodulatory treatments in children and adults with GBS of all degrees of severity. We also included trials in which IVIg was added to another treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected papers, extracted data and assessed quality. We collected data about adverse events from the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review, seven trials with a variable risk of bias compared IVIg with PE in 623 severely affected participants. In five trials with 536 participants for whom the outcome was available, the mean difference (MD) of change in a seven-grade disability scale after four weeks was not significantly different between the two treatments: MD of 0.02 of a grade more improvement in the intravenous immunoglobulin than the plasma exchange group; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to -0.20. There were also no statistically significant differences in the other measures considered. Three studies including a total of 75 children suggested that IVIg significantly hastens recovery compared with supportive care.In one trial involving 249 participants comparing PE followed by IVIg with PE alone, the mean grade improvement was 0.2 (95% CI -0.14 to 0.54) more in the combined treatment group than in the PE alone group; not clinically significantly different, but not excluding the possibility of significant extra benefit. Another trial with 37 participants comparing immunoabsorption followed by IVIg with immunoabsorption alone did not reveal significant extra benefit from the combined treatment.Adverse events were not significantly more frequent with either treatment, but IVIg is significantly much more likely to be completed than PE.Small trials in children showed a trend towards more improvement with high-dose compared with low-dose IVIg, and no significant difference when the standard dose was given over two days rather than five days.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A previous Cochrane review has shown that PE hastens recovery compared with supportive treatment alone. There are no adequate comparisons of IVIg with placebo in adults, but this review provides moderate quality evidence that, in severe disease, IVIg started within two weeks from onset hastens recovery as much as PE. Adverse events were not significantly more frequent with either treatment but IVIg is significantly much more likely to be completed than PE. Also, according to moderate quality evidence, giving IVIg after PE did not confer significant extra benefit. In children, according to low quality evidence, IVIg probably hastens recovery compared with supportive care alone. More research is needed in mild disease and in patients whose treatment starts more than two weeks after onset. Dose-ranging studies are also needed.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for Guillain-Barré syndrome

BACKGROUND

Guillain-Barré syndrome is an acute, paralysing, inflammatory peripheral nerve disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin is beneficial in other autoimmune diseases.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin for Guillain-Barré syndrome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We updated the searches of the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Specialized Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE in June 2009 using the terms 'Guillain-Barré syndrome' and 'acute polyradiculoneuritis' combined with 'intravenous immunoglobulin'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected papers, extracted data and assessed quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Another Cochrane systematic review has shown that plasma exchange significantly hastens recovery. In this review, five trials compared intravenous immunoglobulin with plasma exchange in 536 severely affected, mostly adult participants. The mean difference of change in a seven-grade disability scale after four weeks was not significantly different between the two treatments: 0.02 (95% CI 0.25 to -0.20) of a grade more improvement in the intravenous immunoglobulin than the plasma exchange group. There were also no statistically significant differences in the other measures considered. Three studies including a total of 75 children suggested that intravenous immunoglobulin significantly hastens recovery compared with supportive care.In one trial involving 249 participants comparing plasma exchange followed by intravenous immunoglobulin with plasma exchange alone, the mean grade improvement was 0.2 (95% CI -0.14 to 0.54) more in the combined treatment group than in the plasma exchange alone group, not significantly different but not excluding the possibility of significant extra benefit. Another trial with 37 participants comparing immunoabsorption followed by intravenous immunoglobulin with immunoabsorption alone did not reveal significant extra benefit from the combined treatment.Small trials in children showed a trend towards more improvement with high-dose compared with low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin and no significant difference when the standard dose was given over two days rather than five days.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A previous Cochrane review has shown that plasma exchange hastens recovery compared with supportive treatment alone. There are no adequate comparisons of intravenous immunoglobulin with placebo in adults but this review provides moderate quality evidence that, in severe disease, intravenous immunoglobulin started within two weeks from onset hastens recovery as much as plasma exchange. Adverse events were not significantly more frequent with either treatment but intravenous immunoglobulin is significantly much more likely to be completed than plasma exchange. Also according to moderate quality evidence, giving intravenous immunoglobulin after plasma exchange did not confer significant extra benefit. In children, according to low quality evidence, intravenous immunoglobulin probably hastens recovery compared with supportive care alone. More research is needed in mild disease and in patients whose treatment starts more than two weeks after onset. Dose-ranging studies are also needed.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for Guillain-Barré syndrome

BACKGROUND

Guillain-Barré syndrome is an acute, paralysing, inflammatory peripheral nerve disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin is beneficial in other autoimmune diseases.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin for treating Guillain-Barré syndrome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Register (March 2005), MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2005) and EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2005) using the terms 'Guillain-Barré syndrome' and 'acute polyradiculoneuritis'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised and quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected papers, extracted data and assessed quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Another Cochrane systematic review has shown that plasma exchange significantly hastens recovery. We found six randomised trials comparing intravenous immunoglobulin with plasma exchange. We undertook a meta-analysis of five trials involving 536, mostly adult participants who were unable to walk unaided and had been ill for less than two weeks. Our primary outcome measure was the change in a seven-grade disability scale four weeks after randomisation. The weighted mean difference of this measure was not statistically significant, being only -0.02 (95% confidence interval -0.25 to 0.20) of a disability grade more improvement in the intravenous immunoglobulin than the plasma exchange group. There were no statistically significant differences in other measures. One trial involving 249 participants compared plasma exchange followed by intravenous immunoglobulin with plasma exchange alone. Another involving 37 participants compared immunoabsorption followed by intravenous immunoglobulin with immunoabsorption alone. Neither revealed significant extra benefit from intravenous immunoglobulin. One study with 39 participants showed a trend towards more improvement with high-dose compared with low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin. Another trial with 51 children found no significant difference in outcome when the standard dose was given over two days rather than five days. Three studies including a total of 75 participants suggested that in children intravenous immunoglobulin significantly hastens recovery compared with supportive care.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adults, there are no adequate comparisons with placebo. Randomised trials in severe disease show that intravenous immunoglobulin started within two weeks from onset hastens recovery as much as plasma exchange, which is known to be more effective than supportive care. Treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin is significantly more likely to be completed than plasma exchange. Giving intravenous immunoglobulin after plasma exchange did not confer significant extra benefit. In children, intravenous immunoglobulin probably hastens recovery compared with supportive care alone. More research is needed in mild disease and in treatment starting more than two weeks after onset of the condition. Dose-ranging studies are also needed.

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis (DIAM) is an important entity. This article reviews the literature on this rare idiosyncratic event which may occur after local or systemic drug administration. The data on this adverse reaction is predominantly collated from anecdotal case reports and case series.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for Guillain-Barré syndrome

BACKGROUND

Guillain-Barré syndrome is an acute, paralysing, inflammatory peripheral nerve disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin purified from donated blood is beneficial in other autoimmune diseases.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin for treating Guillain-Barré syndrome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group register (search updated 11 February 2003), MEDLINE and EMBASE (from January 2000 to February 2003) using Guillain-Barré syndrome and acute polyradiculoneuritis as the search terms. We also searched bibliographies of trials and made contact with their authors and other experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised and quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers examined the titles and abstracts of all the papers retrieved by the search, extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials comparing intravenous immunoglobulin with supportive treatment were inadequate to establish its value. Another Cochrane systematic review has shown that plasma exchange hastens recovery. We found six randomised trials that compared intravenous immunoglobulin with plasma exchange. In a meta-analysis of five trials involving 536, mostly adult, participants who were unable to walk unaided and had been ill for less than two weeks. The primary outcome measure in this review was the change in a seven grade disability scale four weeks after randomisation. The weighted mean difference of this measure was not statistically significant, being only 0.04 (95% CI -0.26 to 0.19) of a disability grade more improvement in the intravenous immunoglobulin group than the plasma exchange group. There were also no statistically significant differences in time to walk unaided, mortality, and proportion of participants unable to walk without aid after a year. One trial involving 249 participants compared plasma exchange followed by intravenous immunoglobulin with plasma exchange alone, and another involving 37 participants compared immunoabsorption followed by intravenous immunoglobulin with immunoabsorption alone. Neither revealed significant extra benefit from intravenous immunoglobulin. One study of only 39 participants showed a trend towards more improvement with high-dose compared with low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Although there are no adequate comparisons with placebo, intravenous immunoglobulin hastens recovery from Guillain-Barré syndrome as much as plasma exchange. Giving intravenous immunoglobulin after plasma exchange is not significantly better than plasma exchange alone. Randomised trials are needed to decide the effect of intravenous immunoglobulin in children, in adults with mild disease and in adults who start treatment after more than two weeks.

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis: diagnosis and management

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis (DIAM) has been reported as an uncommon adverse reaction with numerous agents. It is a diagnosis of exclusion, and clinical signs and CSF findings vary greatly. The body of evidence regarding DIAM is largely in the form of anecdotal case reports and must be interpreted carefully bearing this in mind. The major categories of causative agents are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antimicrobials, intravenous immunoglobulin, intrathecal agents, vaccines and a number of other less frequently reported agents. There appears to be an association between DIAM and connective tissue disease, particularly systemic lupus erythematosus, and ibuprofen. There are 2 major proposed mechanisms for DIAM. The first involves direct irritation of the meninges by intrathecal administration of the drug, and the second involves immunological hypersensitivity to the drug, most likely type III and type IV hypersensitivity. Recognition and diagnosis of DIAM is important, as it is treatable by withdrawal of the drug and recurrence is prevented. The outcome of DIAM is generally good, usually without long term sequelae. This article describes the case reports of DIAM in the current literature and discusses the diagnosis and management of this rare complication.