Subcutaneous immunoglobulin in treating inflammatory neuromuscular disorders

Abstract

Our results suggest that subcutaneous immunoglobulins can be an attractive alternative therapy in autoimmune neuromuscular disorders.

Subcutaneous versus intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic autoimmune neuropathies: A meta‐analysis

“…In the study by Markvardsen et al, 20 of 29 (70%) CIDP patients who switched from IVIg to SC‐Ig preferred to continue with SC‐Ig at the end of the study, even though they experienced a larger proportion of mild and local adverse effects . Similar results were reported by other authors . Of interest, patients were similarly satisfied with IVIg as compared to SC‐Ig when both were administered at home .…”

“…A recent cost‐minimization analysis performed in Italy found that the cost of either treatment, despite being lower for SC‐Ig, was only slightly different . The need for administration in a clinic or hospital setting, premedication, and a higher frequency of systemic adverse effects with IVIg may favor the lower cost of SC‐Ig . Cost was not considered in detail in this study, but deserves attention when analyzing both alternatives.…”

“…Six studies (88 patients) compared both treatments in MMN and 4 studies (50 patients) in CIDP (Table ). Two studies that reported a single case of MMN were excluded from the main analysis, given the inherent lack of statistical validity, but they were later included in the sensitivity analysis. For the sensitivity analysis, individual patient data were obtained from 5 studies (21 patients), and aggregate data were obtained from 3 studies (117 patients).…”

Subcutaneous immunoglobulins in the treatment of chronic immune-mediated neuropathies

“…Within this short observation period, an equivalent efficacy of SCIg was demonstrated in these patients . Apart from these two studies there are case series and case reports of classes III and IV evidence [Bayas et al 2013;Cocito et al 2013;Köller et al 2006;Lee et al 2008;Markvardsen et al 2015], which also provide data that corroborate the utility of SCIg in patients with CIDP; one, even as a long-term clinical follow up [Yoon et al 2015]. The switch was due to various reasons such as stabilization by IVIg only, with short treatment intervals, side effects associated with IVIg therapy (e.g.…”

“…Equivalent clinical efficacy of SCIg after switching from IVIg was demonstrated in these patients as well, based on data gathered in the short 16-week observational period . Additional smaller case series or case reports emphasize the potential efficacy of SCIg in patients with MMN [Dacci et al 2010;Eftimov et al 2009;Hadden and Marreno, 2015;Köller et al 2006;Markvardsen et al 2015;Misbah et al 2011;Yoon et al 2015]. The switches from IVIg to SCIg were performed for the same reasons as mentioned in the reports in CIDP.…”