Should Intravenous Immunoglobulin G (IVIg) be used in the treatment of COVID-19?

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Germana Emerita V. Gregorio ◽  
Leonila F. Dans

KEY FINDINGS There is conflicting evidence on the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobin G in the treatment of COVID-19 patients with severe disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIg) is a mixture of polyclonal immunoglobulin G (IgG3, IgG4) antibodies as well as variable amounts of proteins; IgA, IgE and IgM antibodies isolated and pooled from healthy donors. IgG is involved in viral neutralization, modulates anti-inflammatory cytokines and cytokine antagonists. Immediate adverse effects of IVIg include flu-like syndrome, dermatologic side effects, arrhythmia, hypotension, and transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI). Delayed adverse effects can involve any organ which could be severe or even lethal There was a retrospective study (Yun Xie 2020) and several case reports that described recovery of COVID positive patients with severe disease. However, a retrospective study showed that immunoglobulin G with steroids and antivirals did not improve COVID patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (Liu Y 2020). Similarly, another study showed no significant difference in the 28- and 60-day mortality between the IVIg and non-IVIg groups but subgroup analyses reported that in those with critical COVID illness, 28 day mortality is decreased with IVIg (Shao Z). There are eight registered clinical trials on the use of intravenous immunoglobulin G in COVID-19 patients.

Author(s):  
Jiarong Pan ◽  
Canyang Zhan ◽  
Tianming Yuan ◽  
Xiangxiang Chen ◽  
Yanyan Ni ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIG) in infants with ABO hemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN). Methods Infants with moderate-to-severe ABO HDN during early neonatal period (<7 days) at our hospital in 2017 were included in this retrospective study. Patients treated with IVIG and phototherapy were classified as the IVIG group, and those who only received phototherapy were classified as the phototherapy only group. Results Forty-six patients were classified into the IVIG group and 68 other patients were classified into the phototherapy only group. There was no significant difference in duration of phototherapy, hospitalization periods, needs for exchange transfusion, transfusions, and incidence of bilirubin-induced neurological sequelae between these two groups (P = 0.20, 0.27, 0.65, 0.47, 0.78, respectively). Conclusion It seems unnecessary to expose neonates to IVIG in moderate-to-severe ABO HDN when the available data show no appreciable benefits.


1990 ◽  
Vol 89 (5) ◽  
pp. 554-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip K. Peterson ◽  
Judy Shepard ◽  
Mark Macres ◽  
Carlos Schenck ◽  
John Crosson ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e0139828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willem Jan R. Fokkink ◽  
David Falck ◽  
Tom C. M. Santbergen ◽  
Ruth Huizinga ◽  
Manfred Wuhrer ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 200
Author(s):  
Oki Suwarsa ◽  
Fatima Aulia Khairani ◽  
Syawalika Ulya Isneny ◽  
Erda Avriyanti ◽  
Hartati Purbo Dharmadji ◽  
...  

Background: Methotrexate (MTX) and cyclosporine have been used as effective systemic mono-therapy for psoriasis. Several factors are considered to switch monotherapy to combination therapy because monotherapy is no longer effective and has higher side effects. Hence,clinicians have avoided systemic therapy combinations due to its toxicity. However, some studies showed that this combination therapy could be usedeffectively for psoriasis patients. Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the efficacy and adverse effects of systemic MTX and cyclosporine combination therapy in Indonesian psoriasis vulgaris patients. Methods: The retrospective study assessed the effectiveness of 3 monthsmono-therapyand combination therapy of systemic MTX and cyclosporine in psoriasisvulgaris patients from 2016–2017 in Dermatology Clinic, Dr. Hasan Sadikin Hospital, Bandung, West Java, Indonesia. Result: Psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) score 90 were achieved in the group MTX (50%) and cyclosporine group (50%), while none in the combination group.However, eight patients (50%) in group MTX and cyclosporine reached the primary endpoint of PASI 50. One patient in cyclosporine group had adverse effects on kidney profiles. Nonetheless, other patients had no biochemical changes. But, there was no significant difference in the change of PASI between each group (p=0.102). Conclusion: We propose that combination therapy of MTX and cyclosporine is relatively safe and efficacious in treating Indonesian psoriasis vulgaris patients. This combination treatment isas effective as MTX or cyclosporinemono-therapy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document