Transitioning subcutaneous immunoglobulin 20% therapies in patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiencies: Canadian real-world study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Real-world data on transitioning to Immune Globulin Subcutaneous (Human) 20% solution (Ig20Gly) are limited. This study aimed to assess infusion parameters and experience of patients with primary (PID) or secondary immunodeficiencies (SID) transitioning to Ig20Gly in clinical practice in Canada. METHODS: Patients with PID or SID who received subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIG) for ≥ 3 months before transitioning to Ig20Gly were eligible for this multicenter (n = 6), phase 4, non-interventional, prospective, single-arm study. Ig20Gly infusion parameters, dosing, and adverse events were collected from patient medical records at Ig20Gly initiation and 3, 6, and 12 months post-initiation. Patient satisfaction and quality of life were assessed 12 months post-initiation using validated questionnaires. RESULTS: The study included 125 patients (PID, n = 60; SID, n = 64; PID + SID, n = 1). Median volume per infusion was 30.0 ml at initiation, and 40.0 ml at 6 and 12 months post-initiation. Most patients administered Ig20Gly weekly and used two infusion sites (primarily abdomen). At each time point, median infusion duration was ≤ 1 h. At 12 months, 61% of infusions were administered via a pump and 39% manually. Headache and infusion-site reactions were the most reported adverse events of interest. Patients expressed overall satisfaction with Ig20Gly at 12 months post-initiation, with all respondents indicating they would like to continue Ig20Gly. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a detailed description of Ig20Gly infusion parameters, tolerability, and quality of life in clinical practice among patients with PID or SID switching to Ig20Gly from another SCIG and confirms the feasibility of infusing Ig20Gly via pump or manual administration. Trial registration NCT03716700, Registered 31 August 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03716700.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".