A Retrospective Study on the Efficacy of Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin as Compared to Intravenous Formulation in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Secondary Antibody Deficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Secondary antibody deficiency (SAD) is a common complication in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) which favors the development of life-threatening infections. Subcutaneous immunoglobulins (IG) (SCIG) have been proven to be as effective as intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in primary immunodeficiencies. Since only a few studies investigated SCIG in secondary antibody deficiency, the aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of SCIG or IVIG in CLL patients with secondary antibody deficiency. One hundred and sixteen CLL patients were recruited, 63% were males, and the median age was 68 years; 44% had bronchiectasis and 76% never smoked. Forty-nine patients received IVIG and 88 SCIG, including 28 patients who shifted from IVIG to SCIG. Despite similar baseline IgG levels, patients receiving SCIG achieved higher IgG after at least +6 months (p = 0.0009). We observed that SCIG can decrease the cumulative incidence of first (HR 0.39 p < 0.0001) and second (HR 0.56 p = 0.0411) infection more than IVIG. The effect was remarkable in that patients were able to reach at least 6 g/L of IgG after 6 months of treatments (p < 0.0001). Replacement therapies were well tolerated with less adverse events and a lower discontinuation rate in patients was managed with SCIG than IVIG. In this study we describe the clinical features of a large cohort of CLL with secondary antibody deficiency receiving IG. We demonstrated that SCIG are active and well tolerated drugs that allows to reach higher IgG levels and decrease the rate of infections better than IVIG, in particular when IgG levels reach 6 g/L.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".