Rapid Push vs Pump-Infused Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin Treatment: a Randomized Crossover Study of Quality of Life in Primary Immunodeficiency Patients

Boris Bienvenu, Grégoire Cozon, Yves Mataix, Dominique Lachaud, Antoine Alix, Cyrille Hoarau, Daniel Antier, Eric Hachulla, Sylvie Brice, Jean-François Viallard, Stéphanie Tamisier, Anne-Laure Fauchais, Françoise Renon-Carron, Pierre Clerson, Yann Fardini, Jean-Charles Crave, Pierre Miossec, Boris Bienvenu, Grégoire Cozon, Yves Mataix, Dominique Lachaud, Antoine Alix, Cyrille Hoarau, Daniel Antier, Eric Hachulla, Sylvie Brice, Jean-François Viallard, Stéphanie Tamisier, Anne-Laure Fauchais, Françoise Renon-Carron, Pierre Clerson, Yann Fardini, Jean-Charles Crave, Pierre Miossec

Abstract

Purpose: Subcutaneous immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT) may be administered once a week with a pump or every other day with a syringe (rapid push). The objective of the study was to compare the impact of pump and rapid push infusions on patient's life quality index (LQI).

Methods: This study was a randomized, crossover, multicenter, non-inferiority trial conducted in adults with primary immunodeficiency (PID) accustomed to weekly infusions at home by pump. Patients used pump or rapid push for 3 months each according to the randomized sequence. Main criterion was PID-LQI factor I (treatment interference). Non-inferiority ratio was set at 90%.

Results: Thirty patients entered the study; 28 completed the two periods. IgRT exposure was similar during each period. At the end of each period, mean LQI factor 1 was 87.0 (IC95% [80.3; 94.3]) and 77.80 (IC95% [71.5; 84.7]) for pump and rapid push, respectively. There was a slightly larger effect of rapid push on treatment interference than with pump so that the primary endpoint could not be met. No difference was found on other LQI components, satisfaction (TSQM), or quality of life (SF36v2). Eight patients declared to prefer rapid push while 19 others preferred pump. Of rapid push infusions, 67.2% led to local reactions vs 71.8% of pump infusions (p = 0.11) illustrating its good tolerance. Rapid push and pump infusions achieved similar trough IgG levels with similar incidence of infections. Rapid push saved 70% of administration cost when compared to pump.

Conclusions: Since IgRT is a lifelong treatment in PID patients, individualization of treatment is of paramount importance. Rapid push is a new administration method in the physician's armamentarium which is preferred by some patients and is cost-effective. CLINICALTRIALS.

Gov identifier: NCT02180763 CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Self-administration of small volumes of immunoglobulins at home, every other day, using a syringe (rapid push) is a cost-effective alternative to administration of larger volumes by pump once a week. This study compared subcutaneous infusions of immunoglobulins either weekly via a pump or every other day via a syringe (rapid push). Rapid push is preferred by some patients and is cost-effective, therefore completing a physician's armamentarium.

Keywords: PID immunoglobulin replacement therapy; Primary immunodeficiency; home treatment; rapid push.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

B. Bienvenu, G. Cozon, C. Hoarau, JF. Viallard, and E. Hachulla take part in several scientific boards and/or take part in several studies led by Octapharma. JC. Crave works at Octapharma.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT flowchart of the study
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Life quality index (PID-LQI). Legend: dark bars, pump; clear bars, syringe. Values are Lsmeans derived from the mixed model with device, period and sequence as fixed factors, and patient within sequence as random factor
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
SF36v2 health domain scales and norm-based component scores. Legend: dark bars, pump; clear bars, syringe. Values are Lsmeans derived from the mixed model with device, period and sequence as fixed factors, and patient within sequence as random factor

References

    1. Al-Herz W, Bousfiha A, Casanova JL, Chapel H, Conley ME, Cunningham-Rundles C, et al. Primary immunodeficiency diseases: an update on the classification from the international union of immunological societies expert committee for primary immunodeficiency. Front Immunol. 2011;2:54. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2011.00054.
    1. Gardulf A. Immunoglobulin treatment for primary antibody deficiencies: advantages of the subcutaneous route. BioDrugs. 2007;21(2):105–116. doi: 10.2165/00063030-200721020-00005.
    1. Busse PJ, Razvi S, Cunningham-Rundles C. Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin in the prevention of pneumonia in patients with common variable immunodeficiency. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2002;109(6):1001–1004. doi: 10.1067/mai.2002.124999.
    1. Gardulf A, Nicolay U. Replacement IgG therapy and self-therapy at home improve the health-related quality of life in patients with primary antibody deficiencies. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2006;6(6):434–442. doi: 10.1097/01.all.0000246619.49494.41.
    1. Gardulf A, Bjorvell H, Andersen V, Bjorkander J, Ericson D, Froland SS, Gustafson R, Hammarstrom L, Nystrom T, Soeberg B, Smith CIE. Lifelong treatment with gammaglobulin for primary antibody deficiencies: the patients' experiences of subcutaneous self-infusions and home therapy. J Adv Nurs. 1995;21(5):917–927. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1995.21050917.x.
    1. Nicolay U, Kiessling P, Berger M, Gupta S, Yel L, Roifman CM, Gardulf A, Eichmann F, Haag S, Massion C, Ochs HD. Health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction in North American patients with primary immunedeficiency diseases receiving subcutaneous IgG self-infusions at home. J Clin Immunol. 2006;26(1):65–72. doi: 10.1007/s10875-006-8905-x.
    1. Gardulf A, Nicolay U, Math D, Asensio O, Bernatowska E, Bock A, et al. Children and adults with primary antibody deficiencies gain quality of life by subcutaneous IgG self-infusions at home. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004;114(4):936–942. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.06.053.
    1. Abolhassani H, Sadaghiani MS, Aghamohammadi A, Ochs HD, Rezaei N. Home-based subcutaneous immunoglobulin versus hospital-based intravenous immunoglobulin in treatment of primary antibody deficiencies: systematic review and meta analysis. J Clin Immunol. 2012;32(6):1180–1192. doi: 10.1007/s10875-012-9720-1.
    1. Shapiro RS. Why I use subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIG) J Clin Immunol. 2013;33(Suppl 2):S95–S98. doi: 10.1007/s10875-012-9853-2.
    1. Kobrynski L. Subcutaneous immunoglobulin therapy: a new option for patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases. Biologics. 2012;6:277–287.
    1. Shapiro R. Subcutaneous immunoglobulin therapy by rapid push is preferred to infusion by pump: a retrospective analysis. J Clin Immunol. 2010;30(2):301–307. doi: 10.1007/s10875-009-9352-2.
    1. Shapiro RS. Subcutaneous immunoglobulin: rapid push vs. infusion pump in pediatrics. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2013;24(1):49–53. doi: 10.1111/pai.12026.
    1. Gardulf A. Clinical experiences in primary and secondary immunodeficiencies and immune-mediated conditions using gammanorm((R)) Immunotherapy. 2016;8(5):633–647. doi: 10.2217/imt-2015-0013.
    1. Bharmal M, Payne K, Atkinson MJ, Desrosiers MP, Morisky DE, Gemmen E. Validation of an abbreviated Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM-9) among patients on antihypertensive medications. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:36. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-36.
    1. Ware JESK, Kosinski M. SF36 health survey. Manual and interpretation guide. Lincoln: Quality-Metrics Inc.; 2000.
    1. Buchi S, Buddeberg C, Klaghofer R, Russi EW, Brandli O, Schlosser C, et al. Preliminary validation of PRISM (pictorial representation of illness and self measure)—a brief method to assess suffering. Psychother Psychosom. 2002;71(6):333–341. doi: 10.1159/000065994.
    1. Buchi S, Sensky TPRISM. Pictorial representation of illness and self measure. A brief nonverbal measure of illness impact and therapeutic aid in psychosomatic medicine. Psychosomatics. 1999;40(4):314–320. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(99)71225-9.
    1. Nicolay U, Haag S, Eichmann F, Herget S, Spruck D, Gardulf A. Measuring treatment satisfaction in patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases receiving lifelong immunoglobulin replacement therapy. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(7):1683–1691. doi: 10.1007/s11136-005-1746-x.
    1. Atkinson MJ, Sinha A, Hass SL, Colman SS, Kumar RN, Brod M, Rowland CR. Validation of a general measure of treatment satisfaction, the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM), using a national panel study of chronic disease. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:12. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-2-12.
    1. Direction générale de l’offre de soins. Guide pour le suivi de la masse salariale. Ministère chargé de la santé. 2014 [cited 21/03/2017]; Available from:
    1. Chaput H, Pinel C, Wilner L. Salaires dans le secteur privé et les entreprises publiques - En 2013, le salaire net moyen baisse de 0,3% en euros constants. Insee Première 2015 16/09/2015;1565.
    1. Ochs HD, Gupta S, Kiessling P, Nicolay U, Berger M. Safety and efficacy of self-administered subcutaneous immunoglobulin in patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases. J Clin Immunol. 2006;26(3):265–273. doi: 10.1007/s10875-006-9021-7.
    1. Reniers A, Heijmans C, Nols N, Rombaut B, Peche R. Subcutaneous administration of gammanorm in immune-deficient patients by rapid push: report of the Belgian experience. J Clin Immunol; 2014: SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA; 2014. p. S507-S.
    1. Hansen S, Gustafson R, Smith CI, Gardulf A. Express subcutaneous IgG infusions: decreased time of delivery with maintained safety. Clin Immunol. 2002;104(3):237–241. doi: 10.1006/clim.2002.5215.
    1. Beaute J, Levy P, Millet V, Debre M, Dudoit Y, Le Mignot L, et al. Economic evaluation of immunoglobulin replacement in patients with primary antibody deficiencies. Clin Exp Immunol. 2009;160:240–245. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2009.04079.x.
    1. Martin A, Lavoie L, Goetghebeur M, Schellenberg R. Economic benefits of subcutaneous rapid push versus intravenous immunoglobulin infusion therapy in adult patients with primary immune deficiency. Transfus Med. 2013;23(1):55–60. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3148.2012.01201.x.
    1. Jolles S, Orange JS, Gardulf A, Stein MR, Shapiro R, Borte M, Berger M. Current treatment options with immunoglobulin G for the individualization of care in patients with primary immunodeficiency disease. Clin Exp Immunol. 2015;179(2):146–160. doi: 10.1111/cei.12485.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa