Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Subcutaneous immunoglobulin replacement therapy in patients with immunodeficiencies - impact of drug packaging and administration method on patient reported outcomes.
Mallick, R; Solomon, G; Bassett, P; Zhang, X; Patel, P; Lepeshkina, O.
Affiliation
  • Mallick R; CSL Behring, King of Prussia, PA, USA. rajiv.mallick@cslbehring.com.
  • Solomon G; Association des Patients Immunodeficients du Québec, Québec, Canada.
  • Bassett P; Meridian HealthComms Ltd, Manchester, UK.
  • Zhang X; CSL Behring, King of Prussia, PA, USA.
  • Patel P; Formerly of CSL Behring, King of Prussia, PA, USA.
  • Lepeshkina O; Centre hospitalier de l'Université Laval, Québec, Canada.
BMC Immunol ; 25(1): 18, 2024 02 20.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38378441
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Here, the perspective of patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiency receiving subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) via introductory smaller size pre-filled syringes (PFS) or vials were compared.

METHODS:

An online survey was conducted in Canada by the Association des Patients Immunodéficients du Québec (APIQ) (10/2020-03/2021). Survey questions included reasons for choosing SCIg packaging and administration methods, training experiences, infusion characteristics, and switching methods. The survey captured structured patient-reported

outcomes:

treatment satisfaction and its sub-domains, symptom state, general health perception, and physical and mental function. Respondents using PFS were compared with vial users, overall and stratified by their administration method (pump or manual push).

RESULTS:

Of the 132 total respondents, 66 respondents used vials, with 38 using a pump and 28 using manual push. PFS (5 and 10 mL sizes) were being used by 120 respondents, with 38 using a pump and 82 using manual push. PFS users were associated with a 17% lower median (interquartile range) SCIg dose (10 [8, 12] vs. 12 [9, 16] g/week, respectively), a significantly shorter infusion preparation time (15 [10, 20] vs. 15 [10, 30] mins, respectively), and a trend for shorter length of infusion (60 [35, 90] vs. 70 [48, 90] mins, respectively) compared with those on vials. Patient-reported treatment satisfaction scores were overall similar between vial and PFS users (including on the domains of effectiveness and convenience), except for a higher score for vials over PFS on the domain of global satisfaction (p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS:

Consistent with prescribing that reflects a recognition of less wastage, PFS users were associated with a significantly lower SCIg dose compared with vial users. PFS users were also associated with shorter pre-infusion times, reflecting simpler administration mechanics compared with vial users. Higher global satisfaction with treatment among vial users compared with PFS users was consistent with users being limited to smaller PFS size options in Canada during the study period. Patient experience on PFS is expected to improve with the introduction of larger PFS sizes. Overall, treatment satisfaction for SCIg remains consistently high with the introduction of PFS packaging compared with vials.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Immunoglobulin G / Immunologic Deficiency Syndromes Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: BMC Immunol Year: 2024 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Immunoglobulin G / Immunologic Deficiency Syndromes Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: BMC Immunol Year: 2024 Document type: Article