ArticleBMC immunology2016
Treatment with Hizentra in patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiencies: a real-life, non-interventional trial.
Article in BMC immunology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-centered outcomes with subcutaneous immunoglobulin use for infection control in primary and secondary immunodeficiencies: data of a GEIE Spanish Registry.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- A Phase 1 Open-Label Study to Assess the Tolerability, Safety, and Immunogenicity of Hyaluronidase-Facilitated Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin 20% in Healthy Adults.Journal of clinical immunology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough Hizentra is indicated for immunoglobulin replacement therapy in patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiencies, phase III trials have focused on patients with primary immunodeficiencies. In this 9-month, real-life, prospective, non-interventional, longitudinal, multicenter study of patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiencies in France, treatment modalities (primary endpoint), efficacy, safety, tolerability, quality of life, and treatment satisfaction were evaluated using descriptive statistics.
resultsStarting in January 2012, 117 patients were enrolled (99 adults, 18 children). Secondary immunodeficiencies were present in 48.7 % of patients. At follow-up, injections were administered every 7 days in 92.2 % of patients. Nine patients (7.8 %) were taking Hizentra every 10-14 days. The median dose of Hizentra administered was 0.1 g/kg/injection. Fifty-six patients were administered doses <0.1 g/kg/injection and 13 patients were administered doses >0.2 g/kg/injection. Mean trough IgG titers were 9.0 ± 3.3 g/L (median 8.3 g/L). The mean yearly rate of infection was 1.2 ± 1.9. Mean scores on the Short Form-36 physical and mental component summaries were 46.3 ± 10.0 and 46.6 ± 9.3, respectively. Scores on the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication ranged from 69.9 ± 19.9 to 88.3 ± 21.2 depending on the domain. Treatment with Hizentra was well tolerated. No single drug-related systemic reaction occurred in more than one patient and few local reactions were reported (n = 5).
conclusionsUnder real-life conditions and in a cohort that included patients with primary and secondary immunodeficiencies, treatment with Hizentra was effective and well tolerated and patients were generally satisfied with the treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.