ArticleJRSM open2018
Use of intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment of autoimmune encephalitis: audit of the NHS experience.
Article in JRSM open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG) for Patients with Severe Neurotoxicity Associated with Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell (CAR-T) Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Intravenous immunoglobulin as first-line acute treatment in adults with autoimmune encephalitis caused by antibodies to NMDAR, LGI1 and CASPR2.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- BRAF Inhibitor Therapy-Related Encephalitis in a Patient with Metastatic Melanoma.The oncologist · 2021Article
- Autoimmune Encephalitis in Tunisia: Report of a Pediatric Cohort.Journal of immunology research · 2021Article
- Autoimmune Encephalitis: NMDA Receptor Encephalitis as an Example of Translational Neuroscience.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe treatments of limbic and other autoimmune encephalitis include immunosuppression, symptomatic treatment, and in the case of paraneoplastic syndromes, appropriate therapy for underlying neoplasms. When immunotherapy is considered, intravenous immunoglobulin is one option for treatment, either alone or in combination with corticosteroids. To date, however, evidence for the use of intravenous immunoglobulin in this context comes from case series/expert reviews as no controlled trials have been performed. We aimed to analyse the NHS England Database of intravenous immunoglobulin usage, which was designed to log use and guide procurement, to explore usage and therapeutic effect of intravenous immunoglobulin in autoimmune encephalitis in England.
designWe conducted a retrospective audit and review of the NHS England Database on intravenous immunoglobulin use.
settingNHS England Database of intravenous immunoglobulin use which covers secondary and tertiary care prescribing and use of intravenous immunoglobulin for all patients in hospitals in England.
participantsHospital in-patients with confirmed or suspected autoimmune/limbic encephalitis between September 2010 and January 2017.
resultsA total of 625 patients who were 18 years of age or older were treated with intravenous immunoglobulin for autoimmune encephalitis, of whom 398 were determined as having 'highly likely' or 'definite' autoimmune/limbic encephalitis. Ninety-six percent were treated with a single course of intravenous immunoglobulin. The availability and accuracy of reporting of outcomes was very poor, with complete data only available in 27% of all cases.
conclusionsThis is the first review of data from this unique national database. Whilst there was evidence for clinical improvement in many cases of patients treated with intravenous immunoglobulin, the quality of outcome data was generally inadequate. Methods to improve quality, accuracy and completeness of reporting are crucial to maximise the potential value of this resource as an auditing tool.
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.