Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31598044›Full record

ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2019

A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Monoclonal Anti-Rh (D) Immunoglobulin with Polyclonal Anti-Rh (D) Immunoglobulin for the Prevention of Maternal Rh-Isoimmunization.

Anahita R Chauhan, Yogeshwar S Nandanwar, Aruna Ramaiah, Kanan A Yelikar, M D Rashmi, Rekha Sachan, Rahul V Mayekar, Yamini N Trivedi, Gopalkrishna V Paradkar, Kiran P Patole

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Immunology of Transfusion Medicine: Past, Present, and Future.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. FcFrontiers in immunology · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Anahita R Chauhan1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Seth GS Medical College and King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400012 India.
Yogeshwar S Nandanwar2Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400022 India.
Aruna RamaiahDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Modern Government Maternity Hospital, Hyderabad, Telangana 500064 India.
Kanan A Yelikar4Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra 431004 India.
M D RashmiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Apollo BGS Hospitals, Mysuru, Karnataka 570023 India.
Rekha Sachan6Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, 226003 India.
Rahul V Mayekar2Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400022 India.
Yamini N TrivediDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Sheth L.G. General Hospital, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380008 India.
Gopalkrishna V Paradkar8Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Rajiv Gandhi Medical College and Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Hospital, Thane, Maharashtra 400605 India.
Kiran P PatoleDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra 422207 India.
Lokmanya Tilak Municipal General Hospital and Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College · INAhmedabad Civil Hospital · INApollo Hospitals · INDr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre · INGandhi Medical College & Hospital · INGovernment Medical College · INKing Edward Memorial Hospital and Seth G.S. Medical College · INKing George's Medical University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of monoclonal anti-Rhesus (anti-D) immunoglobulin (IgG) with polyclonal anti-D IgG in the prevention of maternal Rh-isoimmunization.

methodsThis was a randomized, multicenter, open-label, comparative clinical trial conducted in the obstetric in-patient departments of nine tertiary care hospitals in India. 206 Rhesus (D)-negative women, not sensitized to Rh antigen, and delivering Rh positive babies, received postpartum intramuscular administration of monoclonal or polyclonal anti-D IgG. The main outcome measures were the proportion of subjects protected from Rh-isoimmunization, identified by a negative indirect Coombs test (ICT) result, at day 180 after anti-D IgG administration, and incidence of adverse events.

results105 subjects were randomized to the monoclonal group and 101 to the polyclonal group. 94 from the monoclonal group had a negative ICT result and none had a positive ICT result at day 180, whereas 87 from the polyclonal group had a negative ICT result and one had a positive ICT result; the rest (11 and 13 subjects respectively) were lost to follow-up. A total of 5 adverse events were reported (3 in the monoclonal group and 2 in the polyclonal group); only one of these was serious. All the adverse events were judged to be unrelated to the interventional drug. None of the subjects in the monoclonal group developed immunogenic reaction to the monoclonal anti-D.

conclusionThe efficacy and safety of the monoclonal preparation of anti-D was comparable to the polyclonal preparation of anti-D when used in the prevention of maternal Rh-isoimmunization.

Indexed as

ImmunoglobulinIsoimmunizationMonoclonalRhesus

Identifiers

PMID31598044
PMCPMC6765035
OpenAlexW2948249537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.