Explore the vast range of titles available.

Hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis is caused by the deposition of misfolded transthyretin proteins in peripheral nerves and other tissues. This phase 3 trial tested patisiran, a small interfering RNA targeting transthyretin messenger RNA, to treat the disease.

IVIG has been widely used for dermatomyositis but with limited evidence-based support. In a 16-week randomized trial, the percentage of patients with improvement was greater with IVIG than with placebo.

Genetic studies have indicated possible involvement of the upregulated calcium-nuclear factor of activated T cells pathway in the pathogenesis of Kawasaki disease. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of ciclosporin, an immunosuppressant targeting this pathway, for protection of patients with Kawasaki disease against coronary artery abnormalities. We did a randomised, open-label, blinded endpoints trial involving 22 hospitals in Japan between May 29, 2014, and Dec 27, 2016. Eligible patients predicted to be at higher risk for intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) resistance were randomly assigned to IVIG plus ciclosporin (5 mg/kg per day for 5 days; study treatment) or IVIG (conventional treatment) groups, stratified by risk score, age, and sex. The primary endpoint was incidence of coronary artery abnormalities using Japanese criteria during the 12-week trial, assessed in participants who received at least one dose of study drug and who visited the study institution at least once during treatment. This trial is registered to Center for Clinical Trials, Japan Medical Association, number JMA-IIA00174. We enrolled 175 participants. One patient withdrew consent after enrolment and was excluded and one patient (in the study treatment group) was excluded from analysis because of lost echocardiography data. Incidence of coronary artery abnormalities was lower in the study treatment group than in the conventional treatment group (12 [14%] of 86 patients vs 27 [31%] of 87 patients; risk ratio 0·46; 95% CI 0·25–0·86; p=0·010). No difference was found in the incidence of adverse events between the groups (9% vs 7%; p=0·78). Combined primary therapy with IVIG and ciclosporin was safe and effective for favourable coronary artery outcomes in Kawasaki disease patients who were predicted to be unresponsive to IVIG. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (grant CCT-B-2503).

Subcutaneous delivery of biotherapeutics has become a valuable alternative to intravenous administration across many disease areas. Although the pharmacokinetic profiles of subcutaneous and intravenous formulations differ, subcutaneous administration has proven effective, safe, well-tolerated, generally preferred by patients and healthcare providers and to result in reduced drug delivery-related healthcare costs and resource use. The aim of this article is to discuss the differences between subcutaneous and intravenous dosing from both health-economic and scientific perspectives. The article covers different indications, treatment settings, administration volumes, and injection devices. We focus on biotherapeutics in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), immunoglobulin-replacement therapy in primary immunodeficiency (PI), beta interferons in multiple sclerosis (MS), and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in oncology. While most subcutaneous biotherapeutics in RA, PI, and MS are self-administered at home, mAbs for oncology are still only approved for administration in a healthcare setting. Beside concerns around the safety of biotherapeutics in oncology, a key challenge for self-administration in this area is that doses and dosing volumes can be comparatively large; however, this difficulty has recently been overcome to some extent by the development of high-concentration solutions, the use of infusion pumps, and the coadministration of the dispersion enhancer hyaluronidase. Furthermore, given the increasing number of biotherapeutics being considered for combination therapy and the high dosing complexity associated with these, especially when administered intravenously, subcutaneous delivery of fixed-dose combinations might be an alternative that will diminish these burdens on healthcare systems.

Treatment with one standard dose (2 g/kg) of intravenous immunoglobulin is insufficient in a proportion of patients with severe Guillain-Barré syndrome. Worldwide, around 25% of patients severely affected with the syndrome are given a second intravenous immunoglobulin dose (SID), although it has not been proven effective. We aimed to investigate whether a SID is effective in patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome with a predicted poor outcome. In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (SID-GBS), we included patients (≥12 years) with Guillain-Barré syndrome admitted to one of 59 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were included on the first day of standard intravenous immunoglobulin treatment (2 g/kg over 5 days). Only patients with a poor prognosis (score of ≥6) according to the modified Erasmus Guillain-Barré syndrome Outcome Score were randomly assigned, via block randomisation stratified by centre, to SID (2 g/kg over 5 days) or to placebo, 7–9 days after inclusion. Patients, outcome adjudicators, monitors, and the steering committee were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the Guillain-Barré syndrome disability score 4 weeks after inclusion. All patients in whom allocated trial medication was started were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. This study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR 2224/NL2107. Between Feb 16, 2010, and June 5, 2018, 327 of 339 patients assessed for eligibility were included. 112 had a poor prognosis. Of those, 93 patients with a poor prognosis were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 49 (53%) received SID and 44 (47%) received placebo. The adjusted common odds ratio for improvement on the Guillain-Barré syndrome disability score at 4 weeks was 1·4 (95% CI 0·6–3·3; p=0·45). Patients given SID had more serious adverse events (35% vs 16% in the first 30 days), including thromboembolic events, than those in the placebo group. Four patients died in the intervention group (13–24 weeks after randomisation). Our study does not provide evidence that patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome with a poor prognosis benefit from a second intravenous immunoglobulin course; moreover, it entails a risk of serious adverse events. Therefore, a second intravenous immunoglobulin course should not be considered for treatment of Guillain-Barre syndrome because of a poor prognosis. The results indicate the need for treatment trials with other immune modulators in patients severely affected by Guillain-Barré syndrome. Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds and Sanquin Plasma Products.

Orthopedic infections are typically treated with intravenous antibiotics. In this trial, 1054 participants with complex orthopedic infections were assigned to receive either oral or intravenous antibiotics for the first 6 weeks of treatment. At 1 year, oral therapy was noninferior to intravenous therapy.

In this randomized, double-blind trial in 1062 adults hospitalized with Covid-19, remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery (10 days, vs. 15 days with placebo). The estimates of mortality by day 29 were 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo. The benefit of remdesivir was most apparent in patients who were receiving low-flow oxygen at baseline.

Three small trials suggest that intravenous immunoglobulin can affect biomarkers and symptoms of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. We tested the safety, effective dose, and infusion interval of intravenous immunoglobulin in such patients. We did a multicentre, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at seven sites in the USA and five in Germany. Participants with probable Alzheimer's disease aged 50–85 years were randomly assigned (by a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with block sizes of eight) to infusions every 4 weeks (0·2, 0·5, or 0·8 g intravenous immunoglobulin per kg bodyweight, or placebo) or infusions every 2 weeks (0·1, 0·25, or 0·4 g/kg, or placebo). Patients, caregivers, investigators assessing outcomes, and staff at imaging facilities and the clinical research organisation were masked to treatment allocation, but dispensing pharmacists, the statistician, and the person responsible for final PET analyses were not. Treatment was masked with opaque pouches and infusion lines. The primary endpoint was median area under the curve (AUC) of plasma amyloid β (Aβ)1–40 between the last infusion and the final visit (2 weeks or 4 weeks depending on infusion interval) in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00812565) and controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN64846759). 89 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 58 were enrolled and 55 included in the primary analysis. Median AUC of plasma Aβ1–40 was not significantly different for intravenous immunoglobulin compared with placebo for five of the six intervention groups (–18·0 [range −1347·0 to 1068·5] for 0·2 g/kg, −364·3 [–5834·5 to 1953·5] for 0·5 g/kg, and −351·8 [–1084·0 to 936·5] for 0·8 g/kg every 4 weeks vs −116·3 [–1379·0 to 5266·0] for placebo; and −13·8 [–1729·0 to 307·0] for 0·1 g/kg, and −32·5 [–1102·5 to 451·5] for 0·25 g/kg every 2 weeks vs 159·5 [51·5 to 303·0] for placebo; p>0·05 for all). The difference in median AUC of plasma Aβ1–40 between the 0·4 g/kg every 2 weeks group (47·0 [range −341·0 to 72·5]) and the placebo group was significant (p=0·0216). 25 of 42 (60%) patients in the intervention group versus nine of 14 (64%) receiving placebo had an adverse event. Four of 42 (10%) patients in the intravenous immunoglobulin group versus four of 14 (29%) receiving placebo had a serious adverse event, including one stroke in the intervention group. Intravenous immunoglobulin may have an acceptable safety profile. Our results did not accord with those from previous studies. Longer trials with greater power are needed to assess the cognitive and functional effects of intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Octapharma AG.

Intravenous fluids are recommended for the treatment of patients who are in septic shock, but higher fluid volumes have been associated with harm in patients who are in the intensive care unit (ICU). In this international, randomized trial, we assigned patients with septic shock in the ICU who had received at least 1 liter of intravenous fluid to receive restricted intravenous fluid or standard intravenous fluid therapy; patients were included if the onset of shock had been within 12 hours before screening. The primary outcome was death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. We enrolled 1554 patients; 770 were assigned to the restrictive-fluid group and 784 to the standard-fluid group. Primary outcome data were available for 1545 patients (99.4%). In the ICU, the restrictive-fluid group received a median of 1798 ml of intravenous fluid (interquartile range, 500 to 4366); the standard-fluid group received a median of 3811 ml (interquartile range, 1861 to 6762). At 90 days, death had occurred in 323 of 764 patients (42.3%) in the restrictive-fluid group, as compared with 329 of 781 patients (42.1%) in the standard-fluid group (adjusted absolute difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.7 to 4.9; P = 0.96). In the ICU, serious adverse events occurred at least once in 221 of 751 patients (29.4%) in the restrictive-fluid group and in 238 of 772 patients (30.8%) in the standard-fluid group (adjusted absolute difference, -1.7 percentage points; 99% CI, -7.7 to 4.3). At 90 days after randomization, the numbers of days alive without life support and days alive and out of the hospital were similar in the two groups. Among adult patients with septic shock in the ICU, intravenous fluid restriction did not result in fewer deaths at 90 days than standard intravenous fluid therapy. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and others; CLASSIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03668236.).

Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) is the leading cause of death from infection worldwide 1 . The only available vaccine, BCG (Bacillus Calmette–Guérin), is given intradermally and has variable efficacy against pulmonary tuberculosis, the major cause of mortality and disease transmission 1 , 2 . Here we show that intravenous administration of BCG profoundly alters the protective outcome of Mtb challenge in non-human primates ( Macaca mulatta ). Compared with intradermal or aerosol delivery, intravenous immunization induced substantially more antigen-responsive CD4 and CD8 T cell responses in blood, spleen, bronchoalveolar lavage and lung lymph nodes. Moreover, intravenous immunization induced a high frequency of antigen-responsive T cells across all lung parenchymal tissues. Six months after BCG vaccination, macaques were challenged with virulent Mtb. Notably, nine out of ten macaques that received intravenous BCG vaccination were highly protected, with six macaques showing no detectable levels of infection, as determined by positron emission tomography–computed tomography imaging, mycobacterial growth, pathology and granuloma formation. The finding that intravenous BCG prevents or substantially limits Mtb infection in highly susceptible rhesus macaques has important implications for vaccine delivery and clinical development, and provides a model for defining immune correlates and mechanisms of vaccine-elicited protection against tuberculosis. The delivery route and dose of the BCG vaccine profoundly alters the protective outcome after Mycobacterium tuberculosis challenge in non-human primates.