Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Tolerability and outcomes with rollout of tixagevimab-cilgavimab in patients with common variable immunodeficiency.
Dluzynski, Daniela; Al-Shaikhly, Taha; Paules, Catharine I; Henao, Maria Paula.
Afiliación
  • Dluzynski D; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa.
  • Al-Shaikhly T; Section of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa.
  • Paules CI; Section of Infectious Disease, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa.
  • Henao MP; Section of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob ; 3(3): 100293, 2024 Aug.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39071730
ABSTRACT

Background:

Tixagevimab-cilgavimab is a combination of 2 mAbs against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In December 2021, the Food and Drug Administration issued Emergency Use Authorization for intramuscular injection of tixagevimab-cilgavimab for prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised patients. Shortly thereafter, our clinic distributed tixagevimab-cilgavimab to patients with common variable immunodeficiency.

Objective:

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of tixagevimab-cilgavimab in a common variable immunodeficiency clinic.

Methods:

A retrospective chart review from February 1, 2022, to August 1, 2022, of 47 patients with common variable immunodeficiency who were offered tixagevimab-cilgavimab was carried out. Comparative outcomes of treatment and nontreatment groups examined the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and other non-SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Results:

Seventy percent of the patients were female; mean age was 49 years. Twenty-three patients received tixagevimab-cilgavimab, and 24 did not receive prophylaxis. In the tixagevimab-cilgavimab group, all were vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 and 22 were receiving immunoglobulin replacement. One patient was infected with SARS-CoV-2, no patients required emergency care, and 7 patients had non-SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the cohort that did not receive prophylaxis, 21 were vaccinated, and all received immunoglobulin replacement. Two patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 1 patient required emergency care due to SARS-CoV-2 disease severity, and 4 patients had a non-SARS-CoV-2 infection. None of the results showed statistical significance.

Conclusions:

Although there is evidence that tixagevimab-cilgavimab can be protective against SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised individuals, our data suggest that this benefit may be blunted in patients with common variable immunodeficiency on immunoglobulin replacement. The additional benefit of tixagevimab-cilgavimab in immunocompromised patients already receiving replacement therapy requires further exploration.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos