Controversies in IgG replacement therapy in patients with antibody deficiency diseases - 30/03/13
Abstract |
This Current perspectives article will review and highlight the importance of accurate diagnosis of patients who have failed to produce specific antibodies to naturally encountered foreign proteins or polysaccharides or after vaccination and the appropriate institution of immunoglobulin replacement therapy. The field of primary immunodeficiency disease (PIDD) has expanded remarkably since the early descriptions 6 decades ago. With greater recognition and advanced cellular and molecular diagnostic technology, new entities and single-gene defects in patients with PIDD are rapidly being defined. This, combined with treatment advances and newborn screening for severe combined immunodeficiency, has resulted in improved outcomes and survival and even permanent cures. Awareness of PIDD has also increased, but the guidelines for recognition remain to be validated. The zeal for registering and enrolling patients has potentially created a large body of “patients” treated with immunoglobulin replacement unnecessarily. The complexity, diversity, and availability of laboratory testing have brought awareness of PIDD to the forefront, but because of an absence of standardization of certain assays, concerns about the correct diagnosis and appropriate treatment have increased. We hope to refocus the discussion on identifying clear laboratory and clinical guidelines for the establishment of an accurate diagnosis of antibody deficiency, its rationale, and, where indicated, institution of safe treatment.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : Antibody deficiency, immunoglobulin replacement, common variable immunodeficiency, primary immunodeficiency, pneumococcal antibody concentration, specific antibody deficiency
Abbreviations used : CVID, PIDD
Supported in part by AI grant 082976 and the David Fund, Texas Children’s Hospital, and the Jeffrey Modell Foundation. |
|
Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: E. W. Gelfand has consultant arrangements with Biotest. H. D. Ochs serves on advisory boards for CSL Behring, Baxter, and Grifols and has received a grant from CSL Behring. W. T. Shearer declares that he has no relevant conflicts of interest. |
Vol 131 - N° 4
P. 1001-1005 - avril 2013 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?