Trends in intravenous immunoglobulin use in New South Wales, Australia

BackgroundIntravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is a critical replacement therapy for immunodeficiencies and immunomodulatory treatment for autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Adequate supply of IVIg is a global issue, necessitating supply restrictions. In Australia, despite strict criteria for use, demand for IVIg has increased over time and exceeds domestic supply. ObjectiveFactors associated with the upward trend in overall IVIg use were examined, including in the number of unique patients, IVIg dosing and treatment frequency and variations by prescribing discipline and disease group. MethodsDe-identified data of IVIg dispensed in the largest Australian state (New South Wales) from 2007 to 2013 were provided by Australian Red Cross Lifeblood. Trends and projections were calculated using log-linear regression of unique patients, treatment episodes and grams of IVIg for overall use and use stratified by discipline and disease group. ResultsDuring the study period, 169 453 treatment episodes were recorded for 12 547 unique patients accounting for 5 827 787 g of IVIg use. Overall, IVIg use increased by 12.0% (11.5-12.6%) per year representing a 97.7% increase (91.6-104%) over the study period. The highest growth was among neurological conditions (16.0% (14.9-17.1%) per year). An increase in the number of unique patients was the primary driver of this growth, augmented by increases in the frequency and average dose per treatment. ConclusionsClinically acceptable measures to improve management of IVIg supply are needed including optimising dose, frequency and duration of treatment. Formal evaluation of IVIg versus alternatives, including cost-effectiveness and comparative efficacy, is warranted.

Automated summary

The demand for intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) in Australia is increasing, mainly due to factors such as the number of patients, dosage, and treatment frequency. Measures are needed to effectively manage the supply of IVIg, including optimizing dosage, frequency, and treatment duration, and formal evaluation should be conducted to compare cost-effectiveness and efficacy.