4.5 Article

Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous human HBV-immunoglobulin (Zutectra®) in liver transplantation: an open, prospective, single-arm phase III study

期刊

TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL
卷 24, 期 5, 页码 441-450

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2011.01222.x

关键词

hepatitis B; hepatitis B immunoglobulin; liver transplantation; re-infection prophylaxis; subcutaneous application

资金

  1. Biotest AG, Dreieich, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Hepatitis B re-infection prophylaxis is crucial for graft and recipient survival for transplanted patients and is administered routinely after liver transplantation for hepatitis B. Aim of the current study was the investigation of efficacy, safety and feasibility of home-treatment of a novel human hepatitis B immunoglobulin BT088 (Zutectra (R)) after weekly subcutaneous application in liver-transplanted patients. A total of 23 patients (5 female, 18 male, median age 51 years) were enrolled and switched from monthly IV to weekly SC hepatitis B immunoglobulin administration. During a period of 18 weeks (optional 24 weeks) anti-HBs levels, signs of re-infection, adverse events and feasibility of self-administration were studied. After 8 weeks of training patients showing good compliance and stable antibody titres were allowed to start self-administration at home. All patients maintained a safety level of > 100 U/l anti-HBs. No failure was noted, no re-infection occurred. A total of 10 treatment-emergent events were assessed as related to study drug application (injection-site haematoma, headache, abdominal pain, fatigue and haematuria). High numbers of self-administration (287 vs. 122 by staff) demonstrated general feasibility of SC administration. Weekly subcutaneous administration of BT088 (Zutectra (R)- registered trade mark in the EU) is effective, safe and presents an easy-to-apply treatment option for combined hepatitis B virus re-infection prophylaxis in liver transplant patients (Eudra CT Number: 2005-003737-40).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据