Original research: Second IVIg course in Guillain-Barré syndrome with poor prognosis: the non-randomised ISID study

  • IGOS Consortium
  • , Christine Verboon
  • , Bianca van den Berg
  • , David R Cornblath
  • , Esmee Venema
  • , Kenneth C Gorson
  • , Michael P Lunn
  • , Hester Lingsma
  • , Peter Van den Bergh
  • , Thomas Harbo
  • , Kathleen Bateman
  • , Yann Pereon
  • , Søren H Sindrup
  • , Susumu Kusunoki
  • , James Miller
  • , Zhahirul Islam
  • , Hans-Peter Hartung
  • , Govindsinh Chavada
  • , Bart C Jacobs
  • , Richard A C Hughes
  • Pieter A van Doorn*, Krista Kuitwaard
*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

52 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare disease course in patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) with a poor prognosis who were treated with one or with two intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) courses.

METHODS: From the International GBS Outcome Study, we selected patients whose modified Erasmus GBS Outcome Score at week 1 predicted a poor prognosis. We compared those treated with one IVIg course to those treated with two IVIg courses. The primary endpoint, the GBS disability scale at 4 weeks, was assessed with multivariable ordinal regression.

RESULTS: Of 237 eligible patients, 199 patients received a single IVIg course. Twenty patients received an 'early' second IVIg course (1-2 weeks after start of the first IVIg course) and 18 patients a 'late' second IVIg course (2-4 weeks after start of IVIg). At baseline and 1 week, those receiving two IVIg courses were more disabled than those receiving one course. Compared with the one course group, the adjusted OR for a better GBS disability score at 4 weeks was 0.70 (95%CI 0.16 to 3.04) for the early group and 0.66 (95%CI 0.18 to 2.50) for the late group. The secondary endpoints were not in favour of a second IVIg course.

CONCLUSIONS: This observational study did not show better outcomes after a second IVIg course in GBS with poor prognosis. The study was limited by small numbers and baseline imbalances. Lack of improvement was likely an incentive to start a second IVIg course. A prospective randomised trial is needed to evaluate whether a second IVIg course improves outcome in GBS.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)113-121
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
Volume91
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2020

Bibliographical note

Funding:
This study is mainly funded by Grifols. Other sponsors of IGOS are GBSCIDP Foundation International, GAIN Charity, Erasmus University Medical Centre,
Glasgow University, CSL Behring and Annexon.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Research programs

  • EMC MM-02-72-02
  • EMC MM-04-44-02
  • EMC NIHES-02-65-01

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Original research: Second IVIg course in Guillain-Barré syndrome with poor prognosis: the non-randomised ISID study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this