Digoxin Immune Fab therapy in the management of digitalis intoxication: safety and efficacy results of an observational surveillance study
AR Hickey,
TL Wenger,
VP Carpenter,
HH Tilson,
MA Hlatky,
CD Furberg,
CH Kirkpatrick,
HC Strauss,
and
TW Smith
Medical Division, Burroughs Wellcome Co., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709.
An observational surveillance study was conducted to monitor the safety and effectiveness of treatment with Digoxin Immune Fab (Ovine) (Digibind) in patients with digitalis intoxication. Before April 1986, a relatively limited number of patients received treatment with digoxin-specific Fab fragments through a multicenter clinical trial. Beginning with commercial availability in July 1986, this study sought additional, voluntarily reported clinical data pertaining to treatment through a 3 week follow-up. The study included 717 adults who received Digoxin Immune Fab (Ovine). Most patients were greater than or equal to 70 years old and developed toxicity during maintenance dosing with digoxin. Fifty percent of patients were reported to have a complete response to treatment, 24% a partial response and 12% no response. The response for 14% of patients was not reported or reported as uncertain. Six patients (0.8%, 95% confidence interval 0.3% to 1.8%) had an allergic reaction to digoxin-specific antibody fragments. Three of the six had a history of allergy to antibiotic drugs. Twenty patients (2.8%, 95% confidence interval 1.7% to 4.3%) developed recrudescent toxicity. Risk of recrudescent toxicity increased sixfold when less than 50% of the estimated dose of antibody was administered. A total of 215 patients experienced posttreatment adverse events. The events for 163 patients (76%) were judged to result from manifestations of underlying disease and thus considered unrelated to Fab treatment. Digoxin-specific antibody fragments were generally well tolerated and clinically effective in patients judged by treating physicians to have potentially life-threatening digitalis intoxication.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
J. M. Marraffa, V. Cohen, and M. A. Howland
Antidotes for toxicological emergencies: A practical review
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm.,
February 1, 2012;
69(3):
199 - 212.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. L. Hopoate-Sitake, C. D. Adair, L. A. Mason, C. Torres, J. Kipikasa, and S. W. Graves
Digibind Reverses Inhibition of Cellular Rb+ Uptake Caused by Endogenous Sodium Pump Inhibitors Present in Serum and Placenta of Women with Preeclampsia
Reproductive Sciences,
February 1, 2011;
18(2):
190 - 199.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. L. Vanden Hoek, L. J. Morrison, M. Shuster, M. Donnino, E. Sinz, E. J. Lavonas, F. M. Jeejeebhoy, and A. Gabrielli
Part 12: Cardiac Arrest in Special Situations: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care
Circulation,
November 2, 2010;
122(18_suppl_3):
S829 - S861.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. J. Morrison, C. D. Deakin, P. T. Morley, C. W. Callaway, R. E. Kerber, S. L. Kronick, E. J. Lavonas, M. S. Link, R. W. Neumar, C. W. Otto, et al.
Part 8: Advanced Life Support: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations
Circulation,
October 19, 2010;
122(16_suppl_2):
S345 - S421.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. H. Schaeffer, S. L. Mlynarchek, C. F. Stanford, J. Delgado, C. P. Holstege, D. Olsen, and G. M. Bogdan
Treatment of Chronically Digoxin-Poisoned Patients With a Newer Digoxin Immune Fab--A Retrospective Study
J Am Osteopath Assoc,
October 1, 2010;
110(10):
587 - 592.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Eyer, W. Steimer, C. Muller, and T. Zilker
Free and Total Digoxin in Serum During Treatment of Acute Digoxin Poisoning With Fab Fragments: Case Study
Am. J. Crit. Care.,
July 1, 2010;
19(4):
391 - 387.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Sharma, M. Guy, A. Rudenski, E. Lamerton, and P.A. Kalra
The limitations of routine total digoxin immunoassay in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease
QJM,
October 1, 2009;
102(10):
747 - 750.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Kirrane, R. Olmedo, L. Nelson, M. Mercurio-Zappala, M. Howland, and R. Hoffman
Inconsistent approach to the treatment of chronic digoxin toxicity in the United States
Human and Experimental Toxicology,
May 1, 2009;
28(5):
285 - 292.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. P. Betten, R. B. Vohra, M. D. Cook, M. J. Matteucci, and R. F. Clark
Antidote Use in the Critically Ill Poisoned Patient
J Intensive Care Med,
September 1, 2006;
21(5):
255 - 277.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. N. Juurlink, M. A. McGuigan, T. W. Paton, and D. A. Redelmeier
Availability of antidotes at acute care hospitals in Ontario
Can. Med. Assoc. J.,
July 10, 2001;
165(1):
27 - 30.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. J. DiDomenico, S. M. Walton, C. A. Sanoski, and J. L. Bauman
Analysis of the Use of Digoxin Immune Fab for the Treatment of Non-Life-Threatening Digoxin Toxicity
Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics,
January 1, 2000;
5(2):
77 - 85.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. J. Ball Jr., R. Kasturi, P. Dey, M. Tabet, S. O'Donnell, D. Hudson, and D. Fishwild
Isolation and Characterization of Human Monoclonal Antibodies to Digoxin
J. Immunol.,
August 15, 1999;
163(4):
2291 - 2298.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. W. Proksch, W. B. Gentry, and S. M. Owens
Pharmacokinetic Mechanisms for Obtaining High Renal Coelimination of Phencyclidine and a Monoclonal Antiphencyclidine Antigen-Binding Fragment of Immunoglobulin G in the Rat
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
November 1, 1998;
287(2):
616 - 624.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. S. Hardin, W. D. Wessinger, J. W. Proksch, and S. M. Owens
Pharmacodynamics of a Monoclonal Antiphencyclidine Fab with Broad Selectivity for Phencyclidine-Like Drugs1
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
June 1, 1998;
285(3):
1113 - 1122.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Riviere, V. Choumet, B. Saliou, M. Debray, and C. Bon
Absorption and Elimination of Viper Venom after Antivenom Administration
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
May 1, 1998;
285(2):
490 - 495.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Bismuth, S. W Borron, F. J Baud, P. Taboulet, and J.-M. Scherrmann
Immunotoxicotherapy: Successes, disappointments and hopes
Human and Experimental Toxicology,
October 1, 1997;
16(10):
602 - 608.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Riviere, V. Choumet, F. Audebert, A. Sabouraud, M. Debray, J.-M. Scherrmann, and C. Bon
Effect of Antivenom on Venom Pharmacokinetics in Experimentally Envenomed Rabbits: Toward an Optimization of Antivenom Therapy
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
April 1, 1997;
281(1):
1 - 8.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. L. Wofford, A. R. Hickey, W. H. Ettinger, and C. D. Furberg
Lack of Age-Related Differences in the Clinical Presentation of Digoxin Toxicity
Arch Intern Med,
November 1, 1992;
152(11):
2261 - 2264.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yuman Fong, L. L. Moldawer, and S. F. Lowry
Review: Experimental and Clinical Applications of Molecular Cell Biology in Nutrition and Metabolism
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr,
September 1, 1992;
16(5):
477 - 486.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMMUNE THERAPY FOR DIGOXIN TOXICITY IS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE
Journal Watch (General),
March 8, 1991;
1991(308):
6 - 6.
[Full Text]
|
|
|
|
