Skip to main content
. 2024 Feb 20;25:18. doi: 10.1186/s12865-024-00608-0

Table 3.

SCIg dosing of the vial and PFS cohorts overall, and stratified by SCIg administration method (pump and manual push).

Dosing Vial cohort (A) PFS cohort (B) p values
Summary n Summary n A vs. B
All respondents
SCIg dose (g/week) (median [IQR]) 12 [9, 16] 63 10 [8, 12] 110 0.02
SCIg dose per bodyweight (g/week/kg) (median [IQR]) 0.15 [0.11, 0.19] 56 0.13 [0.10, 0.17] 100 0.06
Pump subgroup
SCIg dose (g/week) (median [IQR]) 12 [10, 14] 37 10 [8, 16] 37 0.30
SCIg dose per bodyweight (g/week/kg) (median [IQR]) 0.15 [0.12, 0.19] 32 0.15 [0.11, 0.20] 34 0.66
Manual push subgroup
SCIg dose (g/week) (median [IQR]) 10 [8, 16] 26 10 [8, 12] 73 0.18
SCIg dose per bodyweight (g/week/kg) (median [IQR]) 0.14 [0.11, 0.30] 24 0.12 [0.10, 0.16] 66 0.14

Data were compared using the Mann-Whitney test due to the non-normality (skewness) of the distributions. Significant p-values are highlighted in bold. g grams, IQR interquartile range, kg kilogram, PFS pre-filled syringes, SCIg subcutaneous immunoglobulin