Table 2.
IVIg withdrawal group | IVIg continuation group | Treatment comparison | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | Baseline | End point | Mean changea | n | Baseline | End point | Mean changea | Difference in mean change scores | 95% CI | |
MRC sum score (median, range) | 29 | 58 (38–60) | 58 (41–60) | 0b (−10 to −3) | 31 | 60 (49−60) | 59 (42−60) | 0b (−7 to −2) | 0c | −1 to 0d |
Grip strength (mean ± SD) | 29 | 85.3 kPa (34.4) | 73.5 kPa (31.2) | −11.8 kPa (14.2) | 31 | 79.3 kPa (29.2) | 75.8 kPa (28.9) | −3.5 kPa (17.8) | −8.3 | −16.8 to 0.2 |
INCAT-SS (mean ± SD) | 29 | 5.2 (4.6) | 5.6 (4.2) | 0.4 (2.4) | 31 | 3.8 (3.7) | 3.5 (3.6) | −0.4 (2.3) | 0.8 | −0.4 to 2.0 |
PI-NRS (mean ± SD) | 28 | 1.6 (1.9) | 2.4 (2.5) | 0.8 (2.4) | 29 | 1.8 (2.4) | 2.3 (2.5) | 0.5 (1.6) | 0.2 | −0.9 to 1.3 |
FSS score (mean ± SD) | 27 | 35.0 (10.1) | 35.9 (12.1) | 0.9 (6.5) | 29 | 31.9 (12.3) | 32.9 (12.4) | 1.0 (10.8) | −0.1 | −6.3 to 4.0 |
ALDS (mean ± SD) | 27 | 83.2 (10.3) | 80.6 (12.5) | −2.6 (7.4) | 30 | 87.4 (6.0) | 86.7 (11.7) | −0.7 (5.0) | 1.9 | −1.5 to 5.3 |
SF-36 (mean ± SD) | 27 | 29 | ||||||||
Physical component | 42.1 (9.9) | 37.8 (11.2) | −4.4 (9.4) | 45.2 (8.5) | 41.2 (10.5) | −4.0 (8.9) | −0.4 | −5.3 to 4.5 | ||
Mental component | 50.9 (10.3) | 53.1 (7.9) | 2.1 (9.4) | 49.7 (11.8) | 47.9 (12.4) | −1.8 (13.9) | 3.9 | −2.4 to 10.4 | ||
PGIC scale, n (%) | 27 | 29 | ||||||||
Same or better than prior to study | NA | 10 (37%) | NA | NA | 17 (59%) | NA | NA | −44 to 4 | ||
Worse than prior to the study | NA | 17 (63%) | NA | NA | 12 (41%) | NA | NA |
ALDS = AMC Linear Disability Score; FSS = Fatigue Severity Scale; INCAT-SS = INCAT Sensory Sum Score; PI-NRS = Pain Intensity Numeric Rating Scale; SF 36 = Short Form 36.
Reported mean changes and differences in mean changes may slightly differ from apparent differences due to rounding.
Median change scores on the MRC.
The within-group median change score was calculated as the 50th percentile of all individual differences.
Between-group difference on the MRC expressed in median difference in change scores; point estimate and 95% CI were analysed using the Hodges–Lehmann approach.