Toxic Shock SyndromePhase 2IVIGNCT02219165
Efficacy of IntraVenous ImmunoGlobulins in Toxic Shock Syndromes: a Paediatric Pilot Study
A Phase 2 study testing Intravenous human immunoglobulin and Albumin in people with Toxic Shock Syndrome, run by Hospices Civils de Lyon at 1 site in France.
Trial summary
Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes produce many virulence factors. Some of them are responsible for severe infections in humans. Superantigen toxins synthesized by S. aureus or by S. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 1 month to 17 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Toxic Shock Syndrome
- What is being tested?
- Intravenous human immunoglobulin and Albumin
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 siteFrance
- Study dates
- 8 Jan 2015to 19 Apr 2019
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 1 month to 17 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- 1 month <Age < 18 years
- Admitted to PICU, with a strong suspicion of staphylococcal or streptococcal infection (at least one of the following criteria):
- Diagnostic of TSS according to CDC (Centre for Disease Control) criteria or Group A streptococcus necrotizing fasciitis (positive streptest) or Varicella with infected lesions and erythroderma or positive streptest or Erythroderma in menstrual period or Pleuropneumopathy with erythroderma or positive streptest in pleural fluid or Erythroderma and biological fluid positive to type A streptococcus ou staphylococcus (articular, pericardial, bronchopulmonar, pharynx…)
- with shock resistant to fluid resuscitation defined as the presence, despite 40 ml/kg of fluid volume in 1 hour, of: hypotension (<5th percentile) or systolic arterial pressure < 2 SD for age or need for vasoactive drugs in order to maintain AP at a normal level (dopamine > 5µg/kg/min or dobutamine, adrenaline, noradrenaline, milrinone whatever the dose) or 2 signs of hypo perfusion among: metabolic acidosis with a base deficit > 5 lactate x 2 laboratory normal value diuresis < 0,5 ml/kg/h capillary refill time > 5 sec difference skin/central temperature > 3°C
- Consent to participation
Who cannot join
- First signs of shock appeared more than 24h ago
- Known hypersensitivity to one of the components (study treatment or placebo)
- Hypersensitivity to homologous immunoglobulins, specifically in very rare cases of Ig A deficit, when the patient has anti-IgA antibodies
- Known hyperprolinemia
- Immunodeficiency (acquired or not)
- Immunosuppressive drugs
- No health cover
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Efficacy of IntraVenous ImmunoGlobulins (IVIG) in Toxic Shock Syndromes (Staphylococcal and Streptococcal): a Paediatric Pilot Study.
Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes produce many virulence factors. Some of them are responsible for severe infections in humans. Superantigen toxins synthesized by S. aureus or by S. pyogenes, are responsible for toxic shock syndromes (TSS) which lethality can attain 25% in children with validated criteria of septic shock.
Previous studies, performed in vitro and in vivo in animals, have shown that Intravenous immunoglobulins [IVIG] contain antibodies [Ab] against these toxins and, when used at high concentration, IVIG are able to neutralize their toxicity. However, in all these studies, IVIG administration has been preventive and there is no reliable data demonstrating their therapeutic efficacy in vitro or in vivo in humans or in animals, once the disease is present.
Read more
The efficacy of IVIG is established in other pathologies for which the role of the superantigens [superAg] is suspected, like Kawasaki disease in children. The mechanism of action, although not perfectly known, involves at the same time a direct effect on superAg (Ag-Ab complex) and indirect effects like the neutralisation of superAg within the network of anti-idiotype Ab or the neutralisation of the T-cells receptors. Staphylococcal and streptococcal toxic shocks imply bacterial exotoxins that are superAg. It seems thus consistent to imagine a same type of treatment with IVIG. However, there is currently no evidence of the efficacy of IVIG in this indication. One of the explanations relies on the lack of statistical power of previous adult studies, which principal objective was to show a reduction of the mortality. Taking into account the low prevalence of TSS, it has been hard to recruit enough patients to have the required statistical power. Moreover, some works have been extracted from larger studies on septic shock and the definitions of the TSS were nor always very reliable. Lastly, if the investigators consider the definition of the TSS as mentioned by the " Centre for Disease Control " [CDC], for which any hypotension, even a simple orthostatic hypotension, serves the diagnosis of TSS as long as the other symptoms are present, it is obvious that many patients are likely to be recruited in a study although it is highly probable that their health will get better with a " standard " treatment. The definition of a " real " TSS can be refined, keeping the CDC criteria, but changing the hypotension criterion in a more accurate criterion as described in the " surviving sepsis campaign ", internationally accepted and based on norms adapted to the age for paediatric forms.
IVIG therapy is very expensive and TSS is not recognized as indication of IVIG according to their marketing authorization. The feasibility of a randomized controlled study with this treatment needs to be assessed as it would be hazardous to conduct a large prospective RCT without having first assessed this feasibility in terms of recruitment rates, consent rates or compliance rates. Inclusion, randomisation and collect of inform consent in the context of severe shock are challenging and require evaluation of feasibility. The sample size calculation of the large study on mortality required estimations of the event in the specific population of children with criteria of septic shock. Surrogates markers of outcome need to be better defined. For example it would be useful to determine the evolution of organ dysfunctions with and without IVIG treatment in this population.
Various organ failure scores, used upon admission and later on, have been validated in adults and in children. The absence of improvement of the Paediatric logistic organ dysfunction (Pelod) score over time is a good indicator of mortality in Paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). It could be used as surrogate marker to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG.
- Conditions
- Toxic Shock Syndrome
- Being tested
- Intravenous human immunoglobulin, Albumin
- Keywords
- Paediatrics, Toxic Shock Syndrome, Intravenous human immunoglobulin, feasibility
- Medical subject headings
- Shock, Septic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Intravenous human immunoglobulinDrug
Single administration of IVIG 2 g/kg within the 12 hours following PICU admission (or following the manifestation of the first signs of shock). The bottles of IVIG used will contain 10 g of proteins in 100 ml of solution. Thus, to reach a concentration of 2 g/kg, will be administered 1 bottle per 5 kg of body weight (with a maximum of 14 bottles for 70 kg patients and over).
AlbuminDrug
Single administration of albumin 4% within the 12 hours following PICU admission (or following the manifestation of the first signs of shock). The solution will be given at the same volume as IVIG (that is: 1 bottle / 5 kg of body weight).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| IVIG 2 g/kg | Experimental | Intravenous human immunoglobulin Day 1: As soon as there is suspicion of TSS, randomisation will be performed in order for the study treatment to be administered within the 12h following PICU admission (or following the manifestation of the first signs of shock). Concurrently, the TSS antibiotherapy following Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommendations is given Receives: Drug: Intravenous human immunoglobulin |
| Albumin 4% | Placebo comparator | Same study scheduling as the first arm. Only the study treatment given is different (albumin instead of IGIV) Receives: Drug: Albumin |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Recruitment rate
Measured in overall and in the different centers (eligibility, recruitment, refusal, non-respect of the inclusion/non-inclusion criteria)
Measured: up to 12 months
Compliance with the protocol design
timing of randomization, respect of randomization and the interventions, respect of the blinding)
Measured: up to 15 months
Practical feasibility
time required for the Case Report Forms completion, length of the interventions, missing data, difficulties met
Measured: up to 15 months
Financial feasibility
budget per patient, personnel required
Measured: up to 15 months
Secondary outcomes (7)
Evolution of organ failure score (PELOD 2)
Measured: Day 1, day 2 and day 5
Mortality
Measured: D 60
Measure of the Cumulative vasopressor index (CVI) .
Measured: (a) before treatment (day 1) and after treatment (day 2) and (b) over the 24h following drug administration
Adverse events (AE) and serious AE
Measured: Day 1, day 2, day 3, day 4, day 5, PICU discharge, day 60
Mechanism of superantigens (ancillary biological study: immune response: HLA-DR, Treg pool)
Measured: Day 1, day 3/5, day 60
In vivo mechanism of IVIG (ancillary biological study: Vbêta, Ig dosage)
Measured: Day 1, day 3/5, day 60
measure of lactate clearance
Measured: (a) before treatment (day 1) and after treatment (day 2) and (b) over the 24h following drug administration
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Aug 2014 (estimated)
- Study start8 Jan 2015
- Primary completion19 Apr 2019
- Study completion19 Apr 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Toxic Shock SyndromeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Hospices Civils de LyonThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospices Civils de Lyon
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Etienne Javouhey, Principal investigator, Service de réanimation pédiatrique, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant, Groupement Hospitalier Est, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69677 BRON, FRANCE
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02219165
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2013.841
- Acronym
- IVIG
- Status last verified
- Aug 2025
- First submitted
- 6 Aug 2014
- Last updated
- 4 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Portefaix A, Dhelens C, Recher M, Cour-Andlauer F, Naudin J, Mortamet G, Joram N, Tissieres P, Ginhoux T, Kassai B, Boutitie F, Maucort-Boulch D, Javouhey E. High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin versus albumin 4% in paediatric toxic shock syndrome: a randomised controlled feasibility study. Arch Dis Child. 2024 Aug 16;109(9):717-723. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2022-325274.
PubMed 38360044
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy of IntraVenous ImmunoGlobulins (IVIG) in Toxic Shock Syndromes (Staphylococcal and Streptococcal): a Paediatric Pilot Study.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02219165
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IVIG / 2013.841
- Conditions
- Toxic Shock Syndrome
- Keywords
- Paediatrics, Toxic Shock Syndrome, Intravenous human immunoglobulin, feasibility
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospices Civils de LyonUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 8 Jan 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 19 Apr 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 19 Apr 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Aug 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes produce many virulence factors. Some of them are responsible for severe infections in humans. Superantigen toxins synthesized by S. aureus or by S. pyogenes, are responsible for toxic shock syndromes (TSS) which lethality can attain 25% in children with validated criteria of septic shock.
Previous studies, performed in vitro and in vivo in animals, have shown that Intravenous immunoglobulins [IVIG] contain antibodies [Ab] against these toxins and, when used at high concentration, IVIG are able to neutralize their toxicity. However, in all these studies, IVIG administration has been preventive and there is no reliable data demonstrating their therapeutic efficacy in vitro or in vivo in humans or in animals, once the disease is present.
The efficacy of IVIG is established in other pathologies for which the role of the superantigens [superAg] is suspected, like Kawasaki disease in children. The mechanism of action, although not perfectly known, involves at the same time a direct effect on superAg (Ag-Ab complex) and indirect effects like the neutralisation of superAg within the network of anti-idiotype Ab or the neutralisation of the T-cells receptors. Staphylococcal and streptococcal toxic shocks imply bacterial exotoxins that are superAg. It seems thus consistent to imagine a same type of treatment with IVIG. However, there is currently no evidence of the efficacy of IVIG in this indication. One of the explanations relies on the lack of statistical power of previous adult studies, which principal objective was to show a reduction of the mortality. Taking into account the low prevalence of TSS, it has been hard to recruit enough patients to have the required statistical power. Moreover, some works have been extracted from larger studies on septic shock and the definitions of the TSS were nor always very reliable. Lastly, if the investigators consider the definition of the TSS as mentioned by the " Centre for Disease Control " [CDC], for which any hypotension, even a simple orthostatic hypotension, serves the diagnosis of TSS as long as the other symptoms are present, it is obvious that many patients are likely to be recruited in a study although it is highly probable that their health will get better with a " standard " treatment. The definition of a " real " TSS can be refined, keeping the CDC criteria, but changing the hypotension criterion in a more accurate criterion as described in the " surviving sepsis campaign ", internationally accepted and based on norms adapted to the age for paediatric forms.
IVIG therapy is very expensive and TSS is not recognized as indication of IVIG according to their marketing authorization. The feasibility of a randomized controlled study with this treatment needs to be assessed as it would be hazardous to conduct a large prospective RCT without having first assessed this feasibility in terms of recruitment rates, consent rates or compliance rates. Inclusion, randomisation and collect of inform consent in the context of severe shock are challenging and require evaluation of feasibility. The sample size calculation of the large study on mortality required estimations of the event in the specific population of children with criteria of septic shock. Surrogates markers of outcome need to be better defined. For example it would be useful to determine the evolution of organ dysfunctions with and without IVIG treatment in this population.
Various organ failure scores, used upon admission and later on, have been validated in adults and in children. The absence of improvement of the Paediatric logistic organ dysfunction (Pelod) score over time is a good indicator of mortality in Paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). It could be used as surrogate marker to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| IVIG 2 g/kg | Experimental | Drug: Intravenous human immunoglobulinIntravenous human immunoglobulin Day 1: As soon as there is suspicion of TSS, randomisation will be performed in order for the study treatment to be administered within the 12h following PICU admission (or following the manifestation of the first signs of shock). Concurrently, the TSS antibiotherapy following Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommendations is given |
| Albumin 4% | Placebo comparator | Drug: AlbuminSame study scheduling as the first arm. Only the study treatment given is different (albumin instead of IGIV) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 1 month to 17 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 1 month <Age < 18 years
- Admitted to PICU, with a strong suspicion of staphylococcal or streptococcal infection (at least one of the following criteria):
- Diagnostic of TSS according to CDC (Centre for Disease Control) criteria or Group A streptococcus necrotizing fasciitis (positive streptest) or Varicella with infected lesions and erythroderma or positive streptest or Erythroderma in menstrual period or Pleuropneumopathy with erythroderma or positive streptest in pleural fluid or Erythroderma and biological fluid positive to type A streptococcus ou staphylococcus (articular, pericardial, bronchopulmonar, pharynx…)
- with shock resistant to fluid resuscitation defined as the presence, despite 40 ml/kg of fluid volume in 1 hour, of: hypotension (<5th percentile) or systolic arterial pressure < 2 SD for age or need for vasoactive drugs in order to maintain AP at a normal level (dopamine > 5µg/kg/min or dobutamine, adrenaline, noradrenaline, milrinone whatever the dose) or 2 signs of hypo perfusion among: metabolic acidosis with a base deficit > 5 lactate x 2 laboratory normal value diuresis < 0,5 ml/kg/h capillary refill time > 5 sec difference skin/central temperature > 3°C
- Consent to participation
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- First signs of shock appeared more than 24h ago
- Known hypersensitivity to one of the components (study treatment or placebo)
- Hypersensitivity to homologous immunoglobulins, specifically in very rare cases of Ig A deficit, when the patient has anti-IgA antibodies
- Known hyperprolinemia
- Immunodeficiency (acquired or not)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Intravenous human immunoglobulinSingle administration of IVIG 2 g/kg within the 12 hours following PICU admission (or following the manifestation of the first signs of shock). The bottles of IVIG used will contain 10 g of proteins in 100 ml of solution. Thus, to reach a concentration of 2 g/kg, will be administered 1 bottle per 5 kg of body weight (with a maximum of 14 bottles for 70 kg patients and over). | Drug | IVIG 2 g/kg |
| AlbuminSingle administration of albumin 4% within the 12 hours following PICU admission (or following the manifestation of the first signs of shock). The solution will be given at the same volume as IVIG (that is: 1 bottle / 5 kg of body weight). | Drug | Albumin 4% |
Primary outcome
Recruitment rate
Time frame: up to 12 months
Measured in overall and in the different centers (eligibility, recruitment, refusal, non-respect of the inclusion/non-inclusion criteria)
Compliance with the protocol design
Time frame: up to 15 months
timing of randomization, respect of randomization and the interventions, respect of the blinding)
Practical feasibility
Time frame: up to 15 months
time required for the Case Report Forms completion, length of the interventions, missing data, difficulties met
Financial feasibility
Time frame: up to 15 months
budget per patient, personnel required
7 secondary outcomes
Evolution of organ failure score (PELOD 2)
Time frame: Day 1, day 2 and day 5
Mortality
Time frame: D 60
Measure of the Cumulative vasopressor index (CVI) .
Time frame: (a) before treatment (day 1) and after treatment (day 2) and (b) over the 24h following drug administration
Adverse events (AE) and serious AE
Time frame: Day 1, day 2, day 3, day 4, day 5, PICU discharge, day 60
Mechanism of superantigens (ancillary biological study: immune response: HLA-DR, Treg pool)
Time frame: Day 1, day 3/5, day 60
In vivo mechanism of IVIG (ancillary biological study: Vbêta, Ig dosage)
Time frame: Day 1, day 3/5, day 60
measure of lactate clearance
Time frame: (a) before treatment (day 1) and after treatment (day 2) and (b) over the 24h following drug administration
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Sep 2025.
- Results publication: PubMed 38360044Portefaix A, Dhelens C, Recher M, Cour-Andlauer F, Naudin J, Mortamet G, Joram N, Tissieres P, Ginhoux T, Kassai B, Boutitie F, Maucort-Boulch D, Javouhey E. High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin versus albumin 4% in paediatric toxic shock syndrome: a randomised controlled feasibility study. Arch Dis Child. 2024 Aug 16;109(9):717-723. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2022-325274.
Related trials for Toxic Shock Syndrome
Enrolling by invitation
Continuous Temperature Monitoring (CTM) for Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS), an Immune-Related Adverse Event
Cytokine Release Syndrome, Neoplasms
RecruitingPhase 2
Outpatient Administration of Teclistamab or Talquetamab for Multiple Myeloma
Multiple Myeloma
RecruitingObservational study
Impact of Internal Menstrual Protections on Immunity and Vaginal Microbiota
Sexual Transmitted Disease, Vaginosis, Bacterial
RecruitingPhase 1
Adjunctive Methylene Blue for Immunotherapy-related CRS and ICANS: Phase I Study
Cytokine Release Syndrome, ICANS
RecruitingObservational study
Prodromes of Menstrual Staphylococcal Toxic Shock
Toxic Shock Syndrome Staphylococcal
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Etienne Javouhey principal investigator
Service de réanimation pédiatrique, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant, Groupement Hospitalier Est, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69677 BRON, FRANCE
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing Intravenous human immunoglobulin and Albumin in people with Toxic Shock Syndrome, run by Hospices Civils de Lyon at 1 site in France.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in France. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Recruitment rate (time frame: up to 12 months). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02219165, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Sep 2025.