Imunofan and mixed herpesvirus infections in Redkin and Lyuboshenko’s 2011 comparison
Y. V. Redkin, T. M. Lyuboshenko · 2011 · Public Health of the Far East. 2011;3(49):38–41.
Reported findings and study design
The methods list 35 patients per group but also give 29 women and 8 men in the Imunofan arm. Assignment followed order of presentation. Both groups received individualized care. The comparator pooled Thymalin, Thymogen and Tactivin. Lymphocyte markers and IFN-γ were assessed before and after treatment.
Dose, route and schedule
The paper reports 1 mL intramuscularly every three days for 10–15 injections. Its printed concentration differs from the product labeling, so the amount of active peptide per injection cannot be confirmed from this report.
Protocol source ↗ · Original methods, p. 40
| Measure | Result | Comparison, timing and statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical improvement | 73.7% versus 57.1% | Imunofan-based care versus the pooled thymic-peptide group. Denominators conflict in the paper. |
| Fewer, shorter or no recurrences | 36.8% versus 28.6% | Composite reported in Table 2. |
| Immunogram normalization | 85.7% versus 84.3% | Table 2. No formal between-group test given for these percentages. |
| Temperature normalization | 21% versus 14.3% | |
| Lower antiviral or antibacterial antibody titres | 31.6% versus 14.3% | |
| CD3 lymphocytes | 53.34 ± 1.55% to 65.8 ± 1.70% | Within the Imunofan group. · Reported p < 0.05 |
| CD4 lymphocytes | 31.36 ± 1.29% to 36.95 ± 1.40% | Within the Imunofan group. · Reported p < 0.05 |
| Spontaneous IFN-γ | 23.8 ± 2.47 to 42.13 ± 7.75 pg/mL | Within the Imunofan group. · Reported p < 0.05 |
| Stimulated IFN-γ | 1,669.7 ± 123.1 to 2,170.6 ± 89.8 pg/mL | Within the Imunofan group. · Reported p < 0.05 |
The Table 2 percentages are reproduced as published. The paper gives conflicting group sizes and no event counts, and the groups received different care. The IFN-γ and lymphocyte figures are within-group changes.
Source for these results ↗ · Reviewed 2026-11-10
For research and education. Consult a qualified clinician for medical advice.
Study limitations and source details
Study limitations
- The comparison group pooled Thymalin, Thymogen and Tactivin. The paper gives no drug-specific subgroup outcomes, so the rates cannot establish a difference versus any one preparation.
- The groups were assigned in order of presentation and differed in average age. Concurrent antimicrobial and immune-active treatment varied by clinical presentation.
- The Imunofan denominator conflicts within the methods, and Table 2 supplies percentages without event counts or a separate significance test. No systematic adverse-event results were reported.
Source access
Original issue PDF, pp. 38–41, including both tables and the methods.
Source reviewed 2026-11-10.
Source type: Original journal article
Citation and original source
Original source: Y. V. Redkin, T. M. Lyuboshenko. Imunofan and mixed herpesvirus infections in Redkin and Lyuboshenko’s 2011 comparison Public Health of the Far East. 2011;3(49):38–41. 2011.
Molekul research summary: https://molekul.io/research/redkin-imunofan-herpes-2011. Cite the original publication for its findings and this page when referring to Molekul’s summary or evidence appraisal.
Bibliography entryRelated compound profiles
Imunofan
A synthetic RDKVYR hexapeptide with cell, animal and human wound-related research. Historical Thymohexin names have conflicting sequence order.
Thymalin
Thymus-derived peptide mixture with historical Russian studies in autoimmune cytopenias and thyroiditis, alongside other treatments. It is distinct from synthetic Thymogen and Thymodepressin.
Thymogen
EW is discussed in the thymus-derived research program. Thymalin extract outcomes cannot be assigned to this defined peptide.
Tactivin
Thymus-derived polypeptide preparation studied as an immune adjunct and in animal learning models. Clinical findings include a reported infection reduction in leukemia and a neutral melanoma comparison.