MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2547384253 · doi:10.1182/blood.v126.23.7.7

A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Determine the Safety and Efficacy of Romiplostim in Children with Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP)

2015· article· en· W2547384253 sur OpenAlexaff
Michael D. Tarantino, James B. Bussel, Victor S. Blanchette, Jenny M. Despotovic, Carolyn M. Bennett, Ashok Raj, Bronwyn Williams, Donald Beam, Jaime Morales, Melissa J. Rose, Nancy Carpenter, Kun Nie, Melissa Eisen

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Établissements canadiensHospital for Sick Children
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRomiplostimMedicinePlaceboPlateletInternal medicineClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectEltrombopagThrombopoietinSurgeryImmune thrombocytopeniaGastroenterology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Approximately 20% of children diagnosed with ITP have chronic thrombocytopenia, some requiring immunosuppressive treatments. The TPO receptor agonist romiplostim could be a treatment option for symptomatic children with ITP. Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind study, children with ITP for ≥6 months were randomized to weekly romiplostim or placebo (2:1) for 24 weeks, with the dose adjusted weekly from 1-10 μg/kg to target platelet counts of 50-200×109/L. Platelet response was defined as platelet counts ≥50×109/L any week of weeks 2-25 (excluding 4 weeks after rescue medication use). The 1° endpoint, durable platelet response, was defined as ≥6 weekly platelet responses during the final 8 weeks, weeks 18-25. Overall platelet response was defined as ≥4 weekly platelet responses during weeks 2-25. Antibodies to romiplostim or TPO were assayed at baseline and weeks 12 and 25. The Kid's ITP Tool (KIT), in which higher scores reflect improved quality of life, was administered to children and their parents. Results: Patients (n = 62) had median (range) age 9.5 (3-17) years, ITP duration 2.1 (0.5-10.7) years, and baseline platelet counts 18 (1-94) × 109/L; 44% were male. Sixty-six percent of patients were Caucasian, 13% African American, 8% Asian, and 15% other. For the 1° endpoint, measured in the final 8 weeks after 16 weeks of dose titration, rates of durable platelet response were romiplostim: 52% and placebo: 10% (p < 0.002) (Table). Rates of overall platelet response were romiplostim: 71% and placebo: 20% (p = 0.0002), and rates of any platelet response were romiplostim: 81% and placebo: 55% (ad hoc p = 0.03). For romiplostim, the median (range) time to firstplatelet response was 4.5 (1-20) weeks and the median average weekly dose was 3.9 (0.9-8.1) μg/kg. Median platelet counts with romiplostim were ≥50×109/L from week 8 on (Figure). In the final 8 weeks, non-cutaneous bleeding rates were romiplostim: 33% and placebo: 47%, and rescue medication use rates were romiplostim: 24% and placebo: 30%. Over the course of the study, the rates of grade ≥3 bleeding were romiplostim: 5% and placebo: 11%; rates of any bleeding and non-cutaneous bleeding were similar for romiplostim and placebo. We also examined a composite bleeding episode endpoint, defined as clinically significant bleeding, ie, CTCAE grade ≥2, OR the use of rescue medication to prevent such bleeding. The rate for these episodes for weeks 2-25 was less with romiplostim than placebo (8.1 vs 18.4 per 100 patient-weeks, p<0.0001). No patients withdrew due to adverse events (AE). Rates of serious AEs (SAEs) were romiplostim: 23.8% (10 patients) and placebo: 5.3% (1 patient). SAEs with romiplostim consisted of 2 cases each of contusion, epistaxis, and headache, and 1 case each of petechiae, thrombocytosis, nephrotic syndrome, nausea, vomiting, bronchiolitis, fever, urinary tract infection, and seizure. These SAEs often occurred with related comorbidities. Only the headache and thrombocytosis SAEs, which occurred in the same patient, were considered treatment-related by the investigator. There were no thrombotic events, no malignancies observed, and no findings indicating bone marrow dysplasia or fibrosis in the only bone marrow biopsy performed. None of the 42 romiplostim-treated patients developed neutralizing antibodies to either romiplostim or TPO. The parent impact score of the KIT showed significant quality-of-life improvement with romiplostim (p = 0.04) in the mixed-effects repeated measures analysis using a general linear model. Conclusions: In children with symptomatic ITP of ≥6 months duration, romiplostim was effective in inducing high rates of durable and overall platelet responses. There were no new safety signals. By the final 8 weeks of the study, noncutaneous bleeding was decreased with romiplostim. Romiplostim may be a viable treatment option for children with symptomatic chronic ITP. Table. Placebo (N = 20) Romiplostim (N = 42) Durable platelet response, x/n (%), all patients 2/20 (10%) 22/42 (52%) P < 0.002 By baseline age · 1 to <6 years 1/4 (25%) 3/8 (38%) · 6 to <12 years 1/9 (11%) 10/18 (56%) · 12 to <18 years 0/7 (0%) 9/16 (56%) Overall platelet response, x/n (%), all patients 4/20 (20%) 30/42 (71%) P = 0.0002 By baseline age · 1 to <6 years 2/4 (50%) 5/8 (63%) · 6 to <12 years 1/9 (11%) 15/18 (83%) · 12 to <18 years 1/7 (14%) 10/16 (63%) Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Tarantino: Grifols: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BPL: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxter: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cangene: Research Funding; UptoDate, Inc.: Patents & Royalties: royalties; Amgen, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Romiplostim is indicated for use in adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenia who have had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. The use of romiplostim in children with ITP is investigational.. Bussel:Amgen, Cangene, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Genzyme, IgG of America, Immunomedics, Ligand, Eisai, Shionogi and Sysmex: Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; Amgen, GSK, Ligand, Shionogi, and Eisai: Other: Advisory board. Blanchette:Baxter Corporation, Bayer Healthcare, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer: Honoraria; Baxter Corporation, Bayer Healthcare: Research Funding; Baxter Corporation, Bayer Healthcare, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer; Data Safety Monitoring Board Baxter Corporation, Octapharma: Other: Advisory board; Baxter Corporation, Octapharma: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board. Morales:CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxter: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Carpenter:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Other: Stockholder. Nie:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Other: Stockholder. Eisen:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Other: Stockholder.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,018

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,298
Écart entre enseignants0,274 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207