MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2591861675 · doi:10.1182/blood.v114.22.3519.3519

Safety and Efficacy of Romiplostim in Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP) in the “real-life” : Result of the French Experience in 72 Adults.

2009· article· en· W2591861675 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehdi Khellaf, Philippe Quittet, Jean‐François Viallard, Magda Alexis, Stéphane Chèze, J.M. Durand, François Lefrère, Lionel Galicier, Olivier Lambotte, GÉRard Panelatti, Jean‐François Rossi, Borhane Slama, Gandhi Damaj, G Sébahoun, Emmanuel Gyan, X. Delbrel, Nathalie Dhédin, Bruno Royer, N. Schleinitz, Françoise Roudot‐Thoraval, Matthieu Mahévas, Laetitia Languille, Philippe Bierling, Marc Michel, Bertrand Godeau

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRomiplostimMedicineSplenectomyImmune thrombocytopeniaAdverse effectEltrombopagPediatricsThrombopoietinInternal medicinePlatelet

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3519 Poster Board III-456 Introduction Romiplostim is a thrombopoietic agent that has been unequivocaly demonstrated as highly effective in adult's ITP in prospective studies and has recently been licensed for adults with chronic ITP in USA, Europe, Canada, and Australia. France has been the only country where romiplostim could be given for a compassionate use outside clinical studies from January 2008. The official indication for obtaining romiplostim in this setting was: chronic ITP according to the international criteria and failure or relapse after at least one previous line of therapy regardless the status towards splenectomy. We report here the data on safety and efficacy of the first consecutive 80 ITP patients who have been registered by the French health authorities as receiving the treatment “off-label” and with at least one-year of follow up. Patients and methods The data were retrospectively reviewed using a standardized form. The protocol was approved by local ethical committee. Patients who did not fulfil official indication criteria of compassionate use were excluded (i.e. secondary-ITP). Platelet count was monitored at least monthly during the follow-up. Platelet response was defined as platelet count of 50×109/L or more and a doubling of the pre-treatment count in the absence of any rescue medication within the last 8 weeks. One-year sustained response was defined as a platelet response on at least 2 of the last 3 platelet determinations at month-10-11 and 12. Patients who received rescue medication at any time during the study could not be counted as having a one-year sustained response. Report of adverse events was captured using a standardized form. Results Among the 80 patients, 8 were actually excluded from the analysis (6 with secondary ITP and 2 have been misdiagnosed as having ITP). The analysis was then conducted on 72 patients (43 females) with a median age of 60 years (20 to 91). The median duration of ITP prior to romiplostim administration was 8.7 years (0.1 to 49) and the patients had received a median of 5 (2 to 12) treatment-lines before romiplostim including: corticosteroids (100%), rituximab (65/72, 90%) and splenectomy (39/72, 54%). Among the 33 non-splenectomized patients, 13 patients were reluctant to undergo splenectomy whereas splenectomy was considered as contra-indicated in 20 of them. At time of romiplostim first administration, median platelet count was 16×109/L (1 to 60) and 48 patients (66%) were receiving a concurrent treatment for ITP, including mainly steroids (n=29) ± immunosuppressive drugs (n=8). A platelet response was observed at least once in 76% (55/72) of the patients. On average, patients who responded at any point during the study had a platelet response during 64% of the time (range: 37 to 100%). Romiplostim was stopped in 28 % (20/72) of patients for either lack of efficacy (n=16), for intolerance (n=1) or because it was administered only transiently in preparation for surgery (n=3). Two patients had died respectively from a septic shock and from an ITP-related intracranial hemorrhage. At one-year of follow up, 52 patients were still receiving romiplostim at a median dose of 6.5 μg/kg per week. This dose remained relatively stable as after the first 12 weeks of treatment, romiplostim could be pursued at a stable dose ± 2 μg/kg in 82% of the cases. Twenty % (14/72) of patients received a rescue medication during the study and 50% (36/72) of the patients had a one-year sustained response. The percentage of one-year sustained response was similar in splenectomized and non splenectomized groups [respectively 54% (21/39) and 45% (15/33), NS)]. Among the 29 patients who responded to romiplostim and who were receiving a treatment at time of romiplostim initiation, 86 % (25/29) had discontinued this medication and a further 7% (2/29) had reduced the dose by at least 25%. Only one patient stopped romiplostim because of an adverse event (headache). The most frequent otherwise reported adverse events were: arthralgia (26%), fatigue (13%) and nausea (7%). A transient thrombocytosis > 400×109/L and > 1000×109/L has been observed in respectively 19% (14/72) and 4% (3/72) of patients. A transient stroke occurred in 2 elderly patients (age > 70 yrs). No deep vein thrombosis occurred. Myelofibrosis was not observed. Conclusion Our study confirms in “real-life” that romiplostim is definitely an effective and safe treatment for severe chronic ITP in both non-splenectomized and splenectomized adults. Disclosures: Godeau: AMGEN: Consultancy.

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)0,002
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: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,009

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

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

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 Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,258 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations1
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetPlatelet Disorders and Treatments→Travaux en français237 207→