Efficacy of Caplacizumab in Patients with aTTP in the HERCULES Study According to Initial Immunosuppression Regimen
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP) is an acute, life-threatening thrombotic microangiopathy that requires urgent and specialized treatment. Prior to the introduction of caplacizumab, the treatment for aTTP was based on daily therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE; to replenish functional ADAMTS13 enzyme) plus immunosuppression (mainly corticosteroids and rituximab; to suppress anti-ADAMTS13 autoantibody production). TPE combined with immunosuppressive therapy improved outcomes in patients; however, episodes of aTTP are still associated with an acute mortality of up to 20% as these therapies do not have an immediate effect on the pathologic microvascular thrombosis. The primary results of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 HERCULES study showed that, in combination with TPE and corticosteroids, caplacizumab shortened the time to platelet count response and reduced the incidence of a composite outcome of TTP-related death, exacerbation, or major thromboembolic events, by inhibiting vWF-platelet interaction and, thereby, stopping the formation of microthrombi. As additional immunosuppression per local practice was permitted in HERCULES, the present analysis aimed to determine whether there was any difference in the efficacy of caplacizumab according to the initial immunosuppression regimen. Methods: Data of patients participating in HERCULES were stratified based on the type of first-line immunosuppression regimen (i.e. therapy started up to Day 3 of the treatment period) and analyzed descriptively. The main 2 groups analyzed were those receiving corticosteroids only and those receiving a combined regimen of corticosteroids and rituximab. Differences in dose or dosing frequency were not taken into consideration in this descriptive analysis. Results: Of the 145 randomized patients in the HERCULES study, 112 (77.2%) patients received only corticosteroids as first-line immunosuppressive therapy, while 24 (16.6%) patients received corticosteroids and rituximab (initiated within the first 3 days of the study). Three patients (2.1%) received another type of initial immunosuppression (cyclophosphamide + corticosteroids [n=1], hydroxychloroquine [n=1], and mycophenolate mofetil + corticosteroids [n=1]), 1 patient (0.7%) started immunosuppression later in the study (cyclophosphamide + corticosteroids), while 5 patients (3.4%) did not receive any immunosuppressive treatment during the study. Baseline characteristics between the main 2 subgroups were well balanced (Table 1). Immunosuppressive therapy intensification occurred in 38 patients (33.9%) initiated on corticosteroids alone (most often addition of rituximab [n=37], others included splenectomy [n=2], bortezomib [n=1], mycophenolate mofetil [n=1]), and in 3 patients (12.5%) initiated on corticosteroids with rituximab (bortezomib [n=1] and mycophenolate mofetil [n=3]). Caplacizumab treatment improved outcomes in patients with aTTP irrespective of the type of initial immunosuppression. Data on time to platelet count response and clinical outcomes are summarized in Table 2. Caplacizumab reduced the rate of the composite endpoint of TTP-related death, exacerbation, and major thromboembolic events during the double-blind treatment period irrespective of baseline immunosuppression regimen. Notably, in the placebo arm, exacerbations occurred in both subgroups to a similar extent, indicating that corticosteroids, with or without rituximab, are not immediately effective. Overall, recurrences (exacerbations or relapses) during the study were also reduced by caplacizumab in both subgroups (Table 2). Two placebo patients died during the treatment period in the corticosteroid only subgroup versus none in the corticosteroid plus rituximab subgroup (one other placebo patient died during the study drug treatment period while receiving another type of immunosuppression). Conclusion: Immunosuppressive therapy in aTTP aims to control the underlying autoimmune disease, but requires time to take effect; this exposes patients to thrombotic complications and death. Caplacizumab treatment prevents disease exacerbations and death, irrespective of the type of initial immunosuppression used, allowing time for immunosuppressive therapy to take effect. Disclosures Pavenski: Ablynx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding; Bioverativ: Research Funding. Knoebl:Novo-Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy; CSL-Behring: Consultancy; Shire/Takeda: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Scully:Shire: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy; Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy; Shire/Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Kremer Hovinga:Siemens: Honoraria, Other: Honoraria go to employer (Insel Gruppe AG, Department of Hematology); Shire: Consultancy, Other: Honoraria go to employer (Insel Gruppe AG, Department of Hematology), Research Funding; CSL-Behring: Honoraria, Other: Honoraria go to employer (Insel Gruppe AG, Department of Hematology); Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Honoraria go to employer (Insel Gruppe AG, Department of Hematology); Roche: Honoraria, Other: Honoraria go to employer (Insel Gruppe AG, Department of Hematology). Coppo:Shire: Consultancy; Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy. Peyvandi:Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Grifols: Honoraria; Kedrion: Honoraria; Bioverativ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octapharma: Research Funding. Cataland:Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Research Funding. Metjian:Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AblynxNV/Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding. De La Rubia:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. De Winter:Ablynx, a Sanofi company: Employment. de Passos Sousa:Sanofi: Employment. Callewaert:Sanofi (formerly employed by Ablynx, a Sanofi company): Employment.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».