Rituximab maintenance for relapsed refractory thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rituximab, an anti-CD20 chimeric monoclonal antibody, has been used successfully to treat patients with relapsed or refractory thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP); however, the optimal dose and frequency and the role of rituximab maintenance remain uncertain. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We describe a 45-year-old woman with chronic relapsing immune thrombocytopenia who responded to rituximab retreatment administered in four doses over the course of 12 months. Previously, she had received four doses of rituximab and sustained a remission for 19 months. During her latest TTP relapse, multiple treatments were administered including rituximab retreatment. After the first dose (375 mg/m2), she developed serum sickness requiring further doses to be deferred. Three subsequent doses were administered at 4-month intervals over the course of 12 months. ADAMTS13 activity was measured by von Willebrand factor (VWF) digestion. ADAMTS13 inhibition was measured by a modification of the VWF digestion assay and anti-ADAMTS13 antibodies were measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, American Diagnostica). RESULTS: Clinical and laboratory remission were achieved after one dose of rituximab, with normalization of ADAMTS13 activity and disappearance of ADAMTS13 inhibitor. Three subsequent doses of rituximab were given without incident and the patient remained in remission after 3.5 years of follow-up (2.5 years since her last dose of rituximab). CONCLUSION: Maintenance dosing of rituximab should be considered in some patients with relapsing TTP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".