Thrombopoietin Receptor Agonist Use in Children: Data From the Pediatric ITP Consortium of North America ICON2 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data on second-line treatment options for pediatric patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) are limited. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RA) provide a nonimmunosuppressive option for children who require an increased platelet count. PROCEDURE: We performed a multicenter retrospective study of pediatric ITP patients followed at ITP Consortium of North America (ICON) sites to characterize TPO-RA use. RESULTS: Seventy-nine children had a total of 87 treatments (28 eltrombopag, 43 romiplostim, and eight trialed on both). The majority had primary ITP (82%) and most (60.8%) had chronic ITP. However, 22% had persistent ITP and 18% had newly diagnosed ITP. During the first 3 months of treatment, 89% achieved a platelet count ≥ 50 × 10(9) /l (86% romiplostim, 81% eltrombopag, P = 0.26) at least once in the absence of rescue therapy. The average time to a response was 6.4 weeks for romiplostim and 7.0 weeks for eltrombopag (P = 0.83). Only 40% of patients demonstrated a stable response with consistent dosing over time. An intermittent response with constant dose titration was seen in 15%, and an initial response that waned to no response was seen in 13%. Significant adverse events were minimal with the exception of two patients with thrombotic events and one who developed a neutralizing antibody. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that TPO-RA agents are being used in children with ITP of varying duration and severity. The response was similar to clinical trials, but the sustainability of response varied. Future studies need to focus on the ideal timing and rationale for these medications in pediatric patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".