MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Assessment of Safety and Efficacy of a New Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IGIV3I 10% Grifols) In Subjects with Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia

2010· article· en· W2559200630 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Khojasteh, Giraldo Kato, Nehal S. Parikh, Tammuella Singleton, Cameron K. Tebbi, Caroline Cromwell, Chieh‐Lin Fu, Craig M. Kessler, Jeffrey Letzer, Bruce Ritchie, Charles L. Sexauer, Kapil Saxena, Surendra Sirpal, Marcela Torres, Svetlana Loriya, Lidia Kovaleva, Virgilio Sandoval, Miguel Á. Sanz, Antonio Julià, María Angeles Rodríguez Montañés, Jordi Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical endpointAdverse effectInternal medicineBleeding diathesisImmune thrombocytopeniaClinical trialPlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 4669 Two similarly designed prospective, uncontrolled, open-label clinical trials were planned to assess the safety and efficacy of a new intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), IGIV3I 10% Grifols, in subjects with chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in the USA, Canada and Europe (Spain, Russia and the United Kingdom). Subjects were candidates to be enrolled if they had a diagnosis of chronic ITP and a baseline platelet count ≤ 20 × 109/l. Eligible subjects received treatment with IGIV3I 10% Grifols 1g/kg for 2 consecutive days or 0.4 g/kg for 5 consecutive days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the response rate, defined as the proportion of subjects reaching or exceeding the threshold value of 50 × 109/l on or before day 8 (American study) or on day 30 (European study) where day 1 is the day of the first infusion. Secondary efficacy endpoints were the time to response, defined as the number of days elapsed from day 1 to achievement of the threshold value; duration of response, defined as the number of consecutive days with a platelet count known to be ≥50 × 109/l; the maximum (peak) platelet count and regression of haemorrhagic diathesis for those subjects presenting with bleeding signs at baseline. Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs), physical examinations, vital signs and clinical laboratory parameters monitoring. A total of 27 subjects (18 adults and 9 pediatrics) have been enrolled, i.e. administered with at least one infusion of the product at any dose, in the study. Twenty-four (24) subjects (89%) were considered responders. This proportion was higher in pediatric subjects (9/9, 100%) than in adult subjects (15/18, 83%). The mean time to response was 1.6 days (Standard Deviation (SD) 0.9); the mean duration of response was 14.0 days (SD 12.1) and the mean maximum platelet count was 263 × 109/l (SD 195.6). Twenty-three (23) subjects (all the pediatric subjects 9/9 and 14/18 adults) presented with some sign of bleeding at baseline. All subjects (23/23, 100%) experienced an improvement in the haemorrhagic diathesis, regardless of some of them being considered non-responders according to the platelet count criterion. A total of 92 AEs potentially related to study drug were reported. The most common of these were headache (25 events), nausea (8 events), pyrexia (7 events) and chills (6 events). Only 1 AE was reported as definitely related to study drug, an event of palmar erythema. Two serious AEs (SAE) potentially related to the study drug were reported in 2 subjects. One of them was an unexpected laboratory alteration which consisted in leukopenia and decreased hemoglobin and advised to maintain the subject hospitalized for further observation during the weekend. The reaction was transient, without complications or other clinical symptoms and total recovery of the normal laboratory values. The second SAE was an event of thrombosis in the right humeral vein, in a patient with a number of predisposing medical conditions. At the time of discharge the patient's overall condition was satisfactory. Analysis of AEs, clinical laboratory values, physical assessments and vital signs did not indicate any safety concerns for subjects receiving the study drug and are in line with those expected for the ITP population treated with IVIG. Both primary and secondary efficacy endpoints show a good response to the product in terms of rapid elevation of platelet counts to an hemostatic level in line with what is expected for an IVIG product. Moreover, the improvement of the baseline bleeding diathesis even in patients considered as non-responders according to the platelet count criterion is highly suggestive of the clinical efficacy of the product. Overall, these results indicate that treatment with the new IGIV3I 10% Grifols is safe and efficacious for rapidly increasing platelet counts in chronic ITP subjects and improving their bleeding diathesis. Disclosures: Khojasteh: Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Kato:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Parikh:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Singleton:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Tebbi:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Cromwell:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Fu:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Kessler:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Letzer:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Ritchie:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Sexauer:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Saxena:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Sirpal:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Torres:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Loriya:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Kovaleva:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Sandoval:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Sanz:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Julià:Grifols S.A.: Research Funding. Montañés:Grifols S.A.: Employment. Navarro:Grifols S.A.: Employment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments→French-language works237,207→