MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904896757 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-109791

Predictors of Remission in Adults with Immune Thrombocytopenia Treated with Romiplostim

2018· article· en· W2904896757 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian C. Newland, James B. Bussel, Robert Bird, Donald M. Arnold, Craig M. Kessler, Jiřı́ Mayer, Mónica Tejeda Romero, Ann Janssens, Kejia Wang, Melissa Eisen

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomiplostimMedicineThrombopoietinEltrombopagInternal medicineImmune thrombocytopeniaPlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In adults with ITP, thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RA) are often assumed to be lifelong therapy. However, some patients achieve treatment-free remission (TFR) by maintaining hemostatic platelet counts after discontinuing TPO-RA, despite not replacing them with other ITP medications. Predictors of safely discontinuing romiplostim have varied across studies. In an analysis of 8 romiplostim studies, 27 patients achieved TFR; more remitters than nonremitters had ITP for <12 months but there were no unequivocal predictors of TFR (Bussel et. al. Hematology 2016;21:257). In a phase 2 study with forced romiplostim taper after 12 months, 24 (32%) of 75 patients achieved TFR; a higher platelet count in the first 2 months was associated with TFR (P<.05; Newland et. al. Br J Haematol 2016;172:262). Differences between remitters and nonremitters for baseline patient characteristics and time to first platelet response were not statistically significant. Analysis of romiplostim treatment at 2 centers found that 12 (28%) of 43 patients achieved TFR; splenectomized patients were more likely than nonsplenectomized patients to achieve TFR (P=.05; Marshall et. al. Haematologica 2016;101:e476). Aim: This multivariate analysis integrated data across multiple romiplostim studies in adults with ITP to explore predictors of TFR. Methods: Data were pooled for 911 romiplostim-treated patients in 13 ITP studies conducted from 2002 to 2014. All patients failed first-line treatments before study enrollment. Secondary thrombocytopenia patients were excluded. Romiplostim treatment was discontinued per dosing rules; 1 study included a forced taper after 1 year of romiplostim. Typically, the romiplostim dose was reduced for platelet counts >200×109/L and withheld, then reduced, for platelet counts >400×109/L. Concomitant ITP medication could be reduced for platelet counts >50×109/L. TFR was defined as a ≥6-month treatment-free period with platelet counts consistently ≥50×109/L. Univariate analysis with logistic regression examined potential predictors of TFR, including age, sex, ITP duration, prior splenectomy, platelet count (baseline and first 4 weeks), bleeding in the first 6 months, and baseline concurrent therapy. Multivariate analysis with logistic regression evaluated significant predictors from the univariate analysis. Results: TFR was achieved by 61 ITP study patients who received romiplostim. For remitters vs nonremitters, median baseline age was 53 years in both cohorts; 57% vs 61% were female; and 93% vs 88% were Caucasian (Table 1). Median ITP duration at study baseline was 0.5 years among remitters and 3.5 years among nonremitters. Prior splenectomy occurred in 21% of remitters and 36% of nonremitters. The number of prior ITP treatments was ≤3 for 74% of remitters and 39% of nonremitters. Baseline platelet count was <30×109/L for 80% of remitters and 78% of nonremitters. Median platelet counts on treatment during the romiplostim studies were often higher among remitters than nonremitters, despite increasing median doses of romiplostim over time for nonremitters (Figure). During the first 6 months on study, 30% of remitters and 43% of nonremitters had a bleeding event. Prior splenectomy and bleeding in the first 6 study months were significant predictors of lower odds of TFR in the univariate model but not in the multivariate model. In the multivariate model, shorter ITP duration predicted significantly higher odds of TFR, either <3 months (newly diagnosed) vs >12 months (chronic; odds ratio [OR], 4.275; P<.0001) or 3-12 months (persistent) vs chronic (OR, 2.171; P=.0408; Table 2). One limitation of this analysis was 19 of 61 patients entering TFR were from one study of newly diagnosed and persistent patients; the protocol included a forced romiplostim taper. Number of previous treatments was not included in the multivariate analysis. Conclusions: In this integrated analysis of 911 adult ITP patients across 13 studies, shorter ITP duration at baseline (≤12 months) was an independent predictor of TFR. Neither previous splenectomy (which predicted TFR in 1 study) nor bleeding were independent predictors of TFR in this much larger analysis. In total, these results imply that earlier use of romiplostim in adults with ITP could be associated with greater likelihood of achieving TFR. Future studies should also explore biologic variables as predictors of TFR. Disclosures Newland: Amgen Inc., Angle, Dova Pharmaceuticals, Argenx, Rigel, Shionogi, Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Bussel:Uptodate: Honoraria; Protalex: Consultancy; Momenta: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prophylix: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Bird:Amgen, Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Arnold:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; UCB: Consultancy; UCB: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kessler:Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding; Biomarin: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Dimension Advisory boards: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DSMB: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sangamo: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mayer:Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Janssens:Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Ad board, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Genzyme: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Ad board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Wang:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Eisen:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207