Peri-Operative Eltrombopag or Immune Globulin for Patients with Immune Thrombocytopaenia (The Bridging ITP Trial): Methods and Rationale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The Bridging ITP Trial is an open-label randomized trial designed to compare the oral thrombopoietin receptor agonist eltrombopag and intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) for patients with immune thrombocytopaenia (ITP) who require an increase in platelet count before elective surgery. Here, we report the study methods and rationale. Methods We designed a multi-centre, non-inferiority randomized trial comparing daily oral eltrombopag starting 3 weeks pre-operatively, and IVIG administered 1 week pre-operatively for patients with ITP requiring a platelet count increase prior to surgery. Starting dose of eltrombopag is 50 mg daily with a weekly pre-operative dose titration schedule, and treatment is continued for 1 week after surgical haemostasis is achieved. IVIG is administered at a dose of 1 to 2 g/kg 1 week pre-operatively with the allowance for a second dose within 1 week after surgical haemostasis. The objective of the study is to demonstrate non-inferiority of eltrombopag for the primary endpoint of achieving the pre-operative platelet count threshold (50 × 109/L for minor surgery; or 100 × 109/L for major surgery) and sustaining platelet count levels above the threshold for 1 week after surgical haemostasis is achieved, without the use of rescue treatment. Secondary endpoints include thrombosis, bleeding and patient satisfaction. Conclusion The Bridging ITP Trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of eltrombopag as an alternative to IVIG in the peri-operative setting for patients with ITP. The protocol was designed to provide a management strategy that can be applied in clinical practice. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01621204.
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 | 0.022 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".