IVMP+IVIG raises platelet counts faster than IVIG alone: results of a randomized, blinded trial in childhood ITP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) rarely suffer from life-threatening bleeds (eg, intracranial hemorrhage). In such settings, the combination of IV methylprednisolone (IVMP) with IV immune globulin (IVIG) is used to rapidly increase platelet counts (PCs). However, there are no controlled data to support using combination therapy over IVIG alone. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the rapidity of the PC increment and associated adverse events (AEs) between 2 regimens: A (IV placebo) and B (IVMP 30 mg/kg), both given over 1 hour, followed in both cases by IVIG (Gamunex 10%) 1 g/kg over 2-3 hours in children 1-17 years old with primary ITP and PCs <20 × 109/L in whom physicians had decided to treat with IVIG. Thirty-two children (ages: median, 8 years; range, 1.2-17.5 years) with a mean baseline PC of 9.2 × 109/L participated. Eighteen were randomized to regimen A and 14 to regimen B. By 8 hours after initiating therapy, 55% of all children had a PC ≥20 × 109/L (no group difference). By 24 hours, mean PCs were 76.9 × 109/L (B) vs 55 × 109/L (A) (P = .06; P = .035 when adjusted for intergroup differences in patient ages). No patient experienced severe bleeding/unexpected severe AEs. There were statistically fewer IVIG-related headaches in the group receiving combination therapy (P = .046). Our findings show a rapid response to IVIG with/without steroids and provide evidence to support the use of IVMP+IVIG in life-threatening situations. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00376077.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".