MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389233333 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-172819

A Phase 3 Study of Eltrombopag Vs. Standard First-Line Management for Newly Diagnosed Immune Thrombocytopenia in Children: Trial in Progress Update

2023· article· en· W4389233333 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda B. Grimes, Rachael F. Grace, Melissa J. Rose, Sanjay Shah, Shipra Kaicker, Carolyn M. Bennett, Michael Briones, Taizo A. Nakano, Stephanie A. Fritch Lilla, Jeffrey D. Lebensburger, Alexis A. Thompson, Rukhmi Bhat, Rohith Jesudas, Michele P. Lambert, Shelley E. Crary, Kerry Hege, Cathy Lee‐Miller, Suvankar Majumdar, James B. Ford, Joshua J. Bies, Vandy Black, John Fort, Manpreet Kochhar, Julia MW Wong, Bogdan Dinu, Pei‐Chi Kao, Wendy B. London, Jenny M. Despotovic, Robert J. Klaassen, Ellis J. Neufeld, Cindy Neunert, Kristin A. Shimano

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEltrombopagMedicineInternal medicineThrombopoietin receptorPediatricsThrombopoietinRandomized controlled trialRomiplostimRituximabImmune thrombocytopeniaSurgeryPlateletLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) causes low platelet counts, variable bleeding symptoms, and reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Despite this, novel therapies for newly diagnosed ITP have not been introduced in over 30 years. Eltrombopag, a thrombopoietin receptor agonist (TPO-RA), was FDA approved for children with chronic ITP in 2015. The use of eltrombopag for adults with newly diagnosed ITP has been described in two small single-center trials (Tripathi et al, Int J Hematol, 2014; Gόmez-Almaguer et al, Blood, 2014), and pediatric hematologists do use TPO-RAs off-label in some cases of newly diagnosed ITP (Neunert et al, Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2016). TPO-RAs may be an efficacious and more durable first-line therapy for children with newly diagnosed ITP who require treatment. This abstract provides a 4-year interval update on the Pediatric ITP Newly diagnosed patients Eltrombopag vs Standard therapy (PINES) trial in progress. Study Design and Methods: The PINES trial, NCT03939637, is an investigator-initiated prospective, open label, randomized, multi-center trial sponsored by the ITP Consortium of North America (ICON) and funded by Novartis. The primary objective is to determine if the proportion of patients with a platelet response, defined as ≥3 of 4 platelet counts >50 x10 9/L during weeks 6-12 without rescue treatment, is significantly greater in patients with newly diagnosed ITP treated with eltrombopag compared to those treated with standard first-line therapy. Patients (n=162) from 30 ICON centers (Figure) are randomized 2:1, stratified by age and treatment status, to receive the experimental treatment, eltrombopag, or investigator's choice of 3 standard first-line therapies: prednisone, intravenous immune globulin or anti-D globulin at standardized doses. Eligible patients are ages 1 to <18 with primary ITP, within 3 months of diagnosis, with platelet count <30 x10 9/L who require pharmacologic treatment from the perspective of the treating clinician. Baseline treatment status is 1) upfront treatment, or patients within 10 days of ITP diagnosis with no prior treatment, and 2) treatment failure, or patients previously managed with observation or a first-line standard agent. Patients are ineligible if they can be observed without medication or have severe bleeding. A one-sided z-test, at alpha=0.025, will be used to compare the proportion of patients who have a platelet response between the two treatment arms. All randomized patients will be analyzed in the intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary objectives include treatment arm comparison of bleeding scores (WHO Bleeding Scale and Modified Buchanan Score), changes in HRQoL (measured by the Kids ITP Tool, Hockenberry Fatigue Scale, PROMIS, and Global Change Scale), and changes in percentage of CD4 +25 +Foxp3 + regulatory T (Treg) cells. Due to challenges related to recruitment and the logistics and safety of obtaining frequent assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic, the primary endpoint was re-defined in 2021 to what is considered a clinically equivalent definition of response, from ≥6 of 8 weekly to ≥3 of 4 biweekly platelet counts >50 x10 9/L during weeks 6-12. Baseline Characteristics: Since first site activation in 2019, 100 patients have been enrolled (Table). Subjects include 42 patients aged 1-<6 years, 34 patients aged 6-<12 years, and 24 patients aged 12-<18 years. Thirty-six patients received upfront treatment and 64 patients had treatment failure prior to enrollment. Median baseline platelet count at enrollment was 5 x10 9/L (range 1 - 28 x10 9/L). Median WHO Bleeding Scale at enrollment was 1 (range 0 - 3) and median modified Buchanan Overall Score was 3 (range 0 - 3). Baseline HRQoL surveys have been obtained for >80% of eligible subjects. Treg samples have been obtained for 95% of subjects, and 74% of subjects have consented to optional biology studies. Conclusion: Despite historical difficulty completing interventional trials in pediatric ITP and pandemic-related enrollment challenges, PINES trial enrollment is progressing successfully and will ultimately provide definitive data regarding the efficacy of eltrombopag in children with newly diagnosed ITP. There are no current data supporting the use of TPO-RAs for newly diagnosed ITP in children, or as monotherapy for newly diagnosed ITP in adults. Results from this trial therefore carry the potential to change management practices in ITP.

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)0.004
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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