ACVIM consensus statement on the treatment of immune thrombocytopenia in dogs and cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Management of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in dogs and cats is evolving, but there are no evidence-based guidelines to assist clinicians with treatment decisions. Likewise, the overall goals for treatment of ITP have not been established. Immunosuppressive doses of glucocorticoids are the first line treatment, but optimal treatment regimens beyond glucocorticoids remain uncertain. Additional options include secondary immunosuppressive drugs such as azathioprine, modified cyclosporine, and mycophenolate mofetil, usually selected based on clinician preference. Vincristine, human IV immunoglobulin (hIVIg), and transfusion of platelet or red blood cell-containing products are often used in more severe cases. Splenectomy and thrombopoietin receptor agonists are usually reserved for refractory cases, but when and in which patient these modalities should be employed is under debate. To develop evidence-based guidelines for individualized treatment of ITP patients, we asked 20 Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) format questions. These were addressed by 17 evidence evaluators using a literature pool of 288 articles identified by a structured search strategy. Evidence evaluators, using panel-designed templates and data extraction tools, summarized evidence and created guideline recommendations. These were integrated by treatment domain chairs and then refined by iterative Delphi survey review to reach consensus on the final guidelines. In addition, 19 non-PICO questions covering scenarios in which evidence was lacking or of low quality were answered by expert opinion using iterative Delphi surveys with panelist integration and refinement. Commentary was solicited from multiple relevant professional organizations before finalizing the consensus. The rigorous consensus process identified few comparative treatment studies, highlighting many areas of ITP treatment requiring additional studies. This statement is a companion manuscript to the ACVIM Consensus Statement on the Diagnosis of Immune Thrombocytopenia in Dogs and Cats.
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 | 0.052 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".