MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415436220 · doi:10.1001/jama.2025.18168

Eltrombopag for Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Immune Thrombocytopenia Requiring Treatment

2025· article· en· W4415436220 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin A. Shimano, Amanda B. Grimes, Shipra Kaicker, Sanjay Shah, Elizabeth Gunn, Rukhmi Bhat, Manpreet Kochhar, Jennifer Rothman, Melissa J. Rose, Michael Briones, Taizo A. Nakano, Jeffrey D. Lebensburger, Michele P. Lambert, Stephanie A. Fritch Lilla, Rohith Jesudas, Cathy Lee‐Miller, Alexis A. Thompson, Stacey Rifkin-Zenenberg, Suvankar Majumdar, Shelley E. Crary, Kerry Hege, James B. Ford, Joshua J. Bies, John Fort, Tung Wynn, Loan Hsieh, Maritza E. Ruiz, Bogdan Dinu, Julia MW Wong, Pei‐Chi Kao, Taylor Olmsted Kim, Staci D. Arnold, Carolyn M. Bennett, Jenny M. Despotovic, Robert J. Klaassen, Ellis J. Neufeld, Cindy Neunert, Wendy B. London, Rachael F. Grace

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEltrombopagImmune thrombocytopeniaRomiplostimMEDLINEImmune systemPlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Eltrombopag, a thrombopoietin receptor agonist, is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for children with chronic immune thrombocytopenia. Efficacy of eltrombopag during the newly diagnosed phase of pediatric immune thrombocytopenia is unknown. Objective: To determine if the proportion of patients with a platelet response is significantly greater in patients with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia treated with eltrombopag than in those treated with standard therapy (first-line treatments). Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, randomized clinical trial enrolled patients (aged 1-<18 years) with newly diagnosed primary immune thrombocytopenia (platelet count <30 × 109/L who required pharmacological treatment but did not have severe bleeding or need a rapid increase in platelet count) from May 7, 2019, to January 25, 2024, at 23 centers participating in the Pediatric ITP Consortium of North America. Final follow-up occurred on February 26, 2025. Interventions: Eltrombopag was administered orally based on a standard dosing schedule (n = 78) vs standard therapy (investigator choice of glucocorticoids, intravenous immunoglobulin, or anti-D immunoglobulin) (n = 40). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a sustained platelet response defined as 3 or more of 4 platelet counts greater than 50 × 109/L during weeks 6 to 12 without rescue treatment. The secondary outcomes included bleeding scores, change in health-related quality of life, and serious adverse events. Results: Of 118 pediatric patients (median age, 8 years [IQR, 4-12 years]; 49% were male), 63% experienced an initial treatment failure after observation or medical therapy. Enrollment ended after a planned interim analysis met a prespecified threshold for efficacy. Of 71 patients in the eltrombopag group, 46 (65% [95% CI, 54%-76%]) had a sustained platelet response compared with 13 of 37 patients (35% [95% CI, 20%-51%]) in the standard therapy group (between-group difference, 30% [95% CI, 11%-49%]; P = .002), which crossed the monitoring boundary for efficacy. Overall, there was no between-group difference in the number and type of adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: In pediatric patients with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia requiring pharmacological treatment, eltrombopag resulted in a higher rate of sustained platelet response compared with standard therapy. Eltrombopag may be an effective option for pediatric patients with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia with nonsevere bleeding who warrant medical intervention. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03939637.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207