Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is commonly encountered in clinical practice. In 1996 the American Society of Hematology published a landmark guidance paper designed to assist clinicians in the management of this disorder. Since 1996 there have been numerous advances in the management of both adult and pediatric ITP. These changes mandated an update in the guidelines. This guideline uses a rigorous, evidence-based approach to the location, interpretation, and presentation of the available evidence. We have endeavored to identify, abstract, and present all available methodologically rigorous data informing the treatment of ITP. We provide evidence-based treatment recommendations using the GRADE system in those areas in which such evidence exists. We do not provide evidence in those areas in which evidence is lacking, or is of lower quality-interested readers are referred to a number of recent, consensus-based recommendations for expert opinion in these clinical areas. Our review identified the need for additional studies in many key areas of the therapy of ITP such as comparative studies of "front-line" therapy for ITP, the management of serious bleeding in patients with ITP, and studies that will provide guidance about which therapy should be used as salvage therapy for patients after failure of a first-line intervention. (Blood. 2011;117(16):4190-4207)

Background: Despite an increase in the number of therapies available to treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), there are minimal data from randomized trials to assist physicians with the management of patients. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the management of ITP. Methods: In 2015, ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 8 adult clinical experts, 5 pediatric clinical experts, 2 methodologists with expertise in ITP, and 2 patient representatives. The panel was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel reviewed the ASH 2011 guideline recommendations and prioritized questions. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including evidence-to-decision frameworks, to appraise evidence (up to May 2017) and formulate recommendations. Results: The panel agreed on 21 recommendations covering management of ITP in adults and children with newly diagnosed, persistent, and chronic disease refractory to first-line therapy who have non–life-threatening bleeding. Management approaches included: observation, corticosteroids, IV immunoglobulin, anti-D immunoglobulin, rituximab, splenectomy, and thrombopoietin receptor agonists. Conclusions: There was a lack of evidence to support strong recommendations for various management approaches. In general, strategies that avoided medication side effects were favored. A large focus was placed on shared decision-making, especially with regard to second-line therapy. Future research should apply standard corticosteroid-dosing regimens, report patient-reported outcomes, and include cost-analysis evaluations.

Rituximab resulted in an overall platelet count response in 62.5% of adults with ITP. However, this finding derives from uncontrolled studies that also reported significant toxicities, including death in 2.9% of cases. These data suggest that providers should avoid indiscriminate use of rituximab and that randomized, controlled trials of rituximab for ITP are urgently needed.

Anticoagulant prophylaxis is effective in preventing symptomatic venous thromboembolism during anticoagulant prophylaxis in at-risk hospitalized medical patients. Additional research is needed to determine the risk for venous thromboembolism in these patients after prophylaxis has been stopped.