2020
DOI: 10.1002/rth2.12423
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Second‐line treatments and outcomes for immune thrombocytopenia: A retrospective study with electronic health records

Abstract: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Splenectomy, rituximab and thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO‐RAs) have the most robust evidence in terms of efficacy and safety and hence it is recommended that these three options be discussed with patients as suitable second line treatments (GRADE 1C) 33 (Box 2). Some patients are reluctant to undergo splenectomy if there is a non‐surgical alternative 34,35 .…”
Section: Second Line Treatmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Splenectomy, rituximab and thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO‐RAs) have the most robust evidence in terms of efficacy and safety and hence it is recommended that these three options be discussed with patients as suitable second line treatments (GRADE 1C) 33 (Box 2). Some patients are reluctant to undergo splenectomy if there is a non‐surgical alternative 34,35 .…”
Section: Second Line Treatmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These findings align with observations in primary ITP, which show that approximately one-third of patients on eltrombopag are ultimately able to sustain a durable platelet response off all treatment. [20][21][22].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Splenectomy, rituximab, and TPO-RAs have not been directly compared in randomized trials [ 26 ]. However, the reported initial response rates are higher for splenectomy than for rituximab (60%–80% versus 55%–65%), and the responses with splenectomy are more durable, often lasting for many years or even indefinitely for splenectomy versus 1–2 years for rituximab [ 28 , 41 ]. There are also significant differences in the short- and long-term risks of splenectomy versus rituximab [ 41 43 ].…”
Section: Treatment Options For Primary and Secondary Immune Thrombocy...mentioning
confidence: 99%