Diagnosis and management of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) remain largely dependent on clinical expertise and observations more than on evidence derived from clinical trials of high scientific quality. One major obstacle to the implementation of such studies and in producing reliable meta-analyses of existing data is a lack of consensus on standardized critical definitions, outcome criteria, and terminology. Moreover, the demand for comparative clinical trials has dramatically increased since the introduction of new classes of therapeutic agents, such as thrombopoietin receptor agonists, and innovative treatment modalities, such as anti-CD 20 antibodies. To overcome the present heterogeneity, an International Working Group of recognized expert clinicians convened a 2-day structured meeting (the Vicenza Consensus Conference) to define standard terminology and definitions for primary ITP and its different phases and criteria for the grading of severity, and clinically meaningful outcomes and response.These consensus criteria and definitions could be used by investigational clinical trials or cohort studies. Adoption of these recommendations would serve to improve communication among investigators, to enhance comparability among clinical trials, to facilitate meta-analyses and development of therapeutic guidelines, and to provide a standardized framework for regulatory agencies. (Blood.

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.

Over the last decade, there have been numerous developments and changes in treatment practices for the management of patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). This article is an update of the International Consensus Report published in 2010. A critical review was performed to identify all relevant articles published between 2009 and 2018. An expert panel screened, reviewed, and graded the studies and formulated the updated consensus recommendations based on the new data. The final document provides consensus recommendations on the diagnosis and management of ITP in adults, during pregnancy, and in children, as well as quality-of-life considerations.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with immune dysregulation and hyperinflammation, including elevated interleukin-6 levels. The use of tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, has resulted in better outcomes in patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in case reports and retrospective observational cohort studies. Data are needed from randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Methods In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in a 2:1 ratio receive a single intravenous infusion of tocilizumab (at a dose of 8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. Approximately one quarter of the participants received a second dose of tocilizumab or placebo 8 to 24 hours after the first dose. The primary outcome was clinical status at day 28 on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 (discharged or ready for discharge) to 7 (death) in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all the patients who had received at least one dose of tocilizumab or placebo. Results Of the 452 patients who underwent randomization, 438 (294 in the tocilizumab group and 144 in the placebo group) were included in the primary and secondary analyses. The median value for clinical status on the ordinal scale at day 28 was 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 1.0) in the tocilizumab group and 2.0 (non-ICU hospitalization without supplemental oxygen) (95% CI, 1.0 to 4.0) in the placebo group (between-group difference, −1.0; 95% CI, −2.5 to 0; P=0.31 by the van Elteren test). In the safety population, serious adverse events occurred in 103 of 295 patients (34.9%) in the tocilizumab group and in 55 of 143 patients (38.5%) in the placebo group. Mortality at day 28 was 19.7% in the tocilizumab group and 19.4% in the placebo group (weighted difference, 0.3 percentage points (95% CI, –7.6 to 8.2; nominal P=0.94). Conclusions In this randomized trial involving hospitalized patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia, the use of tocilizumab did not result in significantly better clinical status or lower mortality than placebo at 28 days. (Funded by F. Hoffmann–La Roche and the Department of Health and Human Services; COVACTA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04320615 .)

The WHO Rapid Evidence Appraisal for COVID-19 Therapies (REACT) Working Group IMPORTANCE Clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IL-6 antagonists in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have variously reported benefit, no effect, and harm.OBJECTIVE To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes.DATA SOURCES Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts.STUDY SELECTION Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISIn this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I 2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days.RESULTS A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P < .001) for tocilizumab and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.86-1.36; P = .52) for sarilumab. The summary ORs for the association with mortality compared with usual care or placebo in those receiving corticosteroids were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.87) for tocilizumab and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.61-1.38) for sarilumab. The ORs for the association with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death, compared with usual care or placebo, were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) for all IL-6 antagonists, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.82) for tocilizumab, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.74-1.34) for sarilumab. Secondary infections by 28 days occurred in 21.9% of patients treated with IL-6 antagonists vs 17.6% of patients treated with usual care or placebo (OR accounting for trial sample sizes, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.16). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this prospective meta-analysis of clinical trials of patients hosp...

Because of its B-cell depleting effect, rituximab has entered clinical trials in several autoimmune conditions. This study assesses the efficacy and safety of rituximab in 57 adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). All patients had platelet counts <30 x 10(9)/l, all had received two or more previous ITP treatments and 31 had undergone splenectomy. Patients received rituximab 375 mg/m(2) weekly for 4 weeks. Thirty-one patients (54%) responded, achieving a platelet count >50 x 10(9)/l: 18 achieved a complete response (CR: platelet count >150 x 10(9)/l) and 13 a partial response (PR: platelet count 50-150 x 10(9)/l). Twenty-nine responses occurred within 8 weeks of the first infusion. Sixteen of 18 CR patients (28% overall), including eight who had failed splenectomy, continued in CR after a median of 72.5 weeks; 15 of 16 are >1 year from the first infusion. Only two of 13 maintained a PR. Thirty-three patients experienced grade 1-2 adverse events and one a grade 3 event, but they all completed treatment. Circulating B cells fell to <0.03 x 10(9)/l. No changes in immunoglobulin levels or infectious complications were seen. In summary, rituximab was well tolerated with no immediate complications and induced a lasting, substantial response in 32% of adults with chronic ITP

Spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk) signaling is central to phagocytosis‐based, antibody‐mediated platelet destruction in adults with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Fostamatinib, an oral Syk inhibitor, produced sustained on‐treatment responses in a phase 2 ITP study. In two parallel, phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trials (FIT1 and FIT2), patients with persistent/chronic ITP were randomized 2:1 to fostamatinib (n = 101) or placebo (n = 49) at 100 mg BID for 24 weeks with a dose increase in nonresponders to 150 mg BID after 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was stable response (platelets ≥50 000/μL at ≥4 of 6 biweekly visits, weeks 14‐24, without rescue therapy). Baseline median platelet count was 16 000/μL; median duration of ITP was 8.5 years. Stable responses occurred in 18% of patients on fostamatinib vs. 2% on placebo (P = .0003). Overall responses (defined retrospectively as ≥1 platelet count ≥50 000/μL within the first 12 weeks on treatment) occurred in 43% of patients on fostamatinib vs. 14% on placebo (P = .0006). Median time to response was 15 days (on 100 mg bid), and 83% responded within 8 weeks. The most common adverse events were diarrhea (31% on fostamatinib vs. 15% on placebo), hypertension (28% vs. 13%), nausea (19% vs. 8%), dizziness (11% vs. 8%), and ALT increase (11% vs. 0%). Most events were mild or moderate and resolved spontaneously or with medical management (antihypertensive, anti‐motility agents). Fostamatinib produced clinically‐meaningful responses in ITP patients including those who failed splenectomy, thrombopoietic agents, and/or rituximab. Fostamatinib is a novel ITP treatment option that targets an important mechanism of ITP pathogenesis.

The two thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RA), eltrombopag and romiplostim, were licensed in the US for treatment of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in 2008 and, since then, their use has progressively increased around the world; they are currently used in more than 100 countries. The six largest randomized controlled trials conducted in ITP have used one of these two agents. All studies have demonstrated a platelet response rate between 50-90%, depending on the criteria used, with good safety and tolerability. TPO-RA were shown to be effective in reducing bleeding and the need for concomitant or rescue medication. Many other investigations of their mechanism of effect, prospective and retrospective trials, and studies focusing on toxicity have been performed widening our knowledge of these two agents. Initial concerns on issues such as myelofibrosis have not been confirmed. Only a small number of patients develop moderate-severe reticulin fibrosis and/or collagen fibrosis; however, these are usually reversed after discontinuation of TPO-RA. Studies indicate, however, that TPO-RA may increase the risk of venous thromboembolism. Both TPO-RA are currently approved in patients with chronic ITP aged >1-year who are refractory to at least one other treatment. Eltrombopag has acquired two additional indications: severe aplastic anemia refractory to first-line treatment and hepatitis C patients undergoing treatment with interferon-ribavirin. Despite these wide-ranging studies, important questions still need to be answered. This summary review on TPO-RA will summarize what is known regarding efficacy in ITP, evaluate safety concerns in more depth, and focus on the questions that remain.