ABSTRACT
Introduction: Cases of de novo immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), including a fatality following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in a previously healthy recipient, led to studying its impact in pre-existing ITP. Published reports are limited but suggest that most patients with ITP tolerate the COVID-19 vaccines well without frequent ITP exacerbations (Kuter, BJH, 2021). Data regarding risk factors for exacerbation and relationship of response to first dose to that of second dose are limited. Methods: Data for patients with pre-existing ITP were obtained via 3 sources. First, via a ten-center retrospective study of adults with ITP who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine between December 2020 and March 2021 and had a post-vaccination platelet count (n=117);9 centers were in the United States. Eighty-nine percent of patients received mRNA-based vaccines. The second and third sources of data were surveys distributed by the Platelet Disorder Support Association (PDSA) and the United Kingdom ITP Support Association. A 'stable platelet count' was defined as a post-vaccination platelet count within 20% of the pre-vaccination level. ITP exacerbation was defined as any one or more of: platelet decrease ≥ 50% compared to pre-vaccination baseline, platelet decrease by >20% compared to prevaccination baseline with platelet nadir < 30x10 9/L, receipt of rescue therapy for ITP. Continuous variables were described as mean ±SD or median [interquartile range];categorical variables were described as n (%). Relative risks and 95% confidence interval were calculated to estimate strength of association. Results: Among 117 patients with pre-existing ITP from 10 centers who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, mean age was 63±17 years, 62% were female, with median 12 [4-23] years since diagnosis of ITP;patients had received a median of 3 [2-4] prior medical treatments. Sixtynine patients were on ITP treatment at the time of vaccination (Table 1). There was an almost even distribution of platelet count response following each vaccine dose. In 109 patients with data for dose 1, platelet counts increased in 32 (29%), were stable in 43 (39%), and decreased in 34 (31%);in 70 patients following dose 2, platelet counts increased in 24 (34%), were stable in 25 (36%), and decreased in 21 (30%) (Figure 1). Nineteen (17%) patients experienced an ITP exacerbation following the first dose and 14 (20%) of 70 after a second dose. In total, fifteen patients received and responded to rescue treatments (n = 6 after dose 1, n = 8 after dose 2, n = 1 after both doses). Of 7 patients who received rescue treatment after dose 1, 5 received dose 2 and only 1/5 received rescue treatment again. Rescue consisted of increased dose of ongoing medication, steroids, IVIG, and rituximab. Splenectomized persons and those who received 5 or more prior lines of medical therapy were at highest risk of ITP exacerbation. Only 1 of 47 patients who had neither undergone splenectomy nor received 5 or more lines of therapy developed ITP exacerbation after dose 1. There were 14 patients offtreatment at the time of dose 1 and 7 patients at time of dose 2;1 patient in each group developed ITP exacerbation with both these having had normal counts prior to vaccination and having undergone splenectomy. In 43 patients whose platelet counts were stable or increased after dose 1 and received dose 2, only 6 (14%) had platelet decreases to <50 x10 9/L after dose 2. Age, gender, vaccine type, and concurrent autoimmune disease did not impact post-vaccine platelet counts. In surveys of 57 PDSA and 43 U.K. ITP patients, similar rates of platelet change were seen (33% of participants reported decreased platelet count in both surveys) and prior splenectomy was significantly associated with worsened thrombocytopenia in each. Conclusions: Thrombocytopenia may worsen in pre-existing ITP post-SARS-CoV2-vaccination but when ITP exacerbation occurred, it responded well to rescue treatment. No serious bleeding events were noted. Rescue treatment was needed in 13% of patients. Proactive vaccination surveillance of patien s with known ITP, especially those post-splenectomy and with more refractory disease, is indicated. These findings should encourage patients with ITP to not only be vaccinated, but to receive the second dose when applicable to ensure optimal immunization. Rituximab interferes with vaccination response and ideally would be held until a minimum of 2 weeks after completion of vaccination.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Our previous qualitative studies of immune-mediated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) survivors revealed that patients did not communicate to their hematologists about residual cognitive and fatigue issues. A way to overcome this communication barrier is implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in routine care. Integration of PROs into the clinical care of other diseases has resulted in improved patient-provider communication, symptom management, quality of life and overall patient satisfaction. However, decisions about the mode of administration are challenging. Although 92% of the United States population has access to the internet, studies have shown minorities prefer alternative modes of administration. Given that iTTP disproportionately affects Black women, understanding patient preference is critical for integrating PRO instruments into routine care. The primary study goal was to determine the preferred mode of administration of PRO instruments in iTTP. Furthermore, many individuals use the internet as a source of medical information/advice. A study of iTTP literacy reported that only 34% of survivors correctly identified disease relapse risk factors suggesting a critical knowledge gap. A secondary goal was to describe iTTP survivors' behaviors regarding using the internet for medical information or support. Methods: We utilized a cross-sectional study design. iTTP survivors were recruited from August 2019 until present. Eligibility included: 1) age >18 years, 2) documented ADAMTS13 deficiency (< 10% activity) at diagnosis or during a relapse and 3) > 1-year clinical remission. Multi-center recruitment of survivors included: Oklahoma University, Ohio State University, University of Minnesota, Johns Hopkins University, University of Rochester, University of Pennsylvania, University of Alabama at Birmingham, University of Utah and the University of Vermont. Following informed consent, survivors were administered the PROMIS ® cognitive function ability, anxiety and fatigue instruments via their preferred mode (online, telephone, or self-administered). Typical internet usage, behaviors regarding searching for health information online and demographics were also obtained. Results: To date, 94 survivors have completed the study (83% female;54% White;34% Black;median age 49 years [range 26-85 years]). A majority (54%) preferred completing PROMIS ® surveys online vs. self-administered or telephone administered. However, among Black survivors, only 38% preferred online administration and among survivors aged ≥65 years only 22% preferred online administration. Interestingly, there was an overall shift in a preference toward online administration following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (45% (21/47) preferred online pre vs 66% (31/47) preferred online post). Ninety-one percent (86/94) of survivors reported at least occasional internet use vs 8 (9%) reported none. Similarly, 82% (70/85) had searched the internet for health/medical information for themselves in the past year. Also 62% (53/86) of the survivors selected ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ to the statement that the internet helps them determine if symptoms are important enough to see a doctor. Likewise, 62% used the internet to interpret doctor's recommendations. Additionally, 47% (40/86) ‘strongly agree/agree’ the internet helped determine if they would take a medication/seek alternative treatment. Moreover, 64% (55/86) agreed the internet was a good way to find others experiencing similar health problems. However, when asked about behaviors over the past year, only 42% (36/85) used online social networking sites like Facebook to look for health information or find others with iTTP and only 36% (31/85) had actually participated in online iTTP support groups. Conclusions: Overall iTTP survivors preferred online PRO administration;however, Black and older survivors preferred other methods. Recognizing these preferences is a vital step toward integrating PROs into routine care. Furthermore, iTTP survivors are us ng the internet as a source of medical support and information. Therefore, it is critical to not only educate iTTP survivors about credible online resources but also to create additional content. Also, future studies are needed to further explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on online health behaviors. Disclosures: Terrell: Sanofi: Consultancy;Takeda: Consultancy. Journeycake: HEMA Biologics: Honoraria;LFB: Honoraria. Mazepa: Answering TTP Foundation: Research Funding;Sanofi Aventis: Other. Cuker: Spark Therapeutics: Research Funding;Sanofi: Research Funding;Pfizer: Research Funding;Takeda: Research Funding;Novo Nordisk: Research Funding;Novartis: Research Funding;Bayer: Research Funding;Alexion: Research Funding;UpToDate: Patents & Royalties;Synergy: Consultancy. Chaturvedi: Dova: Other: Advisory board member;UCB: Other: Advisory board participation;Argenx: Other: Advisory board member;Alexion: Other: Advisory board member;Sanofi Genzyme: Other: Advisory board member. Lim: Hema Biologics: Honoraria;Sanofi Genzyme: Honoraria;Dova Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Gangaraju: Alexion: Consultancy;Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy. Cataland: Alexion: Consultancy, Research Funding;Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy;Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding;Takeda: Consultancy.