Real-life clinical practice in Spain in the setting of new drug availability for ITP treatment. A Delphi-based Spanish expert panel consensus.

Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a common autoimmune hematological disorder. Despite this, diagnosis is still challenging due to clinical heterogeneity and the lack of a specific diagnostic test. New findings in the pathology and the availability of new drugs have led to the development of different guidelines worldwide. In the present study, the Delphi methodology has been used to get a consensus on the management of adult patients with ITP in Spain and to help in decision-making. The Delphi questionnaire has been designed by a scientific ad hoc committee and has been divided into 13 topics, with a total of 127 items, covering the maximum possible scenarios for the management of ITP. As a result of the study, a total consensus of 81% has been reached. It is concluded that this Delphi consensus provides practical recommendations on topics related to diagnosis and management of ITP patients to help doctors to improve outcomes. Some aspects remain unclear, without consensus among the experts. Thus, more advances are needed to optimize ITP management.

What is the context? Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a hematologic autoimmune disease characterized by accelerated destruction and inadequate production of platelets mediated by autoantibodies (platelet count <100 × 10⁹ /L).Despite being a common condition, its heterogeneous clinical course makes its diagnosis and management still a challenge.In recent years, new molecules with different mechanisms of action have emerged for the treatment of ITP.Due to the increasing information about the pathology and its therapies, several international guidelines have recently been established to provide recommendations for the management and treatment of ITP.There are still many patient scenarios and disease aspects which are not addressed in the guidelines.What is new? Our Spanish ITP Expert Group has developed a Delphi consensus study to provide recommendations and promote standardization of the management of adult patients with ITP in Spain.The scientific committee defined 127 statements for consensus, corresponding to 13 chapters: (i) Diagnosis of ITP, (ii) First-line treatment, (iii) Second-line treatment, (iv) Treatment of refractory patients, (v) Follow-up, (vi) Emergency and surgery, (vii) ITP in the elderly, (viii) ITP in pregnancy, (ix) Anticoagulation and antiplatelet, (x) Secondary ITP, (xi) Quality of life, (xii) Discontinuation of TPO-RA, and (xiii) ITP and Covid.The total number of agreed statements achieved was 103, giving a final percentage of consensus in the Delphi questionnaire of 81%.What is the impact? This Delphi consensus provides recommendations based on real clinical practice data, regarding the diagnosis, treatment, and management of patients and scenarios in ITP to assist clinicians in addressing this disease and achieving optimal outcomes for the patient.

Primary and secondary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): Time for a rethink.

There are not many publications that provide a holistic view of the management of primary and secondary ITP as a whole, reflecting the similarities and differences between the two. Given the lack of major clinical trials, we believe that comprehensive reviews are much needed to guide the diagnosis and treatment of ITP today. Therefore, our review addresses the contemporary diagnosis and treatment of ITP in adult patients. With respect to primary ITP we especially focus on establishing the management of ITP based on the different and successive lines of treatment. Life-threatening situations, "bridge therapy" to surgery or invasive procedures and refractory ITP are also comprehensively reviewed here. Secondary ITP is studied according to its pathogenesis by establishing three major differential groups: Immune Thrombocytopenia due to Central Defects, Immune Thrombocytopenia due to Blocked Differentiation and Immune Thrombocytopenia due to Defective Peripheral Immune Response. Here we provide an up-to-date snapshot of the current diagnosis and treatment of ITP, including a special interest in addressing rare causes of this disease in our daily clinical practice. The target population of this review is adult patients only and the target audience is medical professionals.

Recommendations on the Management of Patients with Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP) in the Context of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination: Consensus Guidelines from a Spanish ITP Expert Group.

Primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an acquired autoimmune disease with highly variable presentation, characteristics, and clinical course. Thrombocytopenia is a common complication of many viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2. In addition, both de novo ITP and exacerbation of ITP after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 have been reported. Patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop a prothrombotic coagulopathy called COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC). In addition, autoimmune hematological disorders secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection, mainly ITP and autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), have been described. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 infection has been associated with exacerbation of autoimmune processes, including ITP. In fact, there is evidence of a high relapse rate in patients with preexisting ITP and COVID-19. As for vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, hematological adverse events (HAE) are practically anecdotal. The most common HAE is thrombocytopenia-associated thrombosis syndrome (TTS) linked to vectored virus vaccines. Other HAEs are very rare, but should be considered in patients with previous complement activation disease or autoimmunity. In patients with ITP who are vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, the main complication is exacerbation of ITP and the bleeding that may result. In fact, this complication occurs in 12% of patients, with splenectomized and refractory patients with more than five lines of previous treatment and platelet counts below 50 × 109/L being the most vulnerable. We conclude that, in general, there is no greater risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in ITP patients than in the general population. Furthermore, no changes are advised in patients with stable ITP, the use of immunosuppressants is discouraged unless there is no other therapeutic option, and patients with ITP are not contraindicated for vaccination against COVID-19.

Use of eltrombopag for patients 65 years old or older with immune thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Eltrombopag is useful for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, results of clinical trials may not accurately mirror clinical practice reality. Here we evaluated eltrombopag for primary and secondary ITP in our ≥65-year-old population. METHODS: A total of 106 primary ITP patients (16 with newly diagnosed ITP, 16 with persistent ITP, and 74 with chronic ITP) and 39 secondary ITP patients (20 with ITP secondary to immune disorders, 7 with ITP secondary to infectious diseases, and 12 with ITP secondary to lymphoproliferative disorders [LPD]) were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Median age of our cohort was 76 (interquartile range, IQR, 70-81) years. 75.9% of patients yielded a platelet response including 66.2% complete responders. Median time to platelet response was 14 (IQR, 8-21) days. Median time on response was 320 (IQR, 147-526) days. Sixty-three adverse events (AEs), mainly grade 1-2, occurred. The most common were hepatobiliary laboratory abnormalities (HBLAs) and headaches. One transient ischemic attack in a newly diagnosed ITP and two self-limited pulmonary embolisms in secondary ITP were the only thrombotic events observed. CONCLUSION: Eltrombopag showed efficacy and safety in ITP patients aged ≥65 years with primary and secondary ITP. However, efficacy results in LPD-ITP were poor. A relatively high number of deaths were observed.

Efficacy and safety of eltrombopag in persistent and newly diagnosed ITP in clinical practice.

Eltrombopag is safe and effective in primary chronic ITP. However, lack of clinical trials avoids a clear demonstration of its utility in newly diagnosed and persistent ITP. Our aim here is to report Spanish results for this type of patients. We retrospectively evaluated 220 adult primary ITP patients. According to standard definition, patients were allocated to newly diagnosed (n = 30), persistent (n = 30), and chronic (n = 160) ITP. Groups were homogenous regarding most relevant parameters. 180 (90%) of 220 patients achieved a platelet response (R) with 167 (75.9%) complete responses (CR) after a 15-month follow-up. No statistical significant differences among groups but a trend towards a greater efficacy in newly diagnosed ITP were observed (93.3% of responses with 86.7% of CR). Efficacy in persistent ITP (83.3% of responses with 80.0% of CR) and chronic ITP (79.4% of responses with 73.1% of CR) was similar. 70 patients (31.8%) experienced adverse events. 15 of them were grade 3-4. Most common adverse effects were headache and hepatobiliary laboratory abnormalities (HBLAs). One persistent ITP had a venous thrombosis and one chronic ITP had grade II myelofibrosis. We consider Eltrombopag use for the early stage ITP as effective and safe as it is in chronic ITP.

Use of eltrombopag for secondary immune thrombocytopenia in clinical practice.

Eltrombopag is a second-line treatment in primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, its role in secondary ITP is unknown. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of eltrombopag in secondary ITP in daily clinical practice. Eighty-seven secondary ITP patients (46 with ITP secondary to autoimmune syndromes, 23 with ITP secondary to a neoplastic disease subtype: lymphoproliferative disorders [LPDs] and 18 with ITP secondary to viral infections) who had been treated with eltrombopag were retrospectively evaluated. Forty-four patients (38%) had a platelet response, including 40 (35%) with complete responses. Median time to platelet response was 15 days (95% confidence interval, 7-28 days), and was longer in the LPD-ITP group. Platelet response rate was significantly lower in the LPD-ITP than in other groups. However, having achieved response, there were no significant differences between the durable response of the groups. Forty-three patients (49·4%) experienced adverse events (mainly grade 1-2), the commonest being hepatobiliary laboratory abnormalities. There were 10 deaths in this case series, all of which were related to pre-existing medical conditions. In routine clinical practice, eltrombopag is effective and well-tolerated in unselected patients with ITP secondary to both immune and infectious disorders. However, the response rate in LPD-ITP is low.

Eltrombopag safety and efficacy for primary chronic immune thrombocytopenia in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Eltrombopag is effective and safe in chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, clinical trials may not accurately reflect what happens in clinical practice. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of eltrombopag in primary chronic ITP in a real-world setting. METHODS: A total of 164 primary patients with chronic ITP from 40 Spanish centers, who had been treated with eltrombopag, were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: The median age of our cohort (72% women) was 63 yr (interquartile range, IQR, 45-75 yr). The median time with ITP diagnosis was 81 months (IQR, 30-192 months). The median number of therapies prior to eltrombopag was 3 (IQR, 2-4). At the time of eltrombopag start, 45 patients (30%) were receiving concomitant treatment for ITP. Forty-six patients (30%) had bleeding signs/symptoms the month before the treatment started. The median platelet count at eltrombopag initiation was 22 × 10(9) /L (IQR, 8-39 × 10(9) /L). A total of 135 patients (88.8%) achieved a platelet response. The median time to platelet response was 12 d (95% CI, 9-13 d). Maintained platelet response rate during the 15-month period under examination was 75.2%. Twenty-eight patients (18.4%) experienced adverse events, mainly grades 1-2. CONCLUSION: Eltrombopag is highly effective and well tolerated in unselected patients with primary chronic ITP.

Successful discontinuation of eltrombopag after complete remission in patients with primary immune thrombocytopenia.

Eltrombopag is effective and safe in immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Some patients may sustain their platelet response when treatment is withdrawn but the frequency of this phenomenon is unknown. We retrospectively evaluated 260 adult primary ITP patients (165 women and 95 men; median age, 62 years) treated with eltrombopag after a median time from diagnosis of 24 months. Among the 201 patients who achieved a complete remission (platelet count >100 × 10(9) /l), eltrombopag was discontinued in 80 patients. Reasons for eltrombopag discontinuation were: persistent response despite a reduction in dose over time (n = 33), platelet count >400 × 10(9) /l (n = 29), patient's request (n = 5), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (n = 3), diarrhea (n = 3), thrombosis (n = 3), and other reasons (n = 4). Of the 49 evaluable patients, 26 patients showed sustained response after discontinuing eltrombopag without additional ITP therapy, with a median follow-up of 9 (range, 6-25) months. These patients were characterized by a median time since ITP diagnosis of 46.5 months, with 4/26 having ITP < 1 year. Eleven patients were male and their median age was 59 years. They received a median of 4 previous treatment lines and 42% were splenectomized. No predictive factors of sustained response after eltrombopag withdrawal were identified. Platelet response following eltrombopag cessation may be sustained in an important percentage of adult primary ITP patients who achieved CR with eltrombopag. However, reliable markers for predicting which patients will have this response are needed.

Use of eltrombopag after romiplostim in primary immune thrombocytopenia.

The thrombopoietin receptor agonists (THPO-RAs), romiplostim and eltrombopag, are effective and safe in immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, the value of their sequential use when no response is achieved or when adverse events occur with one THPO-RA has not been clearly established. Here we retrospectively evaluated 51 primary ITP adult patients treated with romiplostim followed by eltrombopag. The median age of our cohort was 49 (range, 18-83) years. There were 32 women and 19 men. The median duration of romiplostim use before switching to eltrombopag was 12 (interquartile range 5-21) months. The reasons for switching were: lack of efficacy (n = 25), patient preference (n = 16), platelet-count fluctuation (n = 6) and side-effects (n = 4). The response rate to eltrombopag was 80% (41/51), including 67% (n = 35) complete responses. After a median follow-up of 14 months, 31 patients maintained their response. Efficacy was maintained after switching in all patients in the patient preference, platelet-count fluctuation and side-effect groups. 33% of patients experienced one or more adverse events during treatment with eltrombopag. We consider the use of eltrombopag after romiplostim for treating ITP to be effective and safe. Response to eltrombopag was related to the cause of romiplostim discontinuation.