» Articles » PMID: 34162173

Comparison of Splenectomy and Eltrombopag Treatment in the Second-Line Treatment of Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura

Overview
Journal Turk J Haematol
Specialty Hematology
Date 2021 Jun 24
PMID 34162173
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: Primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an acquired autoimmune disease characterized by isolated thrombocytopenia. While first-line treatments focus on inhibiting autoantibodies and platelet destruction, second- and third-line treatments include splenectomy and thrombopoietin receptor agonists. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficiency and toxicities of splenectomy and eltrombopag as second-line treatments in ITP.

Materials And Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who were diagnosed with ITP and followed between 2015 and 2020. Patients who underwent splenectomy or received eltrombopag treatment as second-line or further therapy were included. For subgroup analyses, patients were further stratified according to whether they received eltrombopag in the second or third line of treatment.

Results: There were 38 patients in the splenectomy group and 47 patients in the eltrombopag group. The mean age of patients in the splenectomy and eltrombopag groups was 43.2 and 50.5 years, respectively. Time to response was significantly shorter in the splenectomy arm (p=0.001). However, response rates at the 3, 6, 12, and 24 months did not exhibit a statistically significant difference between groups; nor did total duration of response and adverse events. Response rates at the 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months and the total duration of response did not exhibit a statistically significant difference between eltrombopag subgroups. Eltrombopag treatment was ceased for 20 patients after a median of 54.1 months (range: 1-151). Among them, 12 patients (60%) did not experience a loss of response.

Conclusion: Comparing the splenectomy and eltrombopag arms, even though time to achieve response was in favor of the splenectomy group, this advantage disappeared when overall response rates and response rate at the 2 year were considered. Using eltrombopag in the second or third line of therapy does not yield any difference in terms of time to achieving response.

References
1.
Cheng G, Saleh M, Marcher C, Vasey S, Mayer B, Aivado M . Eltrombopag for management of chronic immune thrombocytopenia (RAISE): a 6-month, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2010; 377(9763):393-402. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60959-2. View

2.
Thomsen R, Schoonen W, Farkas D, Riis A, Jacobsen J, Fryzek J . Risk for hospital contact with infection in patients with splenectomy: a population-based cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151(8):546-55. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-8-200910200-00008. View

3.
Wong R, Saleh M, Khelif A, Salama A, Portella M, Burgess P . Safety and efficacy of long-term treatment of chronic/persistent ITP with eltrombopag: final results of the EXTEND study. Blood. 2017; 130(23):2527-2536. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2017-04-748707. View

4.
Mishra K, Pramanik S, Jandial A, Sahu K, Sandal R, Ahuja A . Real-world experience of eltrombopag in immune thrombocytopenia. Am J Blood Res. 2020; 10(5):240-251. PMC: 7675127. View

5.
Rodeghiero F, Stasi R, Gernsheimer T, Michel M, Provan D, Arnold D . Standardization of terminology, definitions and outcome criteria in immune thrombocytopenic purpura of adults and children: report from an international working group. Blood. 2008; 113(11):2386-93. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2008-07-162503. View