Treatment patterns and outcomes among adults with immune thrombocytopenia receiving pharmaceutical second-line therapies: a retrospective cohort study using administrative claims data.

OBJECTIVES

To describe and compare real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among individuals with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) receiving second-line therapies (rituximab, romiplostim, or eltrombopag).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a large administrative claims database (January 2013-May 2020) among continuously enrolled patients ≥18 years prescribed second-line ITP therapies. The index date was the date of the first claim of the study medications. Treatment patterns and outcomes were measured during the 12-month follow-up period. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance covariates across treatment groups. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare treatment patterns and bleeding risk outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 695 patients were included (rituximab, N = 285; romiplostim, N = 212; eltrombopag, N = 198). After IPTW, all baseline covariates were balanced. Compared to eltrombopag, patients in the rituximab cohort were 57% more likely to receive other ITP therapies (systematic corticosteroids or third-line therapies) during the follow-up period (odds ratio [OR] = 1.571, p = .030). There was no significant difference in the odds of receiving a different second-line therapy or experiencing a bleeding-related episode among three groups (p > .050). Patients in the romiplostim cohort were 69% more likely to receive rescue therapy compared to those in the rituximab cohort (OR = 1.688, p = .025).

CONCLUSION

Patients with ITP receiving rituximab were more likely to need other ITP therapies but did not experience higher risk of bleeding compared to those receiving eltrombopag or romiplostim. Benefits, risks, cost-effectiveness, and patient preference should all be considered in optimizing second-line therapy for ITP.