Sanofi, Boston, MA, USA.
Aetion, Inc., New York, NY, USA.
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2024 Jan-Dec;30:10760296241241525. doi: 10.1177/10760296241241525.
European real-world data indicate that front-line treatment with caplacizumab is associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with delayed caplacizumab treatment. The objective of the study was to describe the characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes in hospitalized patients with an immune-mediated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) episode treated with front-line versus delayed caplacizumab in the US. This retrospective cohort analysis of a US hospital database included adult patients (≥18 years) with an acute iTTP episode (a diagnosis of thrombotic microangiopathy and ≥1 therapeutic plasma exchange [TPE] procedure) from January 21, 2019, to February 28, 2021. Unadjusted baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and costs were compared between patients who received front-line versus delayed (<2 vs ≥2 days after TPE initiation) caplacizumab treatment. Out of 39 patients, 16 (41.0%) received front-line and 23 (59.0%) received delayed treatment with caplacizumab. Baseline characteristics and symptoms were similar between the two groups. Patients who received front-line caplacizumab treatment had significantly fewer TPE administrations (median: 5.0 vs 12.0); and a significantly shorter hospital stay (median: 9.0 days vs 16.0 days) than patients receiving delayed caplacizumab therapy. Both of these were significantly lower in comparison of means (t-test < .01). Median inpatient costs (inclusive of caplacizumab costs) were 54% higher in the delayed treated patients than in the front-line treated patients (median: $112 711 vs $73 318). TPE-specific cost was lower in the front-line treated cohort (median: $6 989 vs $10 917). In conclusion, front-line treatment with caplacizumab had shorter hospitalizations, lower healthcare resource utilization, and lower costs than delayed caplacizumab treatment after TPE therapy.
欧洲的真实世界数据表明,与延迟使用卡普莱西单抗相比,一线治疗卡普莱西单抗可改善临床结局。本研究的目的是描述在美国接受一线与延迟卡普莱西单抗治疗的免疫介导性血栓性血小板减少性紫癜(iTTP)发作住院患者的特征、治疗模式和结局。这是一项回顾性队列分析,纳入了 2019 年 1 月 21 日至 2021 年 2 月 28 日期间美国医院数据库中急性 iTTP 发作(血栓性微血管病诊断和≥1 次治疗性血浆置换 [TPE] 治疗)的成年患者(≥18 岁)。比较了接受一线(TPE 治疗开始后<2 天)与延迟(≥2 天)卡普莱西单抗治疗的患者的基线特征、治疗模式、医疗资源利用和成本。在 39 例患者中,16 例(41.0%)接受一线治疗,23 例(59.0%)接受延迟治疗。两组患者的基线特征和症状相似。接受一线卡普莱西单抗治疗的患者 TPE 治疗次数明显减少(中位数:5.0 次 vs 12.0 次),住院时间明显缩短(中位数:9.0 天 vs 16.0 天)。与延迟治疗相比,这些差异均有统计学意义(t 检验<.01)。延迟治疗组的住院患者中位费用(包括卡普莱西单抗费用)比一线治疗组高 54%(中位数:112711 美元 vs 73318 美元)。一线治疗组的 TPE 特异性成本较低(中位数:6989 美元 vs 10917 美元)。总之,与 TPE 治疗后延迟使用卡普莱西单抗相比,一线使用卡普莱西单抗治疗可缩短住院时间、降低医疗资源利用,并降低成本。