When is the use of intravenous immunoglobulin appropriate in immune thrombocytopaenia?

Sydney Dubois,Richard Layese,Nicolas Limal,Laetitia Languille,Willy Kini‐Matondo,Matthieu Mahevas,Marc Michel,Etienne Audureau,Bertrand Godeau
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.19817
2024-10-12
British Journal of Haematology
Abstract:According to French guidelines, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) should be reserved for patients with a bleeding score (Khellaf score) >8 as well as for immune thrombocytopaenia (ITP) patients with formal contra‐indications to corticosteroids, and corticosteroid‐resistant patients in preparation for an invasive procedure or during pregnancy. We retrospectively studied the prescribing practices of IVIg for ITP in a monocentric retrospective study among 114 patients for a total of 208 IVIg treatments. IVIg prescription was valid according to current French guidelines in 84.4% of cases. Non‐compliant IVIg prescription (15.6%) was more frequent in younger patients (p = 0.027) and in patients taking concomitant anti‐coagulant treatment. Our study shows excellent overall compliance with French guidelines. It suggests the need to include concomitant anti‐coagulant treatment in IVIg prescription algorithms and greatly reduce the weight attributed to age in this indication. Summary Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is the gold standard treatment for severe cases of immune thrombocytopaenia (ITP). However, its cost, limited duration of efficacy and market supply tension have led French guidelines to reserve IVIg for ITP patients with formal contra‐indications to corticosteroids, with French bleeding score ('Khellaf score') > 8, and corticosteroid‐resistant patients either with Khellaf score ≤ 8 or in preparation for an invasive procedure or during pregnancy. We studied the prescribing practices of IVIg for ITP in real‐life conditions and assessed their compliance with French guidelines. A monocentric retrospective study was conducted between 2016 and 2020 among 114 patients hospitalized in our unit, for a total of 208 IVIg treatments. In 37% of cases, the Khellaf score was >8, validating IVIg prescription according to French guidelines. In the remaining cases, reasons noted for use of IVIg included corticosteroid resistance (33.7%), preparation for an invasive procedure (8.5%), context of pregnancy (6.6%) and contra‐indication to corticosteroids (3.3%). After analysis, IVIg prescription was considered valid according to current French guidelines in 84.4% of cases. Non‐compliant IVIg prescription was more frequent in younger patients (p = 0.027). Concomitant anti‐coagulation was also noted as an argument for IVIg prescription outside of the current French guidelines.
hematology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?