Shah, Surbhi

Abstract On-body compressive therapy is an essential treatment for a variety of health conditions. Traditional compression methods like pneumatics and knit stockings offer quality compression, but present issues with user experience (donning/doffing challenges or bulk/mass issues). This paper covers two studies related to active compression stockings, which utilize knitted shape memory alloy (SMA) wire to produce dynamic compression forces on the body. When these SMA knit panels are heated with an at-home heating pad, the knit contracts and creates dynamic compression. The first study characterizes the forces produced on the body by a new iteration of an SMA knit stocking. The second study compares two versions of the SMA knit garment with a commercially available knit compression garment. The results show that SMA knit compression garments are able to produce medical grade compression on the body, but that sizing and material properties can greatly impact the forces produced. In a comparison of different compression stockings, the user experience of the SMA compression garment was preferred over the alternative garments. Overall, the potential of SMA knit compression is further highlighted, with a clear need for further development to ensure consistent medical grade compression.

Classical hematological disorders encompass a broad array of congenital and acquired blood conditions, ranging from thrombotic and hemorrhagic disorders, hemoglobinopathies such as sickle cell disease/thalassemia, abnormalities in blood counts, disorders of iron metabolism, obstetric hematologic conditions, and rare genetic hematologic diseases. The past decade has seen a revolution in research and therapeutic development for these disorders. It has led to FDA approval of novel therapies such as gene therapies for hemophilia and hemoglobinopathies, targeted therapies for coagulation and complement disorders, factor VIII mimetics, new immunotherapeutic targets for cytopenia and genomic-directed diagnosis and therapy for a wide range of blood disorders. Between January 2018 and July 2023, 34 new drugs have been approved for different classical hematological disorders, and several more have received approval for new or expanded indications. This is changing how we treat patients with classical hematological conditions. Most classical hematological disorders have an impact on patients' quality of life as well as life span, and for decades, many of these disorders were managed with limited therapy options with variable efficacy. Rare hemolytic disorders such as cold agglutinin disease, paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, sickle cell disease, thalassemia, porphyria all have expanded options. Newer agents for the management of anemia, thrombocytopenia and leukopenia in different clinical settings are available. Lastly, management of hemophilia is being revolutionized by extended half-life products, non-factor options and gene therapy. Hemophilia care has always been deemed to be costly, but gene therapy is getting additional attention due to the high price tag. We have compiled the list of all new drugs that got FDA approval for classical hematological disorders over past 5 years and plan to present this in the form of an infographic providing details on the drug along with its indication, trial leading to approval and cost implications of each therapy. Our intention is to summarize the drug development for classical hematology and highlight “not so benign” nature of these disorders and related therapy particularly in terms of financial toxicity for the patients.

Introduction: Romiplostim is a thrombopoietin receptor agonist approved by the US FDA for chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in patients who have had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. The recommended dose is 1 mcg/kg/week subcutaneously, escalated weekly by increments of 1 mcg/kg to achieve and maintain a platelet count of 50 x 10 9 /L g ( Kuter et al 2021). It has been postulated that starting at the maximum recommended dose of 10 mcg/kg/week in patients with severe bleeding may swiftly increase platelets and minimize bleeding ( Roumier et al 2021). However, this approach may also increase the risk of major thrombotic events (TE). It is unclear if the more aggressive dosing strategy results in more rapid, robust responses and a tolerable safety profile compared to the FDA approved approach. Methods: This retrospective chart review included adult patients who initiated romiplostim while admitted for ITP at a Mayo Clinic Enterprise site from May 2018 to May 2022. Outcomes included rate of TE at 30 days and 90 days and time to first TE in patients receiving initial romiplostim doses of < 5 mcg/kg (low dose, LD) and > 5 mcg/kg (high dose, HD), median time to platelet response (defined as platelets > 30 x10 9/L and > 50 x10 9/L on 2 separate checks) in LD vs HD, and cost to the institution comparing LD to HD. Outcomes were summarized using descriptive statistics. Statistical analysis was done using BlueSky. Fischer's exact test and chi-squared were performed for categorical data, and Wilcoxon rank sum test were done for continuous variables. Results: Forty-five patients met eligibility criteria: 33 (73%) received initial romiplostim doses < 5 mcg/kg and 12 (27%) received doses > 5 mcg/kg. The majority of patients (43/45 (96%)) presented with platelets < 50 x 10 9/L. The median age was 65 years (68 in LD vs 57 HD). There were 24 (73%) males in the LD group vs five (42%) in the HD group. At baseline, 64% (n = 21) of LD patients and 75% (n = 9) of HD patients presented with bleeding. Major bleeding (defined by 2019 ASH ITP guidelines) was present in 21% (n= 7) vs 17% (n = 2) of patients, LD versus HD, respectively ( Neunert et al 2019). The overall incidence of TE in this study was 24% (n = 11): LD 5 (15%) and HD 6 (50%) (p = 0.044) at 90 days. Median days to TE was 21 days, 12 days in LD group (range 5-21) vs 24.5 days (range 14-58) in HD group (p = 0.067). TE included deep vein thrombosis (DVT, n = 6), DVT with pulmonary embolism (n = 1), portal vein thrombus (n = 1), multiple brain infarcts (n = 1), splenic vein thrombus (n = 1), and left atrial appendage thrombus (n = 1). The median platelet count at the time of TE was 304 x 10 9/L, 415 x 10 9/L (range 58-900) in the LD group vs 323 x 10 8/L (range 33-1427) in the HD group (p = 0.79). Thirty-two (71%) out of 45 patients had a response to romiplostim: 22 in the LD group (71%) vs 10 (83.3%) in the HD group (p = 0.698). Of the patients that responded, the median time to response was 6 days in the LD group vs 11.5 days in the HD group (p = 0.09) The median dose at time of initial response was 2 mcg/kg in the LD group and 6 mcg/kg in the HD group. Wholesale Acquisition Cost (WAC) was used to determine the cost per dose, rounded to the nearest vial size. The average WAC for the initial dose in LD patients was $1806.80 compared to $6061.79 in HD patients. Conclusion:There was a significantly increased incidence of thrombosis in patients admitted with ITP that received initial romiplostim doses > 5 mcg/kg, with no differences in the time to platelet response. Careful consideration of risks versus benefits should be given prior to initiating romiplostim at doses higher than recommended doses.

AbstractPatients with thrombophilia remain concerned about venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk with COVID‐19 vaccinations. The aim of this study was to examine VTE outcomes in patients with inherited or acquired thrombophilia who were vaccinated for COVID‐19. Vaccinated patients ≥18 years between November 1, 2020 and November 1, 2021 were analyzed using electronic medical records across the Mayo Clinic enterprise. The primary outcome was imaging confirmed acute VTE occurring 90 days before and after the date of the first vaccine dose. Thrombophilia patients were identified through laboratory testing results and ICD‐10 codes. A total of 792 010 patients with at least one COVID‐19 vaccination were identified. Six thousand sixty‐seven of these patients were found to have a thrombophilia, among whom there was a total of 39 VTE events after compared to 51 VTE events before vaccination (0.64% vs. 0.84%, p = .20). In patients with Factor V Leiden or prothrombin gene mutation, VTE occurred in 27 patients before and in 29 patients after vaccination (0.61 vs. 0.65%, p = .79). In patients with antiphospholipid syndrome, VTE occurred in six patients before and four patients after vaccination (0.59% vs. 0.39%, p = .40). No difference was observed in the overall VTE rate when comparing the postvaccination 90 days to the prevaccination 90 days, adjusted hazard ratio 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.53–1.23). In this subgroup of COVID‐19 vaccinated patients with thrombophilia, there was no increased risk for acute VTE postvaccination compared to the prevaccination timeframe. These results are consistent with prior studies and should offer additional reassurance to patients with inherited or acquired thrombophilia.