4.3 Article

Clinical effect and safety evaluation of different dosage of Rituximab combined with Cyclophosphamide in treatment of refractory immune Thrombocytopenia

Journal

PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages 69-74

Publisher

PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.12669/pjms.36.2.1168

Keywords

Coagulation function; Cyclophosphamide; Lymphocyte; Refractory immune thrombocytopenic purpura; Rituximab; Untoward effect

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To discuss clinical effect of different dosage of rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide in treatment of refractory immune thrombocytopenia (rITP). Method: This study was conducted at Department of Hematopathology in XX Hospital from January 2016 to January 2018. In this study. Seventy-eight patients with rITP were selected as the objects, divided into observation group (39 cases) and control group (39 cases) according to random number table. Patients in the control group were treated with conventional rituximab and cyclophosphamide, while the observation group received low-dose rituximab. The same amount of cyclophosphamide was used in the two groups. The statistics of clinical effect, recurrence rate, untoward effect and Laboratory inspection of both groups were made before and after the treatment. Results: Compared with the control group, the total occurrence rate of side effects in the observation group decreased significantly; the level of IgM and CD20(+) in the observation group also decreased significantly, while. The level of IgA, IgG, CD3(+) and CD4(+) rose significantly (P<0.05). The differences in the level of Th1, TNF-a, IL-18 and Sc5b-9 had statistical significance before and after the treatment (P<0.05). Conclusion: Rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide has the definite curative effect on rITP. The small dosage of rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide has higher clinical safety in the treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available