ArticleBMC cancer2026
Comparison of the real-world efficacy and safety of romiplostim and recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) in chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia.
Article in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Case Report: Persistent severe thrombocytopenia after adjuvant ado-trastuzumab emtansine with sequential bone marrow findings and romiplostim support.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Romiplostim for refractory chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia in a long-term survivor of limited-stage small cell lung cancer: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of romiplostim and recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) in managing chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT) in patients with solid tumours, aiming to provide valuable evidence for clinical practice in CIT management.
methodsA retrospective cohort study involving patients with solid tumours who received either romiplostim or rhTPO following anticancer treatment was conducted at Nanjing Second Hospital from January 2024 to May 2025. The primary outcomes assessed were platelet recovery, treatment efficacy, and recovery time, whereas the secondary outcomes included chemotherapy adherence and the incidence of adverse events.
resultsA total of 68 patients were included in the analysis, among whom 32 received romiplostim and 36 received rhTPO. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Romiplostim demonstrated a higher treatment efficacy (71.9%) than rhTPO (63.9%) ,although this difference was not statistically significant(P = 0.239). The median platelet recovery time was shorter in the romiplostim group (9 days) than in the rhTPO group (12 days) (P = 0.012). Platelet recovery to ≥ 100 × 10⁹/L was achieved by 62.5% of the romiplostim patients versus 44.4% of the rhTPO patients (P = 0.137). Furthermore, a higher proportion of patients in the romiplostim group (90.6% vs. 83.3% with rhTPO) were able to continue scheduled chemotherapy, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.376). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two groups, although it was lower in the romiplostim group.
conclusionCompared with rhTPO, romiplostim significantly shortened the time to platelet recovery and required fewer administrations. Overall safety was comparable between the two groups, with no new safety concerns identified. Future prospective studies are warranted to confirm long-term outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.