How much prophylaxis is enough in haemophilia?

INTRODUCTION: Prophylaxis has become standard of care for all persons with haemophilia (PWH) with a severe phenotype. However, 'standard prophylaxis' with either factor or non-factor therapies (currently only emicizumab available) is prohibitively expensive for much of the world. We sought to address the question of 'How much prophylaxis is enough?' and 'Can it be individualized?' and specifically 'Can emicizumab be individualized?'. METHODS: We reviewed the literature on prophylaxis in haemophilia since its inception in the 1950s to the present, the development of more and less intense factor prophylaxis regimens and their outcomes and additionally the published outcomes of prophylaxis with low dose emicizumab. RESULTS: What these experiences collectively show is that low dose emicizumab does result in significant benefits to patients whilst being much less expensive than a "one size fits all" emicizumab prophylaxis approach. We also took note that some non-factor therapies still in development are individualized given that high doses of these can potentially put patients at risk. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis is now clearly accepted as standard of care for PWH with a severe phenotype but now in a very short time a large assortment of different treatment options for prophylaxis have become/are becoming available and the haemophilia community will need to determine how to best use these recognizing that no 'one treatment fits all'.

Physical activity and factor VIII levels in patients with haemophilia: A real-world prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Regular physical activity (PA) is recommended for patients with haemophilia (PwH). For PwH it is crucial to ensure a sufficient factor level to prevent PA-induced bleedings. However, there is a gap in the literature dealing with specific factor levels, which are needed when performing specific types of PA. AIM: To provide data on factor VIII (FVIII) levels at the start of PA performed by PwH. METHODS: In this prospective 12-month real-world observational study, 23 PwH recorded every PA they performed and the FVIII levels at the start of the PA using a pharmacokinetic application. PA types were clustered according to the collision and injury risk into three categories (Cat I = low, Cat II = medium, Cat III = high risk). Haemophilia Joint Health Scores (HJHS) were performed at baseline, after 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: 795 PA sessions of Cat I, 193 of Cat II, and 23 of Cat III were documented. FVIII levels at the start of PA were different between categories (Cat I: 29.8 ± 32.1%, Cat II: 38.3 ± 33.4%, Cat III: 86.6 ± 29.2%). Out of all PA sessions, 145 (14%) were performed at a factor level of ≤3%. Three PA-induced bleeding occurred. Baseline HJHS was 14.5 ± 13.6 points and did not change throughout the study. CONCLUSION: This study provides real-life data on FVIII levels at the start of 1011 PA sessions. PwH are mainly active in low-risk sports with higher FVIII levels observed in Cat II and III, respectively. Only three PA-induced bleeding occurred, even though several PA were started with low FVIII levels.

Adherence tool for prophylactic haemophilia treatment in adult and adolescent patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

Hemophilia is a congenital bleeding disorder resulting from a low level or deficiency of clotting factors. It is an x-linked recessive disease and happens almost exclusively in males whereas females are the carrier of the affected gene. The most common types of hemophilia are hemophilia A and Hemophilia B. Hemophilia is classified into mild, moderate and severe. Prophylaxis treatment has more advantages clinically compare to on-demand therapy. It may reduce the bleeding frequency, gives protection from joint damage, may lower the number of total bleeding episodes per year, and may reduce annualised spontaneous and trauma related bleeding events. However, prophylaxis treatment needs regular weekly infusions therefore it is painful to administer especially if the vein is difficult to access. It may cause pain at the site of injections and may lead to non-adherence to treatment. Non-adherence to a regimen will result in insufficient clotting factor levels in the body. The efficacy of the medication is reduced and may lead to a high bleeding tendency. Thus far, the study on adult haemophilic patient adherence tool is scarce and limited; and therefore this review is warranted. The study protocol is conducted as per the PRISMA-P guideline. There are 4 concepts in this systematic review which are Haemophilia, adult and adolescence, preventive treatment and adherence. Articles will be sought from electronic databases PUBMED, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS using the MeSH term, synonym free-text word, truncation, and proximity operators as per each database. The proposed keywords within each concept will be joined using the Boolean operator "OR "and the 4 different concepts combined using the Boolean operator "AND". Search will be limited to Human, English language, and publication until 2022. Studies will be included if they meet the study inclusion criteria. The quality of the studies will be appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS) for observation-based studies. This systematic review does not require formal ethical approval as data will be extracted from selected published studies. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and relevant conference presentations.(PROSPERO registration CRD42021273813).

Real-world evidence on efmoroctocog alfa in patients with haemophilia A: A systematic literature review of treatment experience in Europe.

INTRODUCTION: The real-world effectiveness of the efmoroctocog alfa (recombinant FVIII Fc fusion protein, a rFVIIIFc) has been investigated in numerous studies, however, currently, there exists no comprehensive collection of the existing real-world evidence (RWE) on the performance of prophylactic use of rFVIIIFc. AIM: The aims of this systematic literature study were to identify, review, evaluate and collate the RWE of prophylactic rFVIIIFc for patients with haemophilia A reported in Europe. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase from 2014 to February 2022 to identify publications reporting the effectiveness of rFVIIIFc in patients with haemophilia A. The outcomes of interest were annualised bleeding rates (ABR, AjBR, AsBR), injection frequency, factor consumption, adherence, development of inhibitors and quality-of-life measures. RESULTS: 46 eligible publications (eight full-text articles) were included. rFVIIIFc showed a low ABR in patients with haemophilia A. Studies assessing treatment switching from a standard half-life (SHL) treatment to rFVIIIFc found that the ABR and consumption were reduced in most patients. Studies assessing rFVIIIFc effectiveness reported a median ABR between 0.0 and 2.0 with median injections per week ranging between 1.8 and 2.4 and median doses between 60 and 105 IU/kg/week. Of the studies assessing inhibitor development, only one study reported an incidence of a low titre inhibitor, and no patients developed clinically significant inhibitors. CONCLUSION: rFVIIIFc prophylaxis treatment results in a low ABR across studies in patients with haemophilia A in a European real-world setting, which correlates with findings from clinical trials assessing the efficacy of rFVIIIFc in patients with haemophilia A.

Individualizing primary prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A and B, adherence and new products.

The purpose of prophylaxis in hemophilic patients is to prevent bleeding. The latest guidelines of the World Hemophilia Federation recommend that all patients with a severe hemorrhagic phenotype should receive prophylactic treatment, defined as the regular administration of therapeutic products (either factor concentrates or nonfactor replacement treatments). These products are aimed at preserving hemostasis and preventing bleeding, especially into joints. The guidelines also stipulate that prophylaxis should allow patients with hemophilia to lead healthy and active lives, participating in most physical and social activities, similar to the nonhemophilic population.

Primary prophylaxis in children with severe haemophilia A and B-Implementation over the last 20 years as illustrated in real-world data in the PedNet cohorts.

INTRODUCTION: The prophylactic regimen in children with severe haemophilia is suggested in various publications and guidelines. Few data exist on its implementation in clinical practice. AIM: To investigate the implementation of primary prophylaxis based on real-life data from PedNet during the last 20 years. METHODS: All children from the PedNet cohort (n = 1260) with severe haemophilia A (SHA) or severe haemophilia B (SHB), FVIII/IX < .01 IU/mL, born between 2000 and 2009 (Cohort I; SHA n = 662; SHB n = 88) and 2010-2019 (Cohort II; SHA n = 598; SHB n = 94) were included. RESULTS: In SHA, the median age at start of prophylaxis was 17.3 months (IQR; 12.5-26.1) in Cohort I which decreased to 13.1 months (IQR; 10.4-19.1) in Cohort II (p < .000). "Once-a-week" prophylaxis at start increased from 49% to 68% (SHA) and 38% to 70% (SHB). FVIII doses were reduced from median 43.5 (IQR; 34.6-49.0) to 30.9 IU/kg (IQR; 26.3-46.3), while dosing with FIX did not change. After 2010 approximately 60% of the patients with SHA and SHB started prophylaxis before any joint bleed. The number of CVADs needed in both cohorts was around 30%. Incidences of inhibitors were unchanged: SHA (∼31%) and SHB (∼10%). Sporadic cases were diagnosed significantly later (median 8.3 months; IQR; 3.7-11.9) and they had more joint bleeds before start of prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Primary prophylaxis nowadays starts at an earlier age: before any joint bleed (60% of patients with SHA and SHB). Approximately 70% started on a once-weekly schedule with significantly reduced doses in SHA but unchanged in SHB.

Prophylaxis use of clotting factor replacement products in people with non-severe haemophilia: A review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: People with non-severe haemophilia appear to be under-treated in many countries, and this may lead to joint damage and worsen quality of life. AIM: To review literature for clotting factor replacement prophylaxis in people with non-severe haemophilia A and B (HA/HB) in relation to long-term outcomes to support clinical decision-making. METHODS: A targeted literature search was performed to identify studies published between 2000 and 2021 that included prophylaxis in people with non-severe HA/HB and long-term outcomes, including annualized bleeding rates, joint health and quality of life. RESULTS: Although eligible articles included 2737 and 2272 people with mild or moderate HA, respectively, only 22% (n = 609) and 29% (n = 668) reported treatment regimens. A total of 549 people with moderate HA were treated with factor replacement prophylaxis and were from high-income countries. On the contrary, nearly all people with mild HA received desmopressin (n = 599). Details of treatment regimens for women with haemophilia and people with HB were sparse. Three studies provided long-term outcomes for people with moderate haemophilia who received prophylaxis with factor concentrate, supporting early prophylaxis in people with a frequent bleeding phenotype regardless of their endogenous clotting factor level to preserve joint health. CONCLUSION: There remain large knowledge gaps when considering how to provide optimal treatment for people with non-severe haemophilia. Nonetheless, there is a strong rationale that prophylaxis should be considered early in life according to similar strategies as for severe haemophilia for those with a frequent severe bleeding phenotype.

Prophylaxis in hemophilia

Hemophilia is an inherited X-linked coagulopathy defined by a deficiency or abnormality in the clotting function of factor VIII (Hemophilia A) or factor IX (Hemophilia B). Prophylaxis ­ the regular administration of therapeutic products to maintain hemostasis and prevent bleeding ­ is the mainstream of treatment. Addressing the development and scientific evidence for administrating prophylaxis is the goal of this review. Prophylaxis is the therapeutic modality of choice for people with severe hemophilia, being considered, in principle, a lifelong treatment. It should have an early onset, ideally as a primary, or at least secondary. Even lifelong tertiary prophylaxis seems to offer benefit, although further studies are still lacking. Individualized strategies should lead to an optimization of the dilemma between better joint outcomes versus involved costs.

Avaliação do perfil clínico-terapêutico e da resposta à profilaxia dos portadores de hemofilia A e B em um centro de referência no Ceará / Evaluation of the clinical-therapeutic profile and the response to prophylaxis of patients with hemophilia A and B in a reference center in Ceará

Objetivo: Avaliar o perfil clínico-terapêutico e a resposta à profilaxia em pacientes hemofílicos A e B em um centro de referência no Ceará. Métodos: Estudo de coorte retrospectivo, com dados de 133 hemofílicos A e B, em profilaxia entre 2016 e 2021, por meio de prontuários médicos e sistema Web Coagulopatias. Resultados: Os pacientes todos do sexo masculino em sua maioria foram hemofílicos A (93,2%), na forma grave, residentes em Fortaleza, com maior prevalência do município de Guaiúba. A maioria fazia uso de Fator VIII recombinante e em profilaxia secundária, em relação ao comprometimento articular a maioria não apresentou relato de hemartroses (66,9%), articulação-alvo (87,9%) ou artropatia (54,9%), porém os hemofílicos em profilaxia terciária apresentaram um maior comprometimento articular em relação a profilaxia primária e secundária. Verificou-se uma correlação negativa entre o tempo de profilaxia e a dose de fator utilizada, demonstrando que quanto maior o tempo de profilaxia menor a dose do fator utilizada. Um total de 13 hemofílicos A grave desenvolveram inibidor de fator VIII realizando imunotolerância (ITI) com sucesso total em 84,6%. Por meio da curva ROC, foi verificado uma associação entre a necessidade de ITI e a dose de fator de coagulação, com acurácia de 67,7% de que o uso de doses maiores de fator predispõe ao desenvolvimento de inibidores. Conclusão: Os dados do estudo permitem inferir que quanto mais precoce o tratamento de profilaxia menor é comprometimento articular, dose do fator utilizada e menor predisposição de desenvolver inibidores dos fatores da coagulação.

Objective: to evaluate the clinical-therapeutic profile and response to prophylaxis in hemophiliac A and B patients at a referral center in Ceará. Methods: Retrospective cohort study, with data from 133 hemophiliacs A and B, undergoing prophylaxis between 2016 and 2021, using medical records and the Web Coagulopathies system. Results: Most of the patients were male patients with severe hemophilia A (93.2%), residing in Fortaleza, with a higher prevalence in the city of Guaiúba. Most made use of recombinant Factor VIII and in secondary prophylaxis, in relation to joint involvement, the majority did not report hemarthroses (66.9%), target joint (87.9%) or arthropathy (54.9%). however, hemophiliacs on tertiary prophylaxis showed greater joint impairment in relation to primary and secondary prophylaxis. There was a negative correlation between the prophylaxis time and the factor dose used, demonstrating that the longer the prophylaxis time, the lower the factor dose used. A total of 13 severe A hemophiliacs developed factor VIII inhibitor performing immunotolerance (ITI) with total success in 84.6%. Using the ROC curve, an association was verified between the need for ITI and the dose of coagulation factor, with an accuracy of 67.7% that the use of higher doses of factor predisposes to the development of inhibitors. Conclusion: The study data allow us to infer that the earlier the prophylaxis treatment, the less joint impairment, the dose of the factor used and the less predisposition to develop coagulation factor inhibitors.

Emicizumab: a novel drug in hemophilia A prophylaxis - a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Hemophilia A is a genetically conditioned disease leading to hemostatic disorders due to factor VIII (FVIII) deficiency. The treatment of hemophilia has evolved throughout the past years and has significantly changed. One of the newest drugs for prophylactic treatment is the humanized bispecific IgG antibody - emicizumab, which binds with factor IXa and factor X, bridging those factors and thus mimicking the activity of factor VIII. AREAS COVERED: The literature search was done via the PubMed database, with the emphasis on clinical trials and case reports, describing the off-label emicizumab use. This review presents an extensive summary and considers the advantages and disadvantages (side-effects) of emicizumab, describing additional clinical situations, where emicizumab has been successfully used. In our review, we cover information about the mechanisms of action, indications, and efficacy and discuss some chosen case reports about off-label emicizumab use. EXPERT OPINION: Its convenient administration method (subcutaneous) and frequency of injections (from once a week to once a month) makes it a more comfortable treatment, limiting injection-site reactions, hospital stays, costs of prophylaxis, and significantly increasing patients' quality of life. Adverse effects are scarce and rarely serious - the most common ones are reactions at the injection-site and upper respiratory tract infections.

Individualised prophylaxis based on personalised target trough FVIII level optimised clinical outcomes in paediatric patients with severe haemophilia A.

INTRODUCTION: As standard care of severe haemophilia A (SHA), prophylaxis should be individualised. AIM: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of this new-proposed individualised prophylaxis protocol. METHODS: Boys with SHA were enrolled and followed a PK-guided, trough-level escalating protocol of prophylaxis after a six-month observational period. In the next 2 years, clinical assessments including joint bleeds, ultrasound (US) scores and Haemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) in both sides of ankles, knees and elbows were conducted every 6 months as a scoring system, which determined whether the trough level's escalation. Adjustment of dosing regimen was based on WAPPS-Hemo. RESULTS: Fifty-eight SHA boys were finally analysed. Their age and bodyweight were 5.3(2.8,6.9) years and 21.5(16,25) kg. During the study, 47 escalations were conducted. At study exit, the patient number and proportion of different trough level groups were: < 1 IU/dl, 17.2% (10/58); 1-3 IU/dl, 53.5% (31/58); 3-5 IU/dl, 15.5% (9/58); > 5 IU/dl, 13.8% (8/58). Significantly reduced annualised bleeding rate [4(0,8) to 0(0,2), p < .0001] and annualised joint bleeding rate [2(0,4) to 0(0,.25), p < .0001] was observed at study exit as well as the continuous trend of increased zero bleeding proportion (ZBP) (27.6%-69.0%) and zero joint bleeding proportion (46.5%-81.3%). Besides, 85% (6/7) of the target joints vanished. Statistical improvements of US scores (p = .04) and HJHS (p = .02) were also reported at study exit. CONCLUSION: Our results showed the effectiveness of our protocol based on individualised target trough level and emphasise the importance of personalised prophylaxis.

Expert opinion on current and future prophylaxis therapies aimed at improving protection for people with hemophilia A.

The next frontier in hemophilia A management has arrived. However, questions remain regarding the broader applicability of new and emerging hemophilia A therapies, such as the long-term safety and efficacy of non-factor therapies and optimal regimens for individual patients. With an ever-evolving clinical landscape, it is imperative for physicians to understand how available and future hemophilia A therapies could potentially be integrated into real-life clinical practice to improve patient outcomes. Against this background, nine hemophilia experts from Central European countries participated in a pre-advisory board meeting survey. The survey comprised 11 multiple-choice questions about current treatment practices and future factor and non-factor replacement therapies. The survey questions were developed to reflect current unmet needs in hemophilia management reflected in the literature. The experts also took part in a follow-up advisory board meeting to discuss the most important unmet needs for hemophilia management as well as the pre-meeting survey results. All experts highlighted the challenge of maintaining optimal trough levels with prophylaxis as their most pressing concern. Targeting trough levels of ≥30-50 IU/L or even higher to achieve less bleeding was highlighted as their preferred strategy. However, the experts had an equal opinion on how this could be achieved (i.e., more efficacious non-factor therapies or factor therapy offering broader personalization possibilities such as targeting trough levels to individual pharmacokinetic data). In summary, our study favors personalized prophylaxis to individual pharmacokinetic data rather than a "one-size-fits-all" approach to hemophilia A management to maintain optimal trough levels for individual patients.

Twice Weekly Vs. Thrice Weekly Low-Dose Prophylactic Factor VIII Therapy in Children with Hemophilia A: An Open Label Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Low dose factor VIII prophylactic therapy in hemophilia has not been well established till date. This randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy of twice vs. thrice weekly schedule of low dose prophylactic factor VIII in children with hemophilia A as evaluated by the bleeding rate and clinico-radiological evaluation. METHODS: Thirty-three children with severe hemophilia A (≤18 years) were randomized into two groups. Baseline evaluation included detailed history, clinical (HJHS 2.1 score and FISH score) and radiological examination (Pettersson score and ultrasound score). Group 1 received twice weekly factor VIII prophylaxis while group 2 received thrice weekly factor VIII prophylaxis, the dose being 10 U/kg in both groups. All participants were followed up over next 6 months to one year. Data regarding acute bleeding episodes and repeat clinico-radiological assessment at the end of follow up were recorded. RESULTS: We analyzed 14 children in twice weekly prophylaxis group and 16 children in thrice weekly prophylaxis group. Statistically insignificant difference was found between the bleeding rates in both the groups after prophylaxis with the median values of monthly bleeding rate being 0.17 and p-value of 0.79. The differences between the initial and final clinical and radiological scores within each group were found to be statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the clinical and radiological scores in between the groups. CONCLUSION: Twice weekly FVIII therapy is effective, easily administered prophylactic schedule to prevent long-term complications of hemophilia A. Lay summaryHemophilia A is one of the most common congenital coagulation factor deficiencies. Low dose factor VIII prophylaxis is recommended for hemophilia in resource-poor settings to reduce the bleeding episodes and improve the quality of life, although the optimal schedule for the same has not been well established. A randomized controlled trial on 33 children with hemophilia A (≤18 years) was done to compare the efficacy of twice versus thrice weekly schedule of prophylactic factor VIII. Group 1 received twice weekly factor VIII prophylaxis while group 2 received thrice weekly factor VIII prophylaxis, the dose in both groups being 10 U/kg. They were evaluated by the bleeding rate and clinical (HJHS 2.1 score and FISH score) and radiological scores (Pettersson score and ultrasound score). All participants were followed up over next 6 months to one year. Data regarding acute bleeding episodes and repeat clinico-radiological assessment at end of follow up were recorded. When analyzed, statistically insignificant difference was found between the bleeding rates after the two prophylaxis regimes. There was a significant improvement between initial and final clinical and radiological scores in both the groups and no difference was recorded in between the groups. To conclude, twice weekly FVIII therapy is effective, easily administered prophylactic schedule to prevent long-term complications of hemophilia A.

CTLA4-Ig prevents development of neutralizing antibody formation after continuous treatment with human FVIII in HA rats.

INTRODUCTION: Immunogenicity causing development of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) are major challenges in the treatment of haemophilia, as well as other diseases where proteins are used for treatment. Furthermore, it is a complication for preclinical testing of such therapies in animal models. AIM: To investigate if the immunosuppressive drug CTLA4 immunoglobulin (CTLA4-Ig) can induce tolerance in haemophilia A (HA) rats receiving recombinant human coagulation factor VIII (rhFVIII) treatment. METHODS: Two different prophylactic rhFVIII compounds were given intravenously to HA rats for 4 weeks. Both rhFVIII compounds were co-administered with commercially available CTLA4-Ig or human IgG subclass 4 (hIgG4) as control, and blood samples were collected. To functionally test if pharmacological efficacy was retained, rats were subjected to a bleeding experiment under anaesthesia at end of study. RESULTS: The mean inhibitory level after 4 weeks in rats receiving rhFVIII and hIgG4 was 85.7 BU for octocog alfa and 37.4 BU for rurioctocog alfa pegol. In contrast, co-administration with CTLA4-Ig during rhFVIII therapy prevented the formation of ADAs (both binding and inhibitory) in 14/14 rats receiving octocog alfa and in 7/7 rats receiving rurioctocog alfa pegol. Moreover, we were able to show that the pharmacological efficacy of rhFVIII was preserved. CONCLUSION: In a rat model with spontaneous bleeding, co-administration of CTLA4-Ig with rhFVIII prevented antibody formation. No FVIII antibodies were detected, demonstrating that CTLA4-Ig co-administration can be applicable as a method to prevent immunogenicity, when evaluating human proteins in preclinical systems permitting continuous pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessment.

Évaluation de AfstylaMC (rFVIII): Hémophilie de type A / Afstyla™ (rFVIII) Evaluation: Hemophilia Type A

MANDAT: À la demande du fabricant CSL Behring Canada Inc., l'Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS) a procédé à l'évaluation du produit du système du sang AfstylaMC (lonoctocog alfa), un facteur VIII (FVIII) de coagulation humain recombinant qui s'administre par voie intraveineuse. Au Canada, lonoctocog alfa est indiqué pour la prophylaxie de routine, la maîtrise et la prévention des épisodes hémorragiques ainsi que pour la maîtrise et la prévention des saignements dans un contexte périopératoire chez les adultes et les enfants atteints d'hémophilie A (déficit congénital en facteur VIII). Les indications visées pour cette réévaluation sont identiques à celle reconnue par Santé Canada. Les neuf FVIII suivants sont présentement inscrits sur la Liste des produits du système du sang du Québec et ont servi de comparateurs. Parmi ceux-ci se trouvent six produits à action standard : AdvateMC, HelixateMC, KovaltryMC, NuwiqMC, XynthaMC (inclus Xyntha SolofuseMC) et ZonovateMC (à action standard) ainsi que trois produits à longue action : AdynovateMC, EloctateMC et EsperoctMC. DÉMARCHE D'ÉVALUATION: Une revue des données issues de la littérature et de celles fournies par le fabricant a été réalisée afin de documenter l'efficacité, l'innocuité et l'efficience de lonoctocog alfa. Des données contextuelles et expérientielles issues de la consultation d'experts et de patients sont également présentées. Élaboration par l'INESSS d'une analyse d'efficience et d'impact budgétaire. BESOIN DE SANT: L'hémophilie A, causée par une défaillance du FVIII, se manifeste par des temps de coagulation plus longs que la normale. Dans les cas sévères, le déficit en FVIII mène à des épisodes de saignement fréquents aux articulations, appelés hémarthroses, et aux tissus mous en absence de traumatisme. La prophylaxie à l'aide de FVIII recombinant constitue le traitement privilégié. Celle-ci consiste en plusieurs injections intraveineuses hebdomadaires pour remplacer le FVIII manquant. Malgré une bonne prise en charge de l'hémophilie A au Québec, certaines lacunes liées aux traitements actuels demeurent. Outre le souhait d'un traitement curatif permanent, les besoins suivants ont été identifiés par les experts rencontrés : une meilleure prévention contre le développement d'inhibiteurs (anticorps neutralisants contre le FVIII), la prévention d'arthropathies hémophiliques et des douleurs chroniques, des traitements offrant une protection hémostatique supérieure qui perdure plus longtemps et l'atténuation des contraintes liées aux injections intraveineuses répétées. RÉSULTATS: Efficacité: Lonoctocog alfa est considéré comme un FVIII à action standard. Lonoctocog alfa apparait au moins aussi efficace que ses comparateurs pour prévenir les saignements, lorsqu'utilisé en prophylaxie. Lonoctocog alfa apparait aussi efficace que ses comparateurs pour traiter les saignements perthérapeutiques. Dans les études répertoriées, lonoctocog alfa démontre une efficacité hémostatique bonne ou excellente lors de chirurgies. Innocuité: Le profil d'innocuité de lonoctocog alfa est jugé acceptable. Qualité de vie: Aucune donnée sur l'impact de lonoctocog alfa sur la qualité de vie n'a été présentée. Perspective de l'expert: À la lumière des données disponibles, l'expert consulté est d'avis que l'efficacité de la prophylaxie de lonoctocog alfa est comparable à celle des comparateurs, soient tous les FVIII inscrits à la Liste. Selon l'expert, le profil d'innocuité de lonoctocog alfa est comparable aux autres options disponibles pour la population ciblée.

Multiyear Factor VIII Expression after AAV Gene Transfer for Hemophilia A.

BACKGROUND: The goal of gene therapy for patients with hemophilia A is to safely impart long-term stable factor VIII expression that predictably ameliorates bleeding with the use of the lowest possible vector dose. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 trial, we infused an investigational adeno-associated viral (AAV) vector (SPK-8011) for hepatocyte expression of factor VIII in 18 men with hemophilia A. Four dose cohorts were enrolled; the lowest-dose cohort received a dose of 5 × 1011 vector genomes (vg) per kilogram of body weight, and the highest-dose cohort received 2 × 1012 vg per kilogram. Some participants received glucocorticoids within 52 weeks after vector administration either to prevent or to treat a presumed AAV capsid immune response. Trial objectives included evaluation of the safety and preliminary efficacy of SPK-8011 and of the expression and durability of factor VIII. RESULTS: The median safety observation period was 36.6 months (range, 5.5 to 50.3). A total of 33 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 8 participants; 17 events were vector-related, including 1 serious adverse event, and 16 were glucocorticoid-related. Two participants lost all factor VIII expression because of an anti-AAV capsid cellular immune response that was not sensitive to immune suppression. In the remaining 16 participants, factor VIII expression was maintained; 12 of these participants were followed for more than 2 years, and a one-stage factor VIII assay showed no apparent decrease in factor VIII activity over time (mean [±SD] factor VIII activity, 12.9±6.9% of the normal value at 26 to 52 weeks when the participants were not receiving glucocorticoids vs. 12.0±7.1% of the normal value at >52 weeks after vector administration; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.4 to 0.6 for the difference between matched pairs). The participants had a 91.5% reduction (95% CI, 88.8 to 94.1) in the annualized bleeding rate (median rate, 8.5 events per year [range, 0 to 43.0] before vector administration vs. 0.3 events per year [range, 0 to 6.5] after vector administration). CONCLUSIONS: Sustained factor VIII expression in 16 of 18 participants who received SPK-8011 permitted discontinuation of prophylaxis and a reduction in bleeding episodes. No major safety concerns were reported. (Funded by Spark Therapeutics and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03003533 and NCT03432520.).

Alfadamoctocogue pegol para profilaxia secundária em pacientes com Hemofilia A, a partir de 12 anos, previamente tratados e sem inibidor / Alfadamoctocogue pegol for secondary prophylaxis in patients with Hemophilia A, from 12 years, previously treated and sem inhibitor

INTRODUÇÃO: A hemofilia A é uma doença hereditária ligada ao cromossomo X, caracterizada pela deficiência ou anormalidade da atividade coagulante do fator VIII e representa a maioria dos casos de coagulopatias hereditárias, com aproximadamente 10.123 casos no país em 2016. A manifestação clínica mais frequente da doença é a hemorragia musculoesquelética, principalmente os sangramentos intra articulares (hemartroses) que afetam especialmente as articulações do joelho, tornozelo, cotovelo, ombro e coxofemoral. Hemartroses de repetição em uma mesma articulação podem levar à degeneração articular progressiva com perda funcional e, nos casos graves, os sangramentos ocorrem frequentemente sem causa aparente. O tratamento dos pacientes com hemofilia A requer a infusão intravenosa do fator de coagulação deficiente (FVIII), sendo feito sob demanda (tratamento do episódio hemorrágico) ou de forma profilática para manter os seus níveis séricos adequados, prevenindo os episódios hemorrágicos. O Programa de Coagulopatias do Ministério da Saúde disponibiliza o FVIII recombinante com meia-vida padrão para o uso em profilaxia. A tecnologia proposta consiste em um FVIII recombinante com meia-vida estendida. Os produtos com meia-vida estendida foram desenvolvidos mais recentemente com o objetivo de disponibilizar um tempo maior de FVIII na circulação sanguínea, proporcionando um intervalo maior entre as infusões e melhor proteção contra sangramentos. TECNOLOGIA: Alfadamoctocogue pegol. PERGUNTA: O uso de alfadamoctocogue pegol para profilaxia secundária em pacientes com hemofilia A, a partir de 12 anos, previamente tratados (e sem inibidores) é mais seguro, eficaz e custo-efetivo do que o tratamento padrão no SUS? EVIDÊNCIAS CLÍNICAS: O único estudo comparativo apresentado, ainda que com qualidade de evidência baixa, não demonstrou diferença estatisticamente significativa no principal desfecho, taxa anualizada de sangramento, entre a tecnologia proposta e a tecnologia disponibilizada no SUS. Dentre outros potenciais benefícios relacionados a menor frequência de infusão do alfadamoctocogue pegol, apenas um estudo avaliou isoladamente a satisfação dos pacientes com a tecnologia proposta, sem comparação à tecnologia padrão. Na ausência de evidências científicas demonstrando superioridade da tecnologia proposta, o demandante realizou um painel Delphi, com especialistas na área de hemofilia A que atuam no SUS em diferentes regiões do Brasil, que sugeriu que os pacientes mais beneficiados com o uso do alfadamoctocogue pegol seriam aqueles com perfil sangrador, farmacocinética desfavorável, baixa adesão ao tratamento e com alta atividade diária. AVALIAÇÃO ECONÔMICA: Um estudo de custo-minimização foi construído baseado na premissa do estudo de Batt, 2019 de que ambas as tecnologias possuem a mesma eficácia. Foram construídos cenários para início do tratamento em diferentes faixas etárias (12 e 30 anos) e cenários para diferentes utilizações de UIs dos medicamentos (cenário base e proposto). No horizonte da vida toda, os resultados para os pacientes iniciando com 12 anos de idade foi uma economia por paciente de R$ 1.342.233,18 e R$ 3.625.885,71 para os cenários base e proposto respectivamente. ANÁLISE DE IMPACTO ORÇAMENTÁRIO: Os resultados da análise de custo-efetividade foram utilizados para a construção da análise de impacto orçamentário. Dados do Perfil de Coagulopatias de 2016, do IBGE e do Painel Delphi foram utilizados para estimar o número de pacientes elegíveis ao tratamento. Estimou-se que de 30% a 40% dos pacientes teriam um perfil sangrador e seriam elegíveis a substituição pela formulação de liberação estendida (alfadamoctocogue pegol). Esses valores foram utilizados no market share proposto. Ao final de 5 anos, estimou-se uma economia de R$323.024.411,22. MONITORAMENTO DO HORIZONTE TECNOLÓGICO: Foram detectadas quatro tecnologias potenciais para o tratamento de pacientes com hemofilia a partir de 12 anos de idade. O Mim-8, um anticorpo IgG4 mimético do fator 8 de coagulação, que tem como alvos os fatores IX e X de coagulação, o fitusiran, um RNA silenciador (siRNA), direcionado ao RNA mensageiro (RNAm) codificador de antitrombina, e os anticorpos monoclonais IgG4 concizumabe e marstacimab, inibidores do inibidor da via do fator tissular (TFPI). Além dos potenciais medicamentos descritos, com mecanismos de ação diferentes dos fatores de coagulação, estão em fase 3 clínica os fatores VIII recombinantes FRSW-107, SCT-800 e efanesoctocog alfa (BIVV001). Além desses, foram registrados, em outros países, os fatores VIII recombinantes damoctocog alfa pegol (Japão, 2019); lonoctocog alfa (EUA, 2016) e turoctocog alfa pegol (Alemanha e Suíça, 2019). O alfadamoctocogue é protegido pela patente PI 0517795-2, depositada no Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Intelectual (INPI) em 14/11/2005, com validade até 31/03/30 (45). CONSIDERAÇÕES FINAIS: Não houve estudos de comparação direta que mostrasse que a intervenção é superior ou possui a mesma efetividade do comparador. Apenas um estudo de comparação indireta demonstrou não haver significância estatística entre as alternativas. A avaliação de custo-minimização e o impacto orçamentário mostraram resultados que representaram economia para o SUS com a incorporação da nova tecnologia. RECOMENDAÇÃO PRELIMINAR DA CONITEC: Diante do exposto, a Conitec, em sua 5ª reunião extraordinária, realizada no dia 12 de maio de 2021, deliberou que a matéria fosse disponibilizada em consulta pública com recomendação preliminar de todos os membros do plenário desfavorável à incorporação do alfadamoctocogue pegol para o tratamento de hemofilia A em profilaxia secundária para pacientes a partir de 12 anos de idade no SUS. Os membros do plenário concordaram que, apesar da comodidade posológica, diante da impossibilidade de desconto nos impostos, o impacto orçamentário que antes produziria uma economia, se torna um gasto próximo a 200 milhões de reais ao final de 5 anos. A matéria foi disponibilizada em consulta pública. CONSULTA PÚBLICA: Foram recebidas 3.387 contribuições, sendo 434 pelo formulário para contribuições técnico-científicas e 2.953 pelo formulário para contribuições sobre experiência ou opinião de pacientes, familiares, amigos ou cuidadores de pacientes, profissionais de saúde ou pessoas interessadas no tema. Das 434 contribuições de cunho técnico-científico recebidas, 66 foram analisadas, já que as demais não apresentaram informação alguma (em branco) ou argumentação técnica sobre as evidências. No total, 117 concordaram com a recomendação inicial da Conitec, 9 não concordaram e não discordaram e 308 discordaram. Das 117 que concordaram, 44 apresentaram algum comentário sobre essa opinião e todos eles discordavam da decisão da Conitec. Das 2.952 contribuições recebidas sobre experiência com a tecnologia ou opinião sobre o tema, 339 foram analisadas, já que as demais não apresentaram informação alguma (em branco). No total, 559 concordaram com a recomendação inicial da Conitec, 62 não concordaram e não discordaram e 2.331 discordaram. Os assuntos abordados pelos participantes que discordaram da recomendação preliminar foram majoritariamente relacionados ao acesso e a possibilidade de mais uma opção terapêutica, os ganhos em qualidade de vida e a comodidade posológica que a tecnologia traz aos pacientes. RECOMENDAÇÃO FINAL DA CONITEC: Pelo exposto, o Plenário da Conitec, em sua 101ª Reunião Ordinária, no dia primeiro de setembro de 2021, recomendou, por maioria simples, a incorporação de alfadamoctocogue pegol para a profilaxia secundária em pacientes com Hemofilia A, a partir de 12 anos, previamente tratados e sem inibidor no SUS, conforme Protocolo estabelecido pelo Ministério da Saúde. Considerou-se como justificativa para a decisão a maior vantagem posológica e a economia demonstrada ao SUS. Por fim, foi assinado o Registro de Deliberação nº 664/2021. DECISÃO: Incorporar o alfadamoctocogue pegol para profilaxia secundária em pacientes com Hemofilia A, no âmbito do Sistema Único de Saúde ­ SUS, conforme a Portaria nº 11, publicada no Diário Oficial da União nº 31, seção 1, página 71, em 14 de fevereiro de 2022.

Which tests can most effectively indicate the clinical phenotype of paediatric haemophilia patients with prophylaxis?

Patients with haemophilia A who have similar FVIII levels show clinical heterogeneity, and 10-15% of patients with severe haemophilia do not have a severe bleeding phenotype. The aim of this study was to assess whether global haemostasis tests, such as thrombin generation assay (TGA) and thromboelastography (TEG), can predict the bleeding pattern of severe haemophilia better than trough levels and pharmacokinetic profiles, particularly in the prophylactic setting. The study group consisted of 39 patients with haemophilia A and 75 healthy controls. The annual bleeding rate (ABR) and Hemophilia Joint Health Score 2.1 (HJHS) of the patients were determined. Basal factor FVIII, inhibitor levels, TEG and TGA of participants with prophylaxis were performed after a washout period. Then, a recombinant FVIII product was administered to patients. After factor replacement, the above tests were repeated at 30 min, 6 and 48 h. There was a significant difference in the ABR and HJHS between the groups according to the basal factor VIII activity of patients after wash-out. TEG and TGA parameters of patients with factor activity above 1% were significantly better than those of patients with factor activity below 1%. After factor concentrate administration, factor activities, TEG and TGA parameters at 30 min, 6 and 48 h were similar in the two groups. We showed that the 1% trough level but not for the 3% trough level is critical for both clinical phenotypes and thrombin generation for haemophilia patients in the prophylactic setting.

Predicted coagulation potential using an in vitro simulated model of emicizumab prophylaxis and immune tolerance induction therapy in hemophilia A patients with inhibitor.

Emicizumab reduces bleeding in hemophilia A patients with inhibitor (HA-inh). A combination of immune tolerance induction therapy (ITI) and emicizumab prophylaxis may provide additional benefits, but coagulation potential during this treatment remains unknown. We assessed coagulation potentials in simulated ITI models in vitro using modified-clot waveform analysis. Factor (F)VIII-deficient plasma preincubated with anti-A2 and anti-C2 monoclonal antibodies was reacted with emicizumab (50 µg/mL) (emicizumab-HA-plasma), then spiking bypassing agents (BPAs): activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCC 1.3 IU/mL; 50 IU/kg), recombinant factor (rF)VIIa (2.2 µg/mL; 90 µg/kg), and FVIIa/FX (1.5 µg/mL; 60 µg/kg), and/or FVIII (100, 200 IU/dL). Coagulation potentials in emicizumab-HA-plasma (10 BU/mL) remained within the normal range when BPA and FVIII were both present. In emicizumab-HA-plasma (1 BU/mL) with BPA and FVIII (200 IU/dL), they were near or beyond the normal range, but those with a half concentration of rFVIIa based on the half-life in blood were within the normal range. In samples without inhibitor, coagulation potentials with combined BPA and FVIII were far beyond the normal range but with FVIII (100 IU/dL) and rFVIIa at half concentration they remained within the normal range. These results may provide information on the feasibility of concurrent ITI under emicizumab prophylaxis.