Head-to-head comparison of the pharmacokinetic profiles of a high-purity factor IX concentrate (AlphaNine®) and a recombinant factor IX (BeneFIX®) in patients with severe haemophilia B.

Head-on comparative studies of factor IX (FIX) concentrates performed under standardized conditions are rarely conducted regardless of being a valuable instrument guiding health care providers towards better informed and cost-effective decisions. This study is an extension of a multicentre study that assessed the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of AlphaNine(®) in 25 previously treated patients with severe haemophilia B (FIX:C ≤ 2%). After a washout period ≥ 7 days following the last PK performed with AlphaNine(®) after a dose of 65-75 IU kg(-1) , an identical PK study was performed with BeneFIX(®) on 22 of the same patients. Venous blood samples for analysis were taken at baseline and at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 3, 6, 9, 24, 48, 72 and 74 h post infusion. The outcomes of the comparison of the PK parameters were as follows: Mean (± SD) in vivo recovery (IVR) was 1.3 ± 0.4 IU dL(-1) per IU kg(-1) for AlphaNine(®) and 1.0 ± 0.3 IU dL(-1) per IU kg(-1) for BeneFIX(®) (P < 0.01). Mean terminal half-life, mean residence time, area under the curve, clearance and volume of distribution of BeneFIX(®) were 36.0 ± 12.8 h, 39.3 ± 13.9 h, 1631 ± 467 IU h dL(-1) , 0.046 ± 0.01 dL kg(-1) min(-1) and 1.75 ± 0.52 mL kg(-1) respectively. These values were not significantly different to those observed in AlphaNine(®), although BeneFIX(®) displayed higher than expected IVR values and lower than expected clearance values. In conclusion, AlphaNine(®) showed a comparable half-life, but an IVR significantly higher than that of BeneFIX(®). This dissimilarity may have implications on dosing requirements for on-demand treatment regimes affecting optimal resource allocation.

A clinical study assessing the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of AlphaNine(®) , a high-purity factor IX concentrate, in patients with severe haemophilia B.

Effective treatment with factor IX (FIX) requires a thorough consideration of the properties of the concentrate to be used as replacement therapy, to date, the only available treatment for haemophilia B. The aim of the study was to determine the pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety in routine clinical use of AlphaNine(®) , a high-purity human FIX concentrate. This open, single-arm, multicentre, non-randomized trial included 25 subjects (age ≥ 12) with moderate/severe haemophilia B. Pharmacokinetics was assessed at baseline and after a 6-month follow-up. The degree of haemostasis control achieved was evaluated during a 12-month follow-up. Safety was evaluated in terms of tolerance, thrombogenicity, immunogenicity and viral safety. Mean recovery was 1.01 ± 0.19 IU dL(-1) per IU kg(-1) at baseline and 1.23 ± 0.34 IU dL(-1) per IU kg(-1) 6 months later. Terminal half-life was 34.5 ± 6.2 h and 33.7 ± 5.4 h, respectively. Ratios of each parameter between the two pharmacokinetic studies were all close to 1. A total of 1,576,890 IU AlphaNine(®) were administered in 889 infusions (mean dose per infusion: 1774 IU; 3.2 infusions per month per patient). The main reasons for infusion were mild/moderate bleeding (62.3%) and prophylaxis (20.5% continuous, 15.6% intermittent). Overall, 93.0% of the efficacy assessments were rated as excellent/good and 88.8% of bleedings resolved after the first infusion. Twenty-one adverse events were reported in eight patients, none of which was considered related to the study medication. AlphaNine(®) showed a pharmacokinetic profile in agreement with that of other plasma-derived FIX concentrates and provides safe and clinically effective substitution therapy for patients with haemophilia B.

Evaluation of Anti-HBs serum levels and pharmacokinetic profile after intravenous administration of Niuliva, a new hepatitis B immunoglobulin, following liver transplantation.

PURPOSE: We assessed whether trough anti-hepatitis B surface antigen (HBs) serum levels considered to be protective (>100 IU/L) were maintained in liver transplanted patients after 6 months of uninterrupted treatment with Niuliva, a new intravenous HBIg. METHODS: Twenty patients, aged 18-70 years, who had undergone liver transplantation due to HBV-related liver disease at least 1 year before inclusion were enrolled in a prospective, open-label, uncontrolled, multicenter clinical study. A fixed monthly dose of 5,000 IU of study medication was administered intravenously for 6 months. RESULTS: After the second infusion, all mean values of anti-HBs and 95% CIs were above the limit of 100 IU/L considered to be protective. The percentages of success ranged between 95% (95% CI 75.1%-99.9%) and 100% (95% CI 86.1%-100%). Mean values and 95% CI of in vivo recovery of anti-HBs at 15-30 minutes after each infusion showed overlaps between all intervals, which indicated that significant differences were not present in the recovery of post infusion anti-HBs in vivo. There were no recurrences of HBV infection during the study. There were no seroconversions in patients previously negative to hepatitis C virus or HIV. No serious adverse events related to the study medication were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Serum levels of anti-HBs after using Niuliva in patients who had undergone liver transplantation were protective in 95%-100% of cases after the study period. This new HBIg showed the expected pharmacokinetic profile and was well tolerated and safe.