A 360-degree perspective on adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapy for haemophilia: Insights from the physician, the nurse and the patient.

BACKGROUND: Adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapy for haemophilia has advanced substantially in the last 13 years; recently, three products have received approvals from regulatory authorities. Although the impact on quality of life seems promising, some limitations remain, such as the presence of pre-existing anti-AAV neutralising antibodies and the occurrence of hepatotoxicity. This review follows the CSL Behring-sponsored symposium at the 27th Congress of the European Hematology Association (EHA) 2022 that examined the haemophilia gene therapy process from a 360-degree multidisciplinary perspective. Here, the faculty (haematologist, nurse and haemophilia patient) summarised their own viewpoints from the symposium, with the aim of highlighting the key considerations required to engage with gene therapy effectively, for both patients and providers, as well as the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration, including with industry. RESULTS: When considering these new therapies, patients face a complex decision-making process, which includes whether gene therapy is right for them at their current stage of life. The authors agreed that collaboration and tailored education across the multidisciplinary team (including patients and their carers/families), starting early in the process and continuing throughout the long-term follow-up period, is key for the success of gene therapy. Additionally, patient expectations, which may surround eligibility, follow-up requirements and treatment outcomes, should be continually explored. During these ongoing discussions, transparent communication of the unknown factors, such as anticipated clotting factor levels, long-term factor expression and safety, and psychological changes, is critical. To ensure efficiency and comprehensiveness, clearly­defined protocols should outline the whole process, which should include the recording and management of long-term effects. CONCLUSION: In order to engage effectively, both patients and providers should be familiar with these key considerations prior to their involvement with the haemophilia gene therapy process. The future after the approval of haemophilia gene therapies remains to be seen and real-world evidence is eagerly awaited.

The complex, confusing and poorly understood immune responses to AAV-mediated gene transfer in haemophilia-Is more or less immunosuppression required?

Attempts to achieve a functional cure or amelioration of the severe X linked bleeding disorders haemophilia A (factor VIII deficiency) and haemophilia B (factor IX deficiency) using AAV-based vectors have been frustrated by immune responses that limit efficacy and durability. The immune responses include adaptive and innate pathways as well as cytokine mediated inflammation, especially of the target organ cells-hepatocytes. Immune suppression has only been partly effective in clinical trials at ameliorating the immune response and the lack of good animal models has delayed progress in identifying mechanisms and developing more effective approaches to controlling these effects of AAV gene transfer. Here we discuss the arguments for and against more potent immunosuppression to improve factor expression after AAV-mediated gene therapy.

Monitoring for liver cancer post-gene therapy-How much and how often?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has long been recognized as a complication in people with chronic liver disease, particularly those with cirrhosis. Two gene therapies for haemophilia A and B recently approved in Europe and the US utilize adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors designed to target hepatocytes. A number of other AAV gene therapies are undergoing clinical investigation for both liver and extrahepatic diseases, many of which likely transduce hepatocytes as well. Although AAV vectors predominantly persist in episomal forms, concerns about insertional mutagenesis have arisen due to findings in pre-clinical models and in a small subset of human HCC cases featuring wild-type AAV integrations in proximity to potential oncogenes. Despite the absence of any causative link between AAV vector therapy and HCC in approved extrahepatic gene therapies or haemophilia gene therapy trials, the package inserts for the recently approved haemophilia gene therapies advise HCC screening in subsets of individuals with additional risk factors. In this review, we discuss HCC risk factors, compare various screening modalities, discuss optimal screening intervals, and consider when to initiate and possibly discontinue screening. At this early point in the evolution of gene therapy, we lack sufficient data to make evidence-based recommendations on HCC screening. While AAV vectors may eventually be shown to be unassociated with risk of HCC, we presently favour a cautious approach that entails regular surveillance until such time as it is hopefully proven to be unnecessary.

Which patients should be considered for gene therapy.

Gene therapy for haemophilia, utilizing adeno-associated viral vectors (AAVs) and coagulation factor genes, have demonstrated promising results, leading to recent approvals and introduction of the first gene therapy products into clinical practice. For successful and safe use, there are predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the treatment process and associated risks should be thoroughly understood and long-term safety and efficacy carefully evaluated during follow up. As gene therapy becomes more accessible outside of clinical study centers, continuous evaluation of patient eligibility for subsequent AAV-based treatments becomes essential. Thorough evaluation of factors such as liver condition, anti-AAV status, and medical history ensures that gene therapy maximizing benefits while minimizing risks. Apart from fulfilling the established inclusion and exclusion criteria, the success of gene therapy is greatly influenced by the motivation and willingness of patients to accept temporary constraints, such as regular laboratory monitoring, potential use of immunosuppressants, and thorough documentation. Furthermore, various patient-related factors play a significant role in the management and outcomes of gene therapy, making a comprehensive evaluation essential. With the accumulation of more data, there is potential for the expansion of certain inclusion criteria, which may allow for a larger number of eligible patients to benefit from gene therapy. Empowering patients through shared decision-making enables them to thoroughly consider the therapy's potential benefits and risks.

Hepatitis after gene therapy, what are the possible causes?

Hepatitis is a common adverse event following gene therapy for haemophilia, often associated with a loss of transgene expression. Investigating the potential causes and implications of this is crucial for the overall success of treatment. Gene therapy trials using adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors have demonstrated promising results marked by increases in factor FVIII and FIX levels and reductions in episodes of bleeding. However, hepatocellular injury characterised by elevations in alanine aminotransferases (ALT) has been noted. This liver injury is typically transient and asymptomatic, posing challenges in determining its clinical significance. Proposed causes encompass immune-mediated responses, notably T cell cytotoxicity in response to the AAV vector, direct liver injury from the viral capsid or transcribed protein via the unfolded protein response and pre-existing liver conditions. Liver biopsy data conducted years post-gene therapy infusion has shown sinusoidal infiltration without significant inflammation. The overall safety profile of gene therapy remains favourable with no evidence drug-induced liver injury (DILI) based on Hy's Law criteria. Essential pre-therapy monitoring and identifying patients at high risk of liver injury should involve liver function tests and non-invasive fibroscans, while novel blood-based biomarkers are under exploration. Further research is required to comprehend the mechanisms underlying transaminitis, loss of transgene expression and long-term effects on the liver, providing insights for optimising gene therapy for haemophilia.

Current and emerging gene therapies for haemophilia A and B.

INTRODUCTION: After decades of stumbling clinical development, the first gene therapies for haemophilia A and B have been commercialized and have normalized factor (F)VIII and factor (F)IX levels in some individuals in the long term. Several other clinical programs testing adeno-associated viral (AAV) vector gene therapy are at various stages of clinical testing. DISCUSSION: Multiyear follow-up in phase 1/2 and 3 studies showed long-term and sometimes curative but widely variable and unpredictable efficacy. Liver toxicities, mostly low-grade, occur in the 1st year in at least some individuals in all haemophilia A and B trials and are poorly understood. Wide variability and unpredictability of outcome and slow decline of FVIII levels are a major disadvantage because immune responses to AAV vectors preclude repeat dosing, which otherwise could improve suboptimal or restore declining expression, while overexpression may predispose to thrombosis. Long-term safety outcomes will need lifelong monitoring because AAV vectors infused at high doses integrate into chromosomes at rates that raise questions about potential oncogenicity and necessitate vigilance. Alternative gene transfer systems employing gene editing and/or non-viral vectors are under development and promise to overcome some limitations of the current state of the art for both haemophilia A and B. CONCLUSIONS: AAV gene therapies for haemophilia have now become new treatment options but not universal cures. AAV is a powerful but imperfect gene transfer platform. Biobetter FVIII transgenes may help solve some problems plaguing gene therapy for haemophilia A. Addressing variability and unpredictability of efficacy, and delivery of gene therapy to ineligible patient subgroups may require different gene transfer systems, most of which are not ready for clinical translation yet but bring innovations needed to overcome the current limitations of gene therapy.

Multicenter assessment and longitudinal study of the prevalence of antibodies and related adaptive immune responses to AAV in adult males with hemophilia.

Adeno-associated virus (AAV) based gene therapy has demonstrated effective disease control in hemophilia. However, pre-existing immunity from wild-type AAV exposure impacts gene therapy eligibility. The aim of this multicenter epidemiologic study was to determine the prevalence and persistence of preexisting immunity against AAV2, AAV5, and AAV8, in adult participants with hemophilia A or B. Blood samples were collected at baseline and annually for ≤3 years at trial sites in Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United States. At baseline, AAV8, AAV2, and AAV5 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) were present in 46.9%, 53.1%, and 53.4% of participants, respectively; these values remained stable at Years 1 and 2. Co-prevalence of NAbs to at least two serotypes and all three serotypes was present at baseline for ~40% and 38.2% of participants, respectively. For each serotype, ~10% of participants who tested negative for NAbs at baseline were seropositive at Year 1. At baseline, 38.3% of participants had detectable cell mediated immunity by ELISpot, although no correlations were observed with the humoral response. In conclusion, participants with hemophilia may have significant preexisting immunity to AAV capsids. Insights from this study may assist in understanding capsid-based immunity trends in participants considering AAV vector-based gene therapy.

A post hoc analysis of previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A who developed inhibitors in the PUPs A-LONG trial.

ABSTRACT: Inhibitor development is a major therapeutic complication for people with hemophilia. The phase 3 PUPs A-LONG study evaluated the safety and efficacy of efmoroctocog alfa (a recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein, herein referred to as rFVIIIFc) in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A. Male PUPs <6 years old were enrolled and received rFVIIIFc; inhibitor development was the primary end point. Post hoc analyses, including patient treatment regimen patterns and timing of inhibitor development, descriptive and Kaplan-Meier analyses of time to first inhibitor-positive test by treatment regimen and by titer, and consumption, were performed to describe patients who developed inhibitors during PUPs A-LONG. We investigated patient characteristics (eg, demographics and genotype) and nongenetic risk factors (eg, intense factor exposure and central venous access device [CVAD] placement) that may predict inhibitor development and characteristics of inhibitor development (low-titer vs high-titer inhibitor). Baseline characteristics were similarly distributed for age, race, and ethnicity across both patients who were inhibitor-positive and those who were inhibitor-negative (all P > .05). High-risk F8 variants were associated with development of high-titer inhibitors (P = .028). High-titer inhibitor development was often preceded by the presence of a low-titer inhibitor. Patients whose low-titer inhibitor progressed to a high-titer inhibitor received a higher mean dose per infusion (98.4 IU/kg, n = 5) compared with those whose low-titer inhibitor resolved spontaneously (59.2 IU/kg, n = 7; P = .033) or persisted (45.0 IU/kg, n = 5; P = .047). There was no association between CVAD placement surgery and inhibitor development. Post hoc analyses suggest that F8 genotype and dose of factor are as important as inhibitor risk factors and require further investigation. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT02234323.

Efficacy and Safety of Adeno-Associated Virus-Based Clinical Gene Therapy for Hemophilia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Clinical trials of adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapy have made remarkable progress in recent years. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to assess the efficacy and safety of AAV-based gene therapy for hemophilia. We systematically searched the Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases, for clinical trials involving patients diagnosed with hemophilia and treated with AAV-mediated gene therapy. Data on the annualized bleeding rate (ABR), annualized infusion rate (AIR), the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), severe adverse events (SAEs), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation were extracted as our outcomes. A total of 12 articles from 11 clinical trials were selected from 868 articles for meta-analysis. Pooled analyses showed that AAV-based gene therapy in hemophilia patients reduced the number of bleeding events and the number of factor infusion events by an approximate average of 7 per year and 103 per year, respectively. Eighty percent, 18%, and 63% of hemophilia patients had elevated TRAE, SAE, and ALT levels, respectively. Moreover, subgroup analysis found a significant reduction in ABR and AIR 2-3 years after the therapy. Additional findings that were not pooled including coagulation factor activity are presented in the accompanying tables. Our analysis supported the efficacy and safety of AAV-mediated gene therapy for hemophilia, providing evidence for its application as a therapeutic option for widespread clinical use in hemophilia patients in the future.

Platelet-targeted gene therapy induces immune tolerance in hemophilia and beyond.

Blood platelets have unique storage and delivery capabilities. Platelets play fundamental roles in hemostasis, inflammatory reactions, and immune responses. Beyond their functions, platelets have been used as a target for gene therapy. Platelet-targeted gene therapy aims to deliver a sustained expression of neo-protein in vivo by genetically modifying the target cells, resulting in a cure for the disease. Even though there has been substantial progress in the field of gene therapy, the potential development of immune responses to transgene products or vectors remains a significant concern. Of note, multiple preclinical studies using platelet-specific lentiviral gene delivery to hematopoietic stem cells in hemophilia have demonstrated promising results with therapeutic levels of neo-protein that rescue the hemorrhagic bleeding phenotype and induce antigen-specific immune tolerance. Further studies using ovalbumin as a surrogate protein for platelet gene therapy have shown robust antigen-specific immune tolerance induced via peripheral clonal deletions of antigen-specific CD4- and CD8-T effector cells and induction of antigen-specific regulatory T (Treg) cells. This review discusses platelet-targeted gene therapy, focusing on immune tolerance induction.

Giroctocogene fitelparvovec gene therapy for severe hemophilia A: 104-week analysis of the phase 1/2 Alta study.

ABSTRACT: Patients with hemophilia A require exogenous factor VIII (FVIII) or nonfactor hemostatic agents to prevent spontaneous bleeding events. Adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector-based gene therapy is under clinical investigation to enable endogenous FVIII production. Giroctocogene fitelparvovec is a recombinant AAV serotype 6 vector containing the coding sequence for the B-domain-deleted human F8 gene. In the ongoing phase 1/2, dose-ranging Alta study, 4 sequential cohorts of male participants with severe hemophilia A received a single IV dose of giroctocogene fitelparvovec. The primary end points are safety and changes in circulating FVIII activity. Interim results up to 214 weeks after treatment for all participants are presented. Eleven participants were dosed. Increases in alanine and aspartate aminotransferases were the most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs), which resolved with corticosteroid administration. Two treatment-related serious AEs (hypotension and pyrexia) were reported in 1 participant within 6 hours of infusion and resolved within 24 hours after infusion. At the highest dose level (3 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 5), the mean circulating FVIII activity level at week 52 was 42.6% (range, 7.8%-122.3%), and at week 104 it was 25.4% (range, 0.9%-71.6%) based on a chromogenic assay. No liver masses, thrombotic events, or confirmed inhibitors were detected in any participant. These interim 104-week data suggest that giroctocogene fitelparvovec is generally well tolerated with appropriate clinical management and has the potential to provide clinically meaningful FVIII activity levels, as indicated by the low rate of bleeding events in the highest dose cohort. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03061201.

Deciphering conundrums of adeno-associated virus liver-directed gene therapy: focus on hemophilia.

Adeno-associated virus gene therapy has been the subject of intensive investigation for monogenic disease gene addition therapy for more than 25 years, yet few therapies have been approved by regulatory agencies. Most have not progressed beyond phase 1/2 due to toxicity, lack of efficacy, or both. The liver is a natural target for adeno-associated virus since most serotypes have a high degree of tropism for hepatocytes due to cell surface receptors for the virus and the unique liver sinusoidal geometry facilitating high volumes of blood contact with hepatocyte cell surfaces. Recessive monogenic diseases such as hemophilia represent promising targets since the defective proteins are often synthesized in the liver and secreted into the circulation, making them easy to measure, and many do not require precise regulation. Yet, despite initiation of many disease-specific clinical trials, therapeutic windows are often nonexistent, resulting in excess toxicity and insufficient efficacy. Iterative progress built on these attempts is best illustrated by hemophilia, with the first regulatory approvals for factor IX and factor VIII gene therapies eventually achieved 25 years after the first gene therapy studies in humans. Although successful gene transfer may result in the production of sufficient transgenic protein to modify the disease, many emerging questions on durability, predictability, reliability, and variability of response have not been answered. The underlying biology accounting for these heterogeneous responses and the interplay between host and virus is the subject of intense investigation and the subject of this review.

Educational needs of patients, families, and healthcare professionals to support the patient journey in haemophilia gene therapy in the UK.

With the first gene therapies for haemophilia approved by the European Commission, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, it is important to consider the remaining unmet needs and challenges that may arise throughout patients' treatment journeys. We discuss existing unmet needs and important considerations prior to, during, and following haemophilia gene therapy treatment in the UK, and propose potential next steps. Key areas for attention are education, psychological support, and guidance on implementation. Strategies are urgently required to fulfil these needs. An immediate priority for information providers should be comprehensive education for people with haemophilia (PWH) and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Greater access to resources and training in psychological services will be required throughout the treatment pathway. More specific guidance is required to define the implementation model, criteria for accreditation, and responsibilities of care centres. Furthermore, PWH may revisit discussions with HCPs multiple times pre-infusion, thus the patient journey is unlikely to be linear. Consideration of these challenges, and of potential strategies to address them, will be integral to optimising the future success of this promising therapy.

In Utero Cell Treatment of Hemophilia A Mice via Human Amniotic Fluid Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Engraftment.

Hemophilia is a genetic disorder linked to the sex chromosomes, resulting in impaired blood clotting due to insufficient intrinsic coagulation factors. There are approximately one million individuals worldwide with hemophilia, with hemophilia A being the most prevalent form. The current treatment for hemophilia A involves the administration of clotting factor VIII (FVIII) through regular and costly injections, which only provide temporary relief and pose inconveniences to patients. In utero transplantation (IUT) is an innovative method for addressing genetic disorders, taking advantage of the underdeveloped immune system of the fetus. This allows mesenchymal stromal cells to play a role in fetal development and potentially correct genetic abnormalities. The objective of this study was to assess the potential recovery of coagulation disorders in FVIII knockout hemophilia A mice through the administration of human amniotic fluid mesenchymal stromal cells (hAFMSCs) via IUT at the D14.5 fetal stage. The findings revealed that the transplanted human cells exhibited fusion with the recipient liver, with a ratio of approximately one human cell per 10,000 mouse cells and produced human FVIII protein in the livers of IUT-treated mice. Hemophilia A pups born to IUT recipients demonstrated substantial improvement in their coagulation issues from birth throughout the growth period of up to 12 weeks of age. Moreover, FVIII activity reached its peak at 6 weeks of age, while the levels of FVIII inhibitors remained relatively low during the 12-week testing period in mice with hemophilia. In conclusion, the results indicated that prenatal intrahepatic therapy using hAFMSCs has the potential to improve clotting issues in FVIII knockout mice, suggesting it as a potential clinical treatment for individuals with hemophilia A.

Cellular stress and coagulation factor production: when more is not necessarily better.

Remarkably, it has been 40 years since the isolation of the 2 genes involved in hemophilia A (HA) and hemophilia B (HB), encoding clotting factor (F) VIII (FVIII) and FIX, respectively. Over the years, these advances led to the development of purified recombinant protein factors that are free of contaminating viruses from human pooled plasma for hemophilia treatments, reducing the morbidity and mortality previously associated with human plasma-derived clotting factors. These discoveries also paved the way for modified factors that have increased plasma half-lives. Importantly, more recent advances have led to the development and Food and Drug Administration approval of a hepatocyte-targeted, adeno-associated viral vector-mediated gene transfer approach for HA and HB. However, major concerns regarding the durability and safety of HA gene therapy remain to be resolved. Compared with FIX, FVIII is a much larger protein that is prone to misfolding and aggregation in the endoplasmic reticulum and is poorly secreted by the mammalian cells. Due to the constraint of the packaging capacity of adeno-associated viral vector, B-domain deleted FVIII rather than the full-length protein is used for HA gene therapy. Like full-length FVIII, B-domain deleted FVIII misfolds and is inefficiently secreted. Its expression in hepatocytes activates the cellular unfolded protein response, which is deleterious for hepatocyte function and survival and has the potential to drive hepatocellular carcinoma. This review is focused on our current understanding of factors limiting FVIII secretion and the potential pathophysiological consequences upon expression in hepatocytes.

Delivery of gene therapy in haemophilia treatment centres in the United States: Practical aspects of preparedness and implementation.

INTRODUCTION: Haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs) and healthcare providers (HCPs) will need to adapt to a new treatment paradigm with the emergence of adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapy for the treatment of haemophilia in adults. AIM: This review examines the upcoming patient and institutional journeys, along with practical aspects of preparedness for clinical delivery of gene therapy by HTCs. METHODS: Based on our clinical experience and examination of published literature, we explored the parallel journeys for patients and treatment centres to navigate before, during, and after administration of gene therapy. RESULTS: The patient journey includes: information gathering; decision making; comprehensive patient assessment; preparation for the infusion itself; short- and long-term monitoring; lifestyle modifications; and the possible need for immunosuppressive treatment. Informed decision-making may require patient education with extensive discussions and an understanding that not all people with haemophilia will choose or be eligible for gene therapy, although eligibility criteria continue to evolve. The institutional journey includes: consideration of biosafety procedures; planning for product procurement, handling, storage, and administration; development of detailed protocols and guidance documents; contingency planning for immunosuppressive and haemostatic management; consideration of clinical capabilities and staff training needs; coordination of efforts by the full multidisciplinary team; and collaboration between referring, dosing, and follow-up treatment centres. Documented protocols and guidance documents are pivotal for this complex therapy to ensure safe handling, optimal delivery, and post-infusion management and follow-up. CONCLUSION: Successful implementation of this new treatment modality will require communication and collaboration among multiple stakeholders.

Hemophilia Gene Therapy: The End of the Beginning?

Extensive preclinical research over the past 30 years has culminated in the recent regulatory approval of several gene therapy products for hemophilia. Based on the efficacy and safety data in a recently conducted phase III clinical trial, Roctavian® (valoctocogene roxaparvovec), an adeno-associated viral (AAV5) vector expressing a B domain deleted factor VIII (FVIII) complementary DNA, was approved by the European Commission and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of patients with severe hemophilia A. In addition, Hemgenix® (etranacogene dezaparvovec) was also recently approved by the European Medicines Agency and the FDA for the treatment of patients with severe hemophilia B. This product is based on an AAV5 vector expressing a hyper-active factor IX (FIX) transgene (FIX-Padua) transgene. All AAV-based phase III clinical trials to date show a significant increase in FVIII or FIX levels in the majority of treated patients, consistent with a substantial decrease in bleeding episodes and a concomitant reduction in factor usage obviating the need for factor prophylaxis in most patients. However, significant interpatient variability remains that is not fully understood. Moreover, most patients encountered short-term asymptomatic liver inflammation that was treated by immune suppression with corticosteroids or other immune suppressants. In all phase III trials to date, FIX expression has appeared relatively more stable than FVIII, though individual patients also had prolonged FVIII expression. Whether lifelong expression of clotting factors can be realized after gene therapy requires longer follow-up studies. Further preclinical development of next-generation gene editing technologies offers new prospects for the development of a sustained cure for hemophilia, not only in adults, but ultimately in children with hemophilia too.

Clinical course and prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and haemophilia.

INTRODUCTION: Although patients with haemophilia are known to develop hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at a lower age than patients without, there are few reports on the clinical course and prognosis of HCC. AIM: We aimed to investigate the clinical course and prognosis of patients with HCC and haemophilia. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with haemophilia, who were initially diagnosed with HCC between 2003 and 2021, were included. Their clinical courses and prognoses were retrospectively analysed. The results were compared with those of the 24th Nationwide Follow-up Survey of Primary Liver Cancer. RESULTS: All 22 patients were male; of these, 20 patients had haemophilia A, and 2 had haemophilia B. The mean age of diagnosis was 63 years (range 45-78 years) which is lower than the mean of 72 years reported in the Nationwide Survey. The mean diameter of the largest tumour was 30 mm (range 11-70 mm), and 18 tumours (82%) were solitary at the initial diagnosis. Standard treatments for HCC were performed in all patients. Sixty-one transarterial chemoembolisation, 28 RFA, 10 hepatectomies, and 2 radiation treatments were performed, and molecular-targeted agents were administered to 5 patients during their clinical courses. No deaths were associated with complications of HCC treatments. The median survival time after initial treatment was 6.4 years (range 0.9-18.7 years) which did not differ much from the median survival time of 5.8 years in the Nationwide Survey. CONCLUSION: Standard treatment for HCC could improve the prognosis of patients with HCC and haemophilia.

Management of abdominal pseudotumours in haemophilia: a systematic review.

AIM: Haemophilic pseudotumours are complications in patients with haemophilia A or B and result from locally repetitive bleeding, mainly in the musculoskeletal system. Abdominal haemophilic pseudotumours are exceptionally rare but may cause severe complications. This systematic review aimed to evaluate therapy strategies for symptomatic abdominal haemophilic pseudotumours. METHODS: We systematically searched three databases (Medline [PubMed], Web of Science and EMBASE) for publications published between 1995 and 2023. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted data and performed a quality assessment using the JBI critical appraisal checklist. RESULTS: From a total of 1199 articles, 39 articles describing 41 cases were included for final analysis. Conservative or interventional treatment was performed in 12 cases. In eight cases, a step-up to surgical therapy after interventional treatment was indicated. Primary surgical therapy was performed in 21 cases. Failure to cure was documented in 50% (n = 6) of patients treated in the first group, with a mortality rate of 16.6% (n = 2). Interventional therapy with a step-up to surgery showed no morbidity or mortality. Primary surgical resection documented favourable results in 66.6% (n = 14), with failure to cure in 9.5% (n = 2) and a mortality rate of 14.3% (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Primary surgical resection can be a first-line therapy for symptomatic, abdominal haemophilic pseudotumours, whereas preoperative embolisation could be used as a bridging therapy before surgery, especially in emergency settings. Diagnostic biopsy and percutaneous drainage should be avoided to prevent complications.