Patients with moderate hemophilia A and B with a severe bleeding phenotype have an increased burden of disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with moderate hemophilia express varying bleeding phenotypes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the burden of disease in patients with moderate hemophilia and a mild or severe phenotype incorporating the thrombin generation profile. METHODS: This sub-study of the 6th Hemophilia in the Netherlands study, analyzed data of adults with moderate hemophilia A or B. Patient characteristics and information on bleeding tendency, joint status, and quality of life were obtained from electronic patient files and self-reported questionnaires. A severe bleeding phenotype was defined as an annual bleeding rate ≥5, an annual joint bleeding rate ≥3, and/or the use of secondary/tertiary prophylaxis, and a mild phenotype vice versa. TG was measured with the Nijmegen Hemostasis Assay. RESULTS: This study included 116 patients: 21% had a severe phenotype of whom 46% used prophylaxis. Patients with a severe phenotype treated on demand reported a higher median annual bleeding rate (7), annual joint bleeding rate (3), and more frequently an impaired joint (77%) than patients with a severe phenotype on prophylaxis (2; 0; 70%) or patients with a mild phenotype (0; 0; 47%). Furthermore, patients with a severe phenotype treated on demand experienced a more decreased quality of life. Despite similar factor activity levels, patients with a severe phenotype had a lower thrombin peak height and thrombin potential (0.7%; 0.06%) than patients with a mild phenotype (21.3%; 46.8%). CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate hemophilia and a severe phenotype treated on demand displayed a high burden of disease as well as a low thrombin generation profile advocating them toward more intensive prophylactic treatment.

Modeling Benefits, Costs, and Affordability of a Novel Gene Therapy in Hemophilia A.

The objective was to undertake an early cost-effectiveness assessment of valoctocogene roxaparvovec (valrox; Roctavian) compared to factor (F)VIII prophylaxis or emicizumab (Hemlibra; Roche HQ, Bazel, Switzerland) in patients with severe Hemophilia A (HA) without FVIII-antibodies. We also aimed to incorporate and quantify novel measures of value such as treatment durability, maximum value-based price (MVBP) and break-even time (ie, time until benefits begin to offset upfront payment). We constructed a Markov model to model bleeds over time which were linked to costs and quality-of-life decrements. In the valrox arm, FVIII over time was estimated combining initial effect and treatment waning and then linked to bleeds. In FVIII and emicizumab arms, bleeds were based on trial evidence. Evidence and assumptions were validated using expert elicitation. Model robustness was tested via sensitivity analyses. A Dutch societal perspective was applied with a 10-year time horizon. Valrox in comparison to FVIII, and emicizumab showed small increases in quality-adjusted life years at lower costs, and were therefore dominant. Valrox' base case MVBP was estimated at €2.65 million/treatment compared to FVIII and €3.5 million/treatment versus emicizumab. Mean break-even time was 8.03 years compared to FVIII and 5.68 years to emicizumab. Early modeling of patients with HA in The Netherlands treated with valrox resulted in estimated improved health and lower cost compared to prophylactic FVIII and emicizumab. We also demonstrated feasibility of incorporation of treatment durability and novel outcomes such as value-based pricing scenarios and break-even time. Future work should aim to better characterize uncertainties and increase translation of early modeling to direct research efforts.

Generic PROMIS item banks in adults with hemophilia for patient-reported outcome assessment: Feasibility, measurement properties, and relevance.

BACKGROUND: Legacy hemophilia-specific questionnaires are considered too long, show floor-/ceiling effects, and/or include irrelevant questions. Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item banks, including Computer Adaptive Tests (CATs) and short forms, were designed for more efficient outcome assessment. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the feasibility, measurement properties, and relevance of seven PROMIS CATs and two short forms in patients with hemophilia. PATIENTS/METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, Dutch adults with hemophilia completed nine PROMIS item banks electronically. Feasibility was assessed by number of items and floor/ceiling effects. Reliability was determined as the proportion of reliable scores (standard error ≤3.2). Construct validity was assessed by comparison with legacy instruments and expected differences between subgroups. Relevance of item banks was determined by proportions of limited scores. RESULTS: Overall, 142 of 373 invited patients (mean age, 47 [range, 18-79], 49% severe hemophilia, 46% receiving prophylaxis) responded. Per CAT item bank, mean number of items answered varied from 5 (range, 3-12) to 9 (range, 5-12), with floor effects in pain interference (26% lowest scores) and depression (18% lowest scores). Construct validity and reliability were good for physical function, pain interference, satisfaction with social roles and activities, and fatigue. The CAT physical function showed the most limited scores (38%). The self-efficacy short forms showed ceiling effects (22%-28%) and no relation with the legacy instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The PROMIS CATs physical function, pain interference, satisfaction with social roles and activities, and fatigue are feasible, reliable, and valid alternatives to legacy instruments for patients with hemophilia, with few items and low floor-/ceiling effects.

Patient Perspectives on Novel Treatments in Haemophilia: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: New treatments for haemophilia are under development or entering the market, including extended half-life products, designer drugs and gene therapy, thereby increasing treatment options for haemophilia. It is currently unknown how people with haemophilia decide whether to switch to a new treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore what factors may play a role when Dutch patients and parents of boys with moderate or severe haemophilia make decisions about whether to switch to a different treatment, and how disease and treatment characteristics may affect these decisions. This may aid clinical teams in tailored information provision and shared decision making. METHODS: We conducted interviews among adults with moderately severe or severe haemophilia and parents of young boys with severe haemophilia. We aimed to include participants from a variety of backgrounds in terms of involvement in the haemophilia community, age, treatment centre and treatments. Participants were recruited through the Netherlands Haemophilia Society and a haemophilia treatment centre. Semi-structured interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Twelve people with haemophilia and two mothers of boys with haemophilia were included. In general, participants reported to be satisfied with their current treatment. However, they considered ease of use of the medication (fewer injections, easier handling, alternative administration) an added value of new treatments. Participants were aware of the high cost of coagulation factor products and some expressed their concern about the Netherlands Haemophilia Society's long-term willingness to pay for current and novel treatments, especially for increased usage due to high-risk activities. Participants also expressed their concerns about the short- and long-term safety of new treatments and believed the effects of gene therapy were not yet fully understood. Participants expected their treatment team to inform them when a particular new treatment would be suitable for them. CONCLUSIONS: With the number of treatment options set to increase, it is important for healthcare providers to be aware of how patient experiences shape patients' decisions about new therapies.