Comparing Physician and Patient Perspectives on Prophylactic Treatment with BAY 94-9027 for Severe Haemophilia A: A Post Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: BAY 94-9027 is a newly developed extended half-life product to treat haemophilia, allowing for fewer injections than with standard products. This post hoc analysis aimed to compare physicians' and patients' opinions on BAY 94-9027 prophylaxis, and explore how qualitative interview data is aligned with the data from the Haemophilia-specific Quality of Life questionnaire for Adults (Haemo-QoL-A). METHODS: Exploratory qualitative interviews were conducted with physicians and patients by phone upon the exit of patients from the PROTECT VIII extension phase following a semi-directed guide. In this post hoc analysis, all transcripts were reviewed and reported concepts were compared to assess the level of concordance between physicians and patients. These qualitative data were compared with the Haemo-QoL-A mean global and subscale scores at baseline and end of main phase (36 weeks later). RESULTS: Ten physicians and 16 patients (mean age 47 years) from Israel, the Netherlands and the USA were interviewed. Significant improvements were reported by all physicians from baseline [e.g. lower frequency of bleeds (80%), improvement in emotional functioning (90%)], which is in concordance with patients' reports. The improved confidence reported by physicians cascaded to greater participation in various activities, resulting in a better perceived emotional state and a significant improvement on the Haemo-QoL-A emotional impact subscale score (p = 0.04) between baseline and end of main phase. Most physicians (80%) reported improvement in bleed frequency, as patients did (88%). Improvement in physical functioning or mobility was not consistently reported in this 8-month study. CONCLUSION: Interviewed physicians and patients generally agreed on the beneficial impact of BAY 94-9027, specifically regarding the increased level of self-confidence in patients and its subsequent positive impact on patients' lives. These findings supported the observed improvement on the Haemo-QoL-A emotional impact subscale. Overall, this study highlights the concordance between physician and patient perspective on the positive experience with BAY 94-9027.

Bypassing agent prophylaxis in people with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: People with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors are at high risk of bleeding complications. Infusion of bypassing agents, such as recombinant activated FVII (rFVIIa) and plasma-derived activated prothrombin complex concentrate, are suggested as alternative therapies to factor VIII (haemophilia A) or IX (haemophilia B) for individuals who no longer respond to these treatments because they develop inhibitory antibodies. The ultimate goal of treatment is to preserve the individual's joints, otherwise destroyed by recurrent bleeds. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of bypassing agent prophylaxis to prevent bleeding in people with hemophilia A or B and inhibitors. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for relevant studies from the Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, comprising of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched trial registries (16 February 2017) and bibliographic references of retrieved studies were reviewed for potential articles to be included in the review.Date of the last search of the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Coagulopathies Trials Register: 12 December 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled studies (cross-over or parallel design) evaluating the effect of prophylaxis treatment with bypassing agents compared with on-demand treatment, or studies evaluating the effects of high-dose compared with low-dose prophylaxis in males of any age with hemophilia with inhibitors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data and assessed the risk of bias according to standard Cochrane criteria. They assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomized studies (duration 7 to 15 months) involving 116 males. Risk of bias was judged to be high in two studies due to the open-label study design and in one study due to attrition bias.Two studies compared on-demand treatment to prophylaxis with bypassing agents. In one study (34 males) prophylaxis significantly reduced mean overall bleeding rates, MD - 7.27 (95% CI -9.92 to -4.62) (low quality evidence), mean number of overall bleeding events per month, MD -1.10 (95% CI -1.54 to -0.66), mean number of hemarthrosis, MD -6.60 (95% CI -9.32 to -3.88) (low quality evidence) and mean number of joints that had hemarthrosis, MD -0.90 (95% CI -1.36 to -0.44). The meta-analysis did not conclusively demonstrate significant benefit of prophylaxis on health-related quality of life as measured by Haem-A-QoL score, EQ-5D total score and utility score, EQ-5D VAS and SF-36 physical summary and mental summary score (low quality evidence for all health-related quality of life analyses).The remaining two studies compared dose regimens. The results from one study (22 males) did not conclusively demonstrate benefit or harm of high-dose versus low-dose recombinant activated factor VIIa (rFVIIa) as a prophylaxis for overall bleeding rate, MD -0.82 (95% CI -2.27 to 0.63) (moderate quality evidence), target joint bleeding rate, MD -3.20 (95% CI -7.23 to 0.83) (moderate quality evidence) and serious adverse events, RR 9.00 (95% CI, 0.54 to 149.50) (moderate quality evidence).The overall quality of evidence was moderate to low due to imprecision from limited information provided by studies with small sample sizes and incomplete outcome data in one study. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that prophylaxis with bypassing agents may be effective in reducing bleeding in males with hemophilia with inhibitors. However, there is a lack of evidence for the superiority of one agent over the other or for the optimum dosage regimen. Further studies are needed to evaluate the benefits and harms of prophylaxis treatment on health-related quality of life, as well as the effects of dose of bypassing agents on the outcomes.