Risk of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Persons with Hemophilia A in the United States: Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study Using the ATHNdataset.

Introduction: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), a serious complication in persons with hemophilia A (PWHA), causes high rates of mortality and morbidity. Identified ICH risk factors from patient data spanning 1998-2008 require reassessment in light of changes in the current treatment landscape. Aim and methods: PWHA identified in the ATHNdataset were evaluated retrospectively to assess incidence of ICH and determine the association between ICH risk and key characteristics using time-to-event analyses (Cox proportional-hazards models, survival curves, and sensitivity analyses). Results: Over a median follow-up time of 10.7 patient-years, 135 of 7837 PWHA over 2 years of age in the ATHNdataset (1.7%) experienced an ICH. Stratification by prophylaxis status and inhibitor status resulted in an incidence rate (IR) ratio (IRR) (IR+/IR-) of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.94; P=0.020) and 1.76 (95% CI, 0.97-3.20; P=0.059), respectively. Characteristics associated with greater risk of developing ICH include being aged 2-12 years; being covered by Medicaid; having had HIV, hepatitis C, or hypertension; and never having received factor VIII or prophylactic treatment. In multivariable analysis with interaction, the estimated hazard ratio for PWHA never receiving prophylaxis was 7.67 (95% CI, 2.24-26.30), which shrunk to 2.03 (95% CI, 1.30-9.12) in bootstrapping analysis and 3.09 in the highest-penalty ridge-regression analysis but was still significant. Inhibitor status was found not to be statistically associated with ICH in all analyses. Conclusion: These results align with previous studies demonstrating that prophylaxis confers a protective effect against ICH. Previously, inhibitor positivity had been shown to increase risk for ICH; however, this study did not corroborate those findings.

Effects of PK-guided prophylaxis on clinical outcomes and FVIII consumption for patients with moderate to severe Haemophilia A.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, there has been increased focus on individualizing treatment for persons with hemophilia including pharmacokinetic-guided (PK) dosing. AIMS: In this retrospective study clinical outcomes before and after PK-guided prophylaxis were examined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight Haemophilia Treatment Centres from the United States participated in the study and included 132 patients classified into two cohorts: those undergoing a PK-assessment for product switch (switchers) or to optimize treatment (non-switchers). Subset analyses for the two most common products and patients with dosing per prescription label were included for annual bleeding rates (ABR), mean weekly consumption outcomes, and annualized cost of prophylaxis. RESULTS: The most common products before and after index date were octocog alfa, rurioctocog alfa pegol, and efmoroctocog alfa. Seventy-four (56%) patients were identified as switchers and 58 (44%) patients were classified as non-switchers. The majority of patients (78.0%) experienced either a decrease in ABR post-index or maintained 0 ABR during pre- and post-index time periods, with similar proportions identified in both switchers (77.0%) and non-switchers (79.3%) populations. Non-switchers were identified as having no significant change in cost of therapy, while switchers experienced increased cost of therapy driven by higher price of extended half-life products. Within subset analyses, patients receiving rurioctocog alfa pegol and efmoroctocog alfa had mean ABR under 1 after index date. CONCLUSION: PK-guided prophylaxis has the potential to improve clinical outcomes without increase in cost of therapy for patients maintaining product and can aid in maintaining effective protection against bleeds in those switching product.

A real-world evidence analysis of the impact of switching from factor VIII to emicizumab prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: This study retrospectively compared annualized billed bleed rates (ABRb) in people with hemophilia A (PwHA) without inhibitors who switched from factor VIII (FVIII) prophylaxis to emicizumab. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A real-world comparison study was performed on the effect of switching from FVIII to emicizumab prophylaxis in male, non-inhibitor patients on ABRb using an all-payer claims database (APCD) dataset from 1 January 2014, to 31 March 2021. The identification period was from 1 November 2017, to 30 September 2020. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-one patients were included with a total of 82 and 45 bleeds in the pre- and post-switch periods, respectively. The average follow-up period pre-switch was 978.37 days (SD 555.03), whereas the average follow-up period post-switch was 522.26 days (SD 191.36). No significant differences in mean ABRb were observed pre-/post-switch (0.25 and 0.20, respectively; P = 0.4456). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate no significant reduction in ABRb, suggesting that switching from FVIII to emicizumab may not deliver incremental benefits to PwHA receiving prophylactic care.

Review of Potential Barriers to Effective Hemostatic Management of Acquired Hemophilia A by Non-Hemophilia Experts in the United States.

Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is an ultra-rare autoimmune disorder caused by autoantibodies against factor VIII. It often presents with life-threatening bleeding to non-hemophilia experts, who have limited awareness of this condition. This review evaluated hemostatic management and identified barriers to optimal management of AHA by non-hemophilia experts in the United States through a literature review. AHA case reports published by non-hemophilia experts from January 2016 through November 2021 in non-hematology journals were critically reviewed for a chronology of clinical course and management, consultation with a hemophilia expert, referencing of available AHA recommendations, discussion of all hemostatic options, and bleed control outcomes; 24 case reports representing 24 patients were identified. Twelve patients had an apparent delay in diagnosis, 17 cases did not seek expert consultation, and 15 did not reference the 2009 International AHA Recommendations, including six in whom hemostatic treatment was not consistent with the recommendations. Of the 17 articles published after the 2017 AHA Guidance, eight did not reference them. Of the five articles published after the 2020 International Recommendations for AHA, three did not reference them. Overall, 14 articles did not discuss all available hemostatic treatment options. Four patients died. Our findings reveal variability in hemostatic management of AHA by non-hemophilia experts in the United States. Lack of AHA awareness remains a primary barrier for optimal management of AHA among non-hemophilia experts. Increasing education about existing AHA guidelines, including available therapies and access to expert care at hemophilia treatment centers, may help improve the outcomes of patients with AHA.