HCV infection in hemophilia A patients is associated with altered cytokines and chemokines profile and might modulate the levels of FVIII inhibitor.

Prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) is high in hemophilia A patients and the development of FVIII inhibitor is another challenge in the management of these individuals. The influence of HCV infection in the occurrence of inhibitors was investigated by the comparison of clinical and laboratory data from noninfected (NI, n = 96) and chronically HCV-infected (HCV, n = 58) hemophilia A patients. Concentrations of plasmatic cytokines (IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, TNF, IFN-γ, and IL-17A) and chemokines (CCL2, CCL5, CXCL8, CXCL9, and CXCL10) were quantified from patients' samples. The results showed that older age, use of cryoprecipitate and fresh frozen plasma, and severe hemophilia were associated with HCV infection, whereas exclusive use of virus inactivated clotting factors was a protector factor to acquiring HCV infection. HCV infection was strongly associated with low levels of inhibitor (OR = 20.53, p < 0.001). Patients with a history of inhibitor (INB+) presented a mixed immune profile characterized by higher levels of pro-and anti-inflammatory cytokines than those without a history of inhibitor (INB-). The highest levels of CCL2 and CXCL8 were seen in HCVINB- , whereas CXCL9 and CXCL10 in HCVINB+ . Heatmap analysis of the set of cytokines and chemokines concentration distributed HCV patients into two distinct clusters, HCVINB+ and HCVINB- , both characterized by low concentrations of IL-4, while noninfected patients were grouped in a single block regardless of inhibitor development history (NIINB-/INB+ ). This finding suggests that the strong association between HCV infection and low levels of factor VIII inhibitors might be due to the modulation of the cytokine and chemokine network established by the antiviral response.

Hemophilia - Impact of Recent Advances on Management.

There have been numerous advances in the field of hemophilia management in the past decade, including long acting factor products, non-factor products, and potentially curative interventions such as gene therapy. Each of these interventions introduces exciting treatment modalities to patients with both hemophilia A and B, however they also pose a daunting array of possible management options. Adverse reactions to novel agents are being reported as more patients are treated and long-term sustainability of interventions such as gene therapy is yet to be determined. The practicing hematologist should be aware of the intricacies involved in customizing care for their individual patients and be aware of the monitoring strategies for each interventional strategy to avoid adverse events. Upfront cost vs. long term benefit should be considered as choices of treatment strategies are made, especially in resource poor countries. The goal of the newer agents is to decrease annualized bleed rates and avoid debilitating arthropathy. This article looks at current treatment models for prophylaxis and management of inhibitors, reviews the recent advances in the field (with bioengineered factor products, non-factor products and gene therapy) and summarizes the incorporation of these new interventions in the treatment plan for patients with hemophilia.

Impact of the Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET) study and its post hoc analyses on clinical practice in the United States: A survey of Haemophilia and Thrombosis Research Society members.

INTRODUCTION: A recent randomized trial, the Survey of Inhibitors in Plasma-Product Exposed Toddlers (SIPPET), confirmed that exposure to recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) products doubled the risk of inhibitor development compared to plasma-derived FVIII (pdFVIII) in previously untreated (or minimally treated) patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A. SIPPET post hoc analyses showed that early exposure to rFVIII was more immunogenic and that rFVIII could harm low-risk PUPs with non-null mutations. Clinical implications of SIPPET findings for the haemophilia community were unclear. AIM: Study the impact of the SIPPET study and its post hoc analyses on clinical practice for PUPs with severe haemophilia A in the United States. METHODS: Members of the North American Hemophilia and Thrombosis Research Society (HTRS) completed two online questionnaires related to SIPPET publications and PUP management (study period: 12/2016-8/2018). RESULTS: Over 50% participated the study. Sixty per cent expressed methodological concerns about the SIPPET study, yet 55% shared the study with new families. During the study period, rFVIII selection fell from 43/61 (70%) to 15/54 (28%) while use of pdFVIII and shared decision-making increased from 5/61 (8%) to 9/54 (17%) and from 4/61 (7%) to 10/54 (19%), respectively. Based on post hoc analyses, 44/54 (82%) would change their clinical practice with 31/44 (70%) using pdFVIII for PUPs. Barriers to translation of SIPPET analyses included study design concerns, non-inclusion of novel therapies, inability to perform genetic testing at diagnosis and risk of plasma-derived infections. CONCLUSION: Despite the methodological concerns about the SIPPET study, this Grade I evidence appears to have influenced the clinical practice of haemophilia providers in the United States.

Low incidence of factor VIII inhibitors in previously untreated patients with severe haemophilia A treated with octanate® : Final report from a prospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Octanate® is a human, plasma-derived, von Willebrand factor-stabilized coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) concentrate with demonstrated haemostatic efficacy in previously treated patients with haemophilia A. AIM: This prospective, open-label study aimed to assess the immunogenicity of octanate® in previously untreated patients (PUPs). METHODS: The study monitored development of FVIII inhibitors in 51 PUPs. Tolerability, viral safety, FVIII recovery and efficacy of octanate® for the prevention and treatment of bleeds and in surgical procedures were also assessed. RESULTS: Five (9.8%) of the 51 patients developed inhibitors during the study, 4 of which (7.8%) were high titre. Three inhibitor cases (5.9%) were considered clinically relevant; 2 were transient inhibitors that disappeared during regular octanate® treatment without a change in dose or treatment frequency. Amongst 45 patients with FVIII:C <1% at baseline and who received ≥20 exposure days (EDs) or had <20 EDs but developed an inhibitor, inhibitor incidence was 11.1% (6.7% clinically relevant). All clinically relevant inhibitors developed within 20 EDs of on-demand treatment. No inhibitors developed in PUPs receiving prophylaxis. All patients who developed inhibitors had either intron 22 inversions or large deletions. Irrespective of the reason for administration, haemostatic efficacy was rated as "excellent" in 99.6% of all infusions (4700 of 4717 infusions), and no complications were reported in 23 surgical procedures. Mean incremental in vivo recovery was 2.0%/IU/kg (±0.7) and 1.9%/IU/kg (±0.5) for the first and second assessments, respectively. Tolerability was rated "very good" in 99.9% of infusions. CONCLUSION: In PUPs with severe haemophilia A, octanate® demonstrated haemostatic efficacy with a low rate of inhibitor development.

Risk Factors for the Progression from Low to High Titres in 260 Children with Severe Haemophilia A and Newly Developed Inhibitors.

In children with severe haemophilia A, inhibitors to factor VIII (FVIII) usually develop during the first 50 treatment exposure days and are classified as low or high titre depending on the peak inhibitor titre being greater or less than 5 Bethesda units/mL (BU/mL). Classification of the inhibitor may change with time, as some low-titre inhibitors progress to high titre following re-exposure to FVIII concentrate. The aim of this study was to investigate potential risk factors for such a progression in children with severe haemophilia A and newly diagnosed inhibitors. This study was a follow-up study of the PedNet Registry and included 260 children with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors born between 1990 and 2009 and recruited consecutively from 31 haemophilia centres. Clinical and laboratory data were collected from the date of each child's first positive inhibitor test for at least 3 years. At the time of first positive inhibitor test, 49% (n = 127) had low-titre inhibitors, with 50% of them progressing to high titre and only 25% maintaining low titres. The FVIII gene (F8) mutation type was known in 247 patients (95%), and included 202 (82%) null mutations. The progression to high-titre inhibitors was associated with null F8 mutations (odds ratio [OR]: 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0­6.5), family history of inhibitors (OR: 7.2; 95% CI: 1.8­28.4) and the use of high-dose immune tolerance induction, defined as ≥100 IU FVIII concentrate/kg/d (OR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.5­10.0). These results suggest that high-dose immune tolerance induction should be avoided as the initial strategy in patients who develop low-titre FVIII inhibitors.

New findings on inhibitor development: from registries to clinical studies.

The high incidence of inhibitors against factor VIII (FVIII) concentrates in patients with haemophilia A has encouraged debate as to whether product-type plays a role. There is debate in the literature as to whether rFVIII concentrates are associated with a higher incidence of inhibitors compared to pdFVIII products. The management of haemophilia in patients with inhibitors includes on-demand/prophylaxis treatment with bypassing agents, and/or immune tolerance induction (ITI). However, these options create an economic and emotional burden on patients, their families and healthcare practitioners. Although ITI eliminates inhibitors successfully in 60-80% of cases, it is costly. Despite high costs, preliminary data from a decision analytical model have indicated that ITI is economically advantageous compared with on-demand/prophylactic treatment with bypassing agents. In patients with persistent inhibitors and those who are not candidates for ITI or have failed ITI, bleeding-related mortality and morbidity increase and quality of life decreases, compared with non-inhibitor patients. This article provides an update on the risk of inhibitor development and discusses best management approaches for patients with high-risk factors for inhibitor development.

Increased inhibitor incidence in severe haemophilia A since 1990 attributable to more low titre inhibitors.

Many studies have reported an increased incidence of inhibitors in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A after the introduction of recombinant products. It was the objective of this study to investigate whether the inhibitor incidence has increased between 1990 and 2009 in an unselected cohort of PUPs with severe haemophilia A (FVIII< 1 %). Patients were consecutively recruited from 31 haemophilia treatment centres in 16 countries and followed until 50 exposure days or until inhibitor development. Inhibitor development was studied in five-year birth cohorts comparing cumulative incidences. Furthermore the risk for inhibitor development per five-year birth cohort was studied using multivariable Cox regression, adjusting for potential genetic and treatment-related confounders. A total of 926 PUPs were included with a total cumulative inhibitor incidence of 27.5 %. The inhibitor incidence increased from 19.5 % in 1990-1994 (lowest) to 30.9 % in 2000-2004 (highest; p-value 0.011). Low titre inhibitor incidence increased from 3.1 % in 1990-1994 to 10.5 % in 2005-2009 (p-value 0.009). High titre inhibitor incidences remained stable over time. After 2000, risk of all inhibitor development was increased with adjusted hazard ratios 1.96 (95 % CI 1.06-2.83) in 2000-2004 and 2.34 (1.42-4.92) in 2005-2009. Screening for inhibitors was intensified over this 20-year study period from a median of 1.9 to 2.9 tests/year before 2000 to 2.7 to 4.3 tests/year after 2000. In conclusion, the cumulative inhibitor incidence has significantly increased between 1990 and 2009. The high titre inhibitor incidence has remained stable.

Activated prothrombin complex concentrate (FEIBA®) for the treatment and prevention of bleeding in patients with acquired haemophilia: A sequential study.

Despite anti-haemorrhagic therapy with proper doses of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC, Feiba®), patients with acquired haemophilia A (AHA) have a considerable risk of recurrent bleeding complications. Evidence in support of the benefit-to-risk ratio of prevention strategies with the use of lower doses of aPCC following the end of the initial treatment period is scarce and inconclusive. We report our experience in the management of 18 consecutive patients with AHA admitted to two Haemophilia centres in Italy. We managed the first 11 according to current guidelines (e.g., with conventional aPCC doses until bleeding resolution). Then, we decided to prolong the treatment beyond bleeding resolution with lower doses of the same concentrate (short-term prophylaxis) in the 7 additional patients. In these patients, the treatment was continued for as long as the titre of FVIII inhibitor was found to decrease by at least 50% when compared to the baseline one. We observed six relapses of bleeding in patients in whom aPCC was confined to the treatment of the qualifying bleeding episode, and none in patients to whom lower doses were administered until the pre-specified decrease in the titre of FVIII inhibitor was achieved. No patients experienced thrombotic complications during the study period. Prolonging the treatment with lower doses of aPCC beyond the initial phase in patients with AHA in whom the titre of FVIII inhibitor is still high is likely to safely prevent further bleeding complications.

Should anti-inhibitor coagulant complex and tranexamic acid be used concomitantly?

Inhibitor development in haemophilia patients is challenging especially when undergoing surgical procedures. The development of an inhibitor precludes using factor VIII (FVIII) therapy thereby requiring a bypassing agent (BPA) for surgical bleeding prophylaxis if the FVIII inhibitor titre >5 BU. Concomitant use of anti-inhibitor coagulant complex (AICC) and tranexamic acid has been reported in the literature as a beneficial treatment for this population. Anti-inhibitor coagulant complex is known to cause an increase in thrombin generation and tranexamic acid inhibits fibrinolysis. Hence, the combined used of AICC and tranexamic acid has been limited due to safety concerns over possibilities of increased risk of thrombotic events and disseminated intravascular coagulation. However, the rationale for concomitant therapy is to obtain a potential synergistic effect and to increase clot stability. We conducted a literature review of past studies and individual case reports of concomitant use of AICC and tranexamic acid, which was extensively used during dental procedures. Evidence also exists for concomitant use of the combined therapy in orthopaedic procedures, control of gastrointestinal bleeding, epistaxis and cerebral haemorrhages. Some patients who received the combined therapy had failed monotherapy with a single BPA prior to combined therapy. There were no reports of thrombotic complications related to the concomitant therapy and haemostasis was achieved in all cases. Anti-inhibitor coagulant complex and tranexamic acid therapy was found to be safe, well-tolerated and effective therapy in haemophilia patients with inhibitors. Additional randomized controlled studies should be performed to confirm these findings.

Pearls and pitfalls in factor inhibitor assays.

The proper performance and interpretation of factor inhibitor assays is a critical role for the hemostasis laboratory. Both false-positive and false-negative inhibitor assays may be reported, leading to serious patient mismanagement. Knowledge and recognition of common causes of both false-positive and negative-results can aid in the identification of these potential pitfalls. Safeguards to reporting accurate factor inhibitor assays include initial characterization of the sample, using the Nijmegen modification, properly performing and interpreting an incubated mixing test in conjunction, and performing two dilutions for each dependent dilution in the factor inhibitor assay.

Risky business of inhibitors: HLA haplotypes, gene polymorphisms, and immune responses.

The development of neutralizing antibodies against factor VIII (FVIII inhibitors) and factor IX (FIX inhibitors) is the major complication in hemophilia care today. The antibodies neutralize the biological activity of FVIII and FIX and render replacement therapies ineffective. Antibodies are generated as a result of a cascade of tightly regulated interactions between different cells of the innate and the adaptive immune system located in distinct compartments. Any event that modulates the repertoire of specific B or T cells, the activation state of the innate and adaptive immune system, or the migration pattern of immune cells will therefore potentially influence the risk for patients to develop inhibitors. This chapter reviews our current understanding of different pathways of antibody development that result in different qualities of antibodies. Potential differences in differentiation pathways leading to high-affinity neutralizing or low-affinity non-neutralizing antibodies and the potential influence of gene polymorphisms such as HLA haplotype, FVIII haplotype, and polymorphisms of immunoregulatory genes are discussed.

Distinct characteristics of antibody responses against factor VIII in healthy individuals and in different cohorts of hemophilia A patients.

Neutralizing antibodies against factor VIII (FVIII) remain the major complication in the replacement therapy of hemophilia A patients. To better understand the evolution of these antibodies it is important to generate comprehensive datasets which include both neutralizing and nonneutralizing antibodies, their isotypes, and IgG subclasses. We developed sensitive ELISAs to analyze FVIII-binding antibodies in different cohorts of hemophilia A patients and in healthy individuals. Our data reveal the prevalence of FVIII-binding antibodies among healthy individuals (n = 600) to be as high as 19%, with a prevalence of antibody titers > or =1:80 of 2%. The prevalence of FVIII-binding antibodies was 34% (5% for titers > or =1:80) in patients without FVIII inhibitors (n = 77), 39% (4% for titers > 1:80) in patients after successful immune tolerance induction therapy (n = 23), and 100% (n = 20, all titers > or =1:80) in patients with FVIII inhibitors. We found significant differences for IgG subclasses of FVIII-binding antibodies between the different study cohorts. IgG4 and IgG1 were the most abundant IgG subclasses in patients with FVIII inhibitors. Strikingly, IgG4 was completely absent in patients without FVIII inhibitors and in healthy subjects. These findings point toward a distinct immune regulatory pathway responsible for the development of FVIII-specific IgG4 associated with FVIII inhibitors.

Guidance on the emergent reversal of oral thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors.

The new oral anticoagulants dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban have advantages over warfarin which include no need for laboratory monitoring, less drug-drug interactions and less food-drug interactions. However, there is no established antidote for patients who are bleeding or require emergent surgery and there is a paucity of evidence to guide the clinical care during these situations. Members of thrombosis and anticoagulation groups participating in the Thrombosis and Hemostasis Summit of North America formulated expert opinion guidance for reversing the anticoagulant effect of the new oral anticoagulants and suggest: routine supportive care, activated charcoal if drug ingestion was within a couple of hours, and hemodialysis if feasible for dabigatran. Also, the pros and cons of the possible use of four factor prothrombin complex concentrate are discussed.

Immune tolerance induction therapy for patients with hemophilia A and FVIII inhibitors particularly using low-dose regimens.

BACKGROUND: Inhibitory antibodies against infused clotting factor VIII concentrates (FVIII) developed in 20-30% of patients with hemophilia A. Bypass therapy may control the bleeds in patients with FVIII inhibitors, however, immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy is the only proven modality for eradicating FVIII inhibitors. Since the cost of high-dose (200 IU/kg) ITI is extremely expansive, we conducted this study to identify whether low-dose ITI can be an alternative strategy besides high-dose ITI or bypass therapy. PROCEDURE: Patients with hemophilia A and FVIII inhibitors treated by ITI in Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital from January 2000 to January 2010 were enrolled. Regimens of ITI therapy included high-dose (100 IU/kg) and low-dose (30-50 IU/kg). RESULTS: High-dose ITI therapy for two high responders (HRs) and low-dose ITI therapy for three HRs and all low responders (LRs) were performed. Complete tolerance was achieved in 2 HRs with high-dose regimen, and in one HR and 19 LRs with low-dose regimens. We administered low-dose ITI combined with immune suppressants treatment for one of the patient with extremely high FVIII inhibitor titers and the inhibitor level markedly declined and no spontaneous bleeding episode was noticed during the treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of ITI in our study was satisfactory without clinically significant complications. Low-dose ITI regimens can effectively treat patients with high responder inhibitors, including one patient with extremely high inhibitor levels over 700 BU. Low-dose ITI may be an alternative modality for FVIII inhibitors management, especially in countries with limited resources.

Inhibitors of propagation of coagulation (factors VIII, IX and XI): a review of current therapeutic practice.

The management of patients with congenital haemophilia who develop alloantibodies against factors of the propagation phase of blood coagulation, commonly known as inhibitors, is the most important challenge facing haemophilia caregivers at present, as this complication not only compromises the efficacy of replacement therapy but also consumes an enormous amount of economic resources. Development of inhibitors further complicates the clinical course of severe haemophilia, with a prevalence of up to 30% in patients with haemophilia A (factor VIII deficiency) and up to 5% in those with haemophilia B (factor IX deficiency) and haemophilia C (factor XI deficiency). While the short-term goal of treatment of patients who develop alloantibodies is the control of bleeding, the eradication of the inhibitor is the main long-term goal. The management of severe bleeding episodes and the eradication of the autoantibody are also the mainstays of treatment of patients with acquired haemophilia, a rare but life-threatening haemorrhagic condition characterized by the development of inhibitory autoantibodies against coagulation factor VIII. The most recent options available for treating patients with congenital haemophilia complicated by inhibitors and acquired haemophilia because of autoantibodies against factor VIII are summarized in this review article.

Prospective assessment of thrombin generation test for dose monitoring of bypassing therapy in hemophilia patients with inhibitors undergoing elective surgery.

Clinical response to bypassing agents (BPAs) may vary between patients. Surgery is a particular situation, requiring effective hemostasis during the procedure and for several days postoperatively to obtain satisfactory wound healing. However, the optimal dose of BPA in different surgical situations has not been clearly established. We report here a prospective assessment of thrombin generation test (TGT) in monitoring the effectiveness of BPA during 10 elective invasive procedures performed in 6 patients with severe hemophilia and high-titer inhibitors. A standardized 3-step protocol was used in all cases to individually tailor BPA. Thrombin-generating capacity of patients increased after in vitro and ex vivo addition of BPA in a dose-dependent manner. Our results also showed a correlation between in vivo clinical response to BPA and thrombin-generating capacity. These data suggest that TGT may represent a surrogate marker for monitoring bypassing therapies in surgical situations.