Large Intron Inversions in Romanian Patients with Hemophilia A-First Report.

Background and Objectives: Despite the vast heterogeneity in the genetic defects causing hemophilia A (HA), large intron inversions represent a major cause of disease, accounting for almost half of the cases of severe HA worldwide. We investigated the intron 22 and intron 1 inversion status in a cohort of Romanian unrelated patients with severe HA. Moreover, we evaluated the role of these inversions as relative risk factors in inhibitor occurrence. Materials and Methods: Inverse shifting-a polymerase chain reaction method was used to detect the presence of intron 22 and intron 1 inversions in 156 Romanian patients with HA. Results: Intron inversion 22 was found in 41.7% of the patients, while intron 1 inversion was detected in 3.2% of the patients. Overall, large intron inversions represented the molecular defect in 44.9% of the studied patients. Our findings are in accord with previously published reports from Eastern Europe countries and with other international studies. The risk of inhibitor development was higher in patients with inversion 1 compared to the patients with HA without any inversion detected. Conclusions: The current study demonstrates the major causative role of large intron inversions in severe HA in Romanian patients. Moreover, our study confirms the contribution of intron 1 inversion in inhibitor development.

Expert opinion on current and future prophylaxis therapies aimed at improving protection for people with hemophilia A.

The next frontier in hemophilia A management has arrived. However, questions remain regarding the broader applicability of new and emerging hemophilia A therapies, such as the long-term safety and efficacy of non-factor therapies and optimal regimens for individual patients. With an ever-evolving clinical landscape, it is imperative for physicians to understand how available and future hemophilia A therapies could potentially be integrated into real-life clinical practice to improve patient outcomes. Against this background, nine hemophilia experts from Central European countries participated in a pre-advisory board meeting survey. The survey comprised 11 multiple-choice questions about current treatment practices and future factor and non-factor replacement therapies. The survey questions were developed to reflect current unmet needs in hemophilia management reflected in the literature. The experts also took part in a follow-up advisory board meeting to discuss the most important unmet needs for hemophilia management as well as the pre-meeting survey results. All experts highlighted the challenge of maintaining optimal trough levels with prophylaxis as their most pressing concern. Targeting trough levels of ≥30-50 IU/L or even higher to achieve less bleeding was highlighted as their preferred strategy. However, the experts had an equal opinion on how this could be achieved (i.e., more efficacious non-factor therapies or factor therapy offering broader personalization possibilities such as targeting trough levels to individual pharmacokinetic data). In summary, our study favors personalized prophylaxis to individual pharmacokinetic data rather than a "one-size-fits-all" approach to hemophilia A management to maintain optimal trough levels for individual patients.

Current therapeutic approaches in the management of hemophilia-a consensus view by the Romanian Society of Hematology.

Hemophilia A (HA) and hemophilia B (HB) are rare disorders, being caused by the total lack or under-expression of two factors from the coagulation cascade coded by genes of the X chromosome. Thus, in hemophilic patients, the blood does not clot properly. This results in spontaneous bleeding episodes after an injury or surgical intervention. A patient-centered regimen is considered optimal. Age, pharmacokinetics, bleeding phenotype, joint status, adherence, physical activity, personal goals are all factors that should be considered when individualizing therapy. In the past 10 years, many innovations in the diagnostic and treatment options were presented as being either approved or in development, thus helping clinicians to improve the standard-of-care for patients with hemophilia. Recombinant factors still remain the standard of care in hemophilia, however they pose a challenge to treatment adherence because they have short half-life, which where the extended half-life (EHL) factors come with the solution, increasing the half-life to 96 hours. Gene therapies have a promising future with proven beneficial effects in clinical trials. We present and critically analyze in the current manuscript the pros and cons of all the major discoveries in the diagnosis and treatment of HA and HB, as well as identify key areas of hemophilia research where improvements are needed.

Mobile Health Technology for the Personalized Therapy of Hemophilia.

The management of patients with hemophilia has evolved significantly since the first treatment attempts were made in the late 1930s. Since then, each new step in the treatment of patients with hemophilia has brought important advancements, as well as its unique set of challenges. Today, a patient-centered, individualized comprehensive approach is the new paradigm, moving away from the traditional "one size-fits-all" approach, to provide the best possible care for each patient with a bleeding disorder. As part of this complex task, mobile health applications might have the capacity to play an important role in reaching that goal. However, the use of new electronic technologies as part of a comprehensive treatment approach for patients with hemophilia simultaneously presents a new set of challenges that needs consideration. In the first section, currently available treatment of hemophilia patients will be revised, while in the second part the role of IT software in the treatment monitoring of hemophilia patients will be discussed.

The Possible Non-Mutational Causes of FVIII Deficiency: Non-Coding RNAs and Acquired Hemophilia A.

Hemophilia type A (HA) is the most common type of blood coagulation disorder. While the vast majority of cases are inherited and caused by mutations in the F8 gene, recent data raises new questions regarding the non-heritability of this disease, as well as how other molecular mechanisms might lead to the development of HA or increase the severity of the disease. Some data suggest that miRNAs may affect the severity of HA, but for some patients, miRNA-based interference might cause HA, in the absence of an F8 mutation. A mechanism in HA installation that is also worth investigating and which could be identified in the future is the epigenetic silencing of the F8 gene that might be only temporarily. Acquired HA is increasingly reported and as more cases are identified, the description of the disease might become challenging, as cases without FVIII autoantibodies might be identified.