Cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacokinetic-driven prophylaxis vs. standard prophylaxis in patients with severe haemophilia A.

: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of pharmacokinetic-driven prophylaxis in severe haemophilia A patients. A microsimulation model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pharmacokinetic-driven prophylaxis vs. standard prophylaxis and estimate cost, annual joint bleed rate (AJBR), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over a 1-year time horizon for a hypothetical population of 10 000 severe haemophilia A patients. A dose of 30 IU/kg per 48 h was assumed for standard prophylaxis. Pharmacokinetic prophylaxis was individually adjusted to maintain trough levels at least 1 and 5 IU/dl or less. AJBR was estimated on the relationship between factor VIII (FVIII) levels and bleeding rate reported in the literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the stability of the model and the reliability of results. The FVIII dose was reduced in the 27.8% of patients with a trough level more than 5 IU/dl on standard prophylaxis, with a negligible impact on AJBR (+0.1 bleed/year). The FVIII dose was increased in the 10.6% of patients with trough levels less than 1 IU/dl on standard prophylaxis, with a significant reduction of AJBR (-1.9 bleeds/year). On average, overall, pharmacokinetic-driven prophylaxis was shown to decrease the AJBR from 1.012 to 0.845 with a slight reduction of the infusion dose of 0.36 IU/kg, with total saving of 5 197&OV0556; per patient-year. Pharmacokinetic-driven prophylaxis was preferable (i.e. more effective and less costly) compared with standard prophylaxis, with savings of 31 205&OV0556; per bleed avoided. Pharmacokinetic-driven prophylaxis, accounting for patients' individual pharmacokinetic variability, appears to be a promising strategy to improve outcomes with efficient use of available resources in severe haemophilia A patients.

Benefits of prophylaxis versus on-demand treatment in adolescents and adults with severe haemophilia A: the POTTER study.

Rigorous evidence is lacking on long-term outcomes of factor VIII (FVIII) prophylaxis initiated in adolescent or adult patients with severe haemophilia A. The prospective, open-label Prophylaxis versus On-demand Therapy Through Economic Report (POTTER) study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01159587) compared long-term late secondary prophylaxis (recombinant FVIII-FS 20-30 IU/kg thrice weekly) with on-demand treatment in patients aged 12 to 55 years with severe haemophilia A. The annual number of joint bleeding episodes (primary endpoint), total bleeding episodes, orthopaedic and radiologic (Pettersson) scores, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pharmacoeconomic impact, and safety were evaluated over a > 5-year period (2004-2010). Fifty-eight patients were enrolled at 11 centres in Italy; 53 (27 prophylaxis, 26 on demand) were evaluated and stratified into 2 age subgroups (12-25 and 26-55 years). Patients receiving prophylaxis experienced a significantly lower number of joint bleeding episodes vs the on-demand group (annualised bleeding rate, 1.97 vs 16.80 and 2.46 vs 16.71 in younger and older patients, respectively; p=0.0043). Results were similar for total bleeding episodes. Prophylaxis was associated with significantly fewer target joints (p< 0.001), better orthopaedic (p=0.0019) and Pettersson (p=0.0177) scores, better HRQoL, and fewer days of everyday activities lost (p< 0.0001) but required significantly higher FVIII product consumption. The POTTER study is the first prospective, controlled trial documenting long-term benefits of late secondary prophylaxis in adolescents and adults with severe haemophilia A. The benefits of reduced bleeding frequency, improved joint status, and HRQoL may offset the higher FVIII consumption and costs.

Treatment of children with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors: a health economic evaluation for Germany.

BACKGROUND: Decision makers request increasingly for high levels of evidence when allocating resources in medical care. This is hardly feasible for rare diseases. The objective was to analyze clinical and economic aspects of different immune tolerance induction (ITI) strategies for children with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors. METHODS: A decision model, time frame 18 years (base case: 2 year old boy), was constructed from a German statutory health insurance (SHI) perspective. Compared were high-dose (HD) ITI, low-dose (LD) ITI, 'ITI with risk assessment', on-demand (OD) treatment with bypassing agents. Clinical data were derived from structured literature research and expert opinion. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for parameters with wide statistical ranges. RESULTS: Base case analysis: total costs for HD ITI amounted to €3.4 million with 40.9% ITI costs, 51 joint bleeds, 36 hospital days; LD ITI, €2.4 million with 21.4% ITI costs, 74 joint bleeds, 52 hospital days; 'ITI with risk assessment', €2.7 million with 27.6% ITI costs, 53 joint bleeds, 37 hospital days; OD treatment, €1.7 million, 146 joint bleeds, 104 hospital days. Incremental costs per bleed avoided with HD ITI decreased from €1 million to €0.15 million with increase of joint bleeds from 3 to 20 per year, when compared to 'ITI with risk assessment' in sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: 'ITI with risk assessment' is cost-saving with comparable outcomes to HD ITI. However, patient-related factors like bleeding frequency have to determine treatment decisions in individual patients. More clinical data is needed to increase the significance of model -calculations.

Differing approaches to diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal complications of haemophilia in resource-rich and resource-limited settings.

Management of the musculoskeletal complications of haemophilia should be consistent in both RRS (resource-rich settings) and RLS (resource-limited settings). Due to the lack of available resources in RLS, physicians face challenges that may limit their options for procedures. This article aimed to define the role of different techniques for the management of the musculoskeletal complications of haemophilia in RRS and RLS. A review of recent literature on the topic has been performed. In RLS, ultrasonography can be used as a diagnostic tool instead of MRI; chemical synovectomy can be the first alternative instead of radiosynovectomy and arthroscopic synovectomy; percutaneous treatment of pseudotumours can be performed instead of open surgical removal; finally, autologous cancellous bone can be used to fill cysts and pseudotumours instead of cancellous bone obtained from the Bone Bank. All diagnostic tools and treatments recommended for RLS have been proven to be efficacious; however, the ideal diagnosis and treatment for the musculoskeletal complications of haemophilia in RRS include MRI, radiosynovectomy, arthroscopic knee and ankle debridement in the early stages of arthropathy, total knee arthroplasty and total ankle arthroplasty or ankle fusion (in advanced stages of arthropathy), and surgical removal of pseudotumours. Treatments considered ideal in RRS should be the first therapeutic option if available. However, secondary treatment options that are less costly and therefore more readily available in RLS are perfectly valid and efficacious.

Tertiary prophylaxis in adults: is there a rationale?

There is lack of evidence-based recommendations or clear-cut consensus regarding the clinical and economic utility of regular prophylaxis started in adulthood, with the aim of keeping the clinical situation from getting worse by prevention of further bleeds contributing to increasing musculo-skeletal or other morbidity in haemophilia. Such a prophylaxis program has been shown in relatively small cohorts to be effective in reducing bleeding occurrence, with a variable effect on the joint status, but with significantly higher factor consumption and consequently higher costs than on-demand therapy. There has been no attempt to identify subsets of patients who may benefit from "tertiary" prophylaxis more than others, for example, due to their bleeding phenotype and/or requirements for product issued on-demand or to identify the dosage that provides the optimal balance of clinical benefit and cost effectiveness. This article reviews the published literature on prophylaxis started beyond the age of 18 years, the barriers to the uptake of prophylaxis programs particularly in adults and highlights areas in need of further research.

Secondary prophylaxis treatment versus on-demand treatment for patients with severe haemophilia A: comparisons of cost and outcomes in Taiwan.

This study compared secondary prophylaxis treatment with on-demand treatment for severe haemophilia A in Taiwan. Fifty patients from one medical centre were evaluated over a 5-year period. Differences in annual bleed rates and factor VIII (FVIII) utilization were assessed between patients receiving secondary prophylaxis and patients receiving FVIII concentrates on-demand. Results were then used as inputs in a pharmacoeconomic model to predict outcomes of future haemophilia therapy strategies in Taiwan. The median annual number of total bleeding episodes was significantly lower in the 13 (26%) patients who received secondary prophylaxis than in the 37 patients who received FVIII on-demand (7.76 vs. 31.91, P < 0.0001). The between-group difference in median annual factor VIII utilization was statistically significant (1824.41 IU kg(-1) for the prophylaxis group and 1324.81 IU kg(-1) for the on-demand group, P < 0.01). It was estimated that approximately $2 million (USD) per year would be added to the cost of treatment by having all severe haemophilia A patients in Taiwan receive secondary prophylaxis instead of on-demand therapy while 12,566 bleeding will be prevented. It is recommended that National Health Insurance officials utilize these data to evaluate the benefits of enhanced treatment strategies and before making substantial policy changes to haemophilia care in Taiwan.

Factor VIII requirement to maintain a target plasma level in the prophylactic treatment of severe hemophilia A: influences of variance in pharmacokinetics and treatment regimens.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic factor (F)VIII has been shown to reduce bleeds and arthropathy in patients with severe hemophilia A. OBJECTIVES: Assuming that the trough FVIII level is an important determinant of the efficacy of prophylaxis, this paper addresses the effect of the inter-patient variability in pharmacokinetics and different dosing regimens on trough levels. METHODS: Simulations used FVIII half-lives and in vivo recoveries (IVR), observed during clinical trials with Advate [Antihemophilic Factor (Recombinant), Plasma/Albumin-Free Method], and commonly used prophylactic regimens to calculate their effect on FVIII levels during prophylaxis. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Half-life and dose frequency had a larger effect on trough FVIII and time per week with FVIII<1 IU dL(-1) than IVR and infused dose per kg. The combined effect of these parameters resulted in substantial inter-patient variability in the amount of FVIII required to sustain a desired trough level. Prophylactic regimens based on Monday, Wednesday, Friday dosing were less cost effective in maintaining a desired trough level throughout the week. Dose escalation on Friday to cover the weekend would require potentially harmful doses of FVIII in many patients, especially in young children where more than 50% would require a Friday dose of over 100 IU kg(-1) and some would require more than 400 IU kg(-1). Knowledge of individual patients' half-lives and alteration of frequency of infusions may allow the more cost-effective use of FVIII and potentially expand access to prophylaxis to a greater number of patients, especially in regions where healthcare resources are scarce.

Concomitant infusion of low doses of rFVIIa and FEIBA in haemophilia patients with inhibitors.

Patients with severe haemophilia A and an inhibitor may become refractory to FEIBA and/or recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa). Sequential therapy with both products has been reported in such patients. In this pilot study, we examined the safety and efficacy of combined rFVIIa and FEIBA therapy in patients with haemophilia A and inhibitors during bleeding episodes. We also tried to evaluate whether thrombin generation (TG), by various mixtures of these agents, can serve as a guide for tailoring therapy. TG was measured in plasma taken from eight haemophilia A patients. Increasing concentrations of rFVIIa, FEIBA or both were added ex vivo to the plasmas, and TG was induced by recalcification. Since low concentrations of rFVIIa and FEIBA had either an additive or a synergistic effect in all patients, the lowest combination, yielding TG comparable or lower than TG achieved with either FEIBA 100 U kg(-1) or rFVIIa 160 microg kg(-1) alone, was selected for the treatment of bleeding episodes. Five patients with a high titre of an inhibitor (8-1300 BU), including one previously refractory to infusions of rFVIIa at doses up to 400 microg kg(-1) X4 daily, were treated with combinations of 30-70 microg kg(-1) rFVIIa and 20-30 U kg(-1) FEIBA during a total number of 400 bleeding episodes with excellent haemostatic effect. No adverse events and no DIC were observed following these infusions. Concomitant infusion of low-dose rFVIIa and low-dose FEIBA, seems to be safe, efficacious and economical in patients refractory to rFVIIa and probably other haemophilia A patients with an inhibitor.

FEIBA in treatment of acute bleeding episodes in patients with haemophilia A and factor VIII inhibitors: a retrospective survey in regional haemophilia centre.

FEIBA (factor eight inhibitor by-passing activity) is used to achieve haemostasis in haemophiliacs with inhibitor. The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and consumption of the product in treatment of haemorrhages in haemophiliacs with factor VIII inhibitor, and determine factors that can influence the results of treatment. We used data from our haemophilia centre from years 2000-2008. Six haemophiliacs with factor VIII inhibitor were treated on demand with FEIBA for 61 bleeding episodes (45 haemarthroses, six muscle bleeds, six other sites bleeds and four multiple sites bleeds). The median cumulative dose of FEIBA per bleeding episode was 205 U kg(-1). Bleeding was stopped in 96.7% (59 of 61) of events but re-bleeding occurred in 3 events (4.9%) within 48 h after cessation of bleeding. In home treatment (20 of 61) bleeding stopped in 90% (18 of 20) without recurrence and the median consumption per event was reduced to 153 U kg(-1). Without the use of home treatment the median consumption was 250 U kg(-1) per event and bleeding ceased definitely in 92.7% (38 of 41) of cases. The cumulative dose of FEIBA was lower for three episodes with re-bleeding: median 96 U kg(-1) but not in the two cases of ineffective treatment: 361 U kg(-1). FEIBA in management of bleeding episodes completely resolved the haemorrhage in 91.8% of events and in a further 4.9% if treatment was restarted. Using home treatment saved expenditure due to the lower cumulative dose needed for treatment of haemorrhage.

Prophylaxis in people with haemophilia.

A four-decade clinical experience and recent evidence from randomised controlled studies definitively recognised primary prophylaxis, i.e. the regular infusion of factor concentrates started after the first haemarthrosis and/or before the age of two years, as the first-choice treatment in children with severe haemophilia. The available data clearly show that preventing bleeding since an early age enables to avoid or reduce the clinical impact of muscle-skeletal impairment from haemophilic arthropathy and the related consequences in psycho-social development and quality of life of these patients. In this respect, the aim of secondary prophylaxis, defined as regular long-term treatment started after the age of two years or after two or more joint bleeds, is to avoid (or delay) the progression of arthropathy. The clinical benefits of secondary prophylaxis have been less extensively studied, especially in adolescents and adults; also in the latter better outcomes and quality of life for earlier treatment have been reported. This review summarises evidence from literature and current clinical strategies for prophylactic treatment in patients with severe haemophilia, also focusing on challenges and open issues (optimal regimen and implementation, duration of treatment, long-term adherence and outcomes, cost-benefit ratios) in this setting.

The benefits of prophylactic treatment with APCC in patients with haemophilia and high-titre inhibitors: a retrospective case series.

Prophylactic infusion of factor concentrates is a safe, effective intervention for preventing arthropathy in patients with haemophilia; on-demand treatment is insufficient to prevent the orthopaedic complications and subsequent haemophilic arthropathy that stem from recurrent joint haemorrhages. The usefulness of prophylaxis in haemophilia patients without inhibitors suggests that patients with haemophilia and inhibitors could derive similar benefits. In patients with haemophilia and high-titre (>5 BU mL(-1)) inhibitors, bleeding episodes are treated with bypassing agents such as activated prothrombin complex concentrates (APCCs) and recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa, NovoSeven; Novo Nordisk A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark). It is possible to administer bypassing therapy regularly to prevent haemorrhages, with the goal of limiting arthropathy and serious life- and limb-threatening bleeding. The data evaluating the efficacy and safety of this approach in patients with inhibitors are limited, consisting of results from one prospective trial and retrospective case reports. This report describes our experience with the prophylactic use of the APCC Factor Eight Inhibitor Bypassing Activity, Anti-Inhibitor Coagulant Complex, Vapor Heated (FEIBA; Baxter AG, Vienna, Austria). Data from patients at one treatment centre were retrospectively evaluated. Case records of six patients with haemophilia A or B and high-titre inhibitors were identified. When APCC was administered regularly, most patients exhibited a reduction in the numbers of haemorrhages, an improvement in orthopaedic status, and an improvement in quality of life. Prophylaxis with APCC can reduce haemorrhages and halt further joint deterioration in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors.

Home treatment with bypassing products in inhibitor patients: a 7.5-year experience.

The advantages of early treatment of bleeds include minimizing the damage caused by the haemorrhage as well as offering increased convenience and time saved for the patient. The objectives of this prospective, single-centre study were to evaluate the efficacy, safety and feasibility of long-term home treatment with bypassing product in inhibitor patients. Since May 2000, 10 haemophilia A patients with high-titre inhibitors have been included in the study. Nine patients were treated with activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC; factor eight inhibitor bypassing activity, FEIBA; Baxter AG, Vienna, Austria) and one patient with both aPCC and recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa; NovoSeven; NovoNordisk A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark). A total of 1008 infusions of aPCC and 17 infusions of rFVIIa were given in a home treatment setting. The numbers include 448 infusions of aPCC and 10 infusions of rFVIIa given as prophylactic treatment. During the 7.5 years of follow-up, the patients experienced 431 bleeds. Five hundred and sixty infusions of aPCC and seven infusions of rFVIIa were given to treat these bleeds. Haemostasis was rated as effective in 88% (372/424) and partially effective in 10% (43/424) of the bleeds after a mean number of 1.3 injections. The number of treatments rated as effective was comparable for muscle (90%), joint (85%) and mucocutaneous (86%) bleeds. The safety of the treatment was very good. Only two mild adverse events were reported in total. No thrombotic adverse event has been observed. In conclusion, home treatment with bypassing agents in inhibitor patients is feasible, effective and safe in a long-term perspective.

Effects of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult haemophiliacs.

While primary prophylaxis is a well-established and recommended method of care delivery for children with severe haemophilia, fewer studies have documented the benefits of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescence or adulthood. To evaluate the role of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult severe haemophiliacs, a retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in 10 Italian Centres that investigated 84 haemophiliacs who had bled frequently and had thus switched from on-demand to prophylactic treatment during adolescence (n = 30) or adulthood (n = 54). The consumption of clotting factor concentrates, the orthopaedic and radiological scores, quality of life and disease-related morbidity were compared before and after starting secondary prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the mean annual number of total and joint bleeds (35.8 vs. 4.2 and 32.4 vs. 3.3; P < 0.01) and of days lost from work/school (34.6 vs. 3.0, P < 0.01). A statistically significant reduction in the orthopaedic score was observed during prophylaxis in adolescents, but not in the whole cohort. Patients used more factor concentrates with corresponding higher costs on prophylaxis, but experienced a better quality of life. With respect to on-demand treatment, higher factor consumption and cost of secondary prophylaxis were balanced by marked clinical benefits and greater well-being in this cohort of adolescent/adult haemophiliacs.

Cost and outcome: comparisons of two alternative bypassing agents for persons with haemophilia A complicated by an inhibitor.

The development of inhibitory antibodies to factor VIII is a serious complication of haemophilia. Two haemostatic agents with different bypassing mechanisms have been used in the treatment of patients with inhibitors: activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) and recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa). The objective was to compare cost and outcome of aPCC and rFVIIa in the treatment of joint bleeds. The analyses were based on the FENOC (FEIBA NovoSeven Comparative Study) crossover study where 48 patients used aPCC and rFVIIa to treat two joint bleeds. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for three outcome measures and the variation in cost was analyzed using two alternative regression methods. Results were subjected to sensitivity analyses. Key determinants of cost were prescribed dose, bodyweight and treatment in addition to protocol. The cost of aPCC was on average lower than rFVIIa. At all but one time point, patients rated slightly higher (but not statistically significantly) percentages of treatment efficacy and stopping of the bleed by aPCC. The reported reduction in pain from start of treatment up to 48 hours varied considerably among individuals. The different relative prices in the US, Turkey and Sweden mattered, but did not reverse the main results. In conclusion, the cost per episode was significantly lower for aPCC. The large individual-level variation in reduction of pain supports decisions that consider the individual patient's experience and that accept trade-offs between cost and reduction in pain rather than focusing on cost only.

Cost-utility analysis of Canadian tailored prophylaxis, primary prophylaxis and on-demand therapy in young children with severe haemophilia A.

Primary prophylaxis is the emerging standard treatment for boys with severe haemophilia. Tailored (escalating-dose) prophylaxis (EscDose), beginning at a low frequency and escalating with repeated bleeding may prevent arthropathy at a lower cost than standard prophylaxis (SP). From a societal perspective, we compared the incremental cost per joint-haemorrhage that is avoided and quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gained of SP and EscDose to on-demand (Demand) therapy in severe haemophilia A boys treated to age 6 using a decision analytic model. Costs included factor VIII (FVIII), professional visits and tests, central venous placement/complications, hospitalization, home programmes and parents' lost work-days. Resource utilization was estimated by surveying 17 Canadian clinics. The natural history of bleeding and other probabilities were determined from a longitudinal chart review (n = 24) and published literature. EscDose costs an additional $3192 per joint-haemorrhage that was avoided compared with Demand whereas SP costs an additional $9046 per joint-haemorrhage that was avoided compared with EscDose. Clinic costs and lost wages were reduced by 60-80% for EscDose and SP compared with Demand. EscDose attained more QALYs than SP and Demand on account of less bleeding than Demand and lower need for ports than SP. The incremental cost per QALY for EscDose vs. Demand was $542 938. EscDose was less expensive with similar QALYs compared to SP. Sensitivity analysis was performed on all probability- and cost-estimates, and showed the model was sensitive to the cost of FVIII and the SP and target joint utilities. In conclusion, prophylaxis will substantially improve clinical outcomes and quality of life compared to Demand treatment, but with substantial cost.

Acute traumatic hemarthrosis of the adult's knee--a diagnostic options in arthroscopic era. Literature review.

The review presenting the most common causes of acute knee hemarthrosis in adults, discuss diagnostic accuracy, advantages and disadvantages as well as cost-effectiveness assessment of physical examination, magnetic resonance imaging and artrhroscopy as diagnostic tools in appraisal of acute injured knee.

Prophylaxis in adults with haemophilia.

The indications for and the efficacy of prophylaxis in adults with haemophilia remain controversial. It is unclear whether the benefits of secondary prophylaxis outweigh the costs, because adults with haemophilia usually already have established arthropathy. The objectives of secondary prophylaxis in this group are therefore more limited than the objectives of primary prophylaxis in children. It is also uncertain whether primary prophylaxis should stop or continue once adulthood is reached. Some individuals with near-normal joints may stop prophylaxis in early adulthood and then bleed infrequently. Others who stop prophylaxis begin to bleed frequently and suffer progressive arthropathy; these patients should probably have continued prophylaxis. There is no satisfactory method for selecting patients for continued prophylaxis. Adult prophylaxis is less well studied than prophylaxis in children. A few studies with a small number of patients suggest that adults treated with prophylaxis experienced fewer bleeding episodes, less pain and improved quality of life compared with those treated on demand. The mean annual cost of prophylaxis tends be substantially higher for adults than for children, largely owing to the high cost of clotting factor. Here we review the literature regarding the prophylactic treatment of adult patients with haemophilia A, including studies of the discontinuation of prophylaxis. These studies and others all show clinical benefit from prophylaxis in adulthood and suggest the possibility that optimized prophylaxis (e.g. tailoring an intermediate- or low-dose regimen in patients who bleed infrequently) may improve clinical outcome. The cost-effect argument is more difficult to sustain in adults compared with children; however, the cost of prophylaxis may be counterbalanced by indirect factors, such as days gained at work, reduced hospitalizations, reduced need for orthopaedic surgery and improved quality of life.

Identifying and overcoming barriers to prophylaxis in the management of haemophilia.

Haemophilia is often characterized by acute haemarthrosis and synovitis arising from spontaneous bleeding episodes, particularly in the muscles and joints of the elbows, knees and ankles. Current treatment for patients with severe haemophilia involves coagulation factor concentrate (CFC) replacement therapy given on demand at the time of bleeding or through long-term prophylaxis aimed at preventing future bleeds and joint disease. Although prophylaxis has many advantages over on-demand therapy (particularly if started before age 2 and prior to any signs of joint disease), its practice varies widely even among developed countries because of several barriers. Such barriers include CFC costs and availability; patient perceptions, lifestyles and bleeding patterns; difficulties and complications arising from the use of intravenous access devices (IVADs); the development of inhibitors; and the lack of randomized clinical trials. These barriers can be overcome by tailoring treatment regimens according to individual patient bleeding patterns and CFC pharmacokinetic profiles, using IVADs selectively and judiciously, helping patients maintain normal weight and physical exercise and providing the families of patients with continuous support from healthcare providers.