Minor surgical procedures during immune tolerance induction in people with hemophilia A and inhibitors: results from the Brazilian Immune Tolerance (BrazIT) study cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Surgeries are implicated in the development of anti-factor VIII (FVIII) neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) in hemophilia A individuals with immune tolerance induction (ITI) treatment being the recommended therapy to eradicate these inhibitors. We evaluated the association of surgical procedures performed during ITI and treatment outcome. METHODS: Patients were treated according to the Brazilian ITI Protocol with outcomes being defined as successful (i.e., recovered responsiveness to exogenous FVIII) and failed (i.e., unresponsiveness to exogenous FVIII thus requiring bypassing agents for bleeding control). Surgical procedures during induction therapy were managed following international recommendations. RESULTS: Treatment success rate was 68.7 % in 163 patients; 33 (20.2 %) were submitted to 43 (96 %) minor and two major surgeries. Personal, hemophilia, inhibitor, and treatment characteristics were similar between patients submitted to surgical procedures or not while on ITI; the success rates were 72.7 % and 67.7 % (p-value = 0.577), respectively. CONCLUSION: No association was found between having a minor surgical procedure and ITI treatment outcome.

High levels of anti-factor VIII immunoglobulin G4 and immunoglobulin G total are associated with immune tolerance induction failure in people with congenital hemophilia A and high-responding inhibitors.

Background: Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the treatment of choice to eradicate neutralizing anti-factor (F)VIII alloantibodies (inhibitors) in people with inherited hemophilia A. However, it is not successful in 10% to 40% of the cases. The biological mechanisms and biomarkers associated with ITI outcome are largely unknown. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the association of plasma cytokines (interferon-γ, tumor necrosis factor, interleukin [IL]-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, and IL-17A), chemokines (IL-8/CXCL8, RANTES/CCL5, MIG/CXCL9, MCP-1/CCL2, and IP-10/CXCL10), and anti-FVIII immunoglobulin (Ig) G total, IgG1, and IgG4 with ITI outcome. Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis of the Brazilian Immune Tolerance Study, we assessed plasma levels of anti-FVIII IgGs using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with plasma-derived FVIII and recombinant FVIII as target antigens, immobilized in microplates. Results: We assayed 98 plasma samples of moderately severe and severe (FVIII activity, <2%) people with hemophilia A after completion of a first ITI course. Levels of anti-recombinant FVIII IgG total and IgG4 were higher in people with hemophilia A who failed ITI (IgG total optical density [OD], 0.37; IQR, 0.15-0.73; IgG4 OD, 2.19; IQR, 0.80-2.52) than in those who had partial (IgG total OD, 0.03; IQR, 0.00-0.14; IgG4 OD, 0.39; IQR, 0.09-1.11; P < .0001 for both) or complete success (IgG total OD, 0.04; IQR, 0.00-0.07; IgG4 OD, 0.07; IQR, 0.06-0.40; P < .0001 for both). Plasma cytokines, chemokines, and anti-FVIII IgG1 were not associated with ITI outcome. Conclusion: Our results show that high levels of plasma anti-FVIII IgG4 and IgG total are associated with ITI failure.

Large deletions and small insertions and deletions in the factor VIII gene predict unfavorable immune tolerance induction outcome in people with severe hemophilia A and high-responding inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Hemophilia A is an inherited bleeding disorder caused by pathogenic variants in the factor VIII gene (F8), which leads to factor VIII (FVIII) deficiency. Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is a therapeutic approach to eradicate alloantibodies (inhibitors) against exogenous FVIII in people with inherited hemophilia A. Few studies have evaluated the role of F8 variants on ITI outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included people with severe hemophilia A (FVIII ˂ 1 international units/dL) and high-responding inhibitors (≥ 5 Bethesda units/mL lifelong) who underwent a first course of ITI. Socio-demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected. ITI outcomes were defined as total, partial successes, and failure. Detection of intron 1 and 22 inversions was performed by polymerase-chain reaction, followed by F8 sequencing. RESULTS: We included 168 people with inherited hemophilia A and high-responding inhibitors, median age 6 years at ITI start. Intron 22 inversion was the most prevalent variant (53.6 %), followed by nonsense (16.1 %), small insertion/deletion (11.3 %), and large deletion (10.7 %). In comparison with intron 22 inversion, the odds of ITI failure were 15.5 times higher (odds ratio [OR] 15.50; 95 % confidence interval [95 % CI] 4.59-71.30) and 4.25 times higher (95 % CI, 1.53-12.3) among carriers of F8 large deletions and small insertions and deletions, respectively. CONCLUSION: F8 large deletions and small insertions/deletions predicted ITI failure after a first course of ITI in patients with severe hemophilia A and high-responding inhibitors. This is the first study to show F8 large deletions and small insertions/deletions as predictors of ITI failure.

Time between inhibitor detection and start of immune tolerance induction: Association with outcome in the BrazIT study.

BACKGROUND: Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the treatment of choice for eradication of anti-factor VIII (FVIII) neutralizing alloantibodies (inhibitors) in people with inherited hemophilia A and high-responding inhibitor (PwHA-HRi). The association between ITI outcome and time elapsed between inhibitor detection and start of ITI (∆tinhi-ITI ) is debatable. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate this association among a large cohort of severe PwHA-HRi. METHODS: Severe (factor VIII activity level <1%) PwHA-HRi on ITI (n = 142) were enrolled in 15 hemophilia treatment centers. PwHA-HRi were treated according to the Brazilian ITI Protocol. ITI outcomes were defined as success (i.e., recovered responsiveness to exogenous FVIII) and failure (i.e., no responsiveness to exogenous FVIII and requirement of bypassing agents to control bleeding). RESULTS: Median ages at inhibitor detection and at ITI start were 3.2 years (interquartile range [IQR], 1.6-8.1) and 6.9 years [IQR, 2.6-20.1), respectively. PwHA-HRi were stratified according to ∆tinhi-ITI quartiles: first (0.0-0.6 year), second (>0.6-1.7 year), third (>1.7-9.2 years), and fourth quartile (>9.2-24.5 years). The overall success rate was 65.5% (93/142), with no difference among first, second, third, and fourth quartiles (62.9%, 69.4%, 58.3%, and 71.4%, respectively) even after adjusting the analyses for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, delayed ITI start is not associated with failure of ITI in PwHA-HRi. Therefore, ITI should be offered for these patients, regardless of the time elapsed between the detection of inhibitor and the ITI start.