Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Efficacy of rFIXFc versus N9-GP Prophylaxis in Patients with Hemophilia B: Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of B-LONG and PARADIGM 2 Trials.
Mancuso, Maria Elisa; Eriksson, Daniel; Falk, Aletta; Hakimi, Zalmai; Wojciechowski, Piotr; Wdowiak, Marlena; Klamroth, Robert.
Afiliação
  • Mancuso ME; Center for Thrombosis and Hemorrhagic Diseases, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
  • Eriksson D; Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
  • Falk A; Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Hakimi Z; Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Wojciechowski P; Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Wdowiak M; Creativ-Ceutical, Krakow, Poland.
  • Klamroth R; Assignity, Krakow, Poland.
J Blood Med ; 14: 427-434, 2023.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37534261
ABSTRACT

Purpose:

For patients with hemophilia B, extended half-life factor IX (FIX) products are available for prophylaxis and for treating bleeds. Different methods are used to extend the half-lives of recombinant FIX Fc fusion protein (rFIXFc) and nonacog beta pegol (N9-GP). This affects their biodistribution and plasma FIX levels, although differences do not always correlate with clinical outcomes. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of prophylaxis with rFIXFc and N9-GP was performed, based on licensed dosing in the European Union. Patients and

Methods:

Combined rFIXFc data from the weekly and individualized interval prophylaxis arms of the B-LONG clinical trial, and N9-GP data from the 40 IU/kg once-weekly prophylaxis arm of PARADIGM 2 were used in a MAIC. Individual patient data for rFIXFc (n=87) were matched to aggregated data for N9-GP (n=29). Estimated annualized bleeding rates (ABRs) for rFIXFc were recalculated using a Poisson regression model with adjustment for over-dispersion, and compared with ABRs reported for N9-GP, using incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results:

There was no evidence of significant differences in estimated ABRs between prophylaxis with rFIXFc and N9-GP. Analysis of pooled rFIXFc weekly and interval-adjusted dosing compared with N9-GP 40 IU/kg once weekly produced estimated ABRs of 2.59 versus 2.51 (IRR 1.03; 95% CI 0.56-1.89), as well as 1.34 versus 1.22 (IRR 1.10; 95% CI 0.42-2.91) and 1.13 versus 1.29 (IRR 0.88; 95% CI 0.47-1.63) for overall, spontaneous, and traumatic bleeding events, respectively.

Conclusion:

The study did not reveal any significant differences in the efficacy of rFIXFc and N9-GP prophylaxis. Given differences in trough levels (rFIXFc dosing was targeted to achieve a trough 1-3 IU/dL above baseline versus a reported estimated N9-GP mean trough of 27.3 IU/dL), interpreting plasma FIX levels as potential surrogate efficacy markers requires consideration of compound-specific pharmacokinetic profiles.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article