Expert United Kingdom consensus on the preservation of joint health in people with moderate and severe haemophilia A: A modified Delphi panel.

AIM: For people with haemophilia A (PwHA), bleeding in the joints leads to joint damage and haemophilia-related arthropathy, impacting range of motion and life expectancy. Existing guidelines for managing haemophilia A support healthcare professionals (HCPs) and PwHA in their efforts to preserve joint health. However, such guidance should be reviewed, considering emerging evidence and consensus as presented in this manuscript. METHODS: Fifteen HCPs experienced in the management of PwHA in the UK participated in a three-round Delphi panel. Consensus was defined at ≥70% of panellists agreeing or disagreeing for Likert-scale questions, and ≥70% selecting the same option for multiple- or single-choice questions. Questions not reaching consensus were revised for the next round. RESULTS: 26.8% (11/41), 44.8% (13/29) and 93.3% (14/15) of statements reached consensus in Rounds 1, 2 and 3, respectively. HCPs agreed that prophylaxis should be offered to patients with a baseline factor VIII (FVIII) level of ≤5 IU/dL and that, where there is no treatment burden, the aim of prophylaxis should be to achieve a trough FVIII level ≥15 IU/dL and maintain a longer period with FVIII levels of ≥20-30 IU/dL to provide better bleed protection. The aspirational goal for PwHA is to prevent all joint bleeds, which may be achieved by maintaining normalised (50-150 IU/dL) FVIII levels. CONCLUSION: The panel of experts were largely aligned on approaches to preserving joint health in PwHA, and this consensus may help guide HCPs.

A genome-wide association study of resistance to HIV infection in highly exposed uninfected individuals with hemophilia A.

Human genetic variation contributes to differences in susceptibility to HIV-1 infection. To search for novel host resistance factors, we performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in hemophilia patients highly exposed to potentially contaminated factor VIII infusions. Individuals with hemophilia A and a documented history of factor VIII infusions before the introduction of viral inactivation procedures (1979-1984) were recruited from 36 hemophilia treatment centers (HTCs), and their genome-wide genetic variants were compared with those from matched HIV-infected individuals. Homozygous carriers of known CCR5 resistance mutations were excluded. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and inferred copy number variants (CNVs) were tested using logistic regression. In addition, we performed a pathway enrichment analysis, a heritability analysis, and a search for epistatic interactions with CCR5 Δ32 heterozygosity. A total of 560 HIV-uninfected cases were recruited: 36 (6.4%) were homozygous for CCR5 Δ32 or m303. After quality control and SNP imputation, we tested 1 081 435 SNPs and 3686 CNVs for association with HIV-1 serostatus in 431 cases and 765 HIV-infected controls. No SNP or CNV reached genome-wide significance. The additional analyses did not reveal any strong genetic effect. Highly exposed, yet uninfected hemophiliacs form an ideal study group to investigate host resistance factors. Using a genome-wide approach, we did not detect any significant associations between SNPs and HIV-1 susceptibility, indicating that common genetic variants of major effect are unlikely to explain the observed resistance phenotype in this population.