scholarly journals Practical Utilisation of Octapharma FVIII Concentrates in Previously Untreated and Minimally Treated Haemophilia a Patients Entering Routine Clinical Treatment with Nuwiq®, Octanate® or Wilate® — the Protect-NOW Study

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5034-5034
Author(s):  
Johannes Oldenburg ◽  
Anna Pavlova ◽  
Susan Halimeh ◽  
Robert Klamroth ◽  
Joris Versteden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cumulative Incidence ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Treatment Effectiveness ◽  
Real Life ◽  
High Titre ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Inhibitor Development ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction/Objective: The development of FVIII inhibitors remains the greatest challenge to the treatment of previously untreated patients (PUPs) with haemophilia A. Uncontrolled studies in PUPs have suggested that immunogenicity of FVIII concentrates varies between different products. In the SIPPET study, the first and only large randomised controlled study to examine the impact of FVIII product type on immunogenicity, the cumulative incidence of high-titre inhibitors in PUPs and minimally treated patients (MTPs) treated with hamster cell-derived recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) products was 28.4%, compared with 18.6% for plasma-derived FVIII/von Willebrand factor (pdFVIII/VWF) products [1]. However, SIPPET did not include all currently available FVIII products, limiting the applicability of its conclusions to the current haemophilia treatment landscape. In previous clinical studies of true PUPs treated with the pdFVIII/VWF concentrates octanate® [2] and wilate®, the cumulative incidences of high-titre inhibitors were 8.0% and 11.3%, respectively. For the human-cell derived rFVIII Nuwiq®, the cumulative incidence of high-titre inhibitors was 12.8% (data from a preplanned interim analysis) [3]. These incidences suggest a favourable immunogenicity profile compared to products in the SIPPET study. However, there is a need for more real-life data on treatment effectiveness and safety in PUPs and MTPs. The ongoing, non-interventional, multi-centre Protect-NOW study is a prospective and retrospective study evaluating real-life treatment patterns, effectiveness and safety, including inhibitor development, in PUPs and MTPs with severe haemophilia A who are treated with Octapharma's pdFVIII or rFVIII products. Methods: One hundred and forty PUPs (no previous treatment) and MTPs (<5 previous EDs with other FVIII products) with severe haemophilia A of all ages and ethnicities will be studied for 100 EDs or up to 3 years. Treatment effectiveness will be evaluated for regular prophylaxis, treatment of bleeding episodes, and surgical prophylaxis. Optional sub-studies, including epitope mapping, detection of non-neutralising inhibitors, and gene mutation analysis, will assess factors potentially associated with inhibitor development and eradication in patients with severe haemophilia A. Optional sub-studies will be carried out at the central laboratory at the Institute of Experimental Haematology in Bonn. Protect-NOW is planned to include around 17 countries and 50 centres worldwide. In the US, the Protect-NOW will be performed as part of the ATHN-8 study. Results: Recruitment is ongoing, with seven patients recruited at two German centres to date. The study has been approved by central and/or local ethics committees in Germany, US, UK, Spain and Russia, and is under ethical review in Canada. Final data collection is expected in 2022. Conclusions: Protect-NOW will collect real-life clinical experience with Octapharma's FVIII products in PUPs and MTPs. This study will contribute real-world data to the current debate on the relevance of FVIII concentrate type in inhibitor induction. ReferencesPeyvandi F et al. N Engl J Med 2016; 374:2054-64.Klukowska A et al. Haemophilia 2018; 24:221-28.Liesner R et al. Haemophilia 2018; 24: 211-20. Disclosures Oldenburg: Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Swedish Orphan Biovitrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Biogen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Biotest: Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding; Grifols: Honoraria, Research Funding. Pavlova:Octapharma: Honoraria; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria. Halimeh:Bayer healthcare, Baxalta Innovations, Biotest, CSL Behring, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, LFB, Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer Healthcare, Baxalta Innovations, Biotest, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer: Research Funding. Klamroth:Baxalta (Shire), Bayer, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer, Shire, and SOBI: Research Funding; Baxalta (Shire), Bayer, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer, Shire, and SOBI: Consultancy. Versteden:Octapharma AG: Employment. Jansen:Octapharma: Employment. Belyanskaya:Octapharma AG: Employment.

scholarly journals Factor VIII Levels in Blood Group O and Non-O in Patients with Non-Severe Haemophilia a

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1135-1135
Author(s):  
Judit Rejtoe ◽  
Oliver Königsbrügge ◽  
Ella Grilz ◽  
Stefanie Hofer ◽  
Johanna Gebhart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Linear Regression ◽  
Blood Group ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Abo Blood Group ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Strong Positive Correlation ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Von Willebrand ◽  
The Impact

Introduction ABO blood group affects levels of von Willebrand Factor (VWF) and Factor (F) VIII, as individuals with blood group non-O have higher levels of VWF and FVIII. To the best of our knowledge there is no data available regarding the association between blood group and FVIII in non-severe haemophilia. Aim We aimed to explore the influence of ABO blood group on VWF and FVIII levels in patients with non-severe haemophilia A (HA). Methods We recruited persons with non-severe HA (FVIII levels of 1-40%). Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years), with platelet count > 105 /µl, without impaired renal and hepatic function, active cancer, surgery within the last 6 weeks, or overt infection within the last 2 weeks, who gave their informed consent were included. A blood sample was collected for laboratory analysis. The diagnosis of haemophilia was confirmed by molecular analysis of the FVIII gene in all patients. None of the patients had inhibitors against FVIII at the time of sample collection. The lowest FVIII level ever measured in each patient's history served as basis for the assessment of severity. Healthy male persons with a median age comparable to the patient group served as controls. We determined the following parameters: ABO blood group, FVIII, VWF activity (VWF:Act), and VWF antigen (VWF:Ag). FVIII was measured with a one-stage assay (Sysmex-CA7000 - Sysmex, Kobe, Japan, in multi-dilution mode with native FVIII-deficient plasma - Technoclone, Vienna, Austria and Aktin FS activator - Siemens, Marburg, Germany), VWF:Act (BC von Willebrand Reagent or Innovance VWF Ac - Siemens Healthcare, Marburg, Germany) and VWF:Ag levels with a latex agglutination assay (STA LIATEST VWF, Diagnostica Stago). Comparison of VWF and FVIII levels between blood group O and non-O was calculated with Mann-Whitney-U test, correlation between FVIII and VWF levels was calculated with Spearman's correlation, association of FVIII and VWF separated for blood group was calculated with univariable linear regression. Association of FVIII with VWF and blood group was calculated using multivariable linear regression. All calculations were performed with SPSS (IBM Version 25.0). Results A total of 89 persons with HA (71 with mild and 18 with moderate haemophilia) and 82 healthy controls were included. Patient characteristics are listed in Table 1. Median levels of VWF were significantly higher both in patients (p=0.002 for both VWF:Ag and VWF:Act) and healthy controls (p<0.001 for both VWF:Ag and VWF:Act) with blood group non-O compared to individuals with blood group O. FVIII levels were not significantly different between blood group non-O and O in HA patients (15% vs. 14.1%, p=0.716) but significantly higher in healthy controls with blood group non-O versus O (150.0% vs. 109.5%, p<0.001; Table 2). In HA there was no correlation between FVIII and VWF:Act (rho=0.180, p=0.095) or between FVIII and VWF:Ag (rho=0.028, p=0.795, Table 3). In univariable linear regression there was no significant association between VWF and FVIII in HA, neither in those with blood group non-O nor in those with blood group O (Figure 1). Also in multivariable linear regression there was no significant association between VWF (p=0.632) and blood group (p=0.929) with FVIII in patients with HA. In healthy controls, there was a strong positive correlation between FVIII and VWF:Act (rho=0.751, p<0.001) and between FVIII and VWF:Ag (rho=0.790, p<0.001) (Table 3). In the healthy controls with blood group non-O 1% elevation in the VWF:Ag was associated with 0.63% of elevation in the FVIII:Act and in blood group O 1% elevation in the VWF:Ag was associated with 0.66% of elevation in the FVIII:Act (Figure 2). Conclusions Neither the blood group nor the VWF had an influence on FVIII levels in non-severe HA patients. We conclude that the impact of the genetic mutation of the FVIII gene by far outweighs the influence of VWF levels and the blood group. Thus, for the diagnosis of HA and for determination of HA severity, the blood group needs not to be taken into account. Disclosures Pabinger: Roche: Honoraria; Sobi: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Sobi: Honoraria.

Increased inhibitor incidence in severe haemophilia A since 1990 attributable to more low titre inhibitors

2016 ◽  
Vol 115 (04) ◽  
pp. 729-737 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathelijn Fischer ◽  
Pia Petrini ◽  
Rolf Ljung ◽  
Anne Rafowicz ◽  
Manuel Carcao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cox Regression ◽  
High Titre ◽  
P Value ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Birth Cohorts ◽  
Inhibitor Development ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Development Inhibitor ◽  
Unselected Cohort

SummaryMany studies have reported an increased incidence of inhibitors in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A after the introduction of recombinant products. It was the objective of this study to investigate whether the inhibitor incidence has increased between 1990 and 2009 in an unselected cohort of PUPs with severe haemophilia A (FVIII < 1 %). Patients were consecutively recruited from 31 haemophilia treatment centres in 16 countries and followed until 50 exposure days or until inhibitor development. Inhibitor development was studied in five-year birth cohorts comparing cumulative incidences. Furthermore the risk for inhibitor development per five-year birth cohort was studied using multivariable Cox regression, adjusting for potential genetic and treatment-related confounders. A total of 926 PUPs were included with a total cumulative inhibitor incidence of 27.5 %. The inhibitor incidence increased from 19.5 % in 1990-1994 (lowest) to 30.9 % in 2000-2004 (highest; p-value 0.011). Low titre inhibitor incidence increased from 3.1 % in 1990-1994 to 10.5 % in 2005-2009 (p-value 0.009). High titre inhibitor incidences remained stable over time. After 2000, risk of all inhibitor development was increased with adjusted hazard ratios 1.96 (95 % CI 1.06-2.83) in 2000-2004 and 2.34 (1.42-4.92) in 2005-2009. Screening for inhibitors was intensified over this 20-year study period from a median of 1.9 to 2.9 tests/year before 2000 to 2.7 to 4.3 tests/ year after 2000. In conclusion, the cumulative inhibitor incidence has significantly increased between 1990 and 2009. The high titre inhibitor incidence has remained stable.

The incidence and treatment of bleeding episodes in non-severe haemophilia A patients with inhibitors

2016 ◽  
Vol 115 (03) ◽  
pp. 543-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice S. van Velzen ◽  
Corien L. Eckhardt ◽  
Nina Streefkerk ◽  
Marjolein Peters ◽  
Daniel P. Hart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Intervention ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Inhibitory Antibody ◽  
Bleeding Rate ◽  
Inhibitor Development ◽  
Bleeding Episodes ◽  
The Impact

SummaryThe development of an inhibitory antibody in non-severe haemophilia A patients may aggravate the bleeding phenotype considerably. Effective treatment of bleeding episodes may be challenging, with ensuing severe complications. At present, evidence is scarce for optimal treatment of bleeding episodes in this patient group. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence and the treatment of bleeding episodes in inhibitor patients in a population-based unselected cohort of non-severe haemophilia A patients with clinically relevant inhibitors. Data were available for 100 of the 107 non-severe haemophilia A patients (factor VIII (FVIII) baseline, 2–40 lU/dl) from 29 centres in Europe and one centre in Australia who had developed a clinically relevant inhibitor between 1980 and 2011. The majority (89 %) of the patients were treated during the inhibitor period for bleeding episodes or a surgical intervention: 66 % needed treatment for bleeding episodes, at a median annual bleeding rate (ABR) of 1.1 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.1–2.5) and a median total of 2 (IQR 1–6) bleeding episodes. Compared to the median ABR before inhibitor development of 0.095 bleeds per year (IQR 0.02–0.42), the increase in ABR is more than a 10-fold. More than 90 % of the bleeding episodes were treated with only one type of product, most frequently (51 %) FVIII concentrates. This study provides the incidence of bleeding episodes and treatment choices in non-severe haemophilia A patients with inhibitors. The 10-fold increase to a median ABR of 1.1 episodes per year emphasizes the impact of inhibitor development for non-severe haemophilia A patients.

scholarly journals Simoctocog Alfa (Nuwiq) in Previously Untreated Patients with Severe Haemophilia A: Final Results of the NuProtect Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ri J. Liesner ◽  
Aby Abraham ◽  
Carmen Altisent ◽  
Mark J. Belletrutti ◽  
Manuel Carcao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Human Cell Line ◽  
High Titre ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fourth Generation ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Inhibitor Development ◽  
Fviii Inhibitor

Abstract Introduction FVIII inhibitor development is the most serious contemporary treatment complication in haemophilia A, particularly in previously untreated patients (PUPs). No inhibitors developed in clinical trials in previously treated patients treated with simoctocog alfa (Nuwiq), a fourth-generation recombinant FVIII produced in a human cell line. Methods The NuProtect study investigated the immunogenicity of simoctocog alfa in PUPs. NuProtect was a prospective, multinational, open-label, non-controlled, phase III study. PUPs with severe haemophilia A (FVIII:C <1%) of any age and ethnicity were treated with simoctocog alfa for 100 exposure days or a maximum of 5 years. Patients were true PUPs without prior exposure to FVIII concentrates or blood components. Inhibitor titres were measured with the Nijmegen-modified Bethesda assay; cut-off for positivity was 0.6 BU mL−1 (≥0.6 to <5 low-titre, ≥5 high titre). Results A total of 108 PUPs with a median age at first treatment of 12.0 months (interquartile range: 8.0–23.5) were treated with simoctocog alfa. F8 mutation type was known for 102 patients (94.4%) of whom 90 (88.2%) had null F8 mutations and 12 (11.8%) had non-null mutations. Of 105 PUPs evaluable for inhibitor development, 28 (26.7%) developed inhibitors; 17 high titre (16.2%) and 11 low titre (10.5%). No PUPs with non-null F8 mutations developed inhibitors. Conclusion In the NuProtect study, the rate of inhibitor development in PUPs with severe haemophilia A treated with simoctocog alfa was lower than the rate reported for hamster-cell-derived recombinant factor VIII products in other recent clinical trials. No inhibitors were reported in PUPs with non-null F8 mutations.

Inhibitor treatment by rituximabin congenital haemophilia A

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (02) ◽  
pp. 151-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Escuriola Ettingshausen ◽  
R. Linde ◽  
G. Kropshofer ◽  
L.-B. Zimmerhackl ◽  
W. Kreuz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
B Cell ◽  
Immune Tolerance ◽  
High Titre ◽  
Clotting Factor ◽  
Severe Bleeding ◽  
High Morbidity ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Concomitant Treatment ◽  
Bleeding Tendency ◽  
Severe Haemophilia

SummaryThe development of neutralizing alloanti-bodies (inhibitors) to factor VIII (FVIII) is one of the most serious complications in the treatment of haemophiliacs. Inhibitors occur in approximately 20 to 30% of previously untreated patients (PUPs), predominantly children, with severe haemophilia A within the first 50 exposure days (ED). Immune tolerance induction (ITI) leads to complete elimination of the inhibitor in up to 80% of the patients and offers the possibility to restore regular FVIII prophylaxis. However, patients with high titre inhibitors, in whom standard ITI fails, usually impose with high morbidity and mortality and therefore prompting physicians to alternate therapy regimens. Rituximab, an anti-CD 20 monoclonal antibody has been successfully used in children and adults for the management of B-cell mediated disorders. We report on the use of a new protocol including rituximab in two adolescents with severe haemophilia A and high titre inhibitors, severe bleeding tendency and high clotting factor consumption after failing standard ITI. Both patients received a concomitant treatment with FVIII according to the Bonn protocol, cyclosporine A and immunoglobulin. Treatment with rituximab resulted in a temporary B-cell depletion leading to the disappearance of the inhibitor. FVIII recovery and half-life turned towards normal ranges. In patient 1 the inhibitor reappeared 14 months after the last rituximab administration. In patient 2 complete immune tolerance could be achieved for 60 months. Bleeding frequency diminished significantly and clinical joint status improved in both patients. In patient 1 the treatment course was complicated by aspergillosis and hepatitis B infection. Conclusion: Rituximab may be favourable for patients with congenital haemophilia, high-titre inhibitors and a severe clinical course in whom standard ITI has failed. Prospective studies are required to determine safety, efficacy and predictors of success.

Inhibitor development in haemophilia according to concentrate

2015 ◽  
Vol 113 (05) ◽  
pp. 968-975 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riita Lassila ◽  
Flora Peyvandi ◽  
Gabriele Calizzani ◽  
Alex Gatt ◽  
Thierry Lambert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Calculated Data ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Clotting Factor ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Inhibitor Development ◽  
Haemophilia B ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Recombinant Fviii ◽  
Set Up

SummaryInhibitor development represents the most serious side effect of haemophilia treatment. Any difference in risk of inhibitor formation depending on the product used might be of clinical relevance. It was this study’s objective to assess inhibitor development according to clotting factor concentrate in severe haemophilia A and B. The European Haemophilia Safety Surveillance (EUHASS) was set up as a study monitoring adverse events overall and according to concentrate. Since October 2008, inhibitors were reported at least quarterly. Number of treated patients was reported annually, specifying the number of patients completing 50 exposure days (Previously Untreated Patients, PUPs) without inhibitor development. Cumulative incidence, incidence rates and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Data from October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2012 were analysed for 68 centres that validated their data. Inhibitors developed in 108/417 (26 %; CI 22–30 %) PUPs with severe haemophilia A and 5/72 (7 %; CI 2–16%) PUPs with severe haemophilia B. For Previously Treated Patients (PTPs), 26 inhibitors developed in 17,667 treatment years [0.15/100 treatment years; CI 0.10–0.22) for severe haemophilia A and 1/2836 (0.04/100; (CI 0.00–0.20) for severe haemophilia B. Differences between plasma-derived and recombinant concentrates, or among the different recombinant FVIII concentrates were investigated. In conclusion, while confirming the expected rates of inhibitors in PUPs and PTPs, no class or brand related differences were observed.

scholarly journals Emicizumab-Kxwh for Previously Untreated Patients with Haemophilia: The Conversation Begins

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2409-2409
Author(s):  
Tiffany Lin Lucas ◽  
Shveta Gupta ◽  
Joanna A. Davis ◽  
Fernando F. Corrales-Medina
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
The United States ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Inhibitor Development ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Prophylaxis Therapy

Introduction: With the Federal Drug and Administration approval of the use of emicizumab from birth to adulthood, clinicians will now grapple with when to choose and offer emicizumab for routine prophylaxis, especially in previously untreated patients (PUPs). Given the overall limited real-world reported data and experience using emicizumab in PUPs, we created and administered a survey to medical providers in the United States who care for paediatric patients with haemophilia to investigate real-world practice strategies and treatment selection for PUPs. Methods: After review and endorsement by the Haemostasis and Thrombosis Research Society (HTRS), the survey was electronically distributed by e-mail to all providers included in the HTRS core member list. The survey was also sent to those providers included in a list of Haemophilia Treatment Centre (HTC) physicians (with duplicate emails reconciled). Providers needed to self-identify as ones that treat pediatric patients to be included. The survey was developed as a tiered survey with questions presented to each recipient based on their prior responses. Results: Seventy-seven completed surveys were included and analysed. All participants were active providers at a comprehensive HTC and the majority (93.4%) were practicing at an academically affiliated site. In terms of characteristics of those that answered the survey, forty-eight percent of responders reported that 1-20% of their patients had expressed interest in emicizumab. 46% of participants (34/74) reported that they would personally consider emicizumab as their prophylaxis recommendation for the majority (>50%) of their hemophilia A patients without inhibitors. 57% (44/76) reported that 1-10% of their non-inhibitor hemophilia A patients were already prescribed emicizumab prophylaxis. Each participant was then asked about his or her consideration of emicizumab as prophylaxis therapy for a 2 month old PUP. Just over the majority were unsure or said no to this consideration (51.3%) and their concerns were lack of information on safety and efficacy in this young age group and increased risk for inhibitor development. If the 2 month old PUP had a high risk of inhibitor, the majority of providers who initially were hesitant to start emicizumab prophylaxis would remain so. Of note, those providers went on to be asked if the patient had gone on to complete 50 exposure days without inhibitor development, they would then become more likely to initiate emicizumab prophylaxis therapy. Use of concurrent factor replacement was posed to all participants and there were varied responses. Discussion: Overall, our results reflect a widespread practice variation and a not yet well-standardized or defined approach for the use of emicizumab in PUPs with haemophilia A. In this survey, patient preference and individual bleeding risk were the top reasons for which a provider would consider using switching to emicizumab prophylaxis in both severe and mild/moderate haemophilia A patients. This pattern of practice reflects the current era of individualized medicine. Overall, our findings reinforce the need for more studies to investigate the outcomes of a combined treatment approach with FVIII concentrates and emicizumab focusing in the potential benefit of this approach in decreasing the risk for inhibitor development PUPs. Clinicians also feel the need for further data to help clarifying the safety of emicizumab in this population. Figure Disclosures Gupta: Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Davis:Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kedrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novo Nordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda Shire: Consultancy; Spark Therapeutics: Consultancy. Corrales-Medina:Kedrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda-Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Innowacyjna metoda prowadzenia ITI za pomocą preparatu czynnika VIII z frakcją Fc u pacjentów z hemofilią A z obecnością inhibitora czynnika VIII – przegląd literaturowy

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maciej Trzaska ◽  
Marek Karwacki ◽  
Paweł Łaguna ◽  
Michał Matysiak
Keyword(s):  
Factor Viii ◽  
Tolerance Induction ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Immunological Tolerance ◽  
Therapeutic Benefit ◽  
High Titre ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
First Time

Eradication of factor VIII inhibitors using Immune tolerance induction (ITI) treatment is the standard of care for severe haemophilia A patients presenting with factor VIII inhibitors, but is not always effective. A description of the potential immunological tolerance effect of the IgG Fc domain of recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein (rFVIIIFc), as well as published experience with rFVIIIFc for ITI in patients with severe haemophilia A and high-titre inhibitors. Review of published literature describing cases of ITI with rFVIIIFc in patients with severe haemophilia A and high-titre inhibitors between November 2015 and June 2018. Four publications has been found. Of 56 patients with haemophilia A who presented with FVIII inhibitors, 28 achieved a negative Bethesda titre (< 0.6) after ITI treatment using rFVIIIFc. Additional patients continued on rFVIIIFc ITI at the time of publication, while a few were reported to have switched to bypass therapy alone or other factors . For those still undergoing ITI, longer follow-up is needed to determine final outcomes. No adverse events were reported. Based on literature review, preliminary evidence of FVIIIFc use in high risk, first-time ITI suggests rapid time to tolerization. For rescue ITI, rFVIIIFc showed therapeutic benefit in some patients who previously failed ITI. These findings give hope but highlight the need for further evaluation in ongoing clinical trials.

scholarly journals A previously treated severe haemophilia A patient developed high-titre inhibitor after vaccinations

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 205873842093461
Author(s):  
Zekun Li ◽  
Zhenping Chen ◽  
Xiaoling Cheng ◽  
Xinyi Wu ◽  
Gang Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neutralizing Antibody ◽  
High Titre ◽  
Haemophilia A ◽  
Severe Haemophilia ◽  
Danger Signal ◽  
Inflammatory Microenvironment ◽  
Varicella Zoster ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
The Relationship

The factor VIII (FVIII)-neutralizing antibody (inhibitor) seen in 25%–30% of patients with severe haemophilia A (SHA). Vaccination is a non-genetic risk factor of inhibitor development as ‘danger signal’ which may provide a pro-inflammatory microenvironment to increase FVIII immunogenicity. We reported a previously treated SHA patient postponed the first vaccination to 15-month age received diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus intramuscularly. At 18-month age, the patient received Hepatitis A intramuscularly and Varicella Zoster Virus subcutaneously with 2 weeks interval and FVIII infusion was given <24 h prior for each. Successive bleedings occurred 1 week later with inefficacy of FVIII replacement. High-titre inhibitor was tested at 117 exposure days. This case suggested that continuous vaccinations in close proximity to FVIII could induce inhibitor. The relationship between vaccination and FVIII immunogenicity still needs to be revealed by further study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document