Search

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.

Neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) toward factor VIII form a severe complication in nonsevere hemophilia A, profoundly aggravating the bleeding pattern. Identification of high-risk patients is hampered by lack of data that take exposure days to therapeutic factor VIII concentrates into account. In the INSIGHT study, we analyzed the association between F8 mutation and inhibitor development in patients with nonsevere hemophilia A (factor VIII 2-40 IU/dL). This analysis included 1112 non-severe hemophilia A patients from 14 centers in Europe and Australia that had genotyped at least 70% of their patients. Inhibitor risk was calculated as Kaplan-Meier incidence with cumulative number of exposure days as the time variable. During 44 800 exposure days (median, 24 exposure days per patient; interquartile range [IQR], 7-90), 59 of the 1112 patients developed an inhibitor; cumulative incidence of 5.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0-6.6) after a median of 28 exposure days (IQR, 12-71). The inhibitor risk at 50 exposure days was 6.7% (95% CI, 4.5-8.9) and at 100 exposure days the risk further increased to 13.3% (95% CI, 9.6-17.0). Among a total of 214 different F8 missense mutations 19 were associated with inhibitor development. These results emphasize the importance of F8 genotyping in nonsevere hemophilia A. ( Blood . 2013; 122(11):1954-1962) © 2013 by The American Society of Hematology.

Item does not contain fulltext INTRODUCTION: Patients', parents' and providers' preferences with regard to medical innovations may have a major impact on their implementation. AIM: To evaluate barriers and facilitators for individualized pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided dosing of prophylaxis in haemophilia patients, parents of young patients, and treating professionals by discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire. PATIENTS/METHODS: The study population consisted of patients with haemophilia currently or previously on prophylactic treatment with factor concentrate (n = 114), parents of patients aged 12-18 years (n = 19) and haemophilia professionals (n = 91). DCE data analysis was performed, taking preference heterogeneity into account. RESULTS: Overall, patients and parents, and especially professionals were inclined to opt for PK-guided dosing of prophylaxis. In addition, if bleeding was consequently reduced, more frequent infusions were acceptable. However, daily dosing remained an important barrier for all involved. 'Reduction of costs for society' was a facilitator for implementation in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve implementation of individualized PK-guided dosing of prophylaxis in haemophilia, reduction of bleeding risk and reduction of costs for society should be actively discussed as they are motivating for implementation; daily dosing is still reported to be a barrier for all groups. The knowledge of these preferences will enlarge support for this innovation, and aid in the drafting of implementable guidelines and information brochures for patients, parents and professionals.