Search

Introduction: This study was conducted to evaluate the current implementation of outcome measures in routine clinical haemophilia practice and to explore and appreciate the perception of the relevance of such measures by treaters., Methods: A survey was completed by 19 of the 26 physicians involved in the European Haemophilia Therapy Strategy Board (EHTSB). Employing an extensive inventory of outcome measures used in patients with haemophilia, information was collected about the frequency of data collection and the subjective appreciation of their importance during clinic review., Results: The survey revealed that most treaters currently collect data that are mainly related to the haemostatic treatment (consumption of concentrates) and the bleeding symptoms (number and location of bleeds) in a non-uniform and non-standardized way. By contrast, functional, physical and quality of life scorings are rarely used and show considerable heterogeneity between treaters. Also, many disparities emerged between practice and perception, in particular quality of life data that are perceived as being important but for most of the time are not collected., Conclusions: This survey represents, in our view, the first attempt to evaluate the actual utilization of outcome measures in haemophilia care. While the value of outcome measures is appreciated, they are not assessed regularly. Therefore, there is a need to include appropriate performance indicators (outcome measures) of haemophilia care in routine clinical practice. Consensus recommendations to provide a framework for achieving this aim are provided., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The objective of this study was to examine the association of the intensity of treatment, ranging from high-dose intensive factor VIII (FVIII) treatment to prophylactic treatment, with the inhibitor incidence among previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A. This cohort study aimed to include consecutive patients with a FVIII activity < 0.01 IU/mL, born between 2000 and 2010, and observed during their first 75 FVIII exposure days. Intensive FVIII treatment of hemorrhages or surgery at the start of treatment was associated with an increased inhibitor risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-3.0). High-dose FVIII treatment was associated with a higher inhibitor risk than low-dose FVIII treatment (aHR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.0-4.8). Prophylaxis was only associated with a decreased overall inhibitor incidence after 20 exposure days of FVIII. The association with prophylaxis was more pronounced in patients with low-risk F8 genotypes than in patients with high-risk F8 genotypes (aHR, 0.61, 95% CI, 0.19-2.0 and aHR, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.51-1.4, respectively). In conclusion, our findings suggest that in previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A, high-dosed intensive FVIII treatment increases inhibitor risk and prophylactic FVIII treatment decreases inhibitor risk, especially in patients with low-risk F8 mutations.

We performed molecular analysis of the factor 8 gene (F8) in 272 unrelated Spanish patients with haemophilia A (HA) and detected a mutation by routine analysis in 267 of them (98.1%). No mutation was detected in the remaining five patients despite clinical and laboratory confirmation of HA. The aim is to describe the molecular alterations in F8 discovered by gene dosage methodologies in three of these patients. For methodology, F8 sequencing, intragenic marker analysis, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification and quantitative real time-PCR were followed. One patient had Klinefelter syndrome (47,XXY) and a large deletion spanning exons 1-12 masked by the other F8 allele; the second patient showed a large duplication spanning exons 2-10 and the third patient revealed a non-contiguous double duplication of exons 14 and 23-25. The remaining two patients had mild HA and dosage results were normal. The application of gene dosage methods is useful to define haemophilic patients in whom mutations are not detected using other routine methods. Nevertheless, in a small percentage of patients (<1%), no molecular pathology can be identified after testing several genetic methodologies., (© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Co-morbidities of haemophilia, such as arthropathy and blood-borne infections, can adversely affect the quality of life of adult patients with haemophilia. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a haemophilia-specific health-related quality of life questionnaire for adults (HAEMO-QoL-A). Subjects with varying severities of haemophilia completed the HAEMO-QoL-A at baseline and 4 weeks. Other assessments included the SF-36 and Health Assessment Questionnaire - Functional Disability Index (HAQ-FDI). Two-hundred and twenty-one participants completed the 41-item HAEMO-QoL-A covering six domains (Physical Functioning, Role Functioning, Worry, Consequences of Bleeding, Emotional Impact and Treatment Concerns) and four independent items. Internal consistency was good-to-excellent (Cronbach's alpha-range: 0.75-0.95). Test-retest reproducibility was good, with intraclass correlation coefficients >0.80 except for the Emotional Impact domain (0.79). Concurrent validity between the HAEMO-QoL-A total and subscale scores and all SF-36 subscale scores were generally good (correlations range: 0.13-0.87). Significant correlations between the HAEMO-QoL-A and the HAQ-FDI ranged from -0.14 to -0.69. There were non-significant correlations with the Treatment Concerns subscale and with the Worry subscale. The HAEMO-QoL-A discriminated significantly between adults with haemophilia by severity and HIV status. The Physical Functioning subscale discriminated between patients receiving prophylactic or on-demand therapy. The HAEMO-QoL-A is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing quality of life in haemophilia patients.

The ultimate goal of treatment for patients with inhibitory antibodies should be to permanently eradicate the inhibitor by immune tolerance induction therapy (ITI). However, ITI procedures fail in a substantial number of patients and in many countries ITI is not even offered owing to its high cost. How patients with inhibitors are managed in different European countries is evaluated with a special focus on the use of by-passing agents, i.e. recombinant FVIIa (rFVIIa) and activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCC), as well as the type of monitoring performed. Investigators from 22 large haemophilia centres participating within the network of the European Haemophilia Therapy Standardisation Board (EHTSB) were asked to complete a questionnaire. rFVIIa was routinely used in all centres for both children and adults at dosages ranging from 90 to 250 mug kg(-1) at an interval of 2-4 h. aPCC was used in 85% of the centres in adults and in 25% of the centres in children with haemophilia A at dosages of 50-100 IU kg(-1) every 6-12 h. The corresponding figures for children and adults with haemophilia B were 40% and 15% of the centres, respectively. Higher dosages of both agents were considered in the case of life-threatening bleeds. General recommendations were developed, based on the information provided by the survey. The results clearly indicate the need for well-designed comparative studies to optimize the use of by-passing agents.

The management of patients with inhibitors is an important challenge in haemophilia care. The lack of randomized controlled trials means that clinical decisions are generally based on subjective opinions, and purchasers' attention is likely to focus on the costs of treatment. In order to assess the current management of inhibitor patients and use of immune tolerance induction therapy (ITI) in Europe, we performed a survey within a European network of 21 comprehensive care centres from 14 countries (the European Haemophilia Therapy Standardisation Board). The survey identified a total of 381 patients with inhibitors attending the centres, 211 (55.4%) of whom had never been exposed to ITI. Between 1998 and 2003, the centres performed 233 procedures and 114 (48.9%) were successful. The survey demonstrated that dosing, which is the time to start and stop the ITI, the type of concentrate to use and the definition of success varied among the centres. Well-designed trials are warranted to guide decision-making, but in the absence of these studies we have developed consensus guidance for the management of inhibitor patients based on current clinical practice, as identified by the survey, and review of the literature.