Efficacy and safety of BAY 81-8973, a full-length recombinant factor VIII: results from the LEOPOLD I trial

INTRODUCTION

BAY 81-8973 (Kovaltry(®) ) is a full-length, unmodified recombinant human factor VIII (FVIII) with the same amino acid sequence as sucrose-formulated recombinant FVIII and is produced using additional advanced manufacturing technologies.

AIM

To demonstrate efficacy and safety of BAY 81-8973 for treatment of bleeds and as prophylaxis based on two different potency assignments.

METHODS

In LEOPOLD I (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01029340), males aged 12-65 years with severe haemophilia A and ≥150 exposure days received BAY 81-8973 20-50 IU kg(-1) two or three times per week for 12 months. Potency was based on chromogenic substrate assay per European Pharmacopoeia and label adjusted to mimic one-stage assay potency. Patients were randomized for potency sequence and crossed over potency groups after 6 months, followed by an optional 12-month extension. Primary efficacy endpoint was annualized bleeding rate (ABR). Patients also received BAY 81-8973 during major surgeries.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients received BAY 81-8973 prophylaxis and were included in the analysis. Median ABR was 1.0 (quartile 1, 0; quartile 3, 5.1) without clinically relevant differences between potency periods. Median ABR was similar for twice-weekly vs. three times-weekly dosing (1.0 vs. 2.0). Haemostasis was maintained during 12 major surgeries. Treatment-related adverse event (AE) incidence was ≤7% overall; no patient developed inhibitors. One patient with risk factors for cardiovascular disease developed a myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

BAY 81-8973 was efficacious in preventing and treating bleeding episodes, irrespective of the potency assignment method, with few treatment-related AEs. Caution should be used when treating older patients with cardiovascular risk factors.

Interactive survey of consumer awareness of nanotechnologies and nanoparticles in consumer products in South Korea

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our study was to understand consumers' risk awareness and need for relevant information about nanotechnology and nanoparticles contained in products currently being sold in Korea.

METHODS

One thousand and seven adult consumers (aged 20-50 years) were randomly selected from all over South Korea between November 1 and 9, 2010. We surveyed the origin and degree of their concern and their need for information and education regarding nanomaterials.

RESULTS

Analysis of the survey results showed no significant differences in responses by sex, age, and level of education, but significant differences were found in responses based on average monthly household income. Our research showed that consumers have vague expectations for and positive image of nanotechnology and nanoproducts but do not clearly understand what they are. In addition, we found that preparing and disseminating information to consumers is required in order to provide correct information about nanotechnology to the public.

CONCLUSION

A communication system should be established among the multiple stakeholders involved with nanomaterials to address consumer expectations and concerns. Further, a safety evaluation system must be set up, the results of which should be processed by a reliable expert group so they can be disseminated to the public.

Comparative analysis of nanotechnology awareness in consumers and experts in South Korea

PURPOSE

This study examined the need for public communication about nanotechnologies and nanoparticles by providing a comparative analysis of the differences in risk awareness of nanotechnologies and nanoparticles between consumers and experts.

METHODS

A total of 1,007 consumers and 150 experts participated in this study. A questionnaire was prepared examining their awareness of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials and their view of the necessity for information and education about the latest nanotechnologies and nanomaterials.

RESULTS

Our results indicated that the expert group recognized that they knew more than consumers about nanotechnology and that there was a need for relevant education in nanotechnology and nanomaterials among consumers. We found that the consumer group had a more positive attitude toward nanotechnology, even though they did not know much about it. Moreover, the consumer group was inconclusive about the type of information on nanotechnology deemed necessary for the public, as well as the suitable party to be responsible for education and for delivering the information.

CONCLUSION

An education and promotion program targeting consumers should be established to overcome the differences between consumers and experts in their awareness of nanotechnology. Specifically, the establishment of concepts for nanomaterials or nanoproducts is required immediately. With clear standards on nanomaterials, consumers can make informed decisions in selecting nanoproducts in the market.