Patient Perspectives on Novel Treatments in Haemophilia: A Qualitative Study

Clinical immunogenicity outcomes from GENEr8-1, a phase 3 study of valoctocogene roxaparvovec, an AAV5-vectored gene therapy for hemophilia A

Gene transfer therapies utilizing adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors involve a complex drug design with multiple components that may impact immunogenicity. Valoctocogene roxaparvovec is an AAV serotype 5 (AAV5)-vectored gene therapy for the treatment of hemophilia A that encodes a B-domain-deleted human factor VIII (FVIII) protein controlled by a hepatocyte-selective promoter. Following previous results from the first-in-human phase 1/2 clinical trial, we assessed AAV5-capsid- and transgene-derived FVIII-specific immune responses with 2 years of follow-up data from GENEr8-1, a phase 3, single-arm, open-label study in 134 adult men with severe hemophilia A. No FVIII inhibitors were detected following administration of valoctocogene roxaparvovec. Immune responses were predominantly directed toward the AAV5 capsid, with all participants developing durable anti-AAV5 antibodies. Cellular immune responses specific for the AAV5 capsid were detected in most participants by interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay 2 weeks following dose administration and declined or reverted to negative over the first 52 weeks. These responses were weakly correlated with alanine aminotransferase elevations and showed no association with changes in FVIII activity. FVIII-specific cellular immune responses were less frequent and more sporadic compared with those specific for AAV5 and showed no association with safety or efficacy parameters.

Three-year outcomes of valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy for hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Valoctocogene roxaparvovec transfers a human factor (F)VIII coding sequence into hepatocytes of people with severe hemophilia A to provide bleeding protection.

OBJECTIVES

To present 3-year efficacy and safety in the multicenter, open-label, single-arm, phase 3 GENEr8-1 trial.

METHODS

GENEr8-1 enrolled 134 adult males with severe hemophilia A who were receiving FVIII prophylaxis. Efficacy endpoints included annualized bleeding rate, annualized FVIII utilization, FVIII activity (chromogenic substrate assay; imputed as 1 IU/dL at baseline and 0 IU/dL after discontinuation), and the Haemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults. Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

At week 156, 131 of 134 participants remained in the study; overall, 17 of 134 resumed prophylaxis. Mean annualized bleeding rate for treated bleeds decreased from 4.8 (SD, 6.5) bleeds/y at baseline to 0.8 (SD, 2.3; P < .0001) bleeds/y after prophylaxis (prophylaxis cessation to last follow-up) and 0.97 (SD, 3.48) bleeds/y during year 3. Annualized FVIII utilization decreased 96.8% from baseline after prophylaxis and 94.2% during year 3. At week 156, mean and median FVIII activity were 18.4 (SD, 30.8) and 8.3 IU/dL, respectively. FVIII activity decrease was lower between years 2 and 3 than between years 1 and 2. At the end of year 3, clinically meaningful improvements in the Haemophilia-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults Total Score were observed (mean change from baseline, 6.6; 95% CI, 4.24-8.87; P < .0001). Mild alanine aminotransferase elevations remained the most common AE during year 3 (23.7% of participants). A serious AE of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia was considered unrelated to treatment.

CONCLUSION

Hemostatic efficacy was maintained, and safety remained unchanged from previous years.

Knowledge and attitudes toward gene therapy of a cohort of Italian patients with hemophilia

BACKGROUND

Gene therapy (GT) has recently become a new therapeutic option for hemophilia A and B. However, patient levels of knowledge and attitudes toward it are poorly understood. A general lack of knowledge and education has been highlighted in previous studies. To date, no studies focused on patient attitudes toward GT, priorities, concerns, and information needs, nor how these factors might influence their willingness to accept it.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate knowledge and attitudes toward GT of an Italian cohort of patients with hemophilia.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered to patients with hemophilia A and B to evaluate: (1) clinical data; (2) GT knowledge; (3) willingness to accept GT, perceived benefits and concerns, and information needs.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients participated in the study; 64 with severe hemophilia A and 4 with severe hemophilia B. Participants appeared to know only general information on GT, but little about its detailed functioning. The avoidance of frequent infusions and the reduction of bleeding episodes seem to be the most relevant expected benefits. The possibility of failing or losing effectiveness of GT over time was the main concern. Regarding willingness to undergo GT, 54.4% of respondents gave a negative response, mainly due to fear that treatment will lose effectiveness over time, fear of side effects, and lack of GT knowledge. Greater knowledge increased the acceptability of this disruptive therapy among patients with severe hemophilia.

CONCLUSION

Overall, Italian patients with hemophilia showed poor knowledge of GT. However, it seems that greater knowledge was associated with a greater willingness to have GT.

Long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene transfer up to 6 years post-treatment

INTRODUCTION

Valoctocogene roxaparvovec uses an adeno-associated virus serotype 5 (AAV5) vector to transfer a factor VIII (FVIII) coding sequence to individuals with severe haemophilia A, providing bleeding protection.

AIM

To assess safety and efficacy of valoctocogene roxaparvovec 5-6 years post-treatment.

METHODS

In a phase 1/2 trial, adult male participants with severe haemophilia A (FVIII ≤1 IU/dL) without FVIII inhibitors or anti-AAV5 antibodies received valoctocogene roxaparvovec and were followed for 6 (6 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 7) and 5 (4 × 1013 vg/kg; n = 6) years. Safety, including investigation of potential associations between a malignancy and gene therapy, and efficacy are reported.

RESULTS

No new treatment-related safety signals emerged. During year 6, a participant in the 6 × 1013  vg/kg cohort was diagnosed with grade 2 parotid gland acinar cell carcinoma; definitive treatment was uncomplicated parotidectomy with lymph node dissection. Target enrichment sequencing of tumour and adjacent healthy tissue revealed low vector integration (8.25 × 10-5 per diploid cell). Integrations were not elevated in tumour samples, no insertions appeared to drive tumorigenesis, and no clonal expansion of integration-containing cells occurred. During all follow-ups, >90% decreases from baseline in annualised treated bleeds and FVIII infusion rates were maintained. At the end of years 6 and 5, mean FVIII activity (chromogenic assay) was 9.8 IU/dL (median, 5.6 IU/dL) and 7.6 IU/dL (median, 7.1 IU/dL) for the 6 × 1013 and 4 × 1013 vg/kg cohorts, respectively, representing proportionally smaller year-over-year declines than earlier timepoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Valoctocogene roxaparvovec safety and efficacy profiles remain largely unchanged; genomic investigations showed no association with a parotid tumour.

Perspectives and perception of haemophilia gene therapy by French patients

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

A national survey was initiated by representatives of French patients with haemophilia (AFH) and the French reference centre for haemophilia, in order to appreciate the awareness and knowledge of these patients regarding haemophilia gene therapy (HGT) and understand better their position about this innovative treatment that will soon become available.

RESULTS

Of 143 answers received, 137 could be analysed, representing about 3.5% of patients with severe or moderate haemophilia over 16year-old. They were 80.3% with haemophilia A and 19.7 % with haemophilia B, with a severe form of the disease for 80.3 % of them. Curiosity for HGT was formulated by 64.2% of the participants, 33.6 % being interested by this approach as soon as it will be available and 38.7 % preferring to wait until more patients have been treated. Only 3.6 % of the participants would never consider receiving HGT. The level of awareness and knowledge was estimated to be limited by 39.5 % of the patients. More than 60 % of them declared having never or almost never discussed HGT with the team of their haemophilia centre. Before deciding to get HGT, 54.4 % of the participants considered that it will be very important to compare it with their current treatment and 53.7 % would like to be better informed by their care providers.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlight the need for training and education for patients, but also for professionals at haemophilia centres, about HGT and the shared decision-making process. Objective, unbiased and transparent information must be available for patients about this very promising therapy which nonetheless carries more uncertainty and unknowns compared to other haemophilia treatments.

The Lived Experience of Pediatric Gene Therapy: A Scoping Review

Little is known about patients' and families' lived experiences of participating in pediatric gene therapy (GT) clinical trials. Currently, pediatric GT research targets a broad range of indications--including rare and ultra-rare diseases--which vary in severity and in the availability of alternative therapies. Pediatric GT differs meaningfully from adult GT because the decision to participate involves a dyad of both the child and parent or caregiver/s. It is critical to understand patients' and caregivers' perceptions and experiences of social, emotional, physical, and logistical burdens or benefits of participating in such trials, and how they weigh and prioritize these factors when deciding whether to participate. We conducted a scoping review of the current literature in this subject area with objectives to (1) provide an overview of existing literature, (2) identify gaps and areas for further research, and (3) better understand the lived impact of pediatric GT research on patients and their parents/caregivers. Four themes emerged, including (1) weighing risks and benefits (2) timing of GT trial participation, (3) value of clear communication, and (4) potential impact on quality of life. Notably, our sample surfaced articles about how patients/parents/caregivers were thinking about GT-their understanding of its safety, efficacy, and risks-rather than accounts of their experiences, which was our initial intention. Nevertheless, our findings offer useful insights to improve the informed consent process and promote a more patient- and family-centered approach. Moreover, our findings can contribute to patient advocacy organizations' efforts to develop educational materials tailored to patients' and families' expressed informational needs and perspectives, and can inform more patient- and family-centered policies from GT clinical trial sponsors.

Evaluating Gene Therapy as a Potential Paradigm Shift in Treating Severe Hemophilia

Hemophilia is characterized by a deficiency in coagulation factors VIII or IX. The general standard of care for severe hemophilia is frequent intravenous recombinant or plasma-derived factor replacement to prevent bleeding. While this treatment is effective in preventing bleeding, frequent infusions are burdensome for patients. Nonadherence to the therapeutic regimen leaves people with hemophilia at risk for spontaneous and traumatic bleeds into joints as well as life-threatening bleeds such as intracranial hemorrhage. The chronicity of the disorder often leads to the formation of target joints, causing long-term pain and impairing mobility. As a monogenic disorder with well-understood genetics, hemophilia is an ideal disorder for implementing innovations in gene therapies. Indeed, recent approvals of two gene therapy products have the potential to shift the hemophilia treatment paradigm. Valoctocogene roxaparvovec and etranacogene dezaparvovec-drlb are gene therapies for hemophilia A and B, respectively. These therapies, given as a single intravenous infusion, may improve patients' quality of life, decreasing treatment burden and resulting in factor expression that virtually eliminates the need for factor replacement. Since both treatments involve viral vectors targeted to the liver, short- and long-term safety and efficacy monitoring involves monitoring liver enzymes to track liver health. Long-term monitoring of efficacy, durability of gene expression, and safety are ongoing. Gene therapy presents a promising new therapeutic option for patients with hemophilia and warrants continued innovation and investigation.

Patients' and health care providers' perspectives on quality of hemophilia care in the Netherlands: a questionnaire and interview study

Background

Hemophilia care has improved greatly because of advances in treatment options and comprehensive care. In-depth insight into the perspectives of persons with hemophilia and health care providers on their care may provide targets for further improvements.

Objectives

To assess satisfaction of the hemophilia population with their care, to explore factors determining care satisfaction, and to identify areas for potential health care improvements, including digital health tools.

Methods

First, to assess care satisfaction and factors determining satisfaction and health care improvements, data from a nationwide, cross-sectional questionnaire among 867 adult and pediatric Dutch persons with hemophilia A or B were analyzed. This included the Hemophilia Patient Satisfaction Scale questionnaire, Canadian Hemophilia Outcomes Kids' Life Assessment Tool satisfaction questions, a visual analog scale satisfaction score, and open questions. Second, to further explore factors determining satisfaction and health care improvements, semistructured interviews were conducted with 19 persons with hemophilia or their parents and 18 health care providers.

Results

High care satisfaction was found, with an overall median Hemophilia Patient Satisfaction Scale score of 12 (IQR, 6-21). Participants in the interviews reported that patient-professional interactions, availability of care, and coordination of care were major factors determining satisfaction. Suggested health care improvements included improved information provision and coordination of care, especially shared care with professionals not working within comprehensive care centers. Participants suggested that digital health tools could aid in this.

Conclusion

Satisfaction with hemophilia care is high among persons with hemophilia in the Netherlands, although several potential improvements have been identified. Accentuating these is especially relevant in the current era of treatment innovations, in which we might focus less on other aspects of care.

Two-Year Outcomes of Valoctocogene Roxaparvovec Therapy for Hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Valoctocogene roxaparvovec delivers a B-domain-deleted factor VIII coding sequence with an adeno-associated virus vector to prevent bleeding in persons with severe hemophilia A. The findings of a phase 3 study of the efficacy and safety of valoctocogene roxaparvovec therapy evaluated after 52 weeks in men with severe hemophilia A have been published previously.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, single-group, multicenter, phase 3 trial in which 134 men with severe hemophilia A who were receiving factor VIII prophylaxis received a single infusion of 6×10¹³ vector genomes of valoctocogene roxaparvovec per kilogram of body weight. The primary end point was the change from baseline in the annualized rate of treated bleeding events at week 104 after receipt of the infusion. The pharmacokinetics of valoctocogene roxaparvovec were modeled to estimate the bleeding risk relative to the activity of transgene-derived factor VIII.

RESULTS

At week 104, a total of 132 participants, including 112 with data that were prospectively collected at baseline, remained in the study. The mean annualized treated bleeding rate decreased by 84.5% from baseline (P<0.001) among the participants. From week 76 onward, the trajectory of the transgene-derived factor VIII activity showed first-order elimination kinetics; the model-estimated typical half-life of the transgene-derived factor VIII production system was 123 weeks (95% confidence interval, 84 to 232). The risk of joint bleeding was estimated among the trial participants; at a transgene-derived factor VIII level of 5 IU per deciliter measured with chromogenic assay, we expected that participants would have 1.0 episode of joint bleeding per year. At 2 years postinfusion, no new safety signals had emerged and no new serious adverse events related to treatment had occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The study data show the durability of factor VIII activity and bleeding reduction and the safety profile of valoctocogene roxaparvovec at least 2 years after the gene transfer. Models of the risk of joint bleeding suggest that the relationship between transgene-derived factor VIII activity and bleeding episodes is similar to that reported with the use of epidemiologic data for persons with mild-to-moderate hemophilia A. (Funded by BioMarin Pharmaceutical; GENEr8-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03370913.).

How to translate and implement the current science of gene therapy into haemophilia care?

Gene-based therapy opens an entirely new paradigm in managing people with haemophilia (PWH), offering them the possibility of a functional cure by enabling continuous expression of factor VIII (FVIII) or factor IX (FIX) after transfer of a functional gene designed to replace the PWH's own defective gene. In recent years, significant advances in gene therapy have been made, resulting in clotting factor activity attaining near-normal levels, as reflected by 'zero bleeding rates' in previously severely inflicted patients following a single administration of adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors. While this new approach represents a major advancement, there are still several issues that must be resolved before applying this technology in clinical practice. First, awareness, communication, and education about the therapeutic potential and modalities of gene therapy must be further strengthened. To this end, objective, unbiased, transparent, and regularly updated information must be shared, in an appropriate way and understandable language with the support of patients' organizations. Second, healthcare providers should adopt a patient-centred approach, as the 'one size fits all' approach is inappropriate when considering gene therapy. Instead, a holistic patient view taking into account their physical and mental dimensions, along with unexpressed expectations and preferences, is mandatory. Third, the consent procedure must be improved, ensuring that patients' interests are maximally protected. Finally, gene therapy is likely to be first delivered in a few centres, with the highest expertise and experience in this domain. Thus, patients should be managed based on a hub-and-spoke model, taking into account that the key to gene therapy's success lies in an optimal communication and collaboration both within and between haemophilia centres sharing their experiences in the frame of international registries. This review describes recent progress and explains outstanding hurdles that must be tackled to ease the implementation of this paradigm-changing new therapy.

Gene therapy preferences and informed decision-making: Results from a National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in research survey

INTRODUCTION

To inform education and treatment discussions, it is important to understand how persons with haemophilia prefer to learn about and discuss new therapies and to identify variables that influence decision-making.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate preferences and variables which influence decision-making related to gene therapy and other novel haemophilia therapies.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to men with severe haemophilia enrolled in the National Hemophilia Foundation Community Voices in Research online platform for patient-powered research.

RESULTS

One hundred four men completed the survey including 33% Hispanics, 96 who had had not gene therapy and 71/96 (74%) who were on prophylaxis. Ninety-five percent were somewhat or very familiar with gene therapy. Men with haemophilia obtain information about new therapies from several sources, most commonly their haemophilia treatment team, patient advocacy groups and self-study. Participants identified safety and efficacy as well as other educational needs to inform decision-making. Of those without prior gene therapy, 73% indicated a high likelihood of considering gene therapy. Hispanic ethnicity and government-issued insurance were associated with a higher likelihood of considering gene therapy as a treatment option.

CONCLUSION

Haemophilia Treatment Centers and patient advocacy groups must be able to educate persons with haemophilia about aspects of novel therapies which are important to the individual, especially short- and long-term safety and efficacy. Further research is needed to determine how patient activation and health literacy influence decision-making and how to achieve equitable access and valid informed consent for novel therapies.

Gene therapy in haemophilia: literature review and regional perspectives for Turkey

Haemophilia is an X-linked lifelong congenital bleeding disorder that is caused by insufficient levels of factor VIII (FVIII; haemophilia A) or factor IX (FIX; haemophilia B) and characterized by spontaneous and trauma-related bleeding episodes. The cornerstone of the treatment, factor replacement, constitutes several difficulties, including frequent injections due to the short half-life of recombinant factors, intravenous administration and the risk of inhibitor development. While extended half-life factors and subcutaneous novel molecules enhanced the quality of life, initial successes with gene therapy offer a significant hope for cure. Although adeno-associated viral (AAV)-based gene therapy is one of the most emerging approaches for treatment of haemophilia, there are still challenges in vector immunogenicity, potency and efficacy, genotoxicity and persistence. As the approval for the first gene therapy product is coming closer, eligibility criteria for patient selection, multidisciplinary approach for optimal delivery and follow-up and development of new pricing policies and reimbursement models should be concerned. Therefore, this review addresses the unmet needs of current haemophilia treatment and explains the rationale and principles of gene therapy. Limitations and challenges are discussed from a global and national perspective and recommendations are provided to adopt the gene therapies faster and more sufficient for the haemophilia patients in developing countries like Turkey.

Examining patient and professional perspectives in the UK for gene therapy in haemophilia

Introduction

With the development of gene therapy for people with haemophilia (PWH), it is important to understand how people impacted by haemophilia (PIH) and clinicians prioritise haemophilia treatment attributes to support informed treatment decisions.

Objective

To examine the treatment attribute preferences of PIH and clinical experts in the United Kingdom (UK) and to develop a profile of gene therapy characteristics fit for use in future discrete choice experiments (DCEs).

Methods

Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with PIH (n = 14) and clinical experts (n = 6) who ranked pre‐defined treatment attributes by importance. Framework analysis was conducted to identify key themes and treatment attributes; points were allocated based on the rankings. Synthesis of results by a multidisciplinary group informed development of a profile of gene therapy characteristics for use in future research.

Results

Key themes identified by PIH and clinical experts included patient relevant features and the importance of ‘informed decision making'. The six top‐ranked treatment attributes were ‘effect on factor level’ (79 points), ‘uncertainty regarding long‐term risks’ (57 points), ‘impact on daily life’ (41 points), ‘frequency of monitoring’ (33 points), ‘impact on ability to participate in physical activity’ (29 points), and ‘uncertainty regarding long‐term benefits’ (28 points). The final treatment characteristics were categorised as therapeutic option, treatment effectiveness, safety concerns, impact on self‐management and quality of life (role limitations).

Conclusion

We identified several gene therapy characteristics important to PIH and clinicians in the UK. These characteristics will be used in a future DCE to further investigate patient preferences for gene therapy.

The experiences of people with haemophilia and their families of gene therapy in a clinical trial setting: regaining control, the Exigency study

BACKGROUND

Gene therapy has the potential to change the life experience of people with haemophilia and family members. Few studies have sought to explore the impact of gene therapy on both individuals and families. The aim of this study was to capture real-life experiences of gene therapy in People with haemophilia and their families.

RESULTS

Sixteen participants with severe haemophilia (11 haemophilia A, five haemophilia B), mean age 41.4 years (range 23-75 years), took part in a single qualitative interview; ten were accompanied by a family member. Mean time since transfection was 3.56 years (range 1-10 years). Participants saw their involvement in gene therapy as a positive experience, freeing them from the personal burden of haemophilia and furthering treatment options for the wider haemophilia community. However, participants reported being unprepared for the side effects of immunosuppression. Some also reported feeling unsupported and having little control over what was happening as their factor levels became the focus of the process.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that strategies need to be put into place to enable PwH fully to understand the process of gene therapy, and thereby make an informed choice as to whether it is a treatment they might wish for themselves. These include early and ongoing education, increased provision of psychosocial support and ongoing qualitative research.

Modeling Benefits, Costs, and Affordability of a Novel Gene Therapy in Hemophilia A

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The objective was to undertake an early cost-effectiveness assessment of valoctocogene roxaparvovec (valrox; Roctavian) compared to factor (F)VIII prophylaxis or emicizumab (Hemlibra; Roche HQ, Bazel, Switzerland) in patients with severe Hemophilia A (HA) without FVIII-antibodies. We also aimed to incorporate and quantify novel measures of value such as treatment durability, maximum value-based price (MVBP) and break-even time (ie, time until benefits begin to offset upfront payment). We constructed a Markov model to model bleeds over time which were linked to costs and quality-of-life decrements. In the valrox arm, FVIII over time was estimated combining initial effect and treatment waning and then linked to bleeds. In FVIII and emicizumab arms, bleeds were based on trial evidence. Evidence and assumptions were validated using expert elicitation. Model robustness was tested via sensitivity analyses. A Dutch societal perspective was applied with a 10-year time horizon. Valrox in comparison to FVIII, and emicizumab showed small increases in quality-adjusted life years at lower costs, and were therefore dominant. Valrox’ base case MVBP was estimated at €2.65 million/treatment compared to FVIII and €3.5 million/treatment versus emicizumab. Mean break-even time was 8.03 years compared to FVIII and 5.68 years to emicizumab. Early modeling of patients with HA in The Netherlands treated with valrox resulted in estimated improved health and lower cost compared to prophylactic FVIII and emicizumab. We also demonstrated feasibility of incorporation of treatment durability and novel outcomes such as value-based pricing scenarios and break-even time. Future work should aim to better characterize uncertainties and increase translation of early modeling to direct research efforts.

The Hemophilia Gene Therapy Patient Journey: Questions and Answers for Shared Decision-Making

PURPOSE

The anticipated emergence of hemophilia gene therapy will present people with hemophilia (PWH) and treating clinicians with increasingly complex treatment options. It will be critical that PWH and their families be empowered to participate fully in decision-making through transparent communication and the development of targeted educational resources.

METHODS

The Council of Hemophilia Community (CHC) convened across a series of roundtable meetings to define the patient journey for hemophilia gene therapy, and to develop a question-and-answer style resource to guide discussion between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and their patients. Patient groups were also consulted during the development of this tool.

RESULTS

The CHC defined 5 key stages in the hemophilia gene therapy patient journey: pre-gene therapy (information-seeking and decision-making), treatment initiation, short- and long-term post-gene therapy follow-up. PWH will have different questions and concerns at each stage of their journey, which should be discussed with their HCP to aid decision-making. The resulting patient journey infographic and Q&A resource (see Supplementary Materials) has been developed for HCPs and PWH to provide a novel and practical roadmap of key issues and considerations throughout all stages.

CONCLUSION

These resources support a collaborative, patient-centric, shared decision-making approach to inform treatment decision discussions between HCPs and PWH. The value of such discussions will be influenced by the language adopted; health literacy is a particularly important consideration, and these discussions should be accessible and tailored to PWH. HCPs and PWH can benefit from awareness of the common questions and uncertainties as they progress together along the patient journey. While the contents of this article are specific to hemophilia gene therapy, the concepts developed here could be adapted to aid patients in other disease states.

A survey of physicians' treatment switching practice in people on long-term prophylaxis for hemophilia in five European countries

OBJECTIVE

Recombinant factor VIII and factor IX Fc fusion proteins (rFVIIIFc and rFIXFc) were developed with an extended half-life (EHL) to improve the management of people with hemophilia A (PwHA) and B (PwHB), respectively.

METHODS

This survey gathered physician-reported treatment decisions and physician views on outcomes in PwHA or PwHB who switched to rFVIIIFc or rFIXFc in the 12 months prior to study completion.

RESULTS

Physicians (N = 37) considered bleeds, pharmacokinetic parameters, joint health and adherence the most important factors to assess both in routine care and when deciding to switch to an EHL therapy. In the 12 months prior to study completion, 37 physicians switched 113 PwHA to rFVIIIFc and 25 physicians switched 36 PwHB to rFIXFc. Most PwH (>90%) had moderate or severe hemophilia and many (>60%) switched within 6 months of the survey. The main reason for switching PwHA to rFVIIIFc was to allow fewer injections (49%), while the main reason for switching PwHB to rFIXFc was the product becoming available for use (36%). Overall, 96% of PwHA and 89% of PwHB who were switched remained on these EHL products at the time of survey. Mean total weekly dose, injection frequency and annualized bleeding rate were reported to have reduced following switching.

CONCLUSION

This survey provides valuable insight into reasons for, and challenges to, the use of EHL products in clinical practice. Physicians perceived that switching to treatment with rFVIIIFc or rFIXFc can improve quality of life, treatment burden, disease control and adherence.

An exploration of why men with severe haemophilia might not want gene therapy: The exigency study

INTRODUCTION

For many people with haemophilia (PwH) gene therapy offers a potential functional cure. However, some have stated that they do not wish to have gene therapy either now or in the future.

AIM

This sub-study, part of the larger Exigency programme, assesses the attitudes, views and understanding of those who do not wish to undergo gene therapy.

METHODS

Participants were approached via social media and word of mouth referral and invited to participate in a focus group or individual interview to discuss their views. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Ten adult men with severe haemophilia (eight haemophilia A and two haemophilia B), mean age 34.3 years, participated in a 1-h focus group (n = 9) or interview (n = 1). All were on prophylaxis. None reported significant treatment burden, and all had annual bleeding rates of less than five in the previous 12 months. Four major themes emerged: self-identity and its loss, lack of long-term safety and efficacy data, ongoing concerns about past viral infection, and lack of current treatment burden.

CONCLUSION

There are many concerns about gene therapy, including eligibility, effectiveness and safety, which may result in individuals declining it as a therapy. These concerns may recede as more data are published. This study reveals a psychological dynamic around self-identity and belonging for PwH. The nature of this dynamic is poorly understood and needs exploration to facilitate support for those making decisions about gene therapy.

Optimising prophylaxis in haemophilia A: The ups and downs of treatment

The classical goals of haemophilia A treatment are to prevent bleeds, minimise the risk of long-term complications associated with joint damage, and improve quality of life by maintaining appropriate factor VIII [FVIII] levels. The dose and frequency of FVIII replacement therapies required to reduce bleeds is now known to vary amongst individuals, and may change for the same individual over time, meaning that a standardised dose and regimen may not provide optimal protection to all patients. Here we review the evolving treatment landscape for haemophilia A, and discuss how an increased understanding of the pharmacology and pharmacokinetics underlying FVIII replacement and non-factor replacement therapies could improve patient outcomes. We also review the strengths and weaknesses of current treatments and explore the benefits of personalised therapy and review how this may best be achieved with current treatment options. The key points of our review are summarised in this accompanying short video.

Improving patient informed consent for haemophilia gene therapy: the case for change

Adeno-associated virus-based gene therapy points to a coming transformation in the treatment of people living with haemophilia, promising sustained bleed control and potential improvement in quality of life. Nevertheless, the consequences of introducing new genetic material are not trivial. The perceived benefits should not minimise the challenges facing patients in understanding the long-term risks and providing a valid and meaningful informed consent, whether in a research or clinical setting. Informed consent is a fundamentally important doctrine in both medical ethics and health law, upholding an individual's right to define their personal goals and make their own autonomous choices. Patients should be enabled to recognise their clinical situation, understand the implications of treatment and integrate every facet of their life into their decision. This review describes informed consent processes for haemophilia gene therapy clinical trials, factors affecting patients' decision making and the availability of patient-centred decision support interventions, to ensure that patients' interests are being protected. Regulatory guidance has been published for physicians and manufacturers in haemophilia on informed consent, including for gene therapy, while best-practice recommendations for patient-physician discussions are available. In all settings, however, communicating and presenting highly technical and complex therapeutic information is challenging, especially where multiple barriers to scientific knowledge and health literacy exist. We propose several evidence-informed strategies to enhance the consent procedure, such as utilising validated literacy and knowledge assessment tools as well as participatory learning environments over an extended period, to ensure that patients are fully cognisant of the consent they give or deny. Further research is needed to define new, creative approaches for patient education and the upholding of ethical values in the informed consent process for gene therapy. The lessons learnt and approaches developed within haemophilia could set the gold standard for good practice in ensuring ethical preparedness amidst advances in genetic therapies.

Plain language summary

Improving the informed consent process for people living with haemophilia considering gene therapy. Gene therapy is the process of replacing faulty genes with healthy ones. In haemophilia, gene therapy involves introducing a working copy of the gene for the clotting factor that patients are missing. Following treatment, patients should begin producing their own clotting factor normally. However, people living with haemophilia (PwH) need to be fully informed regarding the potential benefits and risks of gene therapy and what this means for them, whether as part of a research study or routine medical care.Patients must be respected and supported to make decisions about their own health and wellbeing, recognising their legal and moral right to set personal goals and make treatment choices. For this to happen in practice, patients should be aware of their individual health needs, understand the effects of treatment and consider lifestyle preferences in relation to their decisions. This article attempts to describe how informed consent is obtained in haemophilia gene therapy clinical trials, what affects a patient's ability to make decisions and the availability of information and support to respect and protect the interests of PwH.Regulators responsible for approving medical products have published guidance on informed consent for physicians and pharmaceutical manufacturers in haemophilia, including for gene therapy. Recommendations have been made about the best ways for PwH to discuss gene therapy with their physicians. Yet, poor communication of complex topics, such as gene therapy, can be problematic, especially if patients lack the skills and confidence to understand and discuss the science, or for physicians with limited time in clinic.We propose strategies to improve the consent process, so patients can feel more able to make informed decisions about new treatments. Further research is needed to find new, creative approaches for educating patients and ensuring that the informed consent process for gene therapy in haemophilia is ethical.

Patients' Perception of the Impact of Innovation on Hemophilia Care Management Organization: A Qualitative Study Protocol (INNOVHEMO Study)

BACKGROUND

New therapies provide a favorable evolution in the care management of persons with hemophilia. However, the impact of these new therapies on patient care organization remains to be determined. A qualitative study will be implemented to analyze patients' perception regarding the impact of innovation on the organization of their care management. Secondary objectives will include refining specific factors related to persons with hemophilia (barriers or facilitators, especially the place of treatment) to consider within an organizational impact analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Semi-structured individual interviews will be conducted via videoconferencing or by phone by two researchers using an interview guide. Participants will be recruited from the Rhône-Alpes region, in France. Physicians from two hemophilia treatment centers will identify eligible patients. Moreover, a call for volunteers will be launched by the Rhône-Alpes committee of the French hemophilia association. Interviews will be conducted with adult patients, adolescent patients or parents of a minor with hemophilia regularly treated prophylactically or on demand. Data analysis will be performed with NVivo^® software. Each interview will be analyzed by two researchers using an inductive content analytic method.

DISCUSSION

The INNOVHEMO study is an original study analyzing the way patients perceive the impact of an innovation on their care management organization. The resulting patient-specific factors, identified as barriers or facilitators, will need to be integrated into a more comprehensive analysis of the impact of innovation on care management organization.

Patient perspectives regarding gene therapy in haemophilia: Interviews from the PAVING study

Introduction

Exploring patient perceptions regarding gene therapies may provide insights about their acceptability to patients.

Objective

To investigate opinions of people with haemophilia (PWH) regarding gene therapies. Moreover, this study aimed to identify patient‐relevant attributes (treatment features) that influence PWH’s treatment choices.

Methods

Semi‐structured individual interviews were conducted with Belgian PWH, types A and B. A predefined interview guide included information sections and open, attribute ranking and case questions. Qualitative data were organized using NVivo 12 and analysed following framework analysis. Sum totals of scores obtained in the ranking exercise were calculated per attribute.

Results

In total, 20 PWH participated in the interviews. Most participants demonstrated a positive attitude towards gene therapy and were very willing (40%; n = 8) or willing (35%; n = 7) to receive this treatment. The following five attributes were identified as most important to PWH in making their choice: annual bleeding rate, factor level, uncertainty of long‐term risks, impact on daily life, and probability that prophylaxis can be stopped. While participants were concerned about the uncertainty regarding long‐term safety, most participants were less concerned about uncertainty regarding long‐term efficacy.

Conclusions

This qualitative study showed that most PWH have a positive attitude towards gene therapy and that besides efficacy, safety and the related uncertainties, also impact on daily life is important to patients. The identified patient‐relevant attributes may be used by regulators, health technology assessment bodies and payers in their evaluation of gene therapies for haemophilia. Moreover, they may inform clinical trial design, pay‐for‐performance schemes and real‐world evidence studies.

Patient and clinician opinions of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of patients with rare diseases: a qualitative study

Background

Rare diseases may be life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions. Patient care needs are often complex and challenging to coordinate and deliver effectively. Rare diseases and their clinical management may therefore substantially impact on patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may complement clinical assessments by elucidating patients’ perspectives on their health status and care priorities. This study explored the opinions of patients and clinicians on the use of PROMs in the management of patients with rare diseases in routine clinical practice.

Methods

A total of 15 semi-structured one-to-one interviews were conducted with four patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC); five renal transplant recipients; and six PSC doctors from University Hospitals Birmingham (UHB) NHS Foundation Trust. A focus group session was also conducted with 10 clinical staff members (doctors, nurses and other allied health professionals from UHB). The suitability and acceptability of the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ) and the Short Form 12 (SF12) were assessed by patients with PSC and their doctors while the Paediatric quality of life inventory Transplant Module (PedsQL-TM) and the EuroQoL-5 dimensions (EQ. 5D) were evaluated by the renal transplant recipients and their doctors. The discussions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Coding of the transcripts was done using the Nvivo 11 Plus software. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify the main themes and subthemes.

Results

Four themes were identified, namely: (i) potential benefits of PROMs in the management of rare diseases; (ii) views on selected questionnaires; (iii) practical considerations for implementation; and (iv) potential facilitators and barriers of implementation. Patients and clinicians suggested that the use of ePROMs may facilitate patient-centred care by promoting patient-clinician communication, highlighting aspects of HRQOL that are important to patients and encouraging patient involvement in their care. They also felt that the disease-specific CLDQ and PedsQL-TM were more relevant than the generic SF12 and EQ-5D.

Conclusions

Patients with rare diseases often experience impaired HRQOL. The use of an ePROM system may enhance the routine management of patients with rare diseases.