Hemorrhagic and thrombotic adverse events associated with emicizumab and extended half-life factor VIII replacement drugs: EudraVigilance data of 2021

Multicenter evaluation of the hemostatic activity of emicizumab in patients with severe hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Emicizumab has been approved for the prophylaxis of patients with hemophilia A with or without inhibitors. However, spontaneous and trauma-induced breakthrough bleeds have been reported in patients on emicizumab prophylaxis, and no laboratory assay has been validated to evaluate the hemostatic activity of emicizumab.

OBJECTIVES

The thrombin generation assay (TGA) could be a surrogate marker of the hemostatic efficacy of emicizumab. The correlation between TGA and the methods used to measure emicizumab blood concentration was evaluated in this study.

METHODS

TGA was modified by the use of a trigger reagent combining a very low concentration of tissue factor and activated factor (F)XI. Emicizumab quantification was performed by 3 methods: the modified 1-step FVIII assay and 2 methods based on liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry (LC-MS).

RESULTS

Using tissue factor/activated FXI-triggered TGA and platelet-poor plasma, a relationship was observed between the area under the thrombin generation curve (endogenous thrombin potential [ETP]) and the clinical response of patients to emicizumab. The ultrastructure of fibrin clots was consistent with ETP results and showed that emicizumab had a hemostatic activity equivalent to 20 to 30 IU/dL of FVIII. Finally, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses showed no correlation between ETP and LC-MS nor with modified 1-stage FVIII assay, but a statistically significant correlation between the LC-MS methods and the time-to-peak results of the TGA.

CONCLUSION

Using a modified TGA, this study showed that patients who experienced breakthrough bleeds while on emicizumab had a lower thrombin-generating capacity compared with others with good clinical response to emicizumab.

Emicizumab versus immunosuppressive therapy for the management of acquired hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is an autoimmune bleeding disorder caused by neutralizing antibodies against coagulation factor VIII. Immunosuppressive therapy (IST) is standard of care to eradicate autoantibody production and protect from further bleeding but carries a risk of severe infection and mortality in frail patients with AHA. Recently, emicizumab has been studied for its potential to reduce the need for early and aggressive IST.

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes of 2 studies that used either IST (GTH-AH 01/2010; N = 101) or prophylaxis with emicizumab (GTH-AHA-EMI; N = 47) early after diagnosis of AHA.

METHODS

Baseline characteristics were balanced by propensity score matching. Primary endpoint was the rate of clinically relevant new bleeds during the first 12 weeks; secondary endpoints were adverse events and overall survival.

RESULTS

The negative binominal model-based bleeding rate was 68% lower with emicizumab as compared with IST (incident rate ratio, 0.325; 95% CI, 0.182-0.581). No difference was apparent in the overall frequency of infections (emicizumab 21%, IST 29%) during the first 12 weeks, but infections were less often fatal in emicizumab-treated patients (0%) compared with IST-treated patients (11%). Thromboembolic events occurred less often with emicizumab (2%) than with IST (7%). Overall survival after 24 weeks was better with emicizumab (90% vs 76%; hazard ratio, 0.44; 95%, CI, 0.24-0.81).

CONCLUSION

Using emicizumab instead of IST in the early phase after initial diagnosis of AHA reduced bleeding and fatal infections and improved overall survival.

Comparison of thrombotic adverse events in patients treated with factor VIII products and emicizumab using the 2018-2022 US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System data

BACKGROUND

Relatively little is known about thrombotic adverse events (AEs) of emicizumab in postmarketing real-world settings, particularly in comparison with factor VIII (FVIII) products. A recent European study reported a potentially greater thrombotic risk of emicizumab compared with FVIII products.

OBJECTIVES

This drug safety study aims to investigate whether thrombotic AEs are more frequently reported for emicizumab than for FVIII products and if so, whether it is independent of bypassing agents as coreporting drugs using the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System data.

METHODS

Disproportionality analyses for thrombotic AEs of emicizumab vs FVIII products were conducted. Three signal detection indicators were used: proportional reporting ratio (PRR), reporting odds ratio (ROR), and informational component (IC).

RESULTS

During 2018-2022, the proportions of thrombotic AEs among all AEs were 4.07% (97 out of 2383) and 1.44% (134 out of 9324) for emicizumab and FVIII products, respectively: PRR = 2.83 (2.19-3.66), ROR = 2.91 (2.23-3.79), and IC = 1.04 (0.70-1.28). Bypassing agents as coreporting drugs were identified in 36% and 15% of the total thrombotic AE reports associated with emicizumab and FVIII products, respectively. Even after thrombotic AE reports with bypassing agents were excluded, the reporting proportion of thrombotic AEs was still greater for emicizumab than for FVIII products: PRR = 2.19 (1.60-2.99).

CONCLUSION

Thrombotic AEs in the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System data were about 3 times more frequently reported for emicizumab than for FVIII products. More research and efforts in the future are warranted for monitoring, elucidating, and preventing the potential risk of thrombotic AEs in hemophilia therapy, including emicizumab.

Emicizumab promotes factor Xa generation on endothelial cells

BACKGROUND

Until recently, the treatment of hemophilia A relied on factor (F)VIII replacement. However, up to one-third of patients with severe hemophilia A develop neutralizing alloantibodies that render replacement therapies ineffective. The development of emicizumab, a bispecific antibody that partially mimics FVIIIa, has revolutionized the treatment of these patients. However, the use of an activated prothrombin complex concentrate [FEIBA (Takeda)] to treat breakthrough bleeding in patients on emicizumab has been associated with thrombotic complications including a unique microangiopathy.

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that the thrombotic complications observed with the combination of emicizumab and FEIBA might be due to excessive expression of procoagulant activity on the surface of endothelial cells.

METHODS

We examined the ability of emicizumab to promote FX activation on endothelial cells using 2 cell culture models.

RESULTS

We found that endothelial cells readily support emicizumab-mediated activation of FX by FIXa. The level of FXa generation depends on the concentration of available FIXa. The addition of FEIBA to emicizumab increased FXa generation in a dose-dependent manner on endothelial cells in both models. The rate of FXa generation was further enhanced by endothelial cell activation. However, unlike emicizumab, we found limited FXa generation in the presence of FVIII(a), which followed a significant lag time and was not dependent on FIXa concentration under these conditions.

CONCLUSION

Emicizumab promotes FXa generation on the surface of endothelial cells, which is markedly enhanced in the presence of FEIBA. These findings demonstrate a potential mechanism for the thrombotic complications seen with the combined use of emicizumab and FEIBA.

Fitusiran prophylaxis in people with hemophilia A or B who switched from prior BPA/CFC prophylaxis: the ATLAS-PPX trial

ABSTRACT

Fitusiran, a subcutaneous investigational small interfering RNA therapeutic, targets antithrombin to rebalance hemostasis in people with hemophilia A or B (PwHA/B), irrespective of inhibitor status. This phase 3, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of fitusiran prophylaxis in males aged ≥12 years with hemophilia A or B, with or without inhibitors, who received prior bypassing agent (BPA)/clotting factor concentrate (CFC) prophylaxis. Participants continued their prior BPA/CFC prophylaxis for 6 months before switching to once-monthly 80 mg fitusiran prophylaxis for 7 months (onset and efficacy periods). Primary end point was annualized bleeding rate (ABR) in the BPA/CFC prophylaxis and fitusiran efficacy period. Secondary end points included spontaneous ABR (AsBR) and joint ABR (AjBR). Safety and tolerability were assessed. Of 80 enrolled participants, 65 (inhibitor, n = 19; noninhibitor, n = 46) were eligible for ABR analyses. Observed median ABRs were 6.5 (interquartile range [IQR], 2.2-19.6)/4.4 (IQR, 2.2-8.7) with BPA/CFC prophylaxis vs 0.0 (IQR, 0.0-0.0)/0.0 (IQR, 0.0-2.7) in the corresponding fitusiran efficacy period. Estimated mean ABRs were substantially reduced with fitusiran by 79.7% (P = .0021) and 46.4% (P = .0598) vs BPA/CFC prophylaxis, respectively. Forty-one participants (63.1%) experienced 0 treated bleeds with fitusiran vs 11 (16.9%) with BPAs/CFCs. Median AsBR and AjBR were both 2.2 with BPA/CFC prophylaxis and 0.0 in the fitusiran efficacy period. Two participants (3.0%) experienced suspected or confirmed thromboembolic events with fitusiran. Once-monthly fitusiran prophylaxis significantly reduced bleeding events vs BPA/CFC prophylaxis in PwHA/B, with or without inhibitors, and reported adverse events were generally consistent with previously identified risks of fitusiran. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03549871.

Exploring nonreplacement therapies' impact on hemophilia and other rare bleeding disorders

The management of hemophilia, von Willebrand disease (VWD), and rare coagulation disorders traditionally relied on replacement therapies, such as factor concentrates, to address clotting factor deficiencies. However, in recent years, the emergence of nonreplacement therapies has shown promise as an adjunctive approach, especially in hemophilia, and also for patients with VWD and rare bleeding disorders. This review article offers an overview of nonreplacement therapies, such as FVIII-mimicking agents and drugs aimed at rebalancing hemostasis by inhibiting natural anticoagulants, particularly in the management of hemophilia. The utilization of nonreplacement therapies in VWD and rare bleeding disorders has recently attracted attention, as evidenced by presentations at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2023 Congress. Nonreplacement therapies provide alternative methods for preventing bleeding episodes and enhancing patients' quality of life, as many of them are administered subcutaneously and allow longer infusion intervals, resulting in improved quality of life and comfort for patients.

Eptacog beta for the management of patients with haemophilia A and B with inhibitors: A European perspective

Eptacog beta (activated), a recombinant human factor VIIa (rFVIIa), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2020 (SEVENFACT®, LFB & HEMA Biologics) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2022 (CEVENFACTA®, LFB). In Europe, eptacog beta is indicated for the treatment of bleeds and the prevention of bleeds during surgery or invasive procedures in adults and adolescents (≥12 years old) with congenital haemophilia A or B with high-titre inhibitors (≥5 BU) or with low-titre inhibitors who are expected to have a high anamnestic response to factor VIII or factor IX, or to be refractory to increased dosing of these factors. The efficacy and safety of eptacog beta were evaluated in three Phase III clinical studies, PERSEPT 1, 2 and 3. For the EMA filing dossier, the analysis of data from PERSEPT 1 and 2 differed from the analysis used to support the filing in the US. In this review, we summarise current data regarding the mode of action, clinical efficacy and safety of eptacog beta for the management of haemophilia A and B in patients with inhibitors from a European perspective. In addition to providing a valuable summary of the analyses of the clinical data for eptacog beta conducted for the EMA, our review summarises the potential differentiators for eptacog beta compared with other current bypassing agents.

Awareness of individual goals, preferences, and priorities of persons with severe congenital haemophilia A for a tailored shared decision-making approach to liver-directed gene therapy. A practical guideline

In clinical medicine, shared decision making (SDM) is a well-recognized strategy to enhance engagement of both patients and clinicians in medical decisions. The success of liver-directed gene therapy (GT) to transform severe congenital haemophilia A (HA) from an incurable to a curable disease has launched a shift beyond current standards of treatment. However, GT acceptance remains low in the community of HA persons. We argue for both persons with haemophilia (PWH) and specialists in HA care including clinicians, as needing SDM-oriented educational programs devoted to GT. Here, we provide an ad hoc outline to implement education to SDM and tailor clinician information on GT to individual PWHs. Based on routine key components of SDM: patient priorities; recommendations based on individual risk reduction; adverse effects; drug-drug interactions; alternatives to GT; and ongoing re-assessment of the objectives as risk factors (and individual priorities) change, this approach is finalized to exploit efficacious communication.

Efficacy and safety evaluation of eptacog beta (coagulation factor VIIa [recombinant]-jncw) for the treatment of hemophilia A and B with inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Bypassing agents (BPAs) are used to treat acute bleeding episodes, manage bleeding during perioperative care, and prophylactically minimize bleed occurrence in persons with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors (PwHABI). However, the effectiveness of BPAs that have been prescribed for the last several decades can be variable, motivating the development of a new recombinant activated factor VII, eptacog beta.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers key eptacog beta findings from phase 1b and phase 3 (PERSEPT) clinical trials, which formed the basis for its regulatory approval to treat PwHABI ages 12 and older. Descriptions of eptacog beta structure and glycosylation profile, mechanism of action, preclinical study results, and cost analyses are also presented.

EXPERT OPINION

PwHABI have had only two options for bleed treatment for the past several decades. With its distinct glycosylation profile, eptacog beta offers a novel therapy aiming to improve upon BPAs currently in use, providing an option with more than one dosing regimen and a rapid response that allows most bleeds to be treated with just one dose. This has become particularly important given the use of subcutaneous medications (e.g., emicizumab) for prophylaxis of bleeding. Clinicians should consider eptacog beta as a BPA for all PwHABI.

Efficacy/effectiveness and safety of emicizumab prophylaxis of people with hemophilia A: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emicizumab is a monoclonal antibody approved for prophylaxis against bleeds for people with hemophilia A (PwHA). A systematic review was conducted evaluating the efficacy/effectiveness and the safety of emicizumab as prophylaxis for PwHA compared to prophylaxis with factor VIII (FVIII) or bypassing agents (BPA), respectively in patients without and with inhibitors.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Database-directed search strategies were performed in Aug/26/2022 and updated in Mar/16/2023. Studies evaluating the prophylaxis with emicizumab versus prophylaxis with FVIII or BPA in PwHA without or with inhibitors, respectively, were selected by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Annualized bleeding rates for total treated bleeding events (ABR-all) were evaluated by meta-analysis. The quality of studies and certainty of evidence were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies were included. The standard mean differences for ABR-all were -0.6 (95%CI -1.0 to -0.2, p-value = 0.0002), among PwHA without inhibitors, and -1.7 (95%CI -2.4 to -0.9, p-value <0.00001), among PwHA with inhibitors. However, there was moderate heterogeneity in both meta-analyses. The most frequent adverse event was injection site reaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Emicizumab prophylaxis was superior in reducing the ABR-all when compared with prophylaxis with FVIII or BPA.

Between Scylla and Charybdis: thrombosis in children with hemophilia

Thromboembolism is an infrequent complication in children with hemophilia that has been traditionally associated with the presence of a central venous access device. Novel rebalancing agents have shown promising results as prophylactic therapies to minimize the risk of bleeding but both thromboembolism and thrombotic microangiopathy have been reported as complications. The management of thrombosis in children with hemophilia is particularly challenging given the inherent risk of bleeding. In this paper, we present clinical vignettes to review the literature, highlight challenges, and describe our approach to managing thromboembolism in children with hemophilia.

Bispecific antibodies mimicking factor VIII in hemophilia A: converting innovation to an essential medicine

Preventive subcutaneous treatment of severe hemophilia A with bispecific antibodies that mimic the action of coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) is emerging as an effective alternative to replacement therapy with intravenous administration of FVIII concentrates, either derived from plasma or produced by biotechnology. Access to this innovative therapeutic approach for a growing number of patients worldwide increasingly appears to be a priority public health strategy. Inclusion of FVIII mimetic bispecific antibodies on the World Health Organization essential medicines list would contribute to health equity in lower-income countries.