Switching clotting factor concentrates: considerations in estimating the risk of immunogenicity

Clinical evaluation of bleeds and response to haemostatic treatment in patients with acquired haemophilia: A global expert consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Acquired haemophilia (AH) is a rare bleeding disorder with significant morbidity and mortality. Most patients initially present to physicians without experience of the disease, delaying diagnosis and potentially worsening outcomes. Existing guidance in AH is limited to clinical opinion of few experts and does not address monitoring bleeds in specific anatomical locations.

AIM

Derive consensus from a large sample of experts around the world in monitoring bleeding patients with AH.

METHODS

Using the Delphi methodology, a structured survey, designed to derive consensus on how to monitor bleeding patients with AH, was developed by a steering committee for completion by a group of haematologists with an interest in AH. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement with a given survey statement. After three rounds of survey refinement, a final list of consensus statements was compiled.

RESULTS

Thirty-six global specialists in AH participated. The participants spanned 20 countries and had treated a median of 12.0 (range, 1-50) patients with AH within the preceding 5 years. Consensus was achieved in all items after three survey rounds. In addition to statements on general management of bleeding patients, consensus statements in the following areas were presented: urinary tract, gastrointestinal tract, muscles, skin, joints, nose, pharynx, mouth, intracranial and postpartum.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, we present consensus statements derived from a broad sample of global specialists to address monitoring of location-specific bleeds and evaluating efficacy of bleeding treatment in patients with AH. These statements could be applied in practice by treating physicians and validated by individual population surveys.

Pharmacokinetic-based prediction of real-life dosing of extended half-life clotting factor concentrates on hemophilia

The improvement of clotting factor concentrates (CFCs) has undergone an impressive boost during the last six years. Since 2010, several new recombinant factor (rF)VIII/IX concentrates entered phase I/II/III clinical trials. The improvements are related to the culture of human embryonic kidney (HEK) cells, post-translational glycosylation, PEGylation, and co-expression of the fragment crystallizable (Fc) region of immunoglobulin (Ig)G1 or albumin genes in the manufacturing procedures. The extended half-life (EHL) CFCs allow an increase of the interval between bolus administrations during prophylaxis, a very important advantage for patients with difficulties in venous access. Although the inhibitor risk has not been fully established, phase III studies have provided standard prophylaxis protocols, which, compared with on-demand treatment, have achieved very low annualized bleeding rates (ABRs). The key pharmacokinetics (PK) parameter to tailor patient therapy is clearance, which is more reliable than the half-life of CFCs; the clearance considers the decay rate of the drug concentration-time profile, while the half-life considers only the half concentration of the drug at a given time. To tailor the prophylaxis of hemophilia patients in real-life, we propose two formulae (expressed in terms of the clearance, trough and dose interval between prophylaxis), respectively based on the one- and two-compartmental models (CMs), for the prediction of the optimal single dose of EHL CFCs. Once the data from the time decay of the CFCs are fitted by the one- or two-CMs after an individual PK analysis, such formulae provide to the treater the optimal trade-off among trough and time-intervals between boluses. In this way, a sufficiently long time-interval between bolus administration could be guaranteed for a wider class of patients, with a preassigned level of the trough. Finally, a PK approach using repeated dosing is discussed, and some examples with new EHL CFCs are shown.

A contemporary look at FVIII inhibitor development: still a great influence on the evolution of hemophilia therapies

INTRODUCTION

The development of inhibitors against factor VIII (FVIII) replacement therapy remains the most important challenge for clinicians in the treatment of hemophilia patients. This review focusses on risk factors and management of FVIII inhibitors, particularly in light of SIPPET study findings and subsequent analyses. Areas covered: A brief history and evolution of hemophilia therapies is provided, including an overview of conventional and new (including investigational) therapeutic approaches for the treatment of hemophilia. The SIPPET study, the first randomized clinical trial to demonstrate a lower incidence of inhibitors in previously untreated patients treated with plasma-derived FVIII products compared with recombinant FVIII products, has generated much debate. We review the SIPPET trial and reactions, in addition to preliminary observations from a single center's experience, the cost impact of inhibitors, recent findings from SIPPET subanalyses, and inhibitor development in previously-treated patients. Expert commentary: Despite recent advances in potential new treatment options for hemophilia, conventional factor replacement concentrates currently remain the cornerstone of treatment. It is paramount that clinicians familiarize themselves with the findings from the SIPPET trial and substudies, in order to better inform their patients and families on inhibitor risk factors and to aid the treatment decision-making process.

Safety and Efficacy of B-domain Deleted Third Generation Recombinant Factor VIII (GreenGene F™) in Korean Patients with Hemophilia A: Data from a Post-marketing Surveillance Study

BACKGROUND

New B-domain deleted third generation recombinant factor VIII (FVIII; GreenGene F™, beroctocog alfa) was launched in 2010. We determined safety and efficacy of GreenGene F™ during routine clinical practice in patients with hemophilia A over a period of 12 months.

METHODS

From July 2010 to July 2014, a total of 136 hemophilia A patients were enrolled in a post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study. Among them, 134 patients were assessed for drug safety and 114 patients were analyzed for drug efficacy. Patients with differing hemophilia A severities and medical histories were monitored during 12 months of prophylactic and/or on-demand therapy.

RESULTS

Among 134 patients evaluated, 85 (63.4%) had severe hemophilia. Ninety-two received a total of 1,266,077 units for prophylaxis, and 42 received 516,491 units for bleeding episodes. Three patients developed inhibitors. In 112 previously treated patients, one patient (0.9%) developed inhibitor after intensive FVIII treatment for surgery. Among 22 previously untreated patients, inhibitors were observed in 2 infants (9.1%). Overall, there were a total of 47 adverse events (other than inhibitors) of all types in 30 patients (22.4%), 11 in 10 patients (7.5%) of which were considered showing serious adverse events (SAEs); most of which were hemorrhages at different sites. None of the SAEs were judged as product related. An excellent/good efficacy rate of 91.3% for hemostasis and 89.4% for hemorrhage prevention was recorded.

CONCLUSION

The results of this PMS study support the use of GreenGene F™ as safe and efficacious in hemorrhage prevention and treatment of hemophilia A. These results are consistent with the findings from previously published GreenGene F™ studies.

Prospective surveillance study of haemophilia A patients switching from moroctocog alfa or other factor VIII products to moroctocog alfa albumin-free cell culture (AF-CC) in usual care settings

This prospective, open-label, postauthorisation safety surveillance study assessed clinically significant inhibitor development in patients with severe haemophilia A transitioning from moroctocog alfa or other factor VIII (FVIII) replacement products to reformulated moroctocog alfa (AF-CC). Males aged12 years with severe haemophilia A (FVIII:C) < 1 IU/dl), > 150 exposure days (EDs) to recombinant or plasma-derived FVIII products, and no detectable inhibitor at screening were enrolled. Primary end point was the incidence of clinically significant FVIII inhibitor development. Secondary end points included annualised bleeding rate (ABR), less-than-expected therapeutic effect (LETE), and FVIII recovery. Patients were assigned to one of two cohorts based on whether they were transitioning to moroctocog alfa (AF-CC) from moroctocog alfa (cohort 1; n=146) or from another recombinant or plasma-derived FVIII product (cohort 2; n=62). Mean number of EDs on study was 94 (range, 1–139). Six positive FVIII inhibitor results, as determined by local laboratories, were reported in four patients; none were confirmed by a central laboratory, no inhibitor-related clinical manifestations were reported, and all anti-FVIII antibody assays were negative. Median ABRs were 23.4 and 3.4 in patients categorised at baseline as following on-demand and prophylactic regimens, respectively; 86.5 % of bleeding episodes resolved after one infusion. LETE incidence was 0.06 % and 0.19 % in the on-demand and prophylaxis settings, respectively. FVIII recovery remained constant throughout the study. No new safety concerns were identified. This study found no increased risk of clinically significant FVIII inhibitor development in patients transitioning from moroctocog alfa or other FVIII replacement products to moroctocog alfa (AF-CC).

Type and intensity of FVIII exposure on inhibitor development in PUPs with haemophilia A

The impact of treatment-related factors on inhibitor development in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with haemophilia A is still debated. We present the results of a collaborative, individual patient data meta-analytic project. Eligible data sources were published cohorts of PUPs for which patient-level data were available. The exposures of interest were factor (F)VIII type (recombinant [rFVIII] vs plasma-derived [pdFVIII]) and treatment intensity (≥ vs < 150 IU/kg/week) at first treatment. Family history of inhibitors, F8 mutations, age, treatment regimen (on-demand vs prophylaxis), secular trend and surgery were analysed as putative confounders using different statistical approaches (multivariable Cox regression, propensity score analyses, CART). Analyses accounted for the multi-centre origin of the data. We included 761 consecutive, unselected PUPs with moderate to severe haemophilia A from 10 centres in Egypt, Germany, Israel and Italy. A total of 27 % of patients developed inhibitors; 40 % and 22 % of patients treated with rFVIII and pdFVIII (unadjusted HR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.6–2.9), respectively; 51 % and 24 % of patients receiving high-and low-intensity treatment (unadjusted HR 2.9, 95 % CI 2.0–4.2), respectively. In adjusted analyses, only treatment intensity remained an independent predictor; the effect of FVIII type was largely due to confounding, but with a significant interaction between FVIII type and treatment intensity. This patient-level meta-analysis confirms, across different statistical approaches, that high-intensity treatment is a strong risk factor for inhibitor development. The possible role of FVIII type in subgroups is suggested by the test for interactions but could not be proven because of the limited subgroups sample sizes.

Evaluation of safety and effectiveness of factor VIII treatment in haemophilia A patients with low titre inhibitors or a personal history of inhibitor

There is no prospective evidence on inhibitor recurrence among haemophilia A patients with low titre inhibitors or history of inhibitors, and whether or how therapeutic choices affect the risk of recurrence. The aims of this study were to synthesise safety data in patients with moderate-severe haemophilia A and with low titre inhibitors or inhibitor history enrolled in the rAHF PFM (ADVATE) – Post-Authorization Safety Studies (ADVATE-PASS) international programme. The study was conducted in clinics participating to the ADVATE PASS programme. The patient population consisted of patients entering the studies with low titre (≤5 BU) inhibitors or a positive personal history of inhibitors. Patients on Immune Tolerance Induction at study entry were excluded. Primary outcome was new or recurrent inhibitor titre > 5 BU. Secondary outcomes were any increase of inhibitor titre not reaching 5 BU; any unexplained change in treatment regimen. Primary analysis was done by two-stage random effects meta-analysis. Secondary analysis was done by a hierarchical Bayesian random effects logistic model. A total of 219 patients from seven studies were included. Of these 214 (97.7 %) patients had been previously treated for more than 50 exposure days. Two hundred ten patients had positive history for inhibitors, nine a baseline measurable titre. No patient presented a primary outcome event (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0–1.6 %). Six patients with previous history developed a low titre recurrence (overall rate 2.2, 95 %CI 0–4.8 %). When any increase of inhibitor titre or any treatment change was accounted for, overall 3.7 % (95 % CI 0 %-8.0 %) of patients experienced the outcome. In conclusion, the observed rate of events does not support the definition of this population as at high risk for inhibitor development.

Natural history and clinical characteristics of inhibitors in previously treated haemophilia A patients: a case series

BACKGROUND

Development of inhibitors is the most serious complication in haemophilia A treatment. The assessment of risk for inhibitor formation in new or modified factor concentrates is traditionally performed in previously treated patients (PTPs). However, evidence on risk factors for and natural history of inhibitors has been generated mostly in previously untreated patients (PUPs). The purpose of this study was to examine cases of de novo inhibitors in PTPs reported in the scientific literature and to the EUropean HAemophilia Safety Surveillance (EUHASS) programme, and explore determinants and course of inhibitor development.

METHODS

We used a case series study design and developed a case report form to collect patient level data; including detection, inhibitor course, treatment, factor VIII products used and events that may trigger inhibitor development (surgery, vaccination, immune disorders, malignancy, product switch).

RESULTS

We identified 19 publications that reported 38 inhibitor cases and 45 cases from 31 EUHASS centres. Individual patient data were collected for 55/83 (66%) inhibitor cases out of 12 330 patients. The median (range) peak inhibitor titre was 4.4 (0.5-135.0), the proportion of transient inhibitors was 33% and only two cases of 12 undergoing immune tolerance induction failed this treatment. In the two months before inhibitor development, surgery was reported in nine (22%) cases, and high intensity treatment periods reported in seven (17%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

By studying the largest cohort of inhibitor development in PTPs assembled to date, we showed that inhibitor development in PTPs, is on average, a milder event than in PUPs.

Bayesian approach to the assessment of the population-specific risk of inhibitors in hemophilia A patients: a case study

Background

Developing inhibitors is a rare event during the treatment of hemophilia A. The multifacets and uncertainty surrounding the development of inhibitors further complicate the process of estimating inhibitor rate from the limited data. Bayesian statistical modeling provides a useful tool in generating, enhancing, and exploring the evidence through incorporating all the available information.

Methods

We built our Bayesian analysis using three study cases to estimate the inhibitor rates of patients with hemophilia A in three different scenarios: Case 1, a single cohort of previously treated patients (PTPs) or previously untreated patients; Case 2, a meta-analysis of PTP cohorts; and Case 3, a previously unexplored patient population – patients with baseline low-titer inhibitor or history of inhibitor development. The data used in this study were extracted from three published ADVATE (antihemophilic factor [recombinant] is a product of Baxter for treating hemophilia A) post-authorization surveillance studies. Noninformative and informative priors were applied to Bayesian standard (Case 1) or random-effects (Case 2 and Case 3) logistic models. Bayesian probabilities of satisfying three meaningful thresholds of the risk of developing a clinical significant inhibitor (10/100, 5/100 [high rates], and 1/86 [the Food and Drug Administration mandated cutoff rate in PTPs]) were calculated. The effect of discounting prior information or scaling up the study data was evaluated.

Results

Results based on noninformative priors were similar to the classical approach. Using priors from PTPs lowered the point estimate and narrowed the 95% credible intervals (Case 1: from 1.3 [0.5, 2.7] to 0.8 [0.5, 1.1]; Case 2: from 1.9 [0.6, 6.0] to 0.8 [0.5, 1.1]; Case 3: 2.3 [0.5, 6.8] to 0.7 [0.5, 1.1]). All probabilities of satisfying a threshold of 1/86 were above 0.65. Increasing the number of patients by two and ten times substantially narrowed the credible intervals for the single cohort study (1.4 [0.7, 2.3] and 1.4 [1.1, 1.8], respectively). Increasing the number of studies by two and ten times for the multiple study scenarios (Case 2: 1.9 [0.6, 4.0] and 1.9 [1.5, 2.6]; Case 3: 2.4 [0.9, 5.0] and 2.6 [1.9, 3.5], respectively) had a similar effect.

Conclusion

Bayesian approach as a robust, transparent, and reproducible analytic method can be efficiently used to estimate the inhibitor rate of hemophilia A in complex clinical settings.

A close insight to factor VIII inhibitor in the congenital hemophilia A

INTRODUCTION

Hemophilia A (HA) has an X-linked pattern of inheritance and is the most common of the hemorrhagic disorders. HA is caused by a decreased or deficiency of the functional clotting factor VIII (FVIII) and effects 1 in 5000-10,000 male births. The common treatment for hemophilia is replacement therapy by plasma-derived or recombinant FVIII. Approximately 20-30% of people with a severe type of HA develop an inhibitor and this phenomenon is the main challenge in the management of these patients. Genetic factors and environmental determinants contribute to inhibitor development. Here, the roles of various genetic and environmental factors such as the type of FVIII concentrate used, the number of exposure days, and peak treatment time will be discussed in detail. It seems this information is helpful for hematologists.

AREAS COVERED

A literature review was done in January 2016 on PubMed and Scopus using the following keywords:' h(a)emophilia A & factor VIII inhibitor', 'h(a)emophilia A & factor VIII alloantibody', 'h(a)emophilia A & inhibitor'. There was no time limitation; however, there was an English language limitation placed on the articles selected. Expert commentary: Influential genetic and environmental factors in developing inhibitors have been discussed. Most of the risk factors are related to previously untreated patients with hemophili.

Economic analysis of not running tenders for recombinant Factor VIII procurement: a simplified analysis to estimate an otherwise unknown pharmacoeconomic index

Background

Two approaches to the procurement of recombinant Factor VIII products are used by health systems: (A) the most common approach where acquisition tenders are not carried out; (B) the approach tested in the UK in which procurement is based on tenders. The respective cost-effectiveness is not known.

Objective

To estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the comparison A vs B.

Methods

The analysis evaluated: (i) Factor VIII cost with/without tenders; (ii) inhibitor development caused by switching between products; (iii) clinical and economic consequences of inhibitors. Information on these items was obtained from a literature search. Because of the scarce evidence available on some items, our analysis considered the 'most favourable' scenario-that is, some extreme though reasonable assumptions were adopted that were intentionally biased towards improving the ICER of the no-tender option.

Results and discussion

We estimated an ICER for A vs B of £486 409 (€657 139; £1=€1.351) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Since pharmacoeconomic thresholds are ∼£30 000 per QALY, our results indicate that the cost-effectiveness of acquisition strategies that avoid tenders is prohibitive. Because of the simplified nature of our analysis, this estimate is preliminary.

Conclusions

The 'true' ICER of A vs B remains unknown, but its value is likely to be even worse than the unfavourable ICER of £486 409 (€657 139) per QALY.

Pre-existing Antibody: Biotherapeutic Modality-Based Review

Pre-existing antibodies to biotherapeutic drugs have been detected in drug-naïve subjects for a variety of biotherapeutic modalities. Pre-existing antibodies are immunoglobulins that are either specific or cross-reacting with a protein or glycan epitopes on a biotherapeutic compound. Although the exact cause for pre-existing antibodies is often unknown, environmental exposures to non-human proteins, glycans, and structurally similar products are frequently proposed as factors. Clinical consequences of the pre-existing antibodies vary from an adverse effect on patient safety to no impact at all and remain highly dependent on the biotherapeutic drug modality and therapeutic indication. As such, pre-existing antibodies are viewed as an immunogenicity risk factor requiring a careful evaluation. Herein, the relationships between biotherapeutic modalities to the nature, prevalence, and clinical consequences of pre-existing antibodies are reviewed. Initial evidence for pre-existing antibody is often identified during anti-drug antibody (ADA) assay development. Other interfering factors known to cause false ADA positive signal, including circulating multimeric drug target, rheumatoid factors, and heterophilic antibodies, are discussed.

BAX326 (RIXUBIS): a novel recombinant factor IX for the control and prevention of bleeding episodes in adults and children with hemophilia B

Hemophilia B management has improved considerably since the introduction of high-purity plasma-derived factor IX (pdFIX) products in the early 1990s. Recombinant FIX (rFIX) was introduced more recently and has potential safety advantages over the older blood-based products. Until recently, only one such product, nonacog alfa (BeneFIX(®), Pfizer, Inc.), has been available. However, a new rFIX product, BAX326 (RIXUBIS, Baxter Healthcare Corp.), has now been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. BAX326 undergoes rigorous virus elimination and purification steps during manufacture, and has low activated FIX activity, which confers low thrombogenic potential in humans. Preclinical studies showed promising pharmacokinetic and safety profiles, and these early findings have since been expanded in a series of prospective, multicenter, clinical studies. Foremost among these is a pivotal phase I/III study of BAX326 and its use in routine prophylaxis or on-demand treatment in patients aged 12-65 years with severe (FIX level <1%) or moderately severe (FIX level ≤2%) hemophilia B. This study confirmed the pharmacokinetic equivalence of BAX326 and nonacog alfa, and showed a significant reduction in annualized bleeding rate with BAX326 prophylaxis compared with on-demand treatment (79% versus historic controls; p < 0.001). The hemostatic efficacy of BAX326 was rated as 'excellent' or 'good' in 96% of bleeds. BAX326 was also associated with statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in physical health-related quality of life. Results are similarly encouraging in a pediatric study in children aged up to 12 years and in a study in hemophilia B patients undergoing surgery. A further study showed safe transition, with no inhibitor formation in any patient, from treatment with a pdFIX product to BAX326. Overall, the safety profile of BAX326 in clinical trials has been strong, with no inhibitor or specific antibody formation, thrombosis, or treatment-related serious adverse events or anaphylaxis.

Switching treatments in haemophilia: is there a risk of inhibitor development?

Patients with haemophilia A (and their physicians) may be reluctant to switch factor VIII (FVIII) concentrates, often due to concerns about increasing the risk of inhibitors; this reluctance to switch may contribute to patients missing the clinical benefits provided by the arrival of new factor VIII products. This topic was explored at the Eleventh Zürich Haemophilia Forum. Clinical scenarios for which product switching may be cause for concern were discussed; when there is a clinical need, there are no absolute contraindications to switching, but some patients (e.g. previously untreated patients and those undergoing elective surgery) may require more careful consideration. Both patient and physician surveys indicate that the reluctance to switch, and the fear of inhibitor development, does not appear to be evidence based. The evaluation of more recent data did not support previous studies suggesting that particular products (e.g. recombinant vs. plasma-derived and full length vs. B-domain modified) may be associated with increased risk. In addition, data from three national product switches showed that switching was not associated with increased inhibitor risk, but highlighted the need for regular inhibitor testing and for a centralised, unbiased database of inhibitor incidence. To conclude, current evidence does not suggest that switching products significantly influences inhibitor development.