Recombinant factor VIII products and inhibitor development in previously untreated patients with severe haemophilia A: Combined analysis of three studies

The use of Bacillus subtilis as a cost-effective expression system for production of Cholera Toxin B fused factor VIII epitope regions applicable for inducing oral immune tolerance

Coagulation factor replacement therapy for the X-linked bleeding disorder Haemophilia, characterized by a deficiency of coagulation protein factor VIII (FVIII), is severely complicated by antibody (inhibitors) formation. The development of FVIII inhibitors drastically alters the quality of life of the patients and is associated with a tremendous increase in morbidity as well as treatment costs. The ultimate goal of inhibitor control is antibody elimination. Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the only clinically established approach for developing antigen-specific tolerance to FVIII. This work aims to establish a novel cost-effective strategy to produce FVIII molecules in fusion with cholera toxin B (CTB) subunit at the N terminus using the Bacillus subtilis expression system for oral tolerance, as the current clinical immune tolerance protocols are expensive. Regions of B-Domain Deleted (BDD)-FVIII that have potential epitopes were identified by employing Bepipred linear epitope prediction; 2 or more epitopes in each domain were combined and cDNA encoding these regions were fused with CTB and cloned in the Bacillus subtilis expression vector pHT43 and expression analysis was carried out. The expressed CTB-fused FVIII epitope domains showed strong binding affinity towards the CTB-receptor GM1 ganglioside. To conclude, Bacillus subtilis expressing FVIII molecules might be a promising candidate for exploring for the induction of oral immune tolerance.

Nothing short of a revolution: Novel extended half-life factor VIII replacement products and non-replacement agents reshape the treatment landscape in hemophilia A

Hemophilia A, an X-linked genetic disorder, is characterized by a deficiency or dysfunction of clotting Factor VIII. The treatment landscape has substantially changed by introducing novel extended half-life factor VIII (EHL-FVIII) replacement therapies such as efanesoctocog Alfa and non-factor replacement therapy such as emicizumab. These agents signal a shift from treatments requiring multiple weekly infusions to advanced therapies with long half-lives, offering superior protection against bleeding and improving patient adherence and quality of life. While EHL-FVIII treatment might lead to inhibitor development in some patients, non-factor replacement therapy carries thrombotic risks. Therefore, ongoing research and the generation of robust clinical evidence remain vital to guide the selection of optimal and cost-effective first-line therapies for hemophilia A patients.

In vivo genome editing using 244-cis LNPs and low-dose AAV achieves therapeutic threshold in hemophilia A mice

Gene therapy and rebalancing therapy have emerged as promising approaches for treating hemophilia A, but there are limitations, such as temporary efficacy due to individual differences. Genome editing for hemophilia has shown long-term therapeutic potential in preclinical trials. However, a cautious approach is necessary because genome editing is irreversible. Therefore, we attempted to induce low-level human factor 8 (hF8) gene knockin (KI) using 244-cis lipid nanoparticles and low-dose adeno-associated virus to minimize side effects and achieve a therapeutic threshold in hemophilia A mice. We selected the serpin family C member 1, SerpinC1, locus as a target to enable a combined rebalancing strategy with hF8 KI to augment efficacy. This strategy improved blood coagulation activity and reduced hemophilic complications without adverse effects. Furthermore, hemophilic mice with genome editing exhibit enhanced survival for 40 weeks. Here, we demonstrate an effective, safe, and sustainable treatment for hemophilia A. This study provides valuable information to establish safe and long-term genome-editing-mediated treatment strategies for treating hemophilia and other protein-deficient genetic diseases.

Inhibitor development according to concentrate in severe hemophilia: reporting on 1392 Previously Untreated Patients from Europe and Canada

Background

Clotting factor concentrates have been the mainstay of severe hemophilia treatment over the last 50 years. Differences in risk of neutralizing antibody (inhibitor) formation according to concentrate used remain clinically relevant.

Objectives

To assess inhibitor development according to type of clotting factor concentrate in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A and B.

Methods

The European Haemophilia Safety Surveillance (EUHASS) and Canadian Bleeding Disorders Registry (CBDR) have been monitoring adverse events overall and according to concentrate for 11 and 8 years, respectively. Inhibitors were reported quarterly, and PUPs completed 50 exposure days without inhibitor development annually. Cumulative inhibitor incidences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were compared without adjustment for other risk factors.

Results

Fifty-six European and 23 Canadian centers reported inhibitor development in 312 of 1219 (26%; CI, 23%-28%) PUPs with severe hemophilia A and 14 of 173 (8%; CI, 5%-13%) PUPs with severe hemophilia B. Inhibitor development was lower on plasma-derived factor (F)VIII (pdFVIII, 20%; CI, 14%-26%) than on standard half-life recombinant FVIII (SHL-rFVIII, 27%; CI, 24%-30% and odds ratio, 0.67; CI, 0.45%-0.98%; P = .04). Extended half-life recombinant FVIII (EHL-rFVIII, 22%; CI, 12%-36%) showed an intermediate inhibitor rate, while inhibitor rates for Advate (26%; CI, 22%-31%) and Kogenate/Helixate (30%; CI, 24%-36%) overlapped. For other SHL-rFVIII concentrates, inhibitor rates varied from 3% to 43%. Inhibitor development was similar for pdFIX (11%; CI, 3%-25%), SHL-rFIX (8%; CI, 3%-15%), and EHL-rFIX (7%; CI, 1%-22%).

Conclusion

While confirming expected rates of inhibitors in PUPs, inhibitor development was lower in pdFVIII than in SHL-rFVIII. Preliminary data suggest variation in inhibitor development among different SHL-rFVIII and EHL-rFVIII concentrates.

New directions to develop therapies for people with hemophilia

INTRODUCTION

The past few decades have seen a tremendous advancement in the management of hemophilia. Whether it is improved methods to attenuate critical viruses, recombinant bioengineering with decreased immunogenicity, extended half-life replacement therapies to mitigate the burden of repeated infusion treatments, novel nonreplacement products to avoid the drawback of inhibitor development with its attractive subcutaneous administration and then the introduction of gene therapy, the management has trodden a long way.

AREAS COVERED

This expert review describes the progress in the treatment of hemophilia over the years. We discuss, in detail, the past and current therapies, their benefits, drawbacks, along with relevant studies leading to approval, efficacy and safety profile, ongoing trials, and future prospects.

EXPERT OPINION

The technological advances in the treatment of hemophilia with convenient modes of administration and innovative modalities offer a chance for a normal existence of the patients living with this disease. However, it is imperative for clinicians to be aware of the potential adverse effects and the need for further studies to establish causality or chance association of these events with novel agents. Thus, it is crucial for clinicians to engage patients and their families in informed decision-making and tailor individual concerns and necessities.

FVIII inhibitor surveillance in children with hemophilia A in Indonesia: a report from the Indonesian Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Working Group

Background

Factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitor diagnosis and surveillance in Indonesia are challenging owing to geographic conditions and the lack of laboratory facilities nationwide for inhibitor assays. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of FVIII inhibitors in children diagnosed with hemophilia A (HA) in Indonesia.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 12 hospitals in eight provinces of Indonesia between 2020 and 2021. Factor VIII inhibitor screening was performed in a central hemostasis laboratory for all children with HA (≤18 yr) who had received a minimum of 10 exposure days to clotting factor concentrates. The FVIII inhibitor titer was determined using the Bethesda assay.

Results

Children (388) were enrolled in this study, including 219 (56.4%), 131 (33.8%), and 38 (9.4%) with severe, moderate, and mild HA, respectively. The prevalence of children who developed FVIII inhibitors was 37 out of 388 (9.6%). Factor VIII inhibitors were found in 25/219 (11.4%) severe, 11/131 (8.3%) moderate, and 1/38 (2.6%) children with mild HA. Thirteen children had low-titer inhibitors and 24 had high-titer inhibitors, with a median of 9.44 (1.48‒412.0) Bethesda Units. Among 13 children with low-titer inhibitors, eight underwent a confirmation test, of which five tested negative and were classified as transient. A significant difference in annual joint bleeding rate was found between patients with low and high inhibitor titers and those without inhibitors (P＜0.001).

Conclusion

Factor VIII inhibitor prevalence in Indonesia was relatively low. However, the risk factors that may contribute to FVIII inhibitor development among Indonesian patients require further study.

Management of haemophilia A with inhibitors: A regional cross-talk

INTRODUCTION

The development of inhibitors with factor VIII (FVIII) replacement therapy is one of the most common and challenging complications of haemophilia A (HA) treatment, jeopardising treatment efficacy and predisposing patients to high risks of morbidity and mortality. The management of patients with inhibitors is particularly challenging in countries where resources are limited.

AIM

To provide a comprehensive summary of the management of HA with inhibitors while focusing on differences in practice between Western and non-Western countries and how resource scarcity can impact HA management, leading to suboptimal outcomes in patients with inhibitors.

METHODS

Summary of key evidence and regional expert opinion.

RESULTS

We address, particularly, the diagnosis of and testing for inhibitors, as well as the epidemiology of inhibitors, including incidence, prevalence and disease burden. Secondly, we provide an overview of the current treatment landscape in HA with inhibitors regarding the eradication of inhibitors with immune tolerance induction and the treatment and prevention of bleeding with bypassing agents, non-factor replacement agents and other experimental therapies. This is complemented with insights from the authors around the applicability of, and challenges associated with, such therapies in their settings of practice.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude by proposing some key steps towards bridging the gaps in the management of HA with inhibitors in resource-limited countries, including: (1) the collection of quality data that can inform healthcare reforms and policies; (2) improving disease knowledge among healthcare practitioners and patients with the aim of standardising disease management across centres and (3) working towards promoting equal access to HA care and therapies for everyone.

BAFF rs9514828 gene polymorphism and the risk of the development of inhibitors in children with severe haemophilia A

INTRODUCTION

Haemophilia A (HA) is an x-linked recessive disease due to deficiency of coagulation factor VIII (FVIII). The development of neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) against infused FVIII is a major concern. B cell activating factor (BAFF) has been implicated in several autoimmune diseases.

AIM

We aimed to evaluate the possible association of BAFF rs9514828 gene polymorphism and the risk of the development of FVIII inhibitor in children with severe HA.

METHODS

This cohort study was carried out on 100 newly diagnosed boys with severe HA who were never treated before with FVIII concentrate. Assessment of serum levels of BAFF and BAFF rs9514828 genotyping at first diagnosis was performed and the patients were followed up for the completion of a total of 50 exposure days or the development of inhibitors whichever occurred first. The patients were divided as positive or negative according to the presence or absence of inhibitors.

RESULTS

The risk allele for BAFF rs9514828 (T) was significantly more frequent in the inhibitor positive patients than the inhibitor negative patients (P = .003). In addition, CT+TT genotypes were associated with increased risk of FVIII inhibitor development. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis showed that BAFF levels could predict the development of FVIII inhibitors at a cut-off value of ≥ .92 with a sensitivity of 85.9% and a specificity of 80.2%.

CONCLUSION

BAFF rs9514828 gene polymorphism could be independent risk factor and elevated BAFF levels might be useful prognostic marker for the development of FVIII inhibitor in newly diagnosed children with severe HA.

Haemophilia: factoring in new therapies

Haemophilia is an inherited bleeding disorder in which the haemostatic defect results from deficiency of coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) in haemophilia A or factor IX (FIX) in haemophilia B. Traditional treatments for haemophilia have largely worked by directly replacing the missing coagulation factor, but face challenges due to the short half-life of FVIII and FIX, the need for frequent intravenous access and development of neutralising antibodies to coagulation factors (inhibitors). Recent advances in haemophilia therapy have worked to eliminate these challenges. Half-life extension of factor concentrates has lengthened the time needed between infusions, enhancing quality of life. Subcutaneous administration of therapeutics utilising alternative mechanisms to overcome inhibitors have expanded the options to prevent bleeding. Finally, initial successes with gene therapy offer a cautious hope for durable cure. In the present review, we will discuss currently available treatments, as well as highlight therapeutics in various stages of clinical development for the treatment of haemophilia A and B. In this review, we present therapies that are currently clinically available and highlight therapeutics that are in various stages of clinical development for the treatment of haemophilia A and B.

Incidence of inhibitor development in PUPs with severe Haemophilia A in the CEE region between 2005 and 2015

INTRODUCTION

This study analyses real-world data on 144 previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe Haemophilia A, from seven countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Serbia, and Slovenia), over a period of 11 years. It analyses the risk factors associated with development of inhibitors to factor VIII concentrates.

METHODS

Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the hazard risk of factors possibly influencing the development of inhibitors. Patients were followed for up to 100 exposure days (EDs).

RESULTS

Cumulative inhibitor incidence at the time of 100 EDs was 18.7%, slightly lower than the 25-35% incidence reported in most studies. Of PUPs who developed inhibitors, a majority (56%) developed them within the first 20 EDs and 88% by the 50th ED. FVIII class (recombinant or plasma-derived) did not influence the inhibitors' incidence rate (p = 0.64). We found a significant protective effect of prophylaxis compared to on-demand treatment (p = 0.003). PUPs who had an intensive peak treatment during the first 50 EDs were at significantly higher risk for inhibitor development (HR (95% CI) 5.3 (2.3-12.5), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Inhibitors are and will continue to be the most significant complication of haemophilia treatment with factor concentrates. This is particularly true for haemophilia A. In our cohort, we were able to show that the treatment regimen used during first 50EDs influenced significantly the inhibitor risk, but the class of the factor concentrate did not play an important role. Real world data will remain one of the important resources for improving our knowledge of haemophilia.

The German Hemophilia Registry: Growing with Its Tasks

Hemophilia is a rare heredity bleeding disorder that requires treatment for life. While few therapeutic options were available in the past, multiple recent breakthroughs have fundamentally altered and diversified hemophilia therapy, with even more new therapeutic options forthcoming. These changes are mirrored by significant regulatory and legal changes, which have redefined the role of hemophilia registries in the European Union (EU). This dual paradigm shift poses new regulatory, scientific but also structural requirements for hemophilia registries. The aim of this manuscript is to enumerate these significant challenges and to demonstrate their incorporation into the redesign of the German Hemophilia Registry (Deutsches Hämophilieregister, dhr). To identify the spectrum of hemophilia therapies and the degree of regulatory changes, a horizon screening was performed. Consequently, a core dataset for the dhr was defined by harmonization with regulatory guidelines as well as other hemophilia registries and by heeding the needs of different stakeholders (patients, clinicians, regulators, and scientists). Based on this information, a new registry structure was established, which is optimized for capturing data on new and established hemophilia therapies in a changing therapeutic and regulatory landscape.

Inhibitor development in previously untreated patients with severe haemophilia: A comparison of included patients and outcomes between a clinical study and a registry-based study

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate whether a disease registry could serve as a suitable alternative to clinical studies to investigate safety of orphan drugs in children.

Methods

We used individual patient data from previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A from the factor VIII (rAHF‐PFM)‐clinical study and the PedNet registry. The primary outcome was the patient characteristics at entry and the difference in inhibitor development between the clinical study and the registry‐based study at 50 exposure days.

Results

Clinical study patients more often had a positive family history of inhibitors (31% vs 10%) and a high‐risk F8 genotype (82% vs 63%). In the clinical study 41/55 (75%) and in the registry‐based study 162/168 (96%) patients reached 50 exposure days. Inhibitors developed in 16 of the 41 patients in the clinical study (39%) vs 44 of the 162 patients in the registry‐based study (27%); seven patients (7%) vs 28 patients (17%) had high‐titre inhibitors. The risk of developing an inhibitor during the first 50 exposure days was similar (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.56‐1.94), when adjusted for family history of inhibitors, F8 gene mutation and intensive treatment at first exposure.

Conclusion

In the registry‐based study, patient numbers and completeness of follow‐up were higher. The risk of developing an inhibitor to a single product was comparable. Although the sample size of this study was too small to conclude on differences in high‐ or low‐titre inhibitors, this suggests that a registry could serve as a more suitable source for evaluation of high‐titre inhibitors in the setting of factor VIII deficiency.

Inhibitors-Recent insights

The development of inhibitory antibodies to therapeutic factor VIII (FVIII) in haemophilia A (HA) patients is the major complication in treatment/prevention of haemorrhages. The reasons some HA patients develop inhibitors while others do not remain unclear. This review briefly summarizes our understanding of anti-FVIII immune responses, the roles of T cells, both effector and regulatory, and generally discusses the interplay between FVIII and the immune system, both in factor replacement therapy and gene therapy, with some comparisons to factor IX and haemophilia B therapies. Notably, we propose that the prevailing observed active tolerance to FVIII in both HA and non-HA individuals rests to greater or lesser extents on peripherally induced immune tolerance. We also propose that the immune systems of inhibitor-negative HA patients do not merely ignore therapeutic FVIII, but rather have immunologically assessed and actively tolerized the patients to exogenous FVIII. Induction of such peripheral immune tolerance may further be triggered in HA patients who failed to tolerize upon initial FVIII exposure by 'appropriate' stimulation of their immune system, eg by immune tolerance induction therapy via intensive FVIII therapy, by oral administration of FVIII, by cellular therapies or by gene therapy directed to immuno-tolerogenic sites such as the liver.

Hemophilia A Inhibitor Subjects Show Unique PBMC Gene Expression Profiles That Include Up-Regulated Innate Immune Modulators

Formation of pathological anti-FVIII antibodies, or "inhibitors," is the most serious complication of therapeutic FVIII infusions, affecting up to 1/3 of severe Hemophilia A (HA) patients. Inhibitor formation is a classical T-cell dependent adaptive immune response. As such, it requires help from the innate immune system. However, the roles of innate immune cells and mechanisms of inhibitor development vs. immune tolerance, achieved with or without Immune Tolerance Induction (ITI) therapy, are not well-understood. To address these questions, temporal transcriptomics profiling of FVIII-stimulated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) was carried out for HA subjects with and without a current or historic inhibitor using RNA-Seq. PBMCs were isolated from 40 subjects in the following groups: HA with an inhibitor that resolved either following ITI or spontaneously; HA with a current inhibitor; HA with no inhibitor history and non-HA controls. PBMCs were stimulated with 5 nM FVIII and RNA was isolated 4, 16, 24, and 48 h following stimulation. Time-series differential expression analysis was performed and distinct transcriptional signatures were identified for each group, providing clues as to cellular mechanisms leading to or accompanying their disparate anti-FVIII antibody responses. Subjects with a current inhibitor showed differential expression of 56 genes and a clustering analysis identified three major temporal profiles. Interestingly, gene ontology enrichments featured innate immune modulators, including NLRP3, TLR8, IL32, CLEC10A, and COLEC12. NLRP3 and TLR8 are associated with enhanced secretion of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-1β and TNFα, while IL32, which has several isoforms, has been associated with both inflammatory and regulatory immune processes. RNA-Seq results were validated by RT-qPCR, ELISAs, multiplex cytokine analysis, and flow cytometry. The inflammatory status of HA patients suffering from an ongoing inhibitor includes up-regulated innate immune modulators, which may act as ongoing danger signals that influence the responses to, and eventual outcomes of, ITI therapy.

An evaluation of the safety and efficacy of turoctocog alfa for hemophilia A

Introduction: Hemophilia A is an inherited disorder that is characterized by decreased or absent factor (F)VIII and an increased risk of bleeding. Clinical presentation of the severe form of the disease includes spontaneous bleeding into the joints and muscles, while patients with milder forms usually exhibit trauma-associated bleeding. The treatment of hemophilia aims to prevent bleeding. A number of clotting FVIII concentrates are available for managing hemophilia A, which have different safety and efficacy characteristics. Advancements in biotechnology have enabled development of recombinant factor concentrates, which thus minimize the risk of transmitting infectious diseases. Turoctocog alfa (NovoEight®, Novo Nordisk A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark) was the first third-generation B-domain truncated recombinant FVIII.Areas covered: The manuscript describes the characteristics of turoctocog alfa, as well as its efficacy and safety for prophylaxis and on-demand treatment for patients with severe hemophilia A without inhibitors.Expert opinion: In clinical trials, turoctocog alfa has demonstrated very good efficacy and safety for the prophylaxis and on-demand treatment of hemophilia A patients, as well as high hemostatic activity during surgery and in managing bleeding episodes. Post-marketing studies and real-life data are anticipated to further reinforce the value of long-term prophylaxis, and estimate the incidence of inhibitors to FVIII.

Tolerating Factor VIII: Recent Progress

Development of neutralizing antibodies against biotherapeutic agents administered to prevent or treat various clinical conditions is a longstanding and growing problem faced by patients, medical providers and pharmaceutical companies. The hemophilia A community has deep experience with attempting to manage such deleterious immune responses, as the lifesaving protein drug factor VIII (FVIII) has been in use for decades. Hemophilia A is a bleeding disorder caused by genetic mutations that result in absent or dysfunctional FVIII. Prophylactic treatment consists of regular intravenous FVIII infusions. Unfortunately, 1/4 to 1/3 of patients develop neutralizing anti-FVIII antibodies, referred to clinically as “inhibitors,” which result in a serious bleeding diathesis. Until recently, the only therapeutic option for these patients was “Immune Tolerance Induction,” consisting of intensive FVIII administration, which is extraordinarily expensive and fails in ~30% of cases. There has been tremendous recent progress in developing novel potential clinical alternatives for the treatment of hemophilia A, ranging from encouraging results of gene therapy trials, to use of other hemostatic agents (either promoting coagulation or slowing down anti-coagulant or fibrinolytic pathways) to “bypass” the need for FVIII or supplement FVIII replacement therapy. Although these approaches are promising, there is widespread agreement that preventing or reversing inhibitors remains a high priority. Risk profiles of novel therapies are still unknown or incomplete, and FVIII will likely continue to be considered the optimal hemostatic agent to support surgery and manage trauma, or to combine with other therapies. We describe here recent exciting studies, most still pre-clinical, that address FVIII immunogenicity and suggest novel interventions to prevent or reverse inhibitor development. Studies of FVIII uptake, processing and presentation on antigen-presenting cells, epitope mapping, and the roles of complement, heme, von Willebrand factor, glycans, and the microbiome in FVIII immunogenicity are elucidating mechanisms of primary and secondary immune responses and suggesting additional novel targets. Promising tolerogenic therapies include development of FVIII-Fc fusion proteins, nanoparticle-based therapies, oral tolerance, and engineering of regulatory or cytotoxic T cells to render them FVIII-specific. Importantly, these studies are highly applicable to other scenarios where establishing immune tolerance to a defined antigen is a clinical priority.