Defining success in haemophilia care - Are we doing it right?

INTRODUCTION

Transformational advances have occurred in the management of haemophilia in the last decade leading to much better outcomes. However, a detailed and critical examination of its assessment and reporting show gaps in many aspects. These are discussed in this review.

METHODS

The relevant literature related to different aspects of management of haemophilia was reviewed to identify gaps which need to be addressed. These include detection and diagnosis of haemophilia, documentation and reporting of joint bleeding, its management and methods of reporting in clinical trials and practice, aspects of personalizing care as well as access to therapeutic products and the need for and organization of comprehensive care.

RESULTS

Current diagnostic approaches have more than doubled the identified number of persons with haemophilia (PWH) over the last 25 years but still constitute only ∼30% of the expected number. Joint bleeding is the primary indicator of disease severity and treatment efficacy, but there is lack of consistency and standardization in the way it is recorded and reported. Its continued use as an efficacy measure of modern treatments which maintain steady state factor levels or equivalence of >5% will lack sensitivity. The treatment of acute haemarthrosis has focussed on haemostasis and pain control, ignoring the role of inflammation in joint damage. Phenotypic heterogeneity of severe haemophilia has recognized clinical and laboratory variations based on haemostasis but not differences in local response to blood in the joint. At the organizational level, IU/capita provides a relevant measure of access to therapeutic products when the detection rate is ∼100% but is fallaciously low when detection rates are very low. With highly effective modern therapies for haemophilia and nearly no bleeding, the concept of comprehensive care team will need modifications.

CONCLUSION

As haemophilia care advances, a deeper dive is needed into the details of various aspects its management to ensure consistency and contemporary relevance.

PHAREO study: Perceived and observed accessibility to therapeutic drugs used for treating patients with inherited bleeding disorders

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The dispensing of clotting factor concentrates in hospital pharmacies imposes accessibility constraints on patients and their caregivers, thereby increasing the disease burden. Very few studies have addressed these issues so far in terms of individual perceptions and actual difficulties. The PHAREO study aims to report patient's perception of treatment accessibility and evaluate spatial accessibility.

METHODS

The PHAREO study is an observational survey based on a questionnaire specifically designed for the study purpose in collaboration with patients' representatives in the second demographic and economic French region.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We collected 293 responses (participation rate of 64.1%) which show that 89.8% of respondents were either very or rather satisfied with regard to access to treatment. However, respondents reported difficulties in accessing the hospital pharmacy. The data also showed that 79.2% of respondents tended to over-estimate travel time which was reported above their acceptable threshold for 39.2% of them. The main determinants of dissatisfaction were parental burden (OR 2.5 [1.3; 4.8], p = 0.008) and waiting time at the hospital pharmacy (OR 1.5 [1.1;2.0], p = 0.016, per 10 min increase).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The PHAREO study provides subjective and objective data regarding satisfaction levels of persons with haemophilia and other coagulation deficiencies, with a high representativeness rate for patients on prophylaxis (87.5%). Both respondents and hospital pharmacists pled for an evolution of the current dispensing circuit to improve access to treatment and reduce the burden for patients. Currently, the community pharmacists are apart from the dispensing circuit. The authors propose improvements in the pathway of care for patients and their caregivers by including the community pharmacists alongside the hospital pharmacists in a centralized coordination scheme.

Converting factor and nonfactor usage into a single metric to facilitate benchmarking the resources consumed for haemophilia care across jurisdictions and over time

INTRODUCTION

The World Federation of Hemophilia started measuring factor utilization at the country level as IU/capita (International Units of factor concentrates used per country population) in 2001 for its Annual Global Survey. IU/capita have been used to benchmark a country's usage over time and for advocacy. The introduction of a common metric usage spanning across standard half-life (SHL), and extended half-life (EHL) clotting factor concentrates (CFCs) and emicizumab would be a valuable simplification for national healthcare policymaking and industrial production planning.

AIM

Develop and examine a method of converting IU of SHL or EHL, and milligrams of emicizumab into a single metric.

METHODS

We developed conversion factors from manufacturer's recommended dose for prophylaxis with SHL, EHL, and emicizumab as reported on the licensing information for the United States and Europe. We validate the accuracy of these conversion factors against real-world usage data.

RESULTS

The prescribing information in the United States and Europe is marginally different. The SHL/EHL conversion factors are higher when calculated based on the prescribing information than on real-world studies, which are considered more representative of clinical practice. The best estimate of the SHL/EHL conversion factors for FVIII and FIX were 1.04 and 1.87. The conversion factor for emicizumab to SHL is 70 IU/mg.

CONCLUSION

We have generated robust estimates of conversion factors for currently used treatment options for prophylaxis in haemophilia. Usage of a single, harmonized metric will facilitate benchmarking across different countries or longitudinally irrespective of the case-mix of treatment options.