Health-related quality of life and caregiver burden of emicizumab in children with haemophilia A and factor VIII inhibitors-Results from the HAVEN 2 study

Emicizumab and unmet needs of patients with hemophilia a who are managed with replacement therapies

INTRODUCTION

Hemophilia A is managed with coagulation clotting factor VIII (FVIII) therapy that poses significant challenges, such as a high treatment burden, immunogenicity, inconsistent hemostatic cover, poor treatment outcomes, and musculoskeletal progression despite adequate prophylactic treatment. Various non-factor therapies, such as several natural anticoagulant inhibitors and factor FVIII mimetics, have been developed to address these unmet needs. However, the role of emicizumab in addressing these unmet needs remains underexplored.

AREAS COVERED

This review delves into the evolution of hemophilia A replacement clotting therapy from plasma-derived products to recombinant products and, more recently, nonfactor therapies. It underscores the unmet needs of replacement therapy and explores the nonfactor therapies developed to address them. The review then comprehensively summarizes the clinical trial and real-world experience data, demonstrating how emicizumab tackles these unsatisfied demands.

EXPERT OPINION

Replacement clotting factor therapies as the standard of care has exposed several needs that have yet to be addressed. However, data from numerous emicizumab clinical trials and real-world experience offer a promising outlook, suggesting that it may effectively address many unmet needs. As hemophilia treatment goals continue to evolve, the role of currently developed nonfactor therapies in hemophilia management is yet to be fully defined.

How much prophylaxis is enough in haemophilia?

INTRODUCTION

Prophylaxis has become standard of care for all persons with haemophilia (PWH) with a severe phenotype. However, 'standard prophylaxis' with either factor or non-factor therapies (currently only emicizumab available) is prohibitively expensive for much of the world. We sought to address the question of 'How much prophylaxis is enough?' and 'Can it be individualized?' and specifically 'Can emicizumab be individualized?'.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature on prophylaxis in haemophilia since its inception in the 1950s to the present, the development of more and less intense factor prophylaxis regimens and their outcomes and additionally the published outcomes of prophylaxis with low dose emicizumab.

RESULTS

What these experiences collectively show is that low dose emicizumab does result in significant benefits to patients whilst being much less expensive than a "one size fits all" emicizumab prophylaxis approach. We also took note that some non-factor therapies still in development are individualized given that high doses of these can potentially put patients at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis is now clearly accepted as standard of care for PWH with a severe phenotype but now in a very short time a large assortment of different treatment options for prophylaxis have become/are becoming available and the haemophilia community will need to determine how to best use these recognizing that no 'one treatment fits all'.

Knowledge gaps in health-related quality of life research performed in children with bleeding disorders - A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Bleeding disorders (BDs) may influence health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children and caregivers. Measuring HRQoL gives insight into domains requiring support and provides an opportunity to evaluate the effects of novel therapies.

AIM

To gain insight in the current body of literature on HRQoL in children with BDs in order to identify knowledge gaps for research and further development of this field.

METHODS

Scoping review.

RESULTS

We included 53 articles, describing studies mainly performed in Europe and North-America (60.4%) and mostly within the last ten years. Only 32% studies included children <4 years. Almost all studies (47/53, 88.7%) were performed in boys with haemophilia, pooling haemophilia A and B (n = 21) and different disease severities (n = 20). Thirteen different generic and five disease-specific HRQoL-questionnaires were applied; all questionnaires were validated for haemophilia specifically. Six (11,3%) combined generic and disease-specific questionnaires. Self-reports were most frequently applied (40/53, 75.5%), sometimes combined with proxy and/or parent-reports (17/53, 32.1%). Eleven studies used a reference group (20.8%). Statistical analyses mostly consisted of mean and SD (77.4%).

CONCLUSION

HRQoL-research is mainly performed in school-aged boys with haemophilia, treated in developed countries. Pitfalls encountered are the pooling of various BDs, subtypes and severities, as well as the application of multiple generic questionnaires prohibiting comparison of results. More attention is needed for broader study populations including other BDs, young children, feminine bleeding issues and platelet disorders, as well as the use of HRQoL as an effect-measurement tool for medical interventions, and more thorough statistical analysis.

Non-clotting factor therapies for preventing bleeds in people with congenital hemophilia A or B

BACKGROUND

Management of congenital hemophilia A and B is by prophylactic or on-demand replacement therapy with clotting factor concentrates. The effects of newer non-clotting factor therapies such as emicizumab, concizumab, marstacimab, and fitusiran compared with existing standards of care are yet to be systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (clinical, economic, patient-reported, and adverse outcomes) of non-clotting factor therapies for preventing bleeding and bleeding-related complications in people with congenital hemophilia A or B compared with prophylaxis with clotting factor therapies, bypassing agents, placebo, or no prophylaxis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, electronic databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. The date of the last search was 16 August 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating people with congenital hemophilia A or B with and without inhibitors, who were treated with non-clotting factor therapies to prevent bleeds.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed studies for eligibility, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data for the primary outcomes (bleeding rates, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adverse events) and secondary outcomes (joint health, pain scores, and economic outcomes). We assessed the mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI) of effect estimates, and evaluated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs (including 397 males aged 12 to 75 years) were eligible for inclusion. Prophylaxis versus on-demand therapy in people with inhibitors Four trials (189 participants) compared emicizumab, fitusiran, and concizumab with on-demand therapy in people with inhibitors. Prophylaxis using emicizumab likely reduced annualized bleeding rates (ABR) for all bleeds (MD -22.80, 95% CI -37.39 to -8.21), treated bleeds (MD -20.40, 95% CI -35.19 to -5.61), and annualized spontaneous bleeds (MD -15.50, 95% CI -24.06 to -6.94), but did not significantly reduce annualized joint and target joint bleeding rates (AjBR and AtjBR) (1 trial; 53 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Fitusiran also likely reduced ABR for all bleeds (MD -28.80, 95% CI -40.07 to -17.53), treated bleeds (MD -16.80, 95% CI -25.80 to -7.80), joint bleeds (MD -12.50, 95% CI -19.91 to -5.09), and spontaneous bleeds (MD -14.80, 95% CI -24.90 to -4.71; 1 trial; 57 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No evidence was available on the effect of bleed prophylaxis using fitusiran versus on-demand therapy on AtjBR. Concizumab may reduce ABR for all bleeds (MD -12.31, 95% CI -19.17 to -5.45), treated bleeds (MD -10.10, 95% CI -17.74 to -2.46), joint bleeds (MD -9.55, 95% CI -13.55 to -5.55), and spontaneous bleeds (MD -11.96, 95% CI -19.89 to -4.03; 2 trials; 78 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but not target joint bleeds (MD -1.00, 95% CI -3.26 to 1.26). Emicizumab prophylaxis resulted in an 11.31-fold increase, fitusiran in a 12.5-fold increase, and concizumab in a 1.59-fold increase in the proportion of participants with no bleeds. HRQoL measured using the Haemophilia Quality of Life Questionnaire for Adults (Haem-A-QoL) physical and total health scores was improved with emicizumab, fitusiran, and concizumab prophylaxis (low-certainty evidence). Non-serious adverse events were higher with non-clotting factor therapies versus on-demand therapy, with injection site reactions being the most frequently reported adverse events. Transient antidrug antibodies were reported for fitusiran and concizumab. Prophylaxis versus on-demand therapy in people without inhibitors Two trials (208 participants) compared emicizumab and fitusiran with on-demand therapy in people without inhibitors. One trial assessed two doses of emicizumab (1.5 mg/kg weekly and 3.0 mg/kg bi-weekly). Fitusiran 80 mg monthly, emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg/week, and emicizumab 3.0 mg/kg bi-weekly all likely resulted in a large reduction in ABR for all bleeds, all treated bleeds, and joint bleeds. AtjBR was not reduced with either of the emicizumab dosing regimens. The effect of fitusiran prophylaxis on target joint bleeds was not assessed. Spontaneous bleeds were likely reduced with fitusiran (MD -20.21, 95% CI -32.12 to -8.30) and emicizumab 3.0 mg/kg bi-weekly (MD -15.30, 95% CI -30.46 to -0.14), but not with emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg/week (MD -14.60, 95% CI -29.78 to 0.58). The percentage of participants with zero bleeds was higher following emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg/week (50% versus 0%), emicizumab 3.0 mg/kg bi-weekly (40% versus 0%), and fitusiran prophylaxis (40% versus 5%) compared with on-demand therapy. Emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg/week did not improve Haem-A-QoL physical and total health scores, EQ-5D-5L VAS, or utility index scores (low-certainty evidence) when compared with on-demand therapy at 25 weeks. Emicizumab 3.0 mg/kg bi-weekly may improve HRQoL measured by the Haem-A-QoL physical health score (MD -15.97, 95% CI -29.14 to -2.80) and EQ-5D-5L VAS (MD 9.15, 95% CI 2.05 to 16.25; 1 trial; 43 participants; low-certainty evidence). Fitusiran may result in improved HRQoL shown as a reduction in Haem-A-QoL total score (MD -7.06, 95% CI -11.50 to -2.62) and physical health score (MD -19.75, 95% CI -25.76 to -11.94; 1 trial; 103 participants; low-certainty evidence). The risk of serious adverse events in participants without inhibitors also likely did not differ following prophylaxis with either emicizumab or fitusiran versus on-demand therapy (moderate-certainty evidence). Transient antidrug antibodies were reported in 4% (3/80) participants to fitusiran, with no observed effect on antithrombin lowering. A comparison of the different dosing regimens of emicizumab identified no differences in bleeding, safety, or patient-reported outcomes. No case of treatment-related cancer or mortality was reported in any study group. None of the included studies assessed our secondary outcomes of joint health, clinical joint function, and economic outcomes. None of the included studies evaluated marstacimab.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from RCTs shows that prophylaxis using non-clotting factor therapies compared with on-demand treatment may reduce bleeding events, increase the percentage of individuals with zero bleeds, increase the incidence of non-serious adverse events, and improve HRQoL. Comparative assessments with other prophylaxis regimens, assessment of long-term joint outcomes, and assessment of economic outcomes will improve evidence-based decision-making for the use of these therapies in bleed prevention.

[Efficacy and safety of prophylaxis with emicizumab in hemophilia A: A study of 13 patients]

INTRODUCTION

Emicizumab is the first non-replacement therapy for prophylaxis in severe hemophilia A.

AIMS

The principal aim of this study is to describe the results of our patients in prophylaxis with emicizumab, according to the usual clinical practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Follow-up of 13 patients from the start of prophylaxis, recording of bleeding, surgeries, adverse reactions and the need or not for factor therapy. Plasma levels were measured at follow-up visits, the technique was coagulative in one stage, modified by 1:20 dilution.

RESULTS

Median plasma levels were 52.2mg [30.7-71.9]. Prophylaxis was safe and effective; only one spontaneous haemorrhage was recorded over time and no treatment was required. There were no thromboembolic events or serious hypersensitivity, anaphylaxis or anaphylactoid reactions. The incidence of injection site reactions was 8%. Perioperative management in minor interventions was carried out without adjuvant factorial therapy, in 2 major surgeries a dose of plasmatic FVIII concentrate was required in the patient with hemophilia A without inhibitor and FVII in the patient with inhibitor, and it was sufficient to stop the bleeding.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated emicizumab pharmacokinetics and its half life ensure optimal levels with prophylaxis treatment at doses established in the technical data sheet.

Emicizumab prophylaxis for people with hemophilia A: Waste estimation and the Brazilian perspective

Costs of hemophilia A treatment are increasing. Waste of clotting products should be avoided. To estimate the first-year waste of emicizumab prophylaxis for people with hemophilia A and inhibitors (PwHAi) who failed immune tolerance induction (ITI), in Brazil. We evaluated the manufacturer and the Brazilian Ministry of Health (MoH) protocol-recommended regimens in a budget impact model. The loading dose consisted of 3.0 mg/kg/Q1W for 4 weeks, for both recommendations. The manufacturer maintenance regimens comprised 1.5 mg/kg/Q1W, 3.0 mg/kg/Q2W, and 6.0 mg/kg/Q4W. The MoH protocol maintenance regimen encompassed a hybrid Q1W/Q2W administration, depending on the body weight. The Q4W regimen was not recommended by the MoH protocol. Analyses were performed to estimate waste given its expense based on the World Health Organization body weight range (percentiles [P] 15, 50, and 85). The first-year emicizumab waste was estimated individually and for the disclosed PwHAi who failed ITI (n = 114). The highest emicizumab waste was estimated for the lowest body weights and the Q1W regimen. The Q4W regimen resulted in the lowest emicizumab waste, followed by the MoH protocol regimen. The total reconstituted costs estimated for the PwHAi who failed ITI according to the hybrid MoH protocol ranged from US$32,858,777 (P15) to US$47,186,858 (P85), with emicizumab waste ranging from 7.9 % (US$2,594,515) to 3.7 % (US$1,738,750), respectively. Lost resources due to current protocols for emicizumab prophylaxis for PwHAi who failed ITI in Brazil are considerable. Waste was more pronounced due to lower body weight and shorter administration intervals.

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.

Quality of life in children and adolescents with hemophilia A: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Various instruments have been used to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children and adolescents with hemophilia A.

Objective

We systematically reviewed the literature to summarize HRQoL measurement instruments and outcomes in this population.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and LILACS databases were searched. Studies published from 2010 to 2021, reporting HRQoL assessed by generic or hemophilia-specific instruments in individuals aged 0 to 18 years were included. Two independent reviewers performed screening, selection, and data abstraction. Data were meta-analyzed using the generic inverse variance method with the random-effects model for single-arm studies reporting instrument-specific mean total HRQoL scores. Prespecified subgroup meta-analyses were performed. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I 2 statistic.

Results

Six instruments were identified in 29 studies meeting the following inclusion criteria: 4 generic instruments (PedsQL [5 studies], EQ-5D-3L [3 studies], KIDSCREEN-52 [1 study], and KINDL [1 study]) and 2 hemophilia-specific instruments (Haemo-QoL [17 studies] and CHO-KLAT [3 studies]). The overall risk of bias was moderate to low. There was a substantial variability in the primary outcome (mean total HRQoL score) among studies using the same instrument (Haemo-QoL), with scores ranging from 24.10 to 89.58 on a scale from 0 to 100 (higher scores indicating higher HRQoL). Meta-regression with 14 studies using the Haemo-QoL questionnaire demonstrated that 79.34% (R 2 ) of the observed 94.67% total heterogeneity (I 2 ) was explained by the proportion of patients receiving effective prophylactic treatment.

Conclusion

HRQoL assessment in young people with hemophilia A is heterogeneous and context specific. The proportion of patients on effective prophylactic treatment is positively correlated with HRQoL. The review protocol was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42021235453).

Practical considerations and consensus opinion for children's hospital-based inpatient hemostasis and thrombosis (HAT) consultative services: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Pediatric/Neonatal Thrombosis and Hemostasis

Caring for children and adolescents with disorders of hemostasis and thrombosis (HAT) has become more specialized and requires a unique skill set that many providers are not able to obtain in standard pediatric hematology/oncology/bone marrow transplant fellowship training programs. The influx of numerous therapeutic advances and increasing medical complexity has expanded the need for experienced HAT providers and subspecialty collaboration in the inpatient setting due to the nuances in the management of patients with HAT complications and concerns. While there are data highlighting the benefits of an inpatient hemostasis, thrombosis, and anticoagulation management service in adult hospitals, there are limited pediatric data supporting such programs. In this article, we summarize the current practices of various pediatric institutions in the inpatient management of HAT patients and provide a consensus opinion for the development of a pediatric inpatient HAT service at tertiary care referral centers.

Emicizumab state-of-the-art update

Introduction

Emicizumab is a bispecific monoclonal antibody developed to address the unmet needs of clotting factor replacement therapy and has become the benchmark for optimal prophylaxis in managing patients with haemophilia A with inhibitors. We describe the emicizumab rollout and pharmacokinetic strategies and their use in paediatric patients.

Methods

The evolving real‐world experience in using emicizumab has confirmed its safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetic profile in paediatric, adolescent and adult patients receiving emicizumab at various prophylactic dosing regimens. The emicizumab current global rollout includes over 100 countries with 29 low to middle‐income countries accessing emicizumab through the World Federation of Haemophilia (WFH) Humanitarian Aid Program. The diversity of emicizumab dosing and pharmacokinetic tools such as the Calibra® and the WAPPS‐Hemo platforms make it possible to achieve prophylaxis goals in line with the WFH Haemophilia treatment guidelines recommendations, with minimal drug wastage. The emerging experience from long term clinical trials and long‐term real‐world follow‐up confirm the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic profile of emicizumab in paediatric haemophilia A patients. A few questions, including inhibitor recurrence, concurrent use of emicizumab with various replacement therapies and inhibitor eradication, are being addressed through multiple ongoing clinical studies.

Conclusion

The current global rollout of emicizumab is remarkable, and versatile dosing regimens and evolving pharmacokinetic tools such as the Calibra® and WAPPS‐Hemo platforms make it a treatment choice available also for pharmacokinetic guided personalised treatment. Data from paediatric studies are consistent with those seen in adolescent and adult Haemophilia A.

An update of the current pharmacotherapeutic armamentarium for hemophilia A

INTRODUCTION

For several decades, we have seen unprecedented advances in novel therapy development for hemophilia A. These advances address the unmet need of replacement therapy, and they include the development of recombinant products with improved pharmacokinetics, subcutaneously administered products, and those with better efficacy and safety profiles in hemophilia A management.

AREAS COVERED

In this update of hemophilia A treatment, the author summarizes data from completed standard half-life FVIII products, extended half-life FVIII products and FVIII mimetic studies. All products have an acceptable safety profile. The standard half-life products, EHL-FVIII products and emicizumab are efficacious in the prevention and treatment of bleeds and for EHL-FVIII in the perisurgical setting.

EXPERT OPINION

Advances in pharmacotherapy for hemophilia A have been characterized by changing care goals from supportive care to eliminating infections, preventing inhibitors, and more recently achieving zero bleeds in many patients. While gene therapy has the potential for functional cure in hemophilia A, it has many limitations which need to be addressed. Therefore, pharmacotherapy is likely to remain the mainstay in the management of hemophilia A and promises to get better with currently available therapies. Evolving factor and non-factor replacement therapies may also improve current unmet needs in hemophilia A management.

Adoption of emicizumab (Hemlibra®) for hemophilia A in Europe: Data from the 2020 European Association for Haemophilia and Allied Disorders survey

BACKGROUND

Emicizumab, a bispecific monoclonal antibody administered subcutaneously, mimicking the action of activated coagulation factor VIII, has been approved in Europe for use in patients with severe hemophilia of all ages.

AIMS

To assess availability, acceptance, adverse events, efficacy and laboratory monitoring of emicizumab and the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on its use.

METHODS

Online questionnaire sent to 144 hemophilia treatment centres (November 2020 to January 2021).

RESULTS

Forty-six physicians from 21 countries responded, with a total of 3420 patients with severe HA under their care. Emicizumab was widely available, for 100% of inhibitor patients and 88% of non-inhibitor patients. No major adverse events were reported. Four reported deaths in patients on emicizumab were not thought to be related to emicizumab. An annualized bleeding rate (ABR) of zero was achieved in 73% of inhibitors patients. Haemostasis was satisfactory in the majority of minor (93.7%) and major (90.7%) surgical procedures performed while on emicizumab. Inhibitor titers were monitored in 78.4% of inhibitor patients on emicizumab, but chromogenic FVIII assay was only available in 73% of centres. The COVID-19 pandemic did not have a major impact on the adoption of emicizumab in most centres (64.9%).

CONCLUSION

Three years after its rollout in Europe, emicizumab is widely available. Clinical efficacy and safety were evaluated to be very good, keeping in mind the inherent limitations of the study. Unmet needs include establishment of treatment guidelines for surgery and breakthrough bleeding, limited expertise, especially in young children, and availability of laboratory assays.

Safety evaluation of emicizumab prophylaxis in individuals with haemophilia A

INTRODUCTION

Emicizumab is a bispecific-humanized monoclonal antibody that improves hemostasis by bridging activated factor IX and factor X to substitute for the function of missing activated FVIII. It is an alternative to prophylaxis with factor VIII replacement and is associated with improved outcomes in individuals with hemophilia A with and without inhibitors.

AREAS COVERED

Emicizumab is efficacious in reducing bleeding events when compared to on-demand treatment and factor-based prophylaxis. Except for the few thrombotic microangiopathy and thrombotic event cases mainly seen in the HAVEN 1 trial, emicizumab has an overall excellent safety profile with minimal side effects.

EXPERT OPINION

Knowledge gaps include the efficacy and safety of emicizumab in younger age groups and those with mild or moderate hemophilia A. Future directions for research include exploring the risk of inhibitor recurrence in patients with a history of high titer inhibitor who have been successfully tolerized, who switch from factor prophylaxis to emicizumab, as well as conducting 'real world studies' to evaluate the patient's perception of emicizumab in regard to ease and tolerability in order to optimize individualized treatment plans.