Radiosynovectomy for the Treatment of Chronic Hemophilic Synovitis: An Old Technique, but Still Very Effective

A radiosynovectomy (RS) should be indicated when recurrent articular bleeds related to chronic hemophilia synovitis (CHS) exist, established by clinical examination, and confirmed by imaging techniques that cannot be constrained with hematological prophylaxis. RS can be performed at any point in life, mainly in adolescents (>13−14 years) and adults. Intraarticular injection (IAI) of a radioactive material in children might be arduous since we need child collaboration which might include general anesthesia. RS is our initial option for management of CHS. For the knee joint we prescribe Yttrium-90, while for the elbow and ankle we prescribe Rhenium-186 (1 to 3 IAIs every 6 months). The procedure is greatly cost efficient when compared to surgical synovectomy. Chemical synovectomy with rifampicin has been reported to be efficacious, inexpensive, simple, and especially practical in developing countries where radioactive materials are not easily available. Rifampicin seems to be more efficacious when it is utilized in small joints (elbows and ankles), than when utilized in bigger ones (knees). When RS and/or chemical synovectomy fail, arthroscopic synovectomy (or open synovectomy in some cases) should be indicated. For us, surgery must be performed after the failure of 3 RSs with 6-month interims. RS is an effective and minimally invasive intervention for treatment of repeated articular bleeds due to CHS. Although it has been published that the risk of cancer does not increase, and that the amount of radioactive material used in RS is insignificant, the issue of chromosomal and/or deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) changes remains a concern and continued surveillance is critical. As child and adulthood prophylaxis becomes more global, RS might become obsolete in the long-term.

Prophylaxis for hemophilia A without inhibitors: treatment options and considerations

INTRODUCTION

Hemophilia A is a bleeding disorder traditionally managed with standard half-life (SHL) factor (F) VIII concentrates. Extended half-life (EHL) FVIII products and emicizumab-kywh, a nonfactor therapy, are newer treatment options. Additional nonfactor agents and gene therapy are expected to reach the market in the near future.

AREAS COVERED

A PubMed (MEDLINE) search from 1962 to April 2020 related to hemophilia A, its management, and the products currently available for prophylaxis was performed to comprehensively review these topics and analyze the benefits and drawbacks of each therapeutic.

EXPERT OPINION

Prophylaxis with SHL FVIII concentrates remains the standard of care for patients with severe hemophilia A and may also be considered for selected individuals with moderate disease. Several years of real-world experience with EHL FVIII, emicizumab-kywh, and other agents in development will be necessary to determine their ultimate roles in the prevention of bleeding and its complications. Gene therapy may not provide a permanent cure for hemophilia A.

Prophylaxis therapy with bypassing agents in patients with haemophilia A and inhibitors undergoing surgery: A cost analysis in Spain

Objectives

This study estimated the cost of prophylaxis with activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) and recombinant activated factor VIIa (rFVIIa) in surgical patients with haemophilia A and inhibitors in Spain.

Methods

A decision‐analytic model was developed to estimate the cost to the Spanish National Health System of providing haemostatic coverage in this haemophilia population, with age distribution and average weight derived from the literature, and the annual number of surgeries (0.33 per patient) from local data. Drug costs were calculated from official ex‐factory prices with a 7.5% mandatory deduction and recommended dosing regimens.

Results

The estimated average costs per patient were €10 100.73 (aPCC) and €14 265.89 (rFVIIa) for dental extraction, €24 043.88 (aPCC) and €62 301.08 (rFVIIa) for minor surgery and €126 595.81 (aPCC) and €347 731.09 (rFVIIa) for major surgery. Assuming an estimated 23 annual surgeries in this population (N = 69), distributed as 19% dental extraction, 50% minor surgery and 31% major surgery, the total annual cost of prophylaxis was €1 209 682.35 with aPCC and €3 221 929.28 with rFVIIa.

Conclusions

aPCC costs were 62.5% lower than rFVIIa. Assuming potential clinical equivalence, aPCC is a potentially cost‐saving option for surgical patients with haemophilia A and inhibitors.

[The issue of use parallelism factor method and index of circulating anticoagulant in diagnostic algorithm deficity of coagulation factors.]

The paper presents the comparative use of algorithms to identify the causes of deficiency of coagulation factors in patients with a prolonged APTT, including the definition of the index of circulating anticoagulant (ICA) and the factor-parallelism (FP) method. The results obtained in children with hereditary hemophilia and adults with acquired hemophilia. It is shown that ICA is an effective method for pre-selection of patients with hereditary hemophilia if you suspect an inhibitor to subsequent confirmation test Bethesda. The method the FP has just proved itself in the diagnosis of acquired forms of hemophilia. The use of FP method is most expedient at the stage of screening to identify inhibitors in the laboratory. Method FP loses diagnostic value if the results of the activity factor in all dilutions is close to zero, which is characteristic for individual variants of hereditary hemophilia.

The incidence and treatment of bleeding episodes in non-severe haemophilia A patients with inhibitors

The development of an inhibitory antibody in non-severe haemophilia A patients may aggravate the bleeding phenotype considerably. Effective treatment of bleeding episodes may be challenging, with ensuing severe complications. At present, evidence is scarce for optimal treatment of bleeding episodes in this patient group. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence and the treatment of bleeding episodes in inhibitor patients in a population-based unselected cohort of non-severe haemophilia A patients with clinically relevant inhibitors. Data were available for 100 of the 107 non-severe haemophilia A patients (factor VIII (FVIII) baseline, 2–40 lU/dl) from 29 centres in Europe and one centre in Australia who had developed a clinically relevant inhibitor between 1980 and 2011. The majority (89 %) of the patients were treated during the inhibitor period for bleeding episodes or a surgical intervention: 66 % needed treatment for bleeding episodes, at a median annual bleeding rate (ABR) of 1.1 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.1–2.5) and a median total of 2 (IQR 1–6) bleeding episodes. Compared to the median ABR before inhibitor development of 0.095 bleeds per year (IQR 0.02–0.42), the increase in ABR is more than a 10-fold. More than 90 % of the bleeding episodes were treated with only one type of product, most frequently (51 %) FVIII concentrates. This study provides the incidence of bleeding episodes and treatment choices in non-severe haemophilia A patients with inhibitors. The 10-fold increase to a median ABR of 1.1 episodes per year emphasizes the impact of inhibitor development for non-severe haemophilia A patients.

Spanish Consensus Guidelines on prophylaxis with bypassing agents in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors

Prophylaxis with the blood clotting factor, factor VIII (FVIII) is ineffective for individuals with haemophilia A and high-titre inhibitors to FVIII. Prophylaxis with the FVIII bypassing agents activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCC; FEIBA® Baxalta) or recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa; Novo-Seven®, Novo Nordisk) may be an effective alternative. It was our aim to develop evidence -and expert opinion- based guidelines for prophylactic therapy for patients with high-titre inhibitors to FVIII. A panel of nine Spanish haematologists undertook a systematic review of the literature to develop consensusbased guidance. Particular consideration was given to prophylaxis in patients prior to undergoing immune tolerance induction (ITI) (a process of continued exposure to FVIII that can restore sensitivity for some patients), during the ITI period and for those not undergoing ITI or for whom ITI had failed. These guidelines offer guidance for clinicians in deciding which patients might benefit from prophylaxis with FVIII bypassing agents, the most appropriate agents in various clinical settings related to ITI, doses and dosing regimens and how best to monitor the efficacy of prophylaxis. The paper includes recommendations on when to interrupt or stop prophylaxis and special safety concerns during prophylaxis. These consensus guidelines offer the most comprehensive evaluation of the clinical evidence base to date and should be of considerable benefit to clinicians facing the challenge of managing patients with severe haemophilia A with high-titre FVIII inhibitors.

Bypassing agent prophylaxis in people with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors

BACKGROUND

People with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors are at high risk of bleeding complications. Infusion of bypassing agents, such as recombinant activated FVII (rFVIIa) and plasma-derived activated prothrombin complex concentrate, are suggested as alternative therapies to factor VIII (haemophilia A) or IX (haemophilia B) for individuals who no longer respond to these treatments because they develop inhibitory antibodies. The ultimate goal of treatment is to preserve the individual's joints, otherwise destroyed by recurrent bleeds.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of bypassing agent prophylaxis to prevent bleeding in people with hemophilia A or B and inhibitors.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for relevant studies from the Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, comprising of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched trial registries (16 February 2017) and bibliographic references of retrieved studies were reviewed for potential articles to be included in the review.Date of the last search of the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Coagulopathies Trials Register: 12 December 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled studies (cross-over or parallel design) evaluating the effect of prophylaxis treatment with bypassing agents compared with on-demand treatment, or studies evaluating the effects of high-dose compared with low-dose prophylaxis in males of any age with hemophilia with inhibitors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data and assessed the risk of bias according to standard Cochrane criteria. They assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four randomized studies (duration 7 to 15 months) involving 116 males. Risk of bias was judged to be high in two studies due to the open-label study design and in one study due to attrition bias.Two studies compared on-demand treatment to prophylaxis with bypassing agents. In one study (34 males) prophylaxis significantly reduced mean overall bleeding rates, MD - 7.27 (95% CI -9.92 to -4.62) (low quality evidence), mean number of overall bleeding events per month, MD -1.10 (95% CI -1.54 to -0.66), mean number of hemarthrosis, MD -6.60 (95% CI -9.32 to -3.88) (low quality evidence) and mean number of joints that had hemarthrosis, MD -0.90 (95% CI -1.36 to -0.44). The meta-analysis did not conclusively demonstrate significant benefit of prophylaxis on health-related quality of life as measured by Haem-A-QoL score, EQ-5D total score and utility score, EQ-5D VAS and SF-36 physical summary and mental summary score (low quality evidence for all health-related quality of life analyses).The remaining two studies compared dose regimens. The results from one study (22 males) did not conclusively demonstrate benefit or harm of high-dose versus low-dose recombinant activated factor VIIa (rFVIIa) as a prophylaxis for overall bleeding rate, MD -0.82 (95% CI -2.27 to 0.63) (moderate quality evidence), target joint bleeding rate, MD -3.20 (95% CI -7.23 to 0.83) (moderate quality evidence) and serious adverse events, RR 9.00 (95% CI, 0.54 to 149.50) (moderate quality evidence).The overall quality of evidence was moderate to low due to imprecision from limited information provided by studies with small sample sizes and incomplete outcome data in one study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that prophylaxis with bypassing agents may be effective in reducing bleeding in males with hemophilia with inhibitors. However, there is a lack of evidence for the superiority of one agent over the other or for the optimum dosage regimen. Further studies are needed to evaluate the benefits and harms of prophylaxis treatment on health-related quality of life, as well as the effects of dose of bypassing agents on the outcomes.

Estimating the potential cost of a high dose immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy relative to the cost of a combined therapy of a low dose ITI therapy with bypassing agent prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

The International Immune Tolerance Study (I-ITI) demonstrated comparable success rates between low (FVIII 50 IU/kg/TIW) and high dose (FVIII 200 IU/kg/day) regimens. While costlier, the high dose ITI regimen achieved shorter time-to-treatment success with fewer bleeding episodes compared to the low dose ITI regimen. Adding bypassing agent prophylaxis (BAP) to a low dose ITI regimen may reduce bleeding while still being less costly than high dose ITI.

AIM AND METHODS

An economic model was developed to compare high dose ITI to low dose ITI with BAP. All model inputs were derived from clinical trials. The I-ITI study indicated a median time to negative inhibitor titre of 4.6 and 9.2 months and average number of bleeds/patient of 4.2 and 9.9 for the high and low dose regimens respectively. Based on the BAP trials, aPCC (85 U/kg/TIW) and rFVIIa (90 μg/kg/day) achieved a 62% and 45% reduction in bleeding frequency respectively. Cost analysis was from a US third party payer perspective and limited to drug costs. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Costs of low dose ITI with aPCC prophylaxis until negative inhibitor titre is achieved was 24.0% less compared to high dose ITI. Low dose ITI with rFVIIa prophylaxis cost 46.5% more compared to high dose ITI. Model results were robust in the majority of the sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

A low dose ITI regimen with aPCC prophylaxis may be cost saving compared to a high dose ITI regimen with the potential to reduce morbidity by lowering the risk for breakthrough bleeds.

Treatment and Prevention of Bleeds in Haemophilia Patients with Inhibitors to Factor VIII/IX

The development of alloantibodies neutralising therapeutically administered factor (F) VIII/IX (inhibitors) is currently the most severe complication of the treatment of haemophilia. When persistent and at a high titre, inhibitors preclude the standard replacement treatment with FVIII/FIX concentrates, making patients’ management challenging. Indeed, the efficacy of bypassing agents, i.e., activated prothrombin complex concentrates (aPCC) and recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa), needed to overcome the haemostatic interference of the inhibitor, is not comparable to that of factor concentrates. In addition, the therapeutical response is unpredictable, with a relevant inter-individual and even intra-individual variability, and no laboratory assay is validated to monitor the efficacy and safety of the treatment. As a result, inhibitor patients have a worse joint status and quality of life compared to inhibitor-free subjects and the eradication of the inhibitor by immune tolerance induction is the preeminent therapeutic goal, particularly in children. However, over the last decades, treatment with bypassing agents has been optimised, allowing home treatment and the individualisation of regimens aimed at improving clinical outcomes. In this respect, a growing body of evidence supports the efficacy of prophylaxis with both bypassing agents in reducing bleeding rates and improving the quality of life, although the impact on long-term outcomes (in particular on preventing/reducing joint deterioration) is still unknown. This review offers an update on the current knowledge and practice of the use of bypassing agents in haemophiliacs with inhibitors, as well as on debated issues and unmet needs in this challenging setting.

Achievements, challenges and unmet needs for haemophilia patients with inhibitors: Report from a symposium in Paris, France on 20 November 2014

Over the past 20 years, there have been many advances in haemophilia treatment that have allowed patients to take greater control of their disease. However, the development of factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors is the greatest complication of the disease and a challenge in the treatment of haemophilia making management of bleeding episodes difficult and surgical procedures very challenging. A meeting to discuss the unmet needs of haemophilia patients with inhibitors was held in Paris on 20 November 2014. Topics discussed were genetic and non-genetic risk factors for the development of inhibitors, immunological aspects of inhibitor development, FVIII products and inhibitor development, generation and functional properties of engineered antigen-specific T regulatory cells, suppression of immune responses to FVIII, prophylaxis in haemophilia patients with inhibitors, epitope mapping of FVIII inhibitors, current controversies in immune tolerance induction therapy, surgery in haemophilia patients with inhibitors and future perspectives for the treatment of haemophilia patients with inhibitors. A summary of the key points discussed is presented in this paper.

Prophylaxis in real life scenarios

Prophylaxis has become the standard mantra of care for those individuals with severe haemophilia A and B. Primary prophylaxis is advocated to prevent the occurrence of symptomatic acute spontaneous haemarthroses and to preserve joint structure and function. Typically, twice or thrice weekly infusions of factor VIII or IX concentrates are integral to this treatment approach. Secondary prophylaxis is initiated after the relentless cycle of progressive joint damage has been triggered by prior haemarthroses and is intended to preserve existing joint health by preventing additional spontaneous bleeding events. Event-driven prophylaxis involves the administration of clotting factor concentrates to prevent acute traumatic bleeds, which are anticipated to occur in association with surgical or physical trauma. This regimen enhances the effectiveness of primary or secondary prophylaxis protocols or on-demand approaches to replacement therapy. Besides the marked reduction in the so-called annual bleed rate, prophylaxis regimens frequently increase personal self-confidence to embark on a more active and physical lifestyle; however, in reality, prophylaxis must be individualized in accordance with bleeding phenotypes, with the unique pharmacokinetic profile of administered replacement clotting factor concentrates, with the specific clinical scenario, and with the degree of intensity anticipated for any physical activity. The introduction of extended half-life replacement products will also influence how these prophylaxis regimens will be accomplished. The following scenarios will discuss how prophylaxis regimens can be implemented to protect the individual from developing spontaneous and activity-induced acute bleeding complications and to maintain an improved quality of life.

Advances in bypassing agent therapy for hemophilia patients with inhibitors to close care gaps and improve outcomes

In the past, patients with hemophilia and inhibitors have had less-than-optimal treatment and have experienced more orthopedic complications than patients without inhibitors. Bypassing agents offer the potential to close treatment gaps between inhibitor and noninhibitor patients by helping the former better attain key treatment goals, including: facilitating early initiation of treatment and hemostatic control in hemarthroses; providing effective treatment in serious hemorrhagic episodes; and performance of major surgery. Effective treatment with a bypassing agent minimizes joint and/or muscle damage and potentially can serve as an effective prophylactic agent to minimize the number of hemarthroses experienced per year, thereby mitigating the development of arthropathy. The reported efficacy of the currently available bypassing agents ranges from approximately 50-80% (50-64% in controlled studies) for plasma-derived activated prothrombin complex concentrate (pd-aPCC) and 81-91% (in controlled studies) for recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa), including use in major orthopedic surgery. Both bypassing agents have undergone key improvements in their formulation and/or properties in recent years. The nanofiltered, vapor-heated formulation of pd-aPCC has diminished the risk of acquiring blood-borne viral infections and the room temperature stable formulation of rFVIIa allows more convenient storage, increased ease to dissolve and inject, and smaller volumes, thereby increasing overall ease of administration. Use of recommended dosing has been demonstrated to provide effective hemostasis with a minimal number of injections for both agents. In this paper, we review the individual characteristics of pd-aPCC and rFVIIa and discuss clinical data from studies conducted in inhibitor patients that demonstrate the potential benefits of these bypassing agents in this difficult-to-treat population, and underscore the potential opportunities to close the gap in care between inhibitor and noninhibitor hemophilic patients.

Bullous Pemphigoid Associated with Acquired Hemophilia A: A Rare Association of Autoimmune Disease

Background:

Acquired hemophilia (AH) is a rare autoimmune disease with an annual incidence of one per million and has a mortality rate of up to 22%. It is caused by the development of autoantibodies against factor VIII. Approximately half of the reported cases are associated with autoimmune disorders, pregnancy, malignancies, and adverse drug reactions. Autoimmune diseases are the most frequently associated disorders and include rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, cryoglobulinemia, pemphigus vulgaris, and bullous pemphigoid. There are a few reports of acquired hemophilia and bullous pemphigoid in the literature.

Method:

We report a 73-year-old male who presented with cutaneous blistering, upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and hemoptysis. He later developed right flank pain secondary to a retroperitoneal hematoma. He had a prolonged partial thromboplastin time, a low factor VIII level, and a high factor VIII inhibitor level, all consistent with acquired hemophilia. Skin biopsies were diagnostic for bullous pemphigoid.

Results:

He was treated successfully with prednisone, cyclophosphamide, rituximab, and intravenous immunoglobulin.

How I treat inhibitors in haemophilia

The management of patients with inhibitors is the greatest challenge facing haemophilia health professionals. Immune tolerance induction (ITI) can be successful in eliminating the inhibitor in the majority of patients, provided it is started soon after the inhibitor develops and the titre of the inhibitor is <10 BU at commencement of ITI. Acute bleeding is treated using one of two bypassing agents, which exhibit similar efficacy and safety. Surgery in inhibitor patients is challenging and should only be carried out in experienced centres.

Physician preferences for medication attributes for the prophylactic treatment of patients with severe haemophilia A with inhibitors to factor VIII

Prophylaxis may be beneficial for patients with severe haemophilia A who have developed inhibitors to factor VIII. The aim of this study was to determine physicians' preferences for medication attributes in the prophylactic treatment of this patient population. Haematologists from Europe (EU) and the United States (US) participated in a discrete choice exercise to explore their preferences for medication attributes (efficacy, cost, scientific evidence, dosing frequency and administration time) associated with prophylaxis for severe haemophilia A in patients with inhibitors to factor VIII. Physicians' preferences for medication attributes were assessed through completion of 25 trade-off tasks that included a choice between two hypothetical medications each comprised of one randomized level of each medication attribute. Participants also completed a sociodemographic questionnaire. Data were analysed using a random effects logit model. Participants (N = 36: US = 19; EU = 17) were 80.6% men, had a mean of 19.8 years (SD ± 8.1) [range 6-35] of practice experience. The physicians treated an average of 5.7 (± 5.5) patients with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors per month and reported treating 36.2% of these patients prophylactically. The most important medication attributes for prophylactic treatment were efficacy [Relative Importance (RI) = 35.0%] and scientific evidence (RI = 34.1%), whereas treatment cost (12.0%), dosing frequency (10.8%) and administration time (8.2%) were less important. Results were similar across the EU and US. Efficacy and scientific evidence are the primary considerations for physicians' choice of prophylactic medications for use in this patient population.

Cost effectiveness of prophylactic treatment with activated prothrombin complex concentrate in a patient with inhibitor-positive hemophilia A

Patients with hemophilia and high titers of inhibitors are hard to treat during bleeding events and consequently are more likely to incur high treatment costs and to experience deterioration in quality of life. We report here the case of a boy with hemophilia A and high titers of inhibitors who responded well to prophylactic activated prothrombin complex concentrate (APCC) treatment. Previously, he had to be hospitalized frequently because of painful bleeding of target joints of the knee and ankle. At the age of 4 years and 3 months, APCC prophylaxis at a dose of 60 U/kg, three times a week, was initiated together with on-demand therapy with recombinant factor VIIa. This reduced the frequency and severity of bleeding and ended the need for hospitalization. This, together with a decreased requirement for bypass agents, APCC treatment significantly reduced the cost of treatment for this patient.

Anti-inhibitor coagulant complex prophylaxis in hemophilia with inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe hemophilia A and factor VIII inhibitors are at increased risk for serious bleeding complications and progression to end-stage joint disease. Effective strategies to prevent bleeding in such patients have not yet been established.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with hemophilia A who were older than 2 years of age, had high-titer inhibitors, and used concentrates known as bypassing agents for bleeding in a prospective, randomized, crossover study comparing 6 months of anti-inhibitor coagulant complex (AICC), infused prophylactically at a target dose of 85 U per kilogram of body weight (±15%) on 3 nonconsecutive days per week, with 6 months of on-demand therapy (AICC at a target dose of 85 U per kilogram [±15%] used for bleeding episodes). The two treatment periods were separated by a 3-month washout period, during which patients received on-demand therapy for bleeding. The primary outcome was the number of bleeding episodes during each 6-month treatment period.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients underwent randomization; 26 patients completed both treatment periods and could be evaluated per protocol for the efficacy analysis. As compared with on-demand therapy, prophylaxis was associated with a 62% reduction in all bleeding episodes (P<0.001), a 61% reduction in hemarthroses (P<0.001), and a 72% reduction in target-joint bleeding (≥3 hemarthroses in a single joint during a 6-month treatment period) (P<0.001). Thirty-three randomly assigned patients received at least one infusion of the study drug and were evaluated for safety. One patient had an allergic reaction to the study drug.

CONCLUSIONS

AICC prophylaxis at the dosage evaluated significantly and safely decreased the frequency of joint and other bleeding events in patients with severe hemophilia A and factor VIII inhibitors. (Funded by Baxter BioScience; Pro-FEIBA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00221195.).