Clotting factor concentrate switching and inhibitor development in hemophilia A

Switching from Sucrose-Formulated rFVIII to Octocog Alfa (BAY 81-8973) Prophylaxis Improves Bleed Outcomes in the LEOPOLD Clinical Trials

Introduction

Previous clinical trials established the efficacy and safety of sucrose-formulated recombinant factor (F) VIII (rFVIII-FS/Kogenate FS®/Helixate FS®) and octocog alfa (BAY 81-8973/Kovaltry®; LEOPOLD trials).

Aim

To report the results of a post hoc subgroup analysis assessing efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with hemophilia A who were receiving rFVIII-FS prior to enrolling into the LEOPOLD I Part B and LEOPOLD Kids Part A clinical trials and switching to octocog alfa.

Methods

LEOPOLD I Part B (NCT01029340) and LEOPOLD Kids Part A (NCT01311648) were octocog alfa Phase 3, multinational, open-label studies in patients with severe hemophilia A aged 12-65 years and ≤12 years, respectively. Annualized bleeding rate (ABR) was the efficacy endpoint for both studies. Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and development of FVIII inhibitors.

Results

Of the 113 patients in both LEOPOLD trials, 40 (35.4%) patients received rFVIII-FS prophylaxis pre-study and had data available for pre-study total ABR. In LEOPOLD I Part B (n = 22, 35.5%), median (Q1; Q3) total ABR decreased from 2.5 (0.0; 9.0) pre-study to 1.0 (0.0; 6.8), and from 1.0 (0.0; 6.0) pre-study to 0.0 (0.0; 6.02) in LEOPOLD Kids Part A (n = 18, 35.3%). Octocog alfa was well tolerated, and no patients had drug-related serious AEs or inhibitors.

Conclusion

Treatment with octocog alfa prophylaxis appeared to have a favorable risk-benefit profile compared with rFVIII-FS and thus could be an effective and improved alternative strategy for individualized treatment for children, adolescent and adult patients with severe hemophilia A currently on rFVIII-FS treatment.

Cost-utility analysis of emicizumab for the treatment of severe hemophilia A patients in Canada

INTRODUCTION

EHL FVIII products and emicizumab provide clinicians with other prophylactic options for treating hemophilia A, however, it is unclear if emicizumab is a cost-saving option. The objective of this study is to estimate the health and economic effects of using prophylactic EHL FVIII, SHL FVIII, and emicizumab in severe haemophilia A patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A state-transition Markov model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic SHL FVIII, EHL FVIII, and emicizumab in a cohort of 2-year-old male patients over a lifetime horizon in the form of a cost-utility analysis using a Canadian provincial ministry of health payer perspective. The transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were obtained from literature and the Canadian Bleeding Disorders Registry. Probabilistic sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis, over a lifetime horizon, resulted in a total cost and utilities per person for SHL FVIII, EHL FVIII, and emicizumab of $27.2 million (M), $36.7 M, and $26.2 M, respectively, and 31.30, 31.16, and 31.61 quality-adjusted life years, respectively. Emicizumab treatment resulted in 29 and 16 less bleeds in a lifetime compared to SHL FVIII and EHL FVIII, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that emicizumab was cost-saving 100% of the time compared to SHL FVIII and EHL FVIII.

CONCLUSION

The cost-utility analysis showed that emicizumab is more effective and may be less costly than FVIII for Canadian haemophilia A patients, conditional on drug cost assumptions. Our model indicates that emicizumab may be a potentially favourable treatment option for minimising healthcare costs and providing higher effectiveness.

Immunogenicity of Current and New Therapies for Hemophilia A

Anti-drug antibody (ADA) development is a significant complication in the treatment of several conditions. For decades, the mainstay of hemophilia A treatment was the replacement of deficient coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) to restore hemostasis, control, and prevent bleeding events. Recently, new products have emerged for hemophilia A replacement therapy, including bioengineered FVIII molecules with enhanced pharmacokinetic profiles: the extended half-life (EHL) recombinant FVIII products. However, the main complication resulting from replacement treatment in hemophilia A is the development of anti-FVIII neutralizing alloantibodies, known as inhibitors, affecting approximately 25–30% of severe hemophilia A patients. Therefore, the immunogenicity of each FVIII product and the mechanisms that could help increase the tolerance to these products have become important research topics in hemophilia A. Furthermore, patients with inhibitors continue to require effective treatment for breakthrough bleedings and procedures, despite the availability of non-replacement therapy, such as emicizumab. Herein, we discuss the currently licensed treatments available for hemophilia A and the immunogenicity of new therapies, such as EHL-rFVIII products, compared to other products available.

Zero incidence of factor VIII inhibitors and successful haemostatic response in previously factor VIII-treated patients with haemophilia A switching to turoctocog alfa in a noninterventional study

Introduction

Turoctocog alfa (NovoEight^®) is a B‐domain‐truncated recombinant factor VIII (FVIII) approved for patients with haemophilia A.

Aim

To investigate the long‐term safety and efficacy of turoctocog alfa in routine clinical practice.

Methods

Guardian 5 was a prospective, multinational, non‐interventional, post‐authorisation safety study. Male previously treated patients (> 150 exposure days [EDs]) of any age with severe/moderately severe haemophilia A (FVIII ≤ 2%) and a negative inhibitor test prior to first dosing (independent of FVIII‐inhibitor history) were included to receive prophylaxis or on‐demand treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients developing FVIII inhibitors (≥.6 Bethesda Units [BU]) after baseline visit, measured as per routine practice of each study site during clinic visits. Secondary endpoints included haemostatic effect, annualised bleeding rate (ABR), and adverse reactions assessment. The study concluded when 50 patients reached 100 EDs/patient minimum.

Results

Seventy patients were screened and 68 exposed to turoctocog alfa; 63 (92.6%) were on prophylaxis and five received on‐demand treatment. Six (8.8%) patients reported a history of positive inhibitors. During the study, patients were exposed to turoctocog alfa for a mean (standard deviation) of 131.9 (99.0) days/patient. Fifty‐five of 58 patients who completed the study were tested for FVIII inhibitors; no positive tests were reported. Overall success rate of turoctocog alfa for treatment of bleeds was 87.3%. Among patients receiving prophylaxis, median (range) ABR was 1.97 (.0–25.5) bleeds/year; estimated ABR (negative binomial model) was 3.65 (95% confidence interval: 2.53–5.25).

Conclusion

Turoctocog alfa was safe and efficacious for haemophilia A treatment in routine clinical practice.

Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of rurioctocog alfa pegol for prophylactic treatment in previously treated patients with severe hemophilia A: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

Background: Patients with severe hemophilia often present with painful joint and soft tissue bleeding which may restrict them from their daily activities. The current standard of care still relies on a regular prophylactic factor VIII (FVIII), which has a high daily treatment burden. Recently, rurioctocog alfa pegol, a third-generation recombinant FVIII with a modification in its polyethylene glycol (PEG) component, has been developed. Several trials have studied this synthetic drug as bleeding prophylaxis in severe hemophilia A. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of rurioctocog alfa pegol for previously treated patients with severe hemophilia A. Methods: This study was conducted in conformity with the PRISMA guidelines. Data were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Wiley Online Library, and CINAHL (via EBSCOhost). Study qualities were assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) and Modified Jadad scales. Results: Four studies involving 517 previously treated severe hemophilia A patients were included in this study. The pooled mean of total annualized bleeding rate (ABR) and hemostatic efficacy was 2.59 (95% CI = 2.04-3.14) and 92% (95% CI = 85%-97%), respectively. Only 30 (2.3%) non-serious and one (1.4%) serious adverse events were considered related to rurioctocog alfa pegol treatment. At the end of the studies, no development of FVIII inhibitory antibodies was observed. None of the developed binding antibodies to FVIII, PEG-FVIII, or PEG was correlated to the treatment efficacy and safety. Conclusions: Despite the limited availability of direct comparison studies, our analyses indicate that rurioctocog alfa pegol could serve as a safe and effective alternative for bleeding prophylaxis in previously treated hemophilia A patients. Moreover, it appears to have low immunogenicity, which further increases the safety profile of the drug in such clinical conditions.

Understanding the evolution of coverage policies for prophylaxis treatments of hemophilia A without inhibitors: a payer Delphi panel

BACKGROUND: The landscape for hemophilia A prophylaxis is rapidly expanding from factor VIII replacement therapy to include novel treatments such as nonfactor replacement therapies that may enhance coagulation (e.g., emicizumab) or inhibit anticoagulant pathways (e.g., fitusiran and concizumab). For payers, this expansion presents challenges in balancing well-established treatments with new options that cost more and have lesser known real-world safety and efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate likely coverage practices for hemophilia A prophylaxis therapies among U.S. payers given evolving real-world data on safety and efficacy. METHODS: A 3-round modified Delphi process was conducted with representatives of U.S. commercial health plans who had considerable expertise in managing populations of patients with hemophilia. Round 1 consisted of an online questionnaire; round 2 involved an online discussion about the aggregated results from round 1; and round 3 allowed participants to revise their responses from round 1 based on insights gained during round 2. Questions elicited ratings, rankings, and estimates on access restrictions based on given safety and efficacy information for hemophilia A prophylaxis therapies. Consensus was reached if ≥ 74% of panelists (14 of 19) were within 1 SD of the median group estimate during round 3. RESULTS: 19 Payers participated in the research. Among them, 94% dealt with commercial insurance, 94% with Medicare, and 81% with Medicaid; 79% had spent ≥ 5 years in their current role. Panelists reported limited access restrictions on hemophilia A prophylaxis therapies; the most common restrictions were prior authorization (n = 16, 84%) and quantity level limits (n = 13, 67%). Tiering and step therapy were reported by 7 respondents (39%). Respondents agreed that there was an 80% median likelihood that ≥ 9 additional patients with any safety event (e.g., thrombotic event, death) per year would trigger access restrictions, with the median likelihood of restrictions increasing to 95% for another ≥ 10 patients with safety events per year. Respondents also agreed that > 5 thrombotic events requiring treatment per patient per year would have a 98% median likelihood of leading to access restrictions and that ≥ 5 years of real-world safety and efficacy data would be highly likely (95% median likelihood) to affect coverage decisions. Noncoverage was highly unlikely (ranked fifth or sixth of 6 by 14 respondents), as was no restriction-coverage parity (ranked sixth of 6 by 10 respondents). All else being equal, cost continues to affect access policies, with respondents agreeing that a 13%-30% difference in net cost may lead to preferred formulary treatment for a drug with superior efficacy and noninferior safety, inferior efficacy and noninferior safety, or noninferior efficacy and inferior safety. CONCLUSIONS: Payers prefer treatments with well-understood efficacy, safety, and cost over newer treatments with uncertain long-term effects. Relatively unrestricted access to legacy and new hemophilia A prophylaxis will likely continue unless additional real-world safety concerns or major cost differences emerge. DISCLOSURES: Financial support for this study was provided by Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, which was involved in study concept and design. Graf, Tuly, Harley, and Pednekar are employees of PRECISIONheor, a research consultancy to the health and life sciences industries that was contracted by Takeda to conduct this study and write the manuscript. Batt served as a consultant on this project through PRECISIONheor.

A comparison of methods for prediction of pharmacokinetics when switching to extended half-life products in hemophilia A patients

INTRODUCTION

Hemophilia A is a genetic bleeding disorder resulting from a lack of clotting factor VIII. Where extended half-life products are available, people with hemophilia may stop their current drug regimen and switch to a EHL product providing a more convenient dosing regimen. While most factor VIII concentrate regimens are started prophylactically based on international units per weight, this "one-size-fits-all" approach does not account for the large pharmacokinetic variability between individuals.

AIMS

We explored methods to predict individual PK of an EHL product by using population pharmacokinetic models and eta-values (η), a value that quantifies how individuals deviate from a population for any PK parameter, derived from a prior product. In addition, we wanted to investigate which individuals would benefit from this method compared to using a PopPK model alone.

METHODS

PK data from subjects (n = 39) who have taken both Adynovate and Eloctate was collected from clinical trial data and from the Web-Accessible Population Pharmacokinetic Service - Hemophilia (WAPPS-Hemo) database. In addition, PK data from subjects (n = 200) who switched from a standard half-life product to Eloctate was also extracted from the WAPPS-Hemo database. Two methods to estimate individual PK outcomes of the second product were compared. The PopPK method used the Eloctate PopPK model published from WAPPS-Hemo, while the η-method incorporated individually scaled η from the prior product's PopPK model. Both methods were assessed for its performance in predicting PK outcomes. Absolute percent differences were calculated between the predicted and observed PK outcomes. Infusions were parsed into subgroups based on number of samples and individual η-percentiles for analysis.

RESULTS

For the three switching protocols (Adynovate to Eloctate, Eloctate to Adynovate, and SHL FVIII to Eloctate), the η-method resulted in a relative difference reduction in mean absolute percent difference of 27.8% (range 1-59%), 4.9% (range 0-129%), and 18.0% (0-79%) in half-life compared to the PopPK method respectively. With some exceptions (in particular central volume), the η-method produced relative difference reduction in mean absolute percent differences up to 33% lower compared to the PopPK method. When individuals were parsed based on their η-values (either CL or V1), the two methods differentiate up to 64% in terms of half-life and time to 0.02 IU/mL predictions for individuals with a low (0th to 20th percentile) η_CL or η_V1 on the first product. Individuals with higher number of observations per infusion on the first product resulted in better predictions in PK parameter estimates when using the η-method.

CONCLUSION

The use of prior knowledge by implementing η-values into PopPK models may provide clinicians with a safer and more effective method to choose a dosing regimen for patients with hemophilia A switching from one factor concentrate to another. However, the η-method was unable to better predict an increase or decrease in half-life of a future product compared to the PopPK method, and thus supports the conclusion that most individuals would still benefit from a trial on the EHL and subsequent estimation of their individual PK profile from sparse measurements on the EHL.

A comparison of methods for prediction of pharmacokinetics across factor concentrate switching in hemophilia patients

INTRODUCTION

This study proposes a method to predict individual pharmacokinetics of a future product by using the individual pharmacokinetic profile on the current product and the PopPK models of the current and future product.

METHODS

Individual dense data was collected from two PK crossover studies, one enrolling 29 patients switching from Advate to Eloctate and one enrolling 15 patients switching from Advate to Novoeight. Three methods were designed to predict the second product's individual PK parameters (CL, V1, Q, and V2). Method 1 used the second product's typical population value of PK parameters from its PopPK model. Method 2 used the second product's calculated PK parameters based on individual covariates and its PopPK model. Method 3 used method 2, along with the predicted η-values of CL and V1 from the first product and its PopPK model. Each method was used to assess PK prediction during switching from Advate to Novoeight, Novoeight to Advate, and Advate to Eloctate.

RESULTS

The three methods produced different outcomes. The mean absolute relative errors for half-life were lowest for method 3 for each study (11.6%, 13.1%, 13.6%). The regression line between predicted and observed half-life for method 3 was closest to the line of identity for each study (0.84, 0.67, 0.66).

CONCLUSION

Taking into account individual PK from a previous clotting factor product was shown to provide better means of estimating individual PK for a new product. This may improve regimen design across switches and reduce the time to tailor optimal dose of FVIII products.

Using pharmacokinetics for tailoring prophylaxis in people with hemophilia switching between clotting factor products: A scoping review

The objective of this scoping review is to summarize the current use of pharmacokinetics for tailoring prophylaxis in hemophilia patients switching between clotting factor products. Patients with hemophilia may require switching of clotting factor concentrates due to a variety of factors, but there have been perceived risks associated with switching, such as inhibitor development or suboptimal protection due to inadequate dosing while titrating treatment. Studies that look at patients switching from one clotting factor concentrate to another are categorized in terms of their primary and/or secondary objectives, notably biosimilarity and comparative pharmacokinetic studies and inhibitor development studies. Research on how best to switch concentrates with respect to dosing regimen are lacking, and currently a trial‐and‐error approach is used for dosing the new factor concentrate. In the future, studies looking at the predictability of pharmacokinetics (PK) of a new factor concentrate based on individual PK knowledge of the original factor concentrate may offer clinical benefit by providing a safer switching approach and protocol.

GlycoPEGylated recombinant factor IX for hemophilia B in context

Decisions over hemophilia treatment selection and switching involve balancing many clinical and patient-related factors. The current standard of care for patients with hemophilia B is prophylaxis with plasma-derived or recombinant factor IX (rFIX) concentrates. However, several extended half-life (EHL) rFIX products have recently been developed to improve treatment convenience and clinical outcomes for these patients. Nonacog beta pegol, an rFIX product that combines the FIX protein with a 40 kDa polyethylene glycol moiety, has been evaluated in 115 previously treated patients with hemophilia B (including 25 children) in the paradigm clinical trial program. FIX activity levels and pharmacokinetics were monitored throughout these trials and showed that nonacog beta pegol offers significant pharmacological improvements over standard FIX products. Once-weekly prophylaxis with nonacog beta pegol 40 IU/kg resulted in fewer bleeds in all patients (median annualized bleeding rate of 1.0 across all ages), resolved 90% of target joints, and improved health-related quality of life. No patients developed FIX inhibitors, and there were no thromboembolic events or unexpected safety concerns. Nonacog beta pegol was also safe and effective in the perioperative setting. These findings show that nonacog beta pegol is highly effective, while also offering more convenient dosing than standard FIX products. Nonacog beta pegol represents a significant advance in the current context of treatment for hemophilia B, offering effective management across several treatment modalities and settings, and potentially easing the treatment burden for patients of all ages. Meanwhile, the development of novel treatment strategies, such as gene therapy, anti-tissue factor pathway inhibitor antibodies, and RNA interference therapy, may provide patients with additional therapeutic options, which would require reassessment of the role of EHL products in the future.

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).

Many factor VIII products available in the treatment of hemophilia A: an embarrassment of riches?

Hemophilia A (HA) is a common bleeding disorder caused by the deficiency of factor VIII (FVIII) with an incidence of ~1 in 5000 male births. Replacement of FVIII is necessary to prevent and treat bleeding episodes. However, with multiple new drugs in addition to old standards, choosing among the different FVIII treatment options is harder than ever. There are FVIII products that are plasma derived or recombinant, FVIII products designed to extend the half-life of FVIII, and the first single-chain FVIII product, recombinant factor VIII single chain (rFVIII-SC). As development of inhibitors to FVIII continues to be a major problem in the care of HA patients, recent studies showing lower rates of inhibitor development with plasma-derived FVIIII products versus recombinant FVIII products have made choosing among the many options now available even more complex. Although still unproven, extended half-life (EHL) products may provide the hope of decreased immunogenicity but need further testing in previously untreated patients (PUPs). This review highlights some of the differences between FVIII products currently available and hopefully assists the clinician to decide which FVIII product to choose for their patients.

Large scale studies assessing anti-factor VIII antibody development in previously untreated haemophilia A: what has been learned, what to believe and how to learn more

Minimizing the risk of inhibitor development by acting on modifiable risk factors remains a sensible goal for treatment optimization in haemophilia A. By critically appraising published studies assessing inhibitor development, this review addresses the role of studies in previously untreated patients (PUPs) for establishing the immunogenicity of new concentrates, suggest novel research design to be adopted in future studies and discuss clinical practice implications of the reported differential immunogenicity of Kogenate Bayer and Advate factor VIII concentrates. Three considerations are relevant here: (i) all of the existing concentrates, when tested following the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee recommendation, were shown to be safe; as a consequence, (ii) when considering using any newly introduced product, one should be aware that it could, in future, turn out to be as immunogenic as Kogenate Bayer, and (iii) at the population level, it might be wiser not to use Kogenate Bayer in PUPs, if the choice is against Advate. When presenting the risk of developing inhibitors to the individual patient (or their family), the message remains that the risk can be as high as 40%, without any efficient instrument to predict individual inhibitor risk. Patients should be invited to enrol into a randomized registry trial, including random assignment to trials with new investigational products.

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.

The current state of adverse event reporting in hemophilia

INTRODUCTION

Replacement of the missing clotting factor is the mainstay of hemophilia treatment. Whilst historically many hemophilia patients were infected with blood-borne viruses transmitted via plasma-derived products, nowadays the formation of alloantibodies against the missing clotting factor is the main adverse event of treatment. Areas covered: This paper provides an overview of the current national and international adverse event reporting systems, what these surveillance schemes taught us about side effects of the products presently in use, and elaborates on how to adapt these systems to the challenges we face with the changing treatment landscape. Expert commentary: Treatment of inherited bleeding disorders was accompanied by severe complications in the past, resulting in major morbidity and mortality. Current products are much safer, but still require monitoring via efficient safety surveillance systems. Adverse events are reported in national and international systems. With many new products entering the market, as well as non-factor replacement therapies, new safety issues may arise. It is important to identify potential adverse events early by making surveillance systems suitable to pick up unknown or unexpected effects, and to recognize and communicate patterns of adverse events rapidly.

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.

Different impact of factor VIII products on inhibitor development?

Inhibitors are the most serious side effect of haemophilia treatment; they occur in 25–30 % of all patients with severe haemophilia A. Over the last 2 decades, conflicting data on the impact of clotting products have been published.

Due to small studies of selected cases, appreciation of the impact of any particular product has been difficult. Moreover, the emphasis on inhibitor testing has led to increased detection of low-titre inhibitors (to >10 %), while the percentage of high-titre inhibitors is still around 20 %.

Other non-genetic risk factors, such as dosing and intensive treatment, are able to increase individual inhibitor risk. Early prophylaxis might reduce inhibitor risk. Well-defined large PUP studies including products should be considered. This can only be achieved in collaboration with all stakeholders.

In conclusion, while the impact of FVIII products on inhibitor development is large, presently the actual impact of any specific product is unclear.

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.

Tailoring hemostatic therapies to lower inhibitor development in previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A

After technological progress provided safer therapeutic products for patients with hemophilia A, the development of alloantibodies (inhibitors) neutralizing the coagulant activity of infused factor VIII (FVIII) remains the most serious complication of replacement therapy, predisposing patients to greater morbidity and causing higher treatment costs. The pathogenesis of inhibitors, which develop at a high rate in previously untreated children with severe hemophilia A, is multifactorial, resulting from complex interactions between genetic and environmental factors. Among non-genetic determinants, a key role is played by treatment-related factors, including the source of FVIII product (i.e., plasma derived or recombinant) and the mode of replacement therapy delivery (i.e., intensity, prophylaxis vs. on demand). We review the potential interventions on these modifiable factors that may help to lower the rate of inhibitor development. In addition, interest is currently directed toward the potential for lesser immunogenicity of novel hemostatic agents designed to decrease the dosing frequency or avoid/delay the need of FVIII replacement therapy.

Alloantibodies to therapeutic factor VIII in hemophilia A: the role of von Willebrand factor in regulating factor VIII immunogenicity

The rising incidence of neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) against therapeutic factor VIII prompted the conduct of studies to answer the question as to whether this rise is related to the introduction of recombinant factor VIII products. The present article summarizes current opinions and results of non-clinical and clinical studies on the immunogenic potential of recombinant compared to plasma-derived factor VIII concentrates. Numerous studies provided circumstantial evidence that von Willebrand factor, the natural chaperone protein present in plasma-derived factor VIII products, plays an important role in protecting exogenous factor VIII from uptake by antigen presenting cells and from recognition by immune effectors. However, the definite contribution of von Willebrand factor in reducing the inhibitor risk and in the achievement of immune tolerance is still under debate.

Improved prediction of inhibitor development in previously untreated patients with severe haemophilia A

Treatment of previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A is complicated by the formation of inhibitors. Prediction of PUPs with high risk is important to allow altering treatment with the intention to reduce the occurrence of inhibitors. An unselected multicentre cohort of 825 PUPs with severe haemophilia A (FVIII<0.01 IU mL(-1) ) was used. Patients were followed until 50 exposure days (EDs) or inhibitor development. All predictors of the existing prediction model including three new potential predictors were studied using multivariable logistic regression. Model performance was quantified [area under the curve (AUC), calibration plot] and internal validation (bootstrapping) was performed. A nomogram for clinical application was developed. Of the 825 patients, 225 (28%) developed inhibitors. The predictors family history of inhibitors, F8 gene mutation and an interaction variable of dose and number of EDs of intensive treatment were independently associated with inhibitor development. Age and reason for first treatment were not associated with inhibitor development. The AUC was 0.69 (95% CI 0.65-0.72) and calibration was good. An improved prediction model for inhibitor development and a nomogram for clinical use were developed in a cohort of 825 PUPs with severe haemophilia A. Clinical applicability was improved by combining dose and duration of intensive treatment, allowing the assessment of the effects of treatment decisions on inhibitor risk and potentially modify treatment.

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.

Answering relevant research questions via careful observation of clinical practice: a fresh look at the old way forward

Although many aspects of inhibitor development have been elucidated, the role of switching FVIII product concentrate in the risk of inhibitors development in previously treated patients is still under discussion. To provide their contribution, Aznar et al [9] transparently showed the numerous different brands used over time and the number of patients treated with one or another class of concentrates in their center. This way of inclusively reporting data as generated in routine clinical practice would need to be adopted more broadly among hemophilia treater and scientists. Strength and limitations of the approach are discussed.

Inhibitor development in previously treated hemophilia A patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

The development of neutralizing alloantibodies (inhibitors) is the most serious complication of factor VIII (FVIII) replacement therapy in patients with hemophilia A. Unlike previously untreated patients, no definite risk factors for inhibitor development are known for previously treated patients (PTPs). The investigation of the development of inhibitors in PTPs is hindered by several methodological limitations in the available literature. We conducted a systematic review to account for these limitations.

METHODS

We considered the studies reporting on PTPs that were included in the Wight and Paisley meta-analysis and a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies published after 2003. Studies that investigated the development of inhibitors in hemophilia A PTPs who were treated with any type of FVIII concentrate and that included at least 25 patients with follow-up were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-three independent cohorts of PTPs with 4323 subjects and 43 incident de novo inhibitors were found and analyzed. The pooled incidence rate of inhibitor development for the 25 studies providing data on follow-up was 3 (95% confidence interval 1-4) per 1000 person-years. A significant association was not found between putative risk factors and inhibitor development in PTPs at meta-regression analysis and subgroup analysis, but the model was sensitive enough to the inclusion of the reports on the Belgian-Dutch experience with a highly immunogenic factor VIII.

CONCLUSION

We confirmed a low overall rate of de novo inhibitors in PTPs, without any significant effect of putative predictors, including the type of factor VIII concentrate.

Elucidating the role of carbohydrate determinants in regulating hemostasis: insights and opportunities

Recent improvement in modern analytical technologies has stimulated an explosive growth in the study of glycobiology. In turn, this has lead to a richer understanding of the crucial role of N- and O-linked carbohydrates in dictating the properties of the proteins to which they are attached and, in particular, their centrality in the control of protein synthesis, longevity, and activity. Given their importance, it is unsurprising that both gross and subtle defects in glycosylation often contribute to human disease pathology. In this review, we discuss the accumulating evidence for the significance of glycosylation in mediating the functions of the plasma glycoproteins involved in hemostasis and thrombosis. In particular, the role of naturally occurring coagulation protein glycoforms and inherited defects in carbohydrate attachment in modulating coagulation is considered. Finally, we describe the therapeutic opportunities presented by new insights into the role of attached carbohydrates in shaping coagulation protein function and the promise of carbohydrate modification in the delivery of novel therapeutic biologics with enhanced functional properties for the treatment of hemostatic disorders.

Results from a large multinational clinical trial (guardian™3) using prophylactic treatment with turoctocog alfa in paediatric patients with severe haemophilia A: safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics

Recombinant factor VIII (rFVIII) products provide a safe and efficacious replacement therapy for prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding episodes in patients with severe haemophilia A. This multinational, open-label, non-controlled trial investigated the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics (PK) of turoctocog alfa, a new rFVIII product, in a paediatric population. The primary objective was to evaluate safety. A total of 31 younger children (0-5 years) and 32 older children (6-11 years), with ≥ 50 exposure days to any factor VIII (FVIII) product and no history of inhibitors, received prophylaxis with turoctocog alfa (25-50 IU kg(-1) every second day or 25-60 IU kg(-1) three times weekly). PK assessments of turoctocog alfa and the patients' previous FVIII product were performed in 28 patients. Mean exposure to turoctocog alfa was 60 exposure days per patient. This corresponds to approximately 4.5 months in the trial. None of the patients developed inhibitors (≥ 0.6 BU) and no safety concerns were raised. A total of 120 bleeding episodes (95%) were controlled with 1-2 infusions of turoctocog alfa. Based on patient reports, the success rate (defined as 'excellent' or 'good' haemostatic response) for treatment of bleeding episodes was 92%. Overall, the median annualized bleeding rate was 3.0 (interquartile range: 8.5) bleeds patient(-1) year(-1) . PK parameters were comparable between the two age groups. In conclusion, the present large global clinical trial showed that turoctocog alfa was safe, effective in treatment of bleeding episodes and had a prophylactic effect in paediatric patients.