No difference in quality of life between persons with severe haemophilia A and B

INTRODUCTION

Good health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important goal in the treatment of persons with haemophilia B (PwHB). Studies focusing on this population are limited, however, and data are insufficient.

AIM

To assess the HRQoL in PwHB and to compare this to data on persons with haemophilia A (PwHA), as well as to evaluate the impact of joint health on HRQoL and to identify areas of insufficient care.

METHODS

The B-NORD study enrolled persons with severe haemophilia B and matched controls with haemophilia A. HRQoL was assessed using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire and joint health using Haemophilia Joint Health Score 2.1 (HJHS).

RESULTS

The EQ-5D-3L was completed by 63 PwHB and 63 PwHA. Mobility problems were reported by 46% of PwHB and 44% of PwHA, pain/discomfort by 62% and 56%, and anxiety/depression by 33% and 17%, respectively. No significant difference was observed between PwHA and PwHB in EQ-5D profiles, level sum score, EQ-5D index (PwHB mean .80, PwHA mean .83, p = .24), or EQ VAS score (PwHB: mean 70, PwHA: mean 77, p = .061). Linear regression adjusted for age demonstrated that an increase in HJHS score was associated with a significant decrease in both EQ-5D index (B -.003, R2 .22) and EQ VAS score (B -.37, R2 .17).

CONCLUSION

Despite the majority of patients being treated with prophylaxis, impaired HRQoL was reported in both PwHB and PwHA. No differences in HRQoL were found between the two groups. Impaired joint health had a significant negative impact on HRQoL.

Treatment outcomes in persons with severe haemophilia B in the Nordic region: The B-NORD study

INTRODUCTION

Data on outcome in persons with haemophilia B (PwHB) are limited and mainly extrapolated from studies of haemophilia A (HA).

AIM

To characterize treatment outcomes in persons with severe HB in the Nordic region, with a focus on joint health, compared with matched controls with HA.

METHODS

PwHB attending haemophilia centres in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden were enrolled and matched with controls with HA. Joint assessment using Haemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) and ultrasound according to Haemophilia Early Arthropathy Detection protocol (HEAD-US) was conducted. Adherence was evaluated using the Validated Haemophilia Regimen Treatment Adherence Scale (VERITAS).

RESULTS

Seventy-nine males with HB, with median age of 30 years (range 1-75), were enrolled. Eleven patients (14%) had a history of or current inhibitor. Twenty-nine PwHB (37%) reported joint bleeds during the prior year, and 35% had previously undergone joint surgery. Ninety-five per cent were on prophylaxis, and 70% used recombinant concentrates, with a median factor consumption of 3,900 IU/kg/year for standard half-life products. Only two patients had a VERITAS score corresponding to 'non-adherence'. Joint health, assessed with HJHS, showed a significant lower score among PwHB compared with HA controls, explained by a difference in the 18-49 age group, without observed differences in older or younger subgroups. The HEAD-US scores were overall low.

CONCLUSION

The Nordic cohort of PwHB is well treated by prophylaxis, but the goal of zero bleeds for all is not reached. Our findings suggest that patients with severe HB suffer from a milder arthropathy than patients with severe HA.