The incidence of FIX inhibitors in severe hemophilia B (SHB) is not well defined. Frequencies of 3-5% have been reported but most studies to date were small, including patients with different ...severities, and without prospective follow-up for inhibitor incidence. Study objective was to investigate inhibitor incidence in patients with SHB followed up to 500 exposure days (ED), the frequency of allergic reactions, and the relationship with genotypes. Consecutive previously untreated patients (PUPs) with SHB enrolled into the PedNet cohort were included. Detailed data was collected for the first 50 ED, followed by annual collection of inhibitor status and allergic reactions. Presence of inhibitors was defined by at least two consecutive positive samples. Additionally, data on factor IX gene mutation was collected. 154 PUPs with SHB were included; 75% were followed until 75 ED, and 43% until 500 ED. Inhibitors developed in 14 patients (7 high-titre). Median number of ED at inhibitor manifestation was 11 (IQR 6.5-36.5). Cumulative inhibitor incidence was 9.3% (95%CI 4.4-14.1) at 75 ED, and 10.2% (5.1-15.3) at 500 ED. Allergic reactions occurred in 4 (28.6%) inhibitor patients. Missense mutations were most frequent (46.8%) overall but not associated with inhibitors. Nonsense mutations and deletions with large structural changes comprised all mutations among inhibitor patients and were associated with an inhibitor risk of 26.9% and 33.3%, respectively. In an unselected, well-defined cohort of PUPs with SHB, cumulative inhibitor incidence was 10.2% at 500 ED. Nonsense mutations and large deletions were strongly associated with the risk of inhibitor development. The PedNet Registry is registered at clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT02979119.
Objective: The diagnosis of hemophilia was reported as delayed in historic studies. We therefore investigated this issue to provide current epidemiologic data in a large series of patients. Study ...design: The French cohort provided the opportunity to investigate the age at diagnosis and the circumstances of diagnosis in 599 individuals with hemophilia born between 1980 and 1994. The type and the severity of hemophilia, the family history, and the period of birth were analyzed as potential modifying factors. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 7.7 months, with significant differences among subgroups: 5.8 months in severe hemophilia, 9.0 months in moderate forms, 28.6 months in mild forms, 0.4 months in the case of hemophilic brothers, and 10.1 months in de novo hemophilia, which accounted for 55.3% of cases. In severe forms we observed a trend for earlier diagnosis throughout 3 consecutive periods from 1980 to 1994. Of bleeding epsiode, testing due to family history, or routine testing, bleeding was the main circumstance of diagnosis (59.9%). Conclusions: Diagnosis was made earlier than in historic series, but it remained somewhat delayed. Early diagnosis will require efforts in the fields of genetic counseling and specific diagnosis of early bleeding, even without family history, because of the high incidence of de novo hemophilia. (J Pediatr 2002;141:548-52)
The objective of this study was to examine the association of the intensity of treatment, ranging from high-dose intensive factor VIII (FVIII) treatment to prophylactic treatment, with the inhibitor ...incidence among previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A. This cohort study aimed to include consecutive patients with a FVIII activity < 0.01 IU/mL, born between 2000 and 2010, and observed during their first 75 FVIII exposure days. Intensive FVIII treatment of hemorrhages or surgery at the start of treatment was associated with an increased inhibitor risk (adjusted hazard ratio aHR, 2.0; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.3-3.0). High-dose FVIII treatment was associated with a higher inhibitor risk than low-dose FVIII treatment (aHR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.0-4.8). Prophylaxis was only associated with a decreased overall inhibitor incidence after 20 exposure days of FVIII. The association with prophylaxis was more pronounced in patients with low-risk F8 genotypes than in patients with high-risk F8 genotypes (aHR, 0.61, 95% CI, 0.19-2.0 and aHR, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.51-1.4, respectively). In conclusion, our findings suggest that in previously untreated patients with severe hemophilia A, high-dosed intensive FVIII treatment increases inhibitor risk and prophylactic FVIII treatment decreases inhibitor risk, especially in patients with low-risk F8 mutations.
•High-dose intensive factor VIII treatment increases the risk for inhibitor development in patients with severe hemophilia A.•In patients with severe hemophilia A, factor VIII prophylaxis decreases inhibitor risk, especially in patients with low-risk F8 mutations.
Recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) is an effective haemostatic treatment in haemophiliacs with inhibitors. In vitro, FVIIa concentrations corresponding to those obtained with therapeutic doses ...of rFVIIa have been shown to induce normal thrombin generation and platelet activation in the absence of factors VIII or IX. To further study the in vivo haemostatic changes induced by rFVIIa, circulating procoagulant microparticles (MP) were measured in patients treated with discontinuous injections of Novoseven. In 6 out of 15 patients, a transient peak of procoagulant MP was observed after injection, occurring 15 min to 2 h after infusion. It was composed primarily of platelet-derived MP and was of very short duration. This peak was not observed in haemophiliacs without inhibitor, who were treated with conventional replacement therapies. Our results provide further in vivo evidence that rFVIIa specifically activates platelets, either directly or as a consequence of a burst of thrombin generation that could account for its haemostatic efficacy.
Many studies have reported an increased incidence of inhibitors in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe haemophilia A after the introduction of recombinant products. It was the objective ...of this study to investigate whether the inhibitor incidence has increased between 1990 and 2009 in an unselected cohort of PUPs with severe haemophilia A (FVIII< 1 %). Patients were consecutively recruited from 31 haemophilia treatment centres in 16 countries and followed until 50 exposure days or until inhibitor development. Inhibitor development was studied in five-year birth cohorts comparing cumulative incidences. Furthermore the risk for inhibitor development per five-year birth cohort was studied using multivariable Cox regression, adjusting for potential genetic and treatment-related confounders. A total of 926 PUPs were included with a total cumulative inhibitor incidence of 27.5 %. The inhibitor incidence increased from 19.5 % in 1990-1994 (lowest) to 30.9 % in 2000-2004 (highest; p-value 0.011). Low titre inhibitor incidence increased from 3.1 % in 1990-1994 to 10.5 % in 2005-2009 (p-value 0.009). High titre inhibitor incidences remained stable over time. After 2000, risk of all inhibitor development was increased with adjusted hazard ratios 1.96 (95 % CI 1.06-2.83) in 2000-2004 and 2.34 (1.42-4.92) in 2005-2009. Screening for inhibitors was intensified over this 20-year study period from a median of 1.9 to 2.9 tests/year before 2000 to 2.7 to 4.3 tests/year after 2000. In conclusion, the cumulative inhibitor incidence has significantly increased between 1990 and 2009. The high titre inhibitor incidence has remained stable.
Introduction.In patients with hemophilia treated with factor VIII products, the development of inhibitory antibodies poses the largest safety risk. Especially during the first 50 exposure days (EDs), ...up to 37% of patients with severe hemophilia A have been reported to develop an inhibitor. To study neo-immunogenicity of products and new treatment strategies, patients have been distinguished into previously untreated (PUPs) and previously treated patients (PTPs); the latter defined as patients treated for more than 150 EDs. The number of 150 EDs was established in the eighties during a time when most patients received on-demand treatment and testing for inhibitors was not frequently performed. More recent studies on inhibitor incidence in PUPs with severe hemophilia A report that 50% of inhibitors develop within 14-15 EDs, however the cut-off number of EDs for a PUP to become a PTP is not well defined.
The aim of this study was to define the number of EDs for PUPs to become PTPs based on long-term follow-up of patients with severe hemophilia A
Methods.All patients with severe hemophilia A born after January 1, 2000, treated for at least 1 ED and followed prospectively until inhibitor development or the number of EDs at last follow-up, were included. The number of EDs at inhibitor development is the last exposure day before the first positive titer was reported. An inhibitor was defined as positive when at least two positive inhibitor titers were measured. Positivity was defined according to the cut-off level in each individual center's laboratory.
Results.Of 1,038 PUPs with severe hemophilia A, 930 (89.6%) were followed until 75 EDs, 429 until 500 EDs and 212 until 1000 EDs. In total, 300 inhibitors developed, of which 298 (99.3%) within the first 75 EDs. Thereafter only two inhibitors developed, both low titer: after 249 and 264 EDs.
Conclusion.Almost all inhibitors develop during the first 75 EDs. Patients with severe hemophilia A can be defined as PTP after 75 instead of 150 exposure days. A change of definition of PTP will increase the number of severe hemophilia A patients eligible for new therapies.
Display omitted
Santagostino:Bioverativ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kedrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sobi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novo Nordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Grifols: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Male:SOBI: Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Oldenburg:Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biogen Idec: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Chugai: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Grifols: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biotest: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Swedish Orphan Biovitrum: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Liesner:Baxalta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Octapharma: Consultancy, Other: Clinical study investigator for NuProtect Study (Octapharma sponsored), Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Carcao:Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Grifols: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CSL-Behring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; LFB: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioverativ/Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biotest: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nolan:CSL Behring: Research Funding; Sobi: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Álvarez-Roman:Shire: Consultancy; NovoNordisk: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy. Koenigs:Gilead: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Intersero: Research Funding; Bioverativ: Consultancy; Roche/Chugai: Consultancy; EU (IMI, FP7): Research Funding; Sobi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jansen: Research Funding.
To evaluate the applicability and compliance with guidelines for early initiation of long-term prophylaxis in infants with severe hemophilia A and to identify factors associated with guideline ...compliance.
This real-world, prospective, multicenter, population-based FranceCoag study included almost all French boys with severe hemophilia A, born between 2000 and 2009 (ie, after guideline implementation).
We included 333 boys in the study cohort. The cumulative incidence of long-term prophylaxis use was 61.2% at 3 years of age vs 9.5% in a historical cohort of 39 boys born in 1996 (ie, before guideline implementation). The guidelines were not applicable in 23.1% of patients due to an early intracranial bleeding or inhibitor development. Long-term prophylaxis was delayed in 10.8% of patients. In the multivariate analysis, 2 variables were significantly associated with “timely long-term prophylaxis” as compared with “delayed long-term prophylaxis”: hemophilia treating center location in the southern regions of France (OR 23.6, 95% CI 1.9-286.7, P = .013 vs Paris area) and older age at long-term prophylaxis indication (OR 7.2 for each additional year, 95% CI 1.2-43.2, P = .031). Long-term prophylaxis anticipation was observed in 39.0% of patients. Earlier birth year (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.8, P = .010 for birth years 2005-2009 vs 2000-2004) and age at first factor replacement (OR 1.9 for each additional year, 95% CI 1.2-3.0, P = .005) were significantly associated with “long-term prophylaxis guideline compliance” vs “long-term prophylaxis anticipation.”
This study suggests that long-term prophylaxis guidelines are associated with increased long-term prophylaxis use. However, early initiation of long-term prophylaxis remains a challenge.
PDF
