Effects of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult haemophiliacs.
ABSTRACT While primary prophylaxis is a well-established and recommended method of care delivery for children with severe haemophilia, fewer studies have documented the benefits of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescence or adulthood. To evaluate the role of secondary prophylaxis started in adolescent and adult severe haemophiliacs, a retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in 10 Italian Centres that investigated 84 haemophiliacs who had bled frequently and had thus switched from on-demand to prophylactic treatment during adolescence (n = 30) or adulthood (n = 54). The consumption of clotting factor concentrates, the orthopaedic and radiological scores, quality of life and disease-related morbidity were compared before and after starting secondary prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the mean annual number of total and joint bleeds (35.8 vs. 4.2 and 32.4 vs. 3.3; P < 0.01) and of days lost from work/school (34.6 vs. 3.0, P < 0.01). A statistically significant reduction in the orthopaedic score was observed during prophylaxis in adolescents, but not in the whole cohort. Patients used more factor concentrates with corresponding higher costs on prophylaxis, but experienced a better quality of life. With respect to on-demand treatment, higher factor consumption and cost of secondary prophylaxis were balanced by marked clinical benefits and greater well-being in this cohort of adolescent/adult haemophiliacs.
- SourceAvailable from: Sonata Saulyte Trakymiene[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There are two main modes of replacement therapy for haemophilia patients: either to stop bleeding (on-demand) or regular infusions of clotting factor to prevent bleeds (prophylaxis). Fifty yr of clinical experience have provided evidence of the superiority of prophylaxis by showing a reduction in bleeds and development of arthropathy. Prophylaxis has been described extensively in terms of efficacy and health-economic aspects; however, on-demand treatment has received less attention. The aim of this study was to critically review the published literature on PubMed and discuss potential gaps of knowledge in on-demand treatment in persons with severe haemophilia without inhibitors by focusing on two key aspects: how on-demand treatment is provided and what outcome measures have been reported. We identified 134 papers of which 112 were excluded. Of the remaining 22 papers, 16 were comparative studies between prophylaxis and on-demand treatment and six were descriptions of on-demand treatment. The results showed limited reporting on data related to the key aspects of treatment on-demand. Early studies looked at degrees of joint bleeds and different treatment regimens in finding the optimal dose. However, from the late 1980s, there was almost no research into on-demand therapy except efficacy and safety studies of new rFVIII products and studies to prove superiority of prophylaxis over treatment on-demand. The success of on-demand therapy may depend on several factors, for example time to initial dose after a bleed and duration of treatment. Data on these key factors are limited and highlight the necessity of research to optimise replacement therapy.European journal of haematology. Supplementum 08/2014; 76:39-47.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In patients with haemophilia A, factor VIII (FVIII) prophylaxis reduces bleeding frequency and joint damage compared with on-demand therapy. To assess the effect of prophylaxis initiation age, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to evaluate bone and cartilage damage in patients with severe haemophilia A. In this cross-sectional, multinational investigation, patients aged 12–35 years were assigned to 1 of 5 groups: primary prophylaxis started at age <2 years (group 1); secondary prophylaxis started at age 2 to <6 years (group 2), 6 to <12 years (group 3), or 12−18 years (group 4); or on-demand treatment (group 5). Joint status at ankles and knees was assessed using Compatible Additive MRI scoring (maximum and mean ankle; maximum and mean of all 4 joints) and Gilbert scores in the per-protocol population (n = 118). All prophylaxis groups had better MRI joint scores than the on-demand group. MRI scores generally increased with current patient age and later start of prophylaxis. Ankles were the most affected joints. In group 1 patients currently aged 27−35 years, the median of maximum ankle scores was 0.0; corresponding values in groups 4 and 5 were 17.0 and 18.0, respectively [medians of mean index joint scores: 0.0 (group 1), 8.1 (group 2) and 13.8 (group 4)]. Gilbert scores revealed outcomes less pronounced than MRI scores. MRI scores identified pathologic joint status with high sensitivity. Prophylaxis groups had lower annualized joint bleeds and MRI scores vs. the on-demand group. Primary prophylaxis demonstrated protective effects against joint deterioration compared with secondary prophylaxis.Haemophilia 11/2014; · 2.47 Impact Factor
- 10/2014; 12(4):575-98.