MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2588786370 · doi:10.1182/blood.v128.22.327.327

Inhibitor Development in Previously Untreated Patients with Severe Hemophilia a Treated with Nuwiq®, a New Generation Recombinant FVIII of Human Origin

2016· article· en· W2588786370 sur OpenAlexaff
Raina Liesner, Marina Abashidze, Olga Aleinikova, Carmen Altisent, Mark Belletrutti, Annie Borel‐Derlon, Manuel Carção, Hérvè Chambost, Anthony K.C. Chan, Leonid Dubey, Jonathan M. Ducore, Fouzia N. Abubacker, Michael Gattens, Yves Gruel, N. V. Kavardakova, M. El Khorassani, Anna Klukowska, Christoph Königs, Thierry Lambert, Sunil Lohade, Marianne Sigaud, Valentin Ţurea, John K. Wu, Vladimír Vdovin

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHemophilia Treatment and Research
Établissements canadiensMcMaster UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesBC Children's HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenTranslational Research in Oncology
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésImmunogenicityVon Willebrand factorMedicineRecombinant DNATiterIncidence (geometry)Cumulative incidenceImmunologyInternal medicineAntibodyGastroenterologyCohortBiologyPlateletBiochemistry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Studies have shown that the incidence of inhibitor development varies between FVIII concentrates, with some suggesting that recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) concentrates produced in hamster cell lines pose a greater risk of inhibitor development than plasma-derived (pd) von Willebrand factor (VWF)-containing FVIII (pdFVIII/VWF) products. In the SIPPET study, the cumulative incidence of high-titer inhibitorswith hamster-cell derived rFVIII products was 28.4% vs 18.6% for pdFVIII/VWF (Peyvandi F et al. N Engl J Med 2016; 374:2054-2064). These studies did not include new generation rFVIII products produced in human cell lines. Nuwiq® (Human-cl rFVIII) is the first and only new-generation rFVIII produced in human cells without chemical modification or protein fusion. The pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of Nuwiq® have been examined in previously treated patients (PTPs) with severe hemophilia A, and no inhibitors have been reported in 201 PTPs. The immunogenicity, efficacy and safety of Nuwiq® in previously untreated patients (PUPs) with severe hemophilia A is currently being assessed in the ongoing NuProtect study. Methods The NuProtect study was initiated in 2013 and is being conducted in 17 countries and 38 centers worldwide. One hundred evaluable (110 enrolled) male PUPs of all ages and ethnicities are being studied for 100 exposure days (EDs) or a maximum study participation of 5 years. The patients were to have received no treatment with FVIII concentrates or other blood products containing FVIII prior to study entry. The primary objective of the NuProtect study is to assess the immunogenicity of Nuwiq® by determining inhibitor activity (≥0.6 BU) using the Nijmegen modified Bethesda assay in a central laboratory. Intensive screening for inhibitors is scheduled every 3-4 EDs until 20 EDs, then every 10-12 EDs until 100 EDs, and every 3 months until study completion. Secondary endpoints include assessment of hemostatic efficacy in prophylaxis, in the treatment of bleeds and in surgical prophylaxis, as well as safety and tolerability. All patients undergo F8 gene mutation analysis. Results Data from 85 treated PUPs have been included in the first pre-planned interim analysis (May 2016) of which 66 PUPs had ≥20 EDs (by which time the majority of inhibitors are likely to have arisen). The median age at first treatment was 13 months (range: 3-135). Of the 59 patients with available F8 gene mutation analysis, 1 (1.7%) had no identifiable mutation, 44 (74.6%) had mutations conferring a high risk of inhibitor development and 47 (81.0%) had null mutations. Data analysis in May 2016 showed that only 8 of the 66 PUPs treated with Nuwiq® for ≥20 EDs had developed a high-titer inhibitor after a median of 11.5 EDs (range 6-24). Five of the 66 PUPs developed a low-titer inhibitor, 4 (80%) of which were transient. Only 2 patients developed an inhibitor (1 high-titer) after 20 EDs. The cumulative incidence of high-titer inhibitors in PUPs treated with Nuwiq® is 12.8% (95% CI: 4.49-21.15) (Figure 1). The cumulative incidence of low-titer inhibitors was 8.4% (95% CI: 1.28-15.59) and of all inhibitors was 20.8% (95% CI: 10.68-30.95). No patient developed an inhibitor after 25 EDs. The incidence has remained consistent since the start of the study in 2013. Twelve of 13 patients who developed inhibitors had the causative F8 gene mutation detected, all of which were null, and all but one were high-risk. Conclusions PUPs treated with Nuwiq® for ≥20 EDs had 12.8% cumulative incidence of high-titer inhibitorsat the time of interim analysis (8 of 66 PUPs) despite the fact that 81% of patients had gene mutations known to be associated with increased inhibitor risk (e.g. null mutations). These interim data support the low rate of inhibitor development in PUPs treated with Nuwiq® - a human-cell derived (not chemically modified or protein fused) recombinant FVIII. Final data from the NuProtect study are expected in 2018 and will provide further insights into the development of inhibitors in PUPs with severe hemophilia A. Figure 1. Cumulative incidence of inhibitor development Figure 1. Cumulative incidence of inhibitor development Disclosures Liesner: CSL Behring: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Biogen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SOBI: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BPL: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Cangene: Research Funding; Baxalta Innovations GmbH, now a part of Shire: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Grifols: Consultancy, Honoraria. Altisent:Baxalta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding; Grifols: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding; Octapharma: Consultancy. Belletrutti:Shire Pharmaceuticals (formerly Baxalta): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Octapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; NovoNordisk: Other: Travel support. Borel-Derlon:LFB: Other: Reference expert and national coordinator for VWD; Shire - Baxalta: Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding; NovoNordisk: Other: Expert for scientific committee. Ducore:CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biogen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; LFB: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octapharama: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta (Shire): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sigaud:Shire - Baxalta: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,003

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,260
Écart entre enseignants0,237 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetHemophilia Treatment and ResearchTravaux en français237 207