A Practical, One Clinic Visit, Population Pharmacokinetic (PK) Protocol for Generation of PK Profiles in Subjects with Severe Hemophilia a
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Clearance of infused factor VIII (FVIII) varies approximately 2-fold between persons with severe hemophilia A. This results in significant interpatient differences in factor levels following an infusion of FVIII and contributes to potentially significant differences in protection against spontaneous musculoskeletal bleeding in patients on fixed dose prophylaxis regimens. Aim The aim of this study is to compare two PK protocols: 1) a 6-point PK protocol with a 72 hour washout; and 2) a 2-point, one clinic visit PK protocol with no washout using the following pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters: clearance (Cl) and time to FVIII:C of 1% above baseline (tt1%) in persons with severe hemophilia A. Methods Inhibitor negative males with severe hemophilia A (FVIII<2%) receiving a standard half-life recombinant FVIII (rFVIII) concentrate (ADVATE®) were consented into a research ethics board approved study. In the 6-point PK protocol, participants were infused with approximately 50 IU/kg rFVIII after a minimum washout of 72 hours and FVIII levels were measured pre-infusion and at 1, 3, 9, 24 and 48 hours post-infusion. The 2-point PK protocol consisted of a blood sample taken in clinic approximately 24 hours after the participant infused their prophylactic dose at home (15-50 IU/kg), followed by a 25 IU/kg dose given in clinic and a 3 hour post-infusion sample. Frozen plasma samples were sent to a central laboratory in Kingston, Ontario where one-stage and chromogenic FVIII assays were performed. PK parameters (Cl and tt1%) were estimated using the 2 compartmental models of PK programs Phoenix WinNonlin 7.0 (Certara USA Inc.) and myPKFiT version 3.0 (Baxalta US Inc). Intra-class correlations (ICCs) were used to compare the PK parameters derived from the two PK protocols using WinNonlin and myPKFiT. Results 28 males (median age: 12 years, range: 2-69 years) participated. The frequency distribution of clearance and the median half-life (t1/2) generated using myPKFiT is presented in Figure 1. There was a substantial to almost perfect agreement observed when comparing the PK parameters derived from the 6-point PK protocol with washout using the two PK programs (Table 1). There was a moderate to almost perfect agreement observed when comparing the PK parameters derived from the 6-point PK protocol with washout to the 2-point PK protocol with no washout using the myPKFiT program (Table 2). Conclusion The 2-point, one clinic visit, PK protocol (24 and 3 hrs) with no washout offers a convenient and practical approach to generating clinically relevant PK parameters in persons with severe hemophilia A. It can provide information relevant to selection of personalized prophylaxis regimens that aim to reduce to a minimum/eliminate spontaneous joint bleeding. Disclosures Blanchette: Shire: Other: Investigator-initiated research funding; Novo Nordisk: Other: Speaker's fees; Shire: Other: Speaker's fees; Bayer: Other: speaker's fees; Bioverativ: Other: Investigator-initiated research funding; Pfizer: Other: Speaker's fees. Jackson:Pfizer: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria; Bioverativ: Other: Investigator initiated grant funding. Carcao:Octapharma: 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; CSL-Behring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: 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; Biotest: 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; Bioverativ/Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: 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. Khoo:Shire: Research Funding; Biogen Idec: Research Funding. Blatny:Shire, Pfizer, Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,028 | 0,039 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,023 | 0,007 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».