Interim Canadian Data from a Prospective, Observational Study of Routine Clinical Use of a Von Willebrand Factor Concentrate (Wilate®)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction:Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common congenital bleeding disorder with a prevalence of symptomatic cases of 1 in 1,000. VWD is characterized by quantitative or qualitative abnormalities in von Willebrand factor (VWF), resulting in impaired haemostasis. To increase VWF levels, VWF concentrates are the only treatment option for approximately 20% of VWD patients for whom 1-deamino-8-D-arginine vasopressin (DDAVP) is not effective or is contraindicated. Wilate® (Octapharma AG, Lachen, Switzerland) is a high purity, double virus-inactivated, freeze-dried concentrate of VWF and FVIII. The ratio of VWF to FVIII is near the physiological value of 1:1 and is designed to simplify dosing and monitoring. Wilate®, initially approved in 2005 in Germany, is currently broadly approved worldwide for treatment of VWD and Hemophilia A. This non-interventional, prospective study in VWD patients was designed to collect information on the safety, tolerability and efficacy of Wilate® in routine clinical practice. We present the results of an interim analysis conducted in Canadian patients who received Wilate® in a routine clinical setting as prophylaxis, on-demand treatment and/or in a surgical setting. Methods:Ethics committee approval was obtained from all participating centres, and all VWD patients prescribed Wilate® from participating physicians were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded for the presence of VWF inhibitors, bleeding disorders other than VWD, a history of non-compliance, prohibitively difficult venous access, or the inability to follow study requirements. Routine clinical use of Wilate® for prophylaxis, on demand treatment of bleeding episodes, and prophylaxis for major and minor surgeries were documented. Parameters of routine clinical use are reported here and include exposure days, dosing, and number of infusions. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs), tolerability assessments, and haemostatic efficacy assessments are also reported. Results:Interim data from 13 patients, with a mean age of 45.6 (range 16 to 78 years), enrolled in participating Canadian centres was available for this analysis. Patients consisted of 3 males and 10 females, nine with type 1, three with type 2, and one with type 3 VWD. Two patients were treated for on-demand bleeding episodes, 2 were treated prophylactically, whereas 11 patients were treated for surgeries. A total of 1 051 000 IU Wilate® was infused in the thirteen patients with an average dose for all indications of 46 ± 9.7 IU/kg. Tolerability was 'excellent' in 284 of 285 (99.6%) assessed infusions. Hemostatic efficacy of Wilate® was assessed as 'excellent' or 'good' for all on-demand treatments of bleeding episodes. All 29 breakthrough bleeds, which were primarily GI bleeding, were treated successfully in one long-term prophylactic patient with severe VWD in 17 months. One other patient was treated for seventeen days following surgery and experienced no bleeding episodes. Eleven patients underwent 12 surgical procedures, one patient underwent 2 minor dental procedures, and 10 patients underwent ten major surgeries. In all 12 surgeries the haemostatic efficacy of Wilate® treatment was assessed as 'excellent.' No thrombotic events or severe ADRs were observed. Conclusion:This study is a part of ongoing pharmacovigilance of Wilate® and these interim observations support its safety and efficacy for VWD patients in routine clinical settings. In our Canadian cohort, under routine clinical conditions, bleed resolution, prevention, and tolerability were high. Disclosures Cosentino: Octapharma: Employment. James:CSL Behring: Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding; Biogen: Consultancy; Basalt: Consultancy; Bayer: Research Funding. Sholzberg:Shire (previously Baxter, Baxalta): Honoraria, Research Funding; Novonordisk: Honoraria.
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 | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 ».