Immune Tolerance Induction in Hemophilia A Patients Using Wilate® —a Canadian 10 Year Study (PREVAIL)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: Hemophilia A patients with inhibitors experience a higher morbidity, a worse orthopedic condition and a decreased quality of life. In children with severe hemophilia A, attempting to eliminate inhibitors with immune tolerance induction (ITI) is standard of care; however, in adults with longstanding inhibitors ITI has been less extensively studied. Although practical guidelines in adults are scarce there has been an increase in case reports highlighting the success of ITI in patients with long-standing inhibitors. The possibility that the type of factor VIII (FVIII) product used for ITI could influence the likelihood of successful tolerization is the subject of intense debate. It has been postulated that FVIII products containing von Willebrand factor (VWF) may improve the ITI success rate in some patients with inhibitors, especially those with poor prognostic characteristics, i.e., a historical peak inhibitor level >200 BU/mL, an inhibitor level >10 BU/mL at the start of ITI, age >5 years, or >24 months between inhibitor detection and start of ITI. Study Rationale Wilate® is the most extensively used plasma-derived FVIII/VWF concentrate for hemophilia A in Canada. Wilate® has been successful in eliminating inhibitors and reducing bleeding in Canadian children and adults who had developed inhibitors during treatment with other FVIII concentrates, including poor-prognosis patients. Wilate® was well tolerated at the high doses required for ITI. Furthermore, anecdotal clinical experience with Wilate® ITI therapy suggest that patients may have less bleeding, which may limit the need for bypassing agents. This research study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of Wilate® in achieving complete or partial ITI success in severe and moderate hemophilia A patients with inhibitors. Secondary objectives are to determine: the time to achieve immune tolerance; bleeding frequency while on Wilate® ITI treatment; quality of life while on Wilate® ITI treatment; joint health while on Wilate® ITI treatment; relapse rate; and time to relapse following successful ITI using Wilate® . Additional optional sub-studies have been incorporated into this study to gain insight into the biology of ITI, including biomarkers that might predict ITI success or failure: genotyping, anti-FVIII antibody characterization including epitope mapping, and thrombin generation. Study Procedures This 10-year Canadian study is an open-label, uncontrolled, multi-centre observational trial with both prospective and retrospective cohorts. A total of at least 80 hemophilia A patients with inhibitors will be enrolled into this study. The dose and frequency of ITI treatment will be at the discretion of the treating physician. However, use of risk-determined treatment protocols is recommended. Patients with high-titre inhibitors (defined as one with historical peak titre ≥5 BU/m) who have inhibitor titre ≤10 BU/mL at the start of ITI are “good-risk” for ITI success, and those who have inhibitor titre >10 BU/mL at the start of ITI are “poor-risk”. Patients with high-titre inhibitors who are good-risk should receive 50 IU FVIII/kg BW every other day or 3 times per week; daily treatment may also be considered. Patients with high-titre inhibitors who are poor-risk should receive 100-200 IU FVIII/kg BW daily. Patients with low-titre inhibitors (defined as one with historical peak titre For complete success, an individual must achieve the following three criteria: inhibitor titre Conclusion This research study aims to evaluate and document data on the success of Wilate ® ITI in hemophilia patients with FVIII-inhibitors. It is the first 10-year study of its kind in a Canadian setting. The results of this study will provide further insights into addressing one of the most serious complications of hemophilia A treatment. Disclosures Moorehead: Bioverativ: Honoraria; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Baxalta: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Klaassen: Baxalta: Honoraria; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Hoffman-La Roche LTD: Consultancy; Biogen Canada LTD: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Octapharma: Honoraria. Carcao: Octapharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding; Biogen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Baxter: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; Biotest: 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 | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
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 ».