MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405035174 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-193803

Unmet Needs, Factor Consumption, and Healthcare Resource Use Among People with Hemophilia a: Real-World Analysis of the Adelphi Hemophilia Disease Specific ProgrammeTM

2024· article· en· W4405035174 sur OpenAlexaff
Lynn Malec, Davide Matino, Kieran Wynne-Cattanach, C. Blazos, Duygu Bozkaya, Anne-Laure Tardy, Sylvie Bozzi, Jennifer Dumont

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHemophilia Treatment and Research
Établissements canadiensMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDiseaseResource consumptionMedicineResource (disambiguation)Consumption (sociology)Health careGerontologyIntensive care medicineComputer scienceInternal medicineEconomic growthBiologyEconomics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction The standard of care for people living with hemophilia A is life-long prophylaxis treatment with factor VIII replacement therapies (standard half-life [SHL], extended half-life [EHL]), or non-factor therapy (NFT), emicizumab. Despite the improvement in disease management and the availability of new therapies in recent years, bleeds still occur, which impact patients' physical health and quality of life (QoL). Aim This study aimed to understand the unmet needs in patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A receiving prophylactic treatment, by evaluating patient- and physician-reported outcomes and bleeds. Methods Data were drawn from the Adelphi Hemophilia Disease Specific Programme™, a real-world cross-sectional survey of hemophilia treating physicians and their patients in the United States, from July 2023 to March 2024. Physicians reported patient demographics, treatment history, FVIII activity levels, annual bleeding rate (ABR), joint problems, therapy use and employment status for their patients. Patients voluntarily reported the impact of hemophilia A on their QoL. Patients included in this study had hemophilia A with no inhibitors (at time of survey), known baseline clotting factor FVIII level, and had received prophylaxis treatment with NFT or prophylactic (plus on-demand) EHL or SHL therapies. ABR is reported only for those who received treatment for >365 days. Analyses were descriptive. Results Data were collected from 47 physicians for 244 patients (mean age ± standard deviation [SD] 27.4 ± 14.7 years, with 10.7% of patients aged 0-11 years, 7.8% aged 12-17 years and 81.6% aged ≥18 years). At the time of survey, 92 patients had FVIII activity levels of 2.0-5.0%; 90 patients had FVIII levels of 1.0-2.0%; and 62 patients had FVIII levels of <1.0%. A total of 113 patients received treatment with SHL therapy (n=39 for >365 days), 40 received EHL therapy (n=23 for >365 days) and 67 received NFT (n=29 for >365 days). Physicians reported that, in the 12 months prior to the survey, the mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) ABR for patients (n=91) was 0.80 (95% CI 0.57, 1.03). For patients who received SHL therapy the mean ABR was 0.77 (95% CI 0.45, 1.15), for patients who received EHL therapy the mean ABR was 1.09 (95% CI 0.46, 1.74), and for patients who received NFT the mean ABR was 0.52 (95% 0.22, 0.78). In the 12 months prior to the survey, a total of 39 patients experienced one or more bleeds. Of the patients who received SHL, EHL and NFT, 41.0%, 52.2% and 37.9% experienced one or more bleeds, respectively. Overall, 25% of patients suffered from joint problems in the 12 months prior to the survey. Physicians reported that 44.3% of all patients utilized therapy to improve their joint health, including physical therapy (26.2%), yoga/pilates (13.9%), or massage (9.4%). Physicians reported that 23.0% of patients used an aid (brace, splints, orthotics, walking stick or crutches) due to joint damage caused by their hemophilia A. Furthermore, physicians also reported that among patients who were not working full time (n=32), 28.1% attributed their inability to work to their hemophilia A. Corresponding patient-reported data were available for 26 patients. Across all treatment groups, 55.0% (n=11) of patients reported nervousness/anxiety and 40.0% (n=8) of patients reported they fear or worry about their hemophilia A. Eighty percent (n=20) of patients reported that they worry about having breakthrough bleeds. A total of 73.7% (n=14) of patients reported they had difficulty taking part in sports and hobbies due to hemophilia A. Additionally, 84.0% (n=21) of patients reported that they avoid physical activities due to hemophilia A, with 12.0% (n=3) stating that they avoided physical activities often. Conclusion Despite receiving regular prophylactic and on-demand treatment, more than one-third of patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A experienced one or more bleeding episodes per year. Both patients and physicians reported that hemophilia A negatively impacted patients' QoL. One-quarter of physicians reported that patients experienced joint problems, with most patients avoiding physical activity due to hemophilia A. These findings indicate that despite recent advances, an unmet need remains for efficacious treatments that may improve QoL in this population.

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)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
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 enseignants0,041
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,081

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,303
Écart entre enseignants0,261 · 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

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetHemophilia Treatment and Research→Travaux en français237 207→